No problem. The former is what they call dark matter. It has a higher-than-average energy density, and that energy has a mass-equivalence and a gravitational affect. A gravitational field does too, because it’'s a density gradient.
If it was both high and low balancing each other out, there would be no net movement of energy/momentum. Take the derivative of a smooth-curved “high” of electromagnetic potential A for the typical electromagnetic sine wave.
OK. The high density region could be a region closer to the surface of the earth than the low density region.
There’s nothing much to say. A pulse traverses a rubber sheet that varies in density from one region to another. It might change speed and profile, but it keeps on going.
The gradient you’re talking about sounds like a gravitational gradient, which is different to electromagnetism and charge. I’d say two particles “charge” towards one another when they have opposite chiral spin. Think frame-dragging, and two opposite whirlpools being attracted to one another.
They haven’t merged their densities, the escaping photons are “pulses” of higher density zipping away at the speed of light. They’ve just lost their opposite chiral rotations, which cancelled each other out.
I don’t hold with that. They have opposite chiral spins and are attracted to one another, but they’re different too - there’s no lock-and-key annihilation going on.
Sorry James, I can’t see this.
I’d say the front of the wave is positive, the back is negative.
No, inertia and mass are what you’d call the wave momentum if it had no aggregate motion with respect to you. Like when it’s going round and round as an electron. A steeper wave has more momentum, and if it’s going round and round it exhibits more inertia/mass.
Not quite. You create charge when you create mass. And antiprotons are negatively charged. Annihilate one with a proton and you get photons again.
Yes, that’s it. That’s why the electron and proton don’t annihilate.
Yes.
It’s better to call it the weak interaction. Let’s come back to it another day.
Positronium isn’t stable, but antihydrogen is. It’s just tricky to stop it wandering off, whereupon the positron annihilates with an electron and the antiproton annihilates with a proton. By the way, positronium is neither matter nor antimatter, it’s a combination of both, and is said to be like light hydrogen, see cs.cdu.edu.au/homepages/jmit … psatom.htm.
You’re thinking about this the wrong way James. An electron is attracted to a positron. It’s also attracted to a proton. We call the electron matter. We call the positron antimatter. But we call the proton matter too. It isn’t. It’s antimatter.