For a month I’ve known that the most reasonable assumption of how elementary particles move is through turn-by-turn reflections. For quite a while I entertained the idea that these reflections would be from the neighboring helices of elementary particles of energy (dots).
However, a week ago I realized that the idea of turn-by-turn reflection would be better explained by a jagged shape of reflections, very much akin to an idea that I had been thinking about for a year. On the other hand, when I tried to add motion and time to the shape, it seemed like I would need to reduce the jagged shape to tetragons of reflection.
Except when I was writing my latest post, something didn’t feel right. I wasn’t quite sure what it was, but I knew I would have to rethink the whole idea of circular reflection.
So, this is what I did, and it is the subject of today’s post. I won’t bore you with the details, but it seems that I finally have a fully satisfactory explanation of reflection that doesn’t need handwaving. And this explanation is that the reflection of a dot is always in the opposite direction of the dot with which it is being reflected with. In reality, the geometry is a bit more complicated than this, but I can’t easily explain it in this post, so just look at the video below:
As you can see from the video, the reflection is towards the same direction for both (blue and yellow) neighboring dots. This means that the piston motion, described in this post, isn’t ‘up-and-down’, but sideways, or at a 90-degree angle to my original assumption.
Now that I have a decent hypothesis of the direction of the reflection, the next bit is to see whether it makes mathematical sense. I’m highly confident that I’m very close to the finishing line, but I’ve been saying the same thing for ages now.
As always, I’ll be sure to let you know when I know whether I’m right or wrong.
Also, now it should be possible for everyone to post a comment on my posts.
Comments