Quis es tu

Cordus
et quo
vadis,
photon?

Conjecture

Pons
Cordus The Cordus Conjecture is a conceptual
model that integrates the particle and
wave behaviour of light into a single
Conjecture model.
Quis es tu et quo vadis, photon?

Quantum behaviour of individual photons is weird, in

the way they defy rationality. Sometimes they behave
like waves, and sometimes like particles, depending
on how they are observed. They are capricious and
apparently have an element of wilfulness in their
behaviour: they seem to know when a path is
blocked, without even going down it. Also, they seem
to adapt their behaviour in response to whether the
Observer is there or not (e.g. Schrodinger’s Cat, Zeno
effect). If this is quantum mechanics, then it is no
wonder that people consider it beyond weird. Even The cordus concept is
physicists struggle to explain it.
surprisingly simple, yet
The usual explanations put forward have their share powerful and able to explain
of eeriness too: virtual ghost particles that cannot many phenomena and
ever be observed, spooky intelligence in the photon, paradoxes in physics:
philosophical dilemmas about the power of the
Observer to affect the rest of the physical world and
 double-slit experiment;
its future merely by looking at it, and parallel  Heisenberg's
universes beyond the cosmos which are forever uncertainty principle;
unreachable to us.  Zeno effect;
There are good theories for pieces of the problem,  fringes;
but only parts. For example, wave theory is good for  diffraction;
predicting the behaviour of beams of light, and  Mach-Zehnder
quantum mechanics for the particle effects. However
interferometer;
there is no integrative theory, so the present situation
in physics is an incongruous amalgam of theories,  transparency;
with weird implications.  reflection;
 refraction;
Is there a way to explain quantum effects of the
photon rationally, without resorting to bizarre non-
 absorbance;
physical causality? Is there a way to integrate wave  tunnelling;
and particle views in a way that makes sense?  entanglement;
 emission;
 matter waves;
 superposition;
 coherence;
 Schrodinger's Cat.

iii
Cordus conjecture
Edition 1.2
Imprint 1.2.0 of 9 April 2011
Published by Dirk Pons, 13 Kirk St, Kaiapoi, 7630, New Zealand
© Copyright D Pons 2011

Revision history
Revision 1.2 of 9 April 2011: Minor format edits. Edits to parts 4: changed position on directionality of gravitation,
added summary for force. More specifically identified potentially testable differentiating effects throughout.
Revision 1.0 of 6 April 2011: First public release to cordus.wordpress.com and vixra.org

Permissions
The image ‘Figure 1: Cordus model of the photon’ of ‘Cordus conjecture: Overview’ has been released into the
Wikimedia commons and may be freely reused.

iii
Contents
Cordus Conjecture: Overview ................................................................................ 1

1 Introduction to cordus .......................................................................................................1

2 Integration problems in conventional physics....................................................................2
3 Approach taken .................................................................................................................4
4 Cordus mechanics ..............................................................................................................7
4.1 Cordus Conjecture .............................................................................................................7
4.2 Cordus optics .....................................................................................................................9
4.3 Cordus matter.................................................................................................................. 10
4.4 Cordus in extremis ........................................................................................................... 13
5 Conclusions...................................................................................................................... 16

Cordus Conjecture: Part 1.1 Quis es tu photon?....................................................19

1 Introduction: Wave-particle duality ................................................................................. 19

2 Method............................................................................................................................ 20
3 Cordus conjecture............................................................................................................ 21
3.1 Cordus model of the photon ............................................................................................ 22
Lemma L.1 Behaviour of the cordus ........................................................................................ 22
Causa 1 Cordus underlying mechanisms............................................................................. 22
Lemma L.2 Collapse of the cordus........................................................................................... 23
Lemma L.3 Detection and Observers....................................................................................... 24
3.2 Application to quantum measurement effects................................................................. 25
4 Conclusions...................................................................................................................... 25

Cordus Conjecture: Part 1.2 Quo vadis, photon?...................................................27

1 Introduction: Photon Path dilemmas ............................................................................... 27

2 Existing approaches ......................................................................................................... 27
3 Particle behaviour in the Double-slit experiment............................................................. 28
4 Mach–Zehnder interferometer ........................................................................................ 32
Lemma L.7 Beam-splitter ........................................................................................................ 34
5 Conclusions...................................................................................................................... 39

Cordus Conjecture: Part 1.3 Explanation of fringes ...............................................40

1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 40
2 Wave theory explanation of interference ........................................................................ 41
3 Cordus solution................................................................................................................ 42
Lemma L.4 Internal and external variables of the photon ....................................................... 42
Lemma L.5 Span length ........................................................................................................... 43
4 Wave behaviour in single gaps: diffraction ...................................................................... 43
Lemma L.6 Cordus hyff for the photon.................................................................................... 44
5 Fringes in the Double-slit device ...................................................................................... 48
6 Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 53
7 Conclusions...................................................................................................................... 54

Cordus optics: Part 2.1 Frequency ........................................................................57

