Hello to all:

I wanted to let you know that I am revamping my web site at
http://home.nycap.rr.com/jry/FermionMass.htm, and am starting to post
previews of work that I hope to publish in the upcoming months.

I have begun by posting a "Paper Preview: Five Dimensional Spacetime with
Axial Time, and the Geometric Origin of Mass."

This paper will show how if we regard the Dirac Matrices ?^U, U=0,1,2,3,5 as
the structure generators of spacetime, that the ?^5 matrix becomes naturally
associated with a fifth, timelike dimension of spacetime. This fifth, axial
time dimension, together with the ordinary time dimension, defines a "time
plane." This requires us to understand time as a plane through which
particles can move at an "angle," and not merely as a line allowing forward
and backward movement as first taught by Feynman. Importantly, the mass of
a particle is understood to bear a relationship to how that particle moves
through the time plane, relatively to how we, as observers, move through the
time plane. The more a particle's motion through the time plane parallels
our own, the larger is the mass we observe for that particle. Massless
particles move through the time plane perpendicularly to how we, as
observers, move through the time plane. In this way, one may be able to
arrive at a strictly geometric understanding of gravitational mass.

More to follow. Comments are appreciated.

Jay.

_____________________________
Jay R. Yablon
910 Northumberland Drive
Schenectady, New York 12309-2814
Phone / Fax: 518-377-6737
Email:

Jay R. Yablon wrote:
Hello to all:

I wanted to let you know that I am revamping my web site at
http://home.nycap.rr.com/jry/FermionMass.htm, and am starting to post
previews of work that I hope to publish in the upcoming months.

I have begun by posting a "Paper Preview: Five Dimensional Spacetime with
Axial Time, and the Geometric Origin of Mass."

This paper will show how if we regard the Dirac Matrices ?^U, U=0,1,2,3,5 as
the structure generators of spacetime, that the ?^5 matrix becomes naturally
associated with a fifth, timelike dimension of spacetime. This fifth, axial
time dimension, together with the ordinary time dimension, defines a "time
plane." This requires us to understand time as a plane through which
particles can move at an "angle," and not merely as a line allowing forward
and backward movement as first taught by Feynman. Importantly, the mass of
a particle is understood to bear a relationship to how that particle moves
through the time plane, relatively to how we, as observers, move through the
time plane. The more a particle's motion through the time plane parallels
our own, the larger is the mass we observe for that particle. Massless
particles move through the time plane perpendicularly to how we, as
observers, move through the time plane. In this way, one may be able to
arrive at a strictly geometric understanding of gravitational mass.

While that sounds like just the trick for pair creation and
energy conservation, it sounds like it would wreck havoc on
any notion of gravity/inertia equivalence. It doesn't sound
well behaved for fast particles near massive objects.

I am biased tho'. I like my extra time axis dealing with
retarded potential.

Sue...


More to follow. Comments are appreciated.

Jay.

_____________________________
Jay R. Yablon
910 Northumberland Drive
Schenectady, New York 12309-2814
Phone / Fax: 518-377-6737
Email:

Jay R. Yablon wrote:
Hello to all:

I wanted to let you know that I am revamping my web site at
http://home.nycap.rr.com/jry/FermionMass.htm, and am starting to post
previews of work that I hope to publish in the upcoming months.

I have begun by posting a "Paper Preview: Five Dimensional Spacetime with
Axial Time, and the Geometric Origin of Mass."

This paper will show how if we regard the Dirac Matrices ?^U, U=0,1,2,3,5 as
the structure generators of spacetime, that the ?^5 matrix becomes naturally
associated with a fifth, timelike dimension of spacetime. This fifth, axial
time dimension, together with the ordinary time dimension, defines a "time
plane." This requires us to understand time as a plane through which
particles can move at an "angle," and not merely as a line allowing forward
and backward movement as first taught by Feynman. Importantly, the mass of
a particle is understood to bear a relationship to how that particle moves
through the time plane, relatively to how we, as observers, move through the
time plane. The more a particle's motion through the time plane parallels
our own, the larger is the mass we observe for that particle. Massless
particles move through the time plane perpendicularly to how we, as
observers, move through the time plane. In this way, one may be able to
arrive at a strictly geometric understanding of gravitational mass.

More to follow. Comments are appreciated.

Jay.

_____________________________
Jay R. Yablon
910 Northumberland Drive
Schenectady, New York 12309-2814
Phone / Fax: 518-377-6737
Email:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0508257 Page 12
Once again, we confront from a different view, the
decades-old question of why duality symmetry seem
to be violated by Maxwell's equations.

http://www.conformity.com/0102reflectionsfig3.gif
From:
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html

What proof is there that the wave impedance plots
of Figure 3 *actually* converge out in the far-field
where there are no charges to measure it ?

Sue...

Jay R. Yablon wrote:
associated with a fifth, timelike dimension of spacetime.

This requires us to understand time as a plane through which
particles can move at an "angle," and not merely as a line
allowing forward and backward movement as first taught by
Feynman.

Massless particles move through the time plane perpendicularly
to how we, as observers, move through the time plane.
In this way, one may be able to arrive at a strictly geometric
understanding of gravitational mass.

More to follow. Comments are appreciated.

Jay.
_____________________________
Jay R. Yablon
910 Northumberland Drive
Schenectady, New York 12309-2814
Phone / Fax: 518-377-6737
Email:
Posting Web Site Previews of Upcoming Papars

http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0508257 Page 12
Once again, we confront from a different view, the
decades-old question of why duality symmetry seem
to be violated by Maxwell's equations.

http://www.conformity.com/0102reflectionsfig3.gif
From:
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html

What proof is there that the wave impedance plots
of Figure 3 *actually* converge out in the far-field
where there are no charges to measure it ?

Sue...

Can you please clarify your question Sue? Not quite sure how this relates
to the magnetic monopole question.

Thanks.

Jay.

This paper will show how if we regard the Dirac Matrices gamma^U,
U=0,1,2,3,5 as
the structure generators of spacetime, that the gamma^5 matrix becomes
naturally
associated with a fifth, timelike dimension of spacetime. This fifth,
axial
time dimension, together with the ordinary time dimension, defines a
"time
plane." This requires us to understand time as a plane through which
particles can move at an "angle," and not merely as a line allowing
forward
and backward movement as first taught by Feynman. Importantly, the mass
of
a particle is understood to bear a relationship to how that particle
moves
through the time plane, relatively to how we, as observers, move through
the
time plane. The more a particle's motion through the time plane
parallels
our own, the larger is the mass we observe for that particle. Massless
particles move through the time plane perpendicularly to how we, as
observers, move through the time plane. In this way, one may be able to
arrive at a strictly geometric understanding of gravitational mass.

While that sounds like just the trick for pair creation and
energy conservation, it sounds like it would wreck havoc on
any notion of gravity/inertia equivalence. It doesn't sound
well behaved for fast particles near massive objects.

Sue,

Why do you think this would mess up equivalence principle?


I am biased tho'. I like my extra time axis dealing with
retarded potential.

From where do you have an extra time axis in mind?

Jay.


Sue...