Re: Does "identical" mean "one"?

Michael Lorrey (
Tue, 21 Jul 1998 17:58:57 -0400

Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> Hara Ra <> wrote:
> > Richard Feynman suggested that a positron is an electron traveling
> > backward in time. If this is so, the Universe may well be a few
> > quarks traveling back and forth in space and time.

Actually, an associate of Feynman had this thought, that there may only be just one particle in the entire universe moving backward and forward in time, but they could not work it out, and it only would work in a closed universe, which now seems not very likely. Additionally, since any quantum event involves a particle emitting both a virtual photon and anti-photon (only one of which becomes 'real' when accepted by another particle, which emits its advance wave that travels in the opposite direction), then since the big bang involved a large amount of anti matter going backwards in time while matter went forward in time, we can see that it is likely that the universe is open in both directions, and cosmic background radiation that exceeds that accounted for in our own side of the big bang can be accounted for as virtual photons emitted by the antimatter side (that aren't accepted by other anti-matter in that side) of the universe moving toward our temporal 'side' of the universe and being accepted by particles in our side of the universe.

> I fully support this theory. It simplifies a lot of particle
> interactions to realize that a positron is an electron coming backward
> in time. It explains why we see fragments suddenly appear out of
> nowhere and then converge to form a positron. Now, we realize it is a
> positron coming back through time that collides with something and
> breaks up. We are seeing the fragmentation sequence in reverse.

Yes, Feynman's version of QED not only simplifies a lot of particle interactions, but it also explains others that neither the particle or wave theories of QED by Schroedinger and Dirac could, as well as being useful in completely explaining all of classical physics in a quantum mechanical manner. I just read the Gribbins' biography of R. Feynman last night. Its a good read.

> It also explains some weird interactions where two particles appear out
> of nothing and then disappear, existing just long enough to make some
> interaction work. Now we realize that the particle going forward in
> time collided with something, got bounced back in time for a few
> seconds, and then bounced forward through time again. For the overlap
> period, we see "extra" particles where the same particle exists in
> different locations at the same time.

It also explains action at a distance, which many die hard classicists point to as an example of the folly of quantum theory. essentially you have two particles, both of which emit their virtual signals both forward and backward in time. The one moving forward in time is called the 'emitter' and the one going back in time is the 'acceptor'. The phase of the signals overlapping constructively creates a real photon, while if they are out of phase they cancel out on either temporal side of the exchange.

Prof. John Cramer of the U. of Washington found that since the particle further back temporally experiences the acceptor signal at the same instant that it emits its own signal, then causality is eliminated and the Schroedingers Cat paradox is eliminated. There is no 'cloud of probability' that must be observed.

Mike Lorrey