1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 57
2 Cordus Transparency and Opacity.................................................................................... 59

iv
 Lemma O.1 Electron interaction determines Transparency and Opacity.................................. 59
3 Cordus Frequency ............................................................................................................ 61
Lemma O.2 Cordus Frequency ................................................................................................. 61
Causa 2 Working model for frequency ............................................................................... 63
4 Tunnelling ........................................................................................................................ 65
5 Conclusions...................................................................................................................... 66

Cordus optics: Part 2.2 Reflection.........................................................................67

1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 67
2 Cordus effects at surface interfaces ................................................................................. 69
Lemma O.3 Surface interaction................................................................................................ 69
3 Cordus model for Reflection ............................................................................................ 70
3.1 Reflection in general ........................................................................................................ 70
3.2 Critical angle for total internal reflection ......................................................................... 74
4 Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 76

Cordus optics: Part 2.3 Refraction ........................................................................77

1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 77
2 Cordus refraction ............................................................................................................. 78
Lemma O.4 Refraction ............................................................................................................. 78
2.1 Derivation of Snell’s Law.................................................................................................. 79
2.2 Brewster's angle .............................................................................................................. 81
2.3 Mixed reflection and refraction ....................................................................................... 84
3 Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 86

Cordus matter: Part 3.1 Wider Locality.................................................................90

1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 90
2 Entanglement .................................................................................................................. 92
Lemma M.1 Photon-photon interaction .............................................................................. 92
3 Complementary frequency state synchronisation (CoFS) ................................................. 93
4 Locality and Bell's theorem .............................................................................................. 94
5 Principle of Wider Locality ............................................................................................... 95
6 Conclusions...................................................................................................................... 96

Cordus matter: Part 3.2 Matter particuloids .........................................................97

1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 97
2 Cordus model of the Electron........................................................................................... 97
Lemma M.2 Electron ........................................................................................................... 98
2.1 Wave-particle duality of the electron .............................................................................. 98
2.2 Aharonov-Bohm effect..................................................................................................... 99
2.3 Electron configuration, Orbitals, Spin ............................................................................ 100
Lemma M.2 continued............................................................................................................... 101
2.4 Atomic bonding ............................................................................................................. 103
Lemma M.3 Electron-mediated covalent bonds......................................................................... 103
3 Application to matter generally ..................................................................................... 104
Lemma M.4 Matter ........................................................................................................... 105
4 Conclusions.................................................................................................................... 107

Cordus matter: Part 3.3 Energy cycles within matter ..........................................109

1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 109
2 Cordus model for photon absorption............................................................................. 110

v
 3 Recycling the energy: reversibility, elasticity, entropy ................................................... 111
4 Photon Emission ............................................................................................................ 114
5 Conclusions.................................................................................................................... 114

Cordus matter: Part 3.4 Special states of matter.................................................116

1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 116
2 Superposition ................................................................................................................ 117
3 Coherence...................................................................................................................... 118
4 Superfluidity ................................................................................................................. 120
5 Superconductivity .......................................................................................................... 123
6 Conclusions.................................................................................................................... 126

Cordus matter: Part 3.5 Schrodinger’s Cat reconceptualised ...............................128

1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 128
2 Contrasting interpretations: Quantum and Cordus mechanics....................................... 128
3 Heisenberg uncertainty principle ................................................................................... 130
4 Schrodinger’s Cat ........................................................................................................... 131
5 Contrast: String Theory .................................................................................................. 134
6 Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 134
7 Conclusions.................................................................................................................... 135

Cordus in extremis: Part 4.1 Electromagnetism...................................................137

1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 137
2 Field forces .................................................................................................................... 139
2.1 Quantum mechanics interpretation of fields ................................................................. 139
2.2 Cordus electrostatics...................................................................................................... 140
E.1 Hyffon lemma ...................................................................................................................... 140
2.3 Electric field ................................................................................................................... 141
2.4 Cordus magnetism ......................................................................................................... 144
E.2 Magnetism Lemma............................................................................................................... 144
2.5 Magnetic interaction ..................................................................................................... 148
E.2.7 Magnetic interaction lemma .................................................................................... 149
3 Conclusions.................................................................................................................... 152

Cordus in extremis: Part 4.2 Fabric of the universe .............................................155

1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 155
2 Temporal capacitance.................................................................................................... 156
3 Cordus Fabric-of-the-universe conjecture ...................................................................... 157
E.3 Fabric hyff Lemma................................................................................................................ 157
4 Conclusions.................................................................................................................... 161

Cordus in extremis: Part 4.3 Gravitation, Mass and Time ....................................163

1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 163
2 Cordus Gravitation......................................................................................................... 164
E.4 Gravitation and mass Lemma......................................................................................... 165
2.1 Mechanism for gravitational interaction force............................................................... 165
2.2 Features of cordus gravitation ....................................................................................... 168
3 Mass .............................................................................................................................. 169
E.4 Additional lemmas continued ........................................................................................ 169
4 Cordus Time................................................................................................................... 173
E.5 Time Lemma .................................................................................................................. 173

vi
 5 Force and the Principle of Geometrically Constrained re-energisation........................... 176
E.6 Force Lemma ................................................................................................................. 176
6 Conclusions.................................................................................................................... 177

Cordus in extremis: Part 4.4 Quarks ...................................................................178

1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 178
2 Existing interpretations for the strong interaction ........................................................ 179
3 Cordus quark mechanics ................................................................................................ 179
E.6 Quark lemma ................................................................................................................. 179
4 Quark structures ............................................................................................................ 180
5 Level of assembly........................................................................................................... 184
E.7 Level-of-assembly lemma .............................................................................................. 187
6 Conclusions.................................................................................................................... 188
7 Closing summary............................................................................................................ 189
Possibly testable predictions of cordus mechanics .................................................................... 192

vii
Cordus Conjecture: Overview

Dirk J. Pons, 1 Arion D. Pons, Ariel M. Pons, Aiden J. Pons.

Abstract
The Cordus conjecture suggests there is a deeper, simpler, deterministic,
and more elegant reality beneath quantum mechanics and wave theory.

Revision 1.02
Document: Cordus_0Summary_E1.05.doc

1 Introduction to cordus
What is the Cordus conjecture?
The Cordus conjecture is that all 'particles', e.g. photons of light, electrons,
and the protons in the nucleus of the atom, have a specific internal
structure. This structure is a 'cordus': two reactive ends that each behave
like a particle, with a fibril joining them. The reactive ends are energised at
a frequency, and emit a force line called a hyff that makes up the field, see
Figure 1 for application to the photon.

Hyper-fine fibrils
(hyff) emitted
from reactive end

Reactive end (RE)

energised at
frequency of
particuloid
Motion of Fibril, does not react
photon to matter, maintains
frequency re-
energisation.
Spacing is the span

Other reactive end,

in a complementary
frequency state

ow is this helpful?

Figure 1: Cordus model of the photon

The idea of a cordus allows many puzzling phenomena to be explained at a

conceptual level. For example, light seems to behave either as a wave or a
particle in the double slit experiment, and cordus explains this wave-
particle duality. Curiously, the same cordus concept flows across as an
explanation for many other baffling effects in fundamental physics. It
therefore provides an explanation that is logically consistent across a wide
range of effects.
Why is it called a 'conjecture'? Is it valid?

1
For commentary, discussion and feedback, please see
http://cordus.wordpress.com. Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons,
University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

1
As the term ‘conjecture’ shows, it is a guess based on intuition. It is a
conceptual and descriptive model. There is no guarantee that the cordus
conjecture is correct. It is a thought-experiment rather than a fully
worked-out or validated theory. Some or all of it may be entirely wrong.
Is cordus accepted by the broader scientific community?
Cordus is an unusual idea, and it produces a radical re-conceptualisation of
fundamental physics. It is unorthodox, and cuts across conventional
physics and challenges the premises on which those theories have been
built. However it is simply a process of taking a creative idea and running it
through to its logical conclusions.

It is in those conclusions that, if cordus is correct, there are causalities for

existing principles of conventional physics. For example, cordus invalidates
the ‘particle’ premise of quantum mechanics, refutes superposition,
redefines the principle of locality, denies the existence of ‘virtual
particles’, refutes the concept of interference of light, asserts that Bell’s
theorem is wrong, re-introduces a modified concept of the aether, and
reconceptualises the fundamental forces. Cordus explains why Quantum
mechanics, which seems to apply at the level of individual particles, does
not scale up to macroscopic bodies: something that QM itself has been
unable to explain. Furthermore, cordus proposes a set of new principles
for the next deeper level of physics.
How is it beautiful?
Cordus is a wild idea, in that it is totally different to conventional physics,
and is based on conjecture and intuition with all the attached subjectivity.
It is not an incremental extension of existing theories, but a disruptive new
idea and a drastically different way of thinking. That does not necessarily
make it valid, but it is beautiful albeit in a different way to the usual
standard of beauty in physics or mathematics. Cordus has a beauty in its
coherence: it provides logically consistent explanations across a broad
range of physical effects. It does so without the weirdness that is so typical
of the conventional explanations. It is also beautiful in the way it
unexpectedly shows that the next deeper layer of reality is deterministic,
not probabilistic as usually thought. There are many surprises in the
cordus conjecture.
What are the implications if the theory was to be true?
There is, as we have taken care to point out, no certainty that this
thought-experiment is really valid. Nonetheless, if it were to be true, then
the implications are that there is a deeper mechanics beneath the
conventional theories of quantum mechanics (QM) and electromagnetic
wave theory (WT). Both QM and WT emerge as outward, and in the case
of QM only approximate, mathematical representations of a deeper
behaviour within particuloids. The extreme predictions of cordus also
encompass general relativity (GR).

2 Integration problems in conventional physics

The dominant existing frameworks for fundamental theoretical physics are

Quantum mechanics (QM) for particles, Electromagnetic wave theory (WT)
for light, electrostatics and magnetism, and General relativity (GR) for

2
gravitation. While those conventional theories are generally accepted as
valid in their particular areas, there is the unfortunate problem that they
do not integrate well, see Figure 2. Furthermore, they sometimes give
weird explanations to simple phenomena, this being particularly the case
with QM. Also, there are many areas that they simply do not explain at all,
or give conflicting interpretations.

A case in point is wave-particle duality. For example in the double-slit

experiment, light apparently sometimes behaves like a wave, and
sometimes like a particle, depending on how it is observed. WT and QM
adequately describe the fringe and particle behaviours respectively, but
their explanations do not overlap. Thus there is no single integrated
explanation for wave-particle duality. Furthermore, while QM has
exquisite mathematical models for the particle behaviour, the physical
interpretation of those models results in really strange predictions of
reality e.g. superposition, and some explanations that are beyond physics,
e.g. virtual particles and parallel universes. That in itself would not be a
problem except that we do not actually see reality behaving the way QM
predicts, especially not at the macroscopic scale.

All these issues suggest that there might be a deeper physics, a better
theoretical foundation that provides a coherent explanation across the
many phenomena. However, if there is a deeper theory, one that
subsumes both wave and particle perspectives, it is not obvious what that
might be. Also, there is reason to believe, per Bell's theorem, that no
theory of internal (or hidden) variables is possible for the photon and
particles generally. Thus the problem of wave-particle duality may be
fundamentally unsolvable. The null explanation is then to simply accept
the paradoxes and consider the matter intractable.

3
Figure 2: Areas where there are integration problems in conventional
physics. Cordus addresses all of these with a radically new conceptual
framework that provides a logically consistent description across all the
effects.

3 Approach taken

The Cordus conjecture started as an attempt to create a more rational

explanation for wave-particle duality of the photon in the double-slit
device. The method did not follow the conventional method of physics,
which relies on derivation of beautiful mathematics and subsequent
extrapolation to explanation, but rather used the logic of creating a system
model by reverse-engineering known phenomena, adding conjectures and
intuitive material, and noting the necessary assumptions along the way.
Thus the central strand in the Cordus conjecture is a set of lemmas, and
these we do not attempt to prove. The resulting Cordus model is primarily
conceptual and descriptive, rather than mathematical, at least at this point
in time. It is likely that much of the mathematics of conventional physics
can be adapted and re-contextualised for a Cordus Mechanics, because
the issues are not with the mathematics but the explanations of
conventional physics.

4
Quis es tu, cordus?
Cordus asserts there is no such thing as a ‘particle’. Instead the basic
structure for a photon, electron, proton etc., is a cordus with two reactive
ends, with a physical gap between them, held together with a fibril. The
reactive ends may be energised to various degrees, and in turn consist of
hyff force lines. The energy shuttles between the ends, and this also
means that the particuloid does not exist continuously at one location, but
at two, and oscillates between them at a frequency. Consequently, cordus
suggests that all the principles of physics that are built on a ‘particle’
premise are of dubious validity, especially at the finer scales.

Outcomes
The idea of a ‘cordus’ was first created to explain photon path dilemmas in
the double-slit, and then extended to explain fringes too. This provided a
conceptual resolution of wave-particle duality. The principle was then
extended to optical effects of reflection and refraction. The next step was
application to matter effects, particularly the electron and special states of
matter. It is here that the contrast between Cordus and Quantum
mechanics is most evident. Thereafter the cordus principle was pushed to
the extremities, out of curiosity. This last set of papers is therefore the
most radical – and the least likely to be correct but the most disruptive to
conventional theories of physics if true. It provides a new perspective on
fields, unifies gravitation with electromagnetism, and infers the structure
of quarks.

A major benefit of the Cordus conjecture is that it provides a conceptual

framework that is coherent across many physical phenomena. The effects
explained include:

Internal structure of the photon

Path dilemmas of the photon in the double-slit device and Mach-Zehnder
interferometer

Wave-particle duality of the photon, electron, and matter waves

Fringes in gaps, apertures, and double slit, diffraction of single photons
and beams

Near field

Beam divergence

Frequency of photon, electron and matter generally

Zeno effect

Heisenberg uncertainty principle

Entanglement

Aharonov-Bohm effect

Electron orbital shape

Spin angular momentum

Pauli exclusion principle

Atomic bonding

Entropy

Superfluidity including quantum vortices and heat conduction

Superconductivity including Meissner effect

Josephson effect

Coherence

Quantum mechanic’s scaling problem: why does QM not apply at
macroscopic levels?

Casimir effect

5

Tunnelling

Reflection including derivation of critical angle from a particuloid
perspective

Refraction and Snell’s law derived

Brewster’s angle derived

Polarisation

Electrostatic field and granulation [quantisation] thereof

Magnetism

Gravitation and mass
th

Spacetime, but not time as 4 dimension

Lorentz

Relativistic nature of the vacuum

Finite speed of light in vacuum

Colour of quarks

Charge of quarks in 1/3 units

Mass excess in the atom

Parity violation

The implications of cordus are that several existing principles of

conventional physics may need to be revised or abandoned:

Particle: invalidated, does not exist as QM assumes, replaced with
‘cordus particuloid’

Virtual particle: invalidated, unnecessary and confounded concept,
replaced with ‘hyff’

Many-worlds interpretation: irrelevant

Interference of light: refuted, does not occur as Wave Theory describes.
Useful mathematical concept, worth keeping if limitations respected.

Locality: invalidated, replaced with new ‘Principle of Wider locality’

Power of Observer choice to change outcomes: invalidated, instead the
way the Observer sets up the experiment determines the behaviour the
photon will evidence

Heisenberg uncertainty principle: minor adjustment

Bell’s Theorem: refuted

Beam splitter: reconceptualised

Superposition: refuted as a physical effect, but useful as a rough
statistical approximation

Coherence: reconceptualised, limitations applied

Schrodinger’s Cat: irrelevant as based on flawed premises

Quantum mechanics: only applicable on average over many ‘particles’,
and only at a level where things look like 1D points

Copenhagen interpretation: a mathematical simplification of deeper
effects, is not the reality

Wave theory: validity limited primarily to light en-masse

Fundamental forces limited to electrostatic, magnetism, and gravitation.
Common unified underlying mechanism provided. Abandon strong and
weak interactions – nothing specially fundamental about them.

Invariance of the speed of light in the vacuum: not supported, instead is
variable depending on fabric.

Aether re-introduced in modified form, but not a matter or particle based
one.

The cordus conjecture also introduces some new concepts that do not
exist in conventional physics:

Cordus structure and mechanics

6

Complementary frequency state synchronisation (COFS) as the
underlying mechanism for electron orbitals, Pauli exclusion principle,
entanglement, internal structure of proton, atomic structure, atomic
bonding, strong force

Principle of wider locality

Internal structure of the photon

structure of quarks

Internal structure of the proton and neutron

Electric field and granulation thereof

Electric field cannot be shielded

Magnetism: new concept

Gravitation: new concept, integrated with electromagnetism, granulation

Fabric of the Universe

Mass: new concept of underlying mechanism, granulation and transient
nature

Time: new concept, and how atomic time aggregates to personal sense of
time

Vacuum: new concept of what it contains, fabric hyff, differentiation
from ‘void’

Strong force (interaction): not a fundamental force but a COFS effect

Weak interaction: not a fundamental force or interaction but same class
of interactions as photon emission

Level of assembly: new concept for understanding why smaller
particuloids are heavier (explains mass excess)

Conservation of mass: reformulated

Synchronous hyff emission direction (SHED) as mechanism for strong
interaction holding quarks together

As the method explains, the treatment of these matters is by logical

inference, and the results are primarily conceptual. The validity of the
results is uncertain and it is to be expected that some or all of the model
may be wrong or require revision. Nonetheless, the ideas build a novel
conceptual framework for fundamental physics. This framework is
coherent in its ability to explain a wide range of phenomena in a physically
descriptive way.

4 Cordus mechanics

The following is a summary of the cordus conjecture and its mechanics.

Each of the parts is a paper on its own.

4.1 Cordus Conjecture

Cordus Conjecture: Part 1.1 Quis es tu photon?

This paper introduces the core idea: a new conceptual model is proposed
for the internal structure of the photon, and the mechanics thereof. This
internal structure is called a cordus. The cordus consists of two reactive
ends (RE) connected together with a fibril. The fibril connecting the two
reactive ends does not interact with other matter. Each of the two reactive
ends behaves like a whole photon in its ability to interact with other
matter, including reflection, transmission, and the ability to take two
paths, though it collapses to only one location. The reactive ends emit

7
hyperfine fibrils (hyff) which are force lines. The cordus structure is neither
a particle nor a wave, though can appear as either in certain
circumstances. (Pons, 2011a)

Cordus Conjecture: Part 1.2 Quo vadis, photon?

Photon path dilemmas are a difficult area for conventional physics. Typical
situations are the double-slit device and interferometers. The problem
manifests as an apparent ability of the photon to simultaneously take all
paths through the device, but eventually only appear at one. Neither
Electromagnetic wave theory nor Quantum mechanics provides a fully
coherent explanation for the behaviour of light in the double-slit device,
and the integration of ‘wave-particle duality’ is poor. It is shown that a
cordus structure is conceptually able to resolve the path dilemmas in
wave-particle duality. Explanations are given for the double-slit device and
interferometers. The Cordus conjecture implies there is a deeper, simpler,
deterministic, and more elegant reality beneath quantum mechanics and
wave theory. (Pons, 2011b)

Cordus Conjecture: Part 1.3 Explanation of fringes

The cordus concept is shown to be able to explain wave behaviour in
gaps, and fringes in the double slit device. This is useful because one of the
enigmas of the double-slit device is that single photons form fringe
patterns. Cordus explains fringes in terms of force lines called hyperfine
fibrils (hyff) and their interaction with the edges of the light path. This also
explains beam divergence and near-field effects. The significance of this is
that it shows it is conceptually possible to create a solution for fringes
based on a particuloid interpretation of light, without using the concept of
interference. This means that the Cordus solution has coherence over a
wider range than simply the path-ambiguity problems. (Pons, 2011c)

The biggest difference between Wave theory and the cordus explanation is
their interpretation of the mechanism for fringes. Wave theory explains
fringes as ‘interference’: two separate waves of light differing by full (half)
fractions of wavelengths and thus constructively (destructively)
interfering. From the Cordus perspective photons do not actually interfere
or add together, and 'interference' is only a convenient analogy. The
Cordus explanation is that fringes are caused instead by interaction of the
photon hyff with opaque edges.

Comments on the bracket of ‘Cordus Conjecture’ papers as a whole

Wave theory and quantum mechanics are functionally adequate theories
on their own, and powerful in their ability to predict how beams of light
and individual photons, respectively, will behave in a given situation.
However, despite their mathematical sophistication, they are incongruous
explanations of reality when wave and particle behaviours occur in the
same situation, e.g. the double-slit device. In these situations their
explanations are weird, which suggests that the models of causality are
incomplete. The problem has been that wave theory and quantum
mechanics are just so good, that it has been difficult to see what the

8
deeper mechanics could be, especially as Bell's theorem seems to prohibit
solutions with hidden variables.

How do Quantum mechanics and Wave theory fit in?

From the cordus perspective both conventional theories, quantum
mechanics and wave theory, are mathematical simplifications of a deeper
mechanics. Those theories represent the output behaviour of the inner
system. The weirdness of conventional wave-particle duality is not
because the photon is fundamentally weird, but because the existing
conceptual frameworks are inadequate: their mathematics are sufficient
for forward propagation of effect (prediction), but give unreliable results
when used for backward inference of causality (explanation).

Resolution of wave-particle duality

The Cordus conjecture does away with much of the weirdness of wave-
particle duality: there is no need for virtual particles, superposition,
observer dilemmas, pilot waves, intelligent photons, or parallel universes.
A simple deterministic, unintelligent photon with a dual existence is all
that is required.

From this perspective wave and particle behaviours are simply the
different output behaviours that the internal system shows depending on
how it is measured. The duality and the apparent incongruity of Quantum
mechanics and Wave theory is resolved: the conflict no longer exists at the
deeper level.

Thus Cordus offers a deeper mechanics that subsumes both quantum

mechanics and wave theory. This bracket shows how it resolves wave-
particle duality, and other papers extend it to other enigmatic effects, as
well as the mundane. Perhaps surprisingly, Cordus is also simpler and
more coherent across a wider range of phenomena than quantum
mechanics or wave theory on their own. Even more surprising, and
unexpectedly contrary to the prevailing probabilistic paradigm of Quantum
mechanics, Cordus suggests that the next deeper level of reality is
deterministic.

4.2 Cordus optics

Cordus optics: Part 2.1 Frequency

Conventional particle and wave theories struggle to explain the frequency
of photons and matter in a coherent manner using natural physics. This
paper applies the cordus conjecture to develop a model for frequency of
the photon. The interpretation is that there really is a part of the photon
cordus that moves with a frequency. The working model is for a
reciprocal motion: the energy alternates between the two reactive ends
across the span of the cordus, and the hyff represent the observable
electric field. This cordus model for frequency readily explains polarisation
and tunnelling, and the concept is fundamental to other developments of
the cordus mechanics including the reflection and refraction of
particuloids. The implications are that frequency is not just an intrinsic

9
variable, but a physical effect within the photon. The cordus frequency is a
fundamental conceptual building-block in creating an integrated solution
that unifies wave and particle behaviour. It is a powerful concept that is
coherent across many other phenomena too, including matter particuloids
and it contributes subsequently to the cordus model for granular fields.
(Pons, 2011m)

Cordus optics: Part 2.2 Reflection

Optical effects such as reflection and refraction are conventionally best
described by Electromagnetic Wave theory, at least when they involve
beams of light. However that theory does not explain why single photons
should also show such behaviour. This paper shows that optical effects
can also be explained from a cordus particuloid perspective. Several
principles are proposed for the interaction of a cordus photon with an
optical surface, and these are used to explain reflection and subsequently
refraction. The formula for critical angle is derived from a particuloid basis.
The cordus and wave theory perspectives are compared and contrasted.
The significance of this work is that the cordus mechanics explains the
reflection and refraction behaviour of both single photons as well as
beams of light, so it is a more universal explanation. (Pons, 2011n)

Cordus optics: Part 2.3 Refraction

Explaining basic optical effects is not possible with classical particle
mechanics, and even with quantum mechanics it is not straight forward
and not particularly intuitive. The problem is much simpler when solved in
the cordus domain. This paper provides cordus explanations for Snell’s
Law and Brewster’s Angle, and quantitative derivations too. This is
significant because the cordus mechanics were derived for single photons,
and immediately generalise also to beams of light. Therefore cordus can
explain particle behaviour, fringes, and optical effects, using a single
coherent mechanics. The cordus explanation does not need the
conventional concept of ‘interference’. (Pons, 2011o)

4.3 Cordus matter

Matter is conventionally thought to consist of particles, and quantum

mechanics (QM) is the dominant, and apparently mostly sufficient, theory
for this area. The application of cordus concepts to the particle world of
quantum mechanics consequently has some surprises.

Cordus matter: Part 3.1 Wider Locality

Quantum mechanics does a good job of providing mathematical
descriptions of particle effects, and the fact that it can do so is usually
taken as circumstantial evidence that QM must be correct. Unlike other
areas, such as wave-particle duality, there is no major competing
interpretation to QM in the area of sub-atomic particles. All the same, QM
is not particularly effective at providing a qualitative description of the
effects, and this makes it complex and difficult to understand at an
intuitive level, and consequently people generally, though perhaps not
physicists specifically, perceive QM as strange. Maybe the effects really are

10
intrinsically complex, and the mathematical formulations are the reality:
the simplest possible way to express the underlying mechanisms of
causality. (Pons, 2011h)

Einstein called entanglement ‘spooky action at a distance’ and it continues

to sit uneasily within physics since a qualitative explanation is lacking even
though the reality is accepted. It is contrary to relativity, and to the
principle of locality. Nor can entanglement satisfactorily be explained with
existing hidden-variable theories. However it is consistent with quantum
mechanics. The principle of locality is that an object is only affected by its
immediate surrounding. Entanglement appears to require the principle to
be violated: twin particles may be linked, such that changing the state of
one instantly changes the other, even if they are separated by
macroscopic distances. The mechanisms are incompletely understood in
conventional physics. (Pons, 2011h)

This particular paper shows how entanglement is readily explained as a

natural consequence of the cordus. This obviates the need for the usual
spooky and metaphysical interpretations. The paper also introduces the
principle of complementary frequency state synchronisation (CoFS). This is
an important concept in that later papers show how it underpins the Pauli
exclusion principle, coherence, and the strong interaction.

More radically, Cordus suggests that Bell’s Theorem is only applicable to

1D point particles, and is thus generally irrelevant. It is an artefact of the
flawed 1D particle premise of conventional physics, and is not an obstacle
to models of hidden variables. Another radical suggestion from Cordus is
that the principle of locality is not viable in its present form and needs to
be widened.

These are unorthodox predictions. The implications are that the ‘particle’
conceptual foundation of Quantum mechanics is invalid. QM only applies
at the level at which small pieces of matter look like point particles, and is
invalid at smaller scales.

Cordus matter: Part 3.2 Matter particuloids

While matter forms the tangible substance of our world, our
understanding of it at the atomic level is far from complete. Some of the
most enigmatic effects in the physics of electrons are its wave-particle
duality and the Aharonov-Bohm and Casimir effects. Even relatively core
concepts of atomic physics, like spin and the Pauli exclusion principle, lack
satisfactory descriptive explanations. This paper shows that application of
the cordus principle can explain these effects in a coherent manner.
(Pons, 2011i)

Cordus matter: Part 3.3 Energy cycles within matter

The interaction of light with electrons is one of the fundamental
perceptual realities of what we see. Yet that interaction is only partly
understood. Cordus concepts are applied to develop a descriptive model
of the mechanisms whereby photons are absorbed into electrons and
emitted. From the Cordus perspective, the temperature of a body is

11
primarily a measure of its phonons (lattice-vibrations). Cordus shows why
entropy occurs, despite the individual mechanisms being reversible. An
understanding of the mechanisms for entropy is relevant to the
understanding of coherence, superfluidity and superconductivity. Cordus
suggests that a failure to adequately conceptualise entropy leads to
misapplication of coherence and ultimately to unreliability in the premise
of superposition. (Pons, 2011j)

The cordus re-conceptualisation of entropy might seem basic and almost

self-evident in hindsight, but it is a core concept in understanding why QM
does not scale up to the macroscopic world. Entropy is the Achilles heel of
Quantum mechanics.

Cordus matter: Part 3.4 Special states of matter

The Cordus principle of complementary frequency states (CoFS) is used to
develop a novel descriptive model for the mechanisms underlying
superfluidity and superconductivity. In both cases Cordus explains the
effects as synchronisation of forces between electrons and atoms. Several
associated effects are likewise explained, including quantum vortices, heat
conduction in superfluids, and the Meissner effect in superconductors.
Cordus also asserts that superposition does not exist, at least not the way
QM conceptualises it. In particular, that the mathematics of superposition
and the wavefunction are not the reality, only mathematical
approximations of deeper effects, and are unreliable qualitative
descriptors of those underlying mechanisms. (Pons, 2011k)

Cordus makes the unorthodox assertion that superposition does not exist,
at least not the way QM conceives of a whole particle or body being fully
in two places at once. Cordus provides for positional variability: the two
reactive ends of a cordus are in different places, and extends that to larger
assemblies of matter only if such objects can be placed in full body-
coherence (which is rare). However Cordus rejects the QM superposition
concept of causal variability: the idea that the whole particle or body is
simultaneously in both and neither positions and therefore has two
futures before it, which can diverge.

Cordus asserts that QM is only approximately accurate at the sub-atomic

scale because of the problem with superposition, and not at all at the large
scale. Briefly, the reason is that large bodies have too much internal
entropy (disorder) to have the necessary coherence to appear in more
than one location. Even if they did have body-coherence the results would
be minuscule (small span) and not as dramatic as popularly imagined. The
mathematics of QM are premised on coherence, and thus the explanations
of QM are unreliable where body-coherence fails. In most room-
temperature applications this is the atomic level. Quantum mechanics
therefore does not practically apply to large bodies, living creatures, or the
universe as a whole.

Cordus re-conceptualises, or at least conceptually clarifies the concept of

‘coherence’, and describes why that state cannot be readily achieved. Thus
Cordus predicts what size bodies should and realistically cannot be made

12
into matter-waves. Thus the concept of large macroscopic objects, such as
motor-cars, being able to go through a double slit, is proposed to be a
fallacy. This also allows Cordus to explain why Quantum mechanics, which
seems to apply at the level of individual particles, does not scale up to
macroscopic bodies: something that QM itself has been unable to explain.

Cordus matter: Part 3.5 Schrodinger’s Cat reconceptualised

Quantum mechanics is the dominant conceptual foundation for
fundamental physics. Nonetheless there are effects that it does not
explain, or explains only by reference to metaphysical effects. While many
have wondered whether there could be a more-complete explanation, the
solution has been elusive. Cordus suggests that the necessary deeper
mechanics is only accessible by abandoning the premise of ‘particle’, and
shows how to achieve this. The resulting Cordus mechanics provides a new
way of thinking and a radically different conceptual foundation. This paper
primarily contrasts Quantum and Cordus mechanics. In the process,
Cordus re-conceptualises Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. It also
provides an explanation for the paradox of Schrödinger’s Cat, and shows it
to be based on unrealistic and unattainable premises. (Pons, 2011l)

Cordus does not support the idea of virtual particles, nor the interference
thereof, nor the collapse of the wavefunction. For Cordus the particuloid is
neither a wave nor a particle but behaves as either depending on the
measuring method. The measurement method unavoidably changes how
the particle behaves, and this is particularly pronounced with the photon.
The Experimenter's choice of method therefore limits the type of results
that will be observed. Wave and particle duality are only measuring
artefacts, not the reality.

4.4 Cordus in extremis

The Cordus concept as a whole is conjectural, and the previous papers

have taken care to ground the concepts by comparing them against well-
known physical phenomena. The present bracket of papers is less
cautious. The purpose here is to audaciously push the cordus concept to
see if it has novel suggestions about deeper mechanisms, particularly the
propagation of light and fields in general. As always, we are not saying that
the results are necessarily valid, only that they are logical and curious. In
extremis therefore refers both to the subject of fields and the cosmos, and
the conceptual extrapolation of doubtful validity.

Cordus in extremis: Part 4.1 Electromagnetism

The Cordus conjecture is extended to create a conceptual model for
electromagnetic fields. The resulting model shows how a cordus
particuloid generates small transient units of force at the sub-atomic level,
thereby creating the apparently smooth and continuous electric field that
we more commonly perceive. The starting premise is that all fields are
hyff, of one sort or another. Hyff are directional force lines that extend
out into space from their basal particuloid, and where the force appears in
pulses that travel outwards along the line (hyffons). Thus fields consist of a

13
rapid sequence of discrete impulses of transient force, radiating out from a
cordus at the centre. However we do not see this granularity at our level
of perception. Instead we perceive fields to be smooth, continuous, and
uniform in all directions. This is because of the en-masse effect of many
particuloids being involved.

Cordus also reconceptualises how magnetism is generated at the sub-

atomic level, and likewise explains how the granularity arises. From the
Cordus perspective, a static charge only generates an electrostatic force,
without magnetism, because the hyff are straight outwards. However a
moving charge causes bending of the e-hyff, and this is what we perceive
as magnetism. Any moving mass generates curvature of the hyff, and
these generate the magnetic field, except that neutral-charge mass has no
observable magnetic field because it emits positive and negative hyff. Thus
electrostatic forces are a position effect, while magnetism is a velocity
effect. However the same basic structure, the hyff, is responsible for both.

Cordus electromagnetism is applied to explain the electric field

surrounding a wire carrying current, the locus of moving test charges in a
magnetic field, and the mechanism for how force arises in permanent
magnets. The contribution made by this paper is a description of
electromagnetism that goes to the next deeper level: it explains the
underlying mechanisms for how the forces arise. Also, it provides a
mechanism for fields to be granular and directional at the small scale, but
smooth and continuous at larger scale. (Pons, 2011d)

The cordus explanation for electromagnetism is unorthodox in several

areas. First, it dispenses with the need for additional particles, and
conventional references to ‘virtual particles’ of any kind are thus re-
interpreted as a hyff effect. Second, conventional theories tend to portray
electric fields and magnetic fields with equal standing: they are
interchangeable concepts. By contrast, Cordus suggests that the electric
field is the fundamental effect, and the magnetic field is a derivative. Thus
electrostatics is a reactive end position effect, magnetism a RE-movement
phenomenon, and (yet to be shown) gravitation a RE-acceleration effect.
Third, Cordus is unconventional in asserting that the electric field cannot
be shielded, and that what looks like shielding is only localised
neutralisation.

The results show that the Cordus conjecture can be extended to

electromagnetic fields. Doing so permits novel re-conceptualisation of
some fundamental paradigms of conventional physics, and lays the
foundation for the next ideas.

Cordus in extremis: Part 4.2 Fabric of the universe

The concept of the vacuum is problematic for conventional physics.
Electromagnetic wave theory models it as consisting of nothing at all, but
yet paradoxically having finite electric and magnetic constants. Quantum
mechanics models it as consisting of temporary particles, but no average
substance. General Relativity theory includes a spacetime medium,
without describing the composition. In all cases the underlying physical

14
mechanisms are obscure. Furthermore, these existing perspectives conflict
in their expectations, so the integration is poor. The treatment is not
always logical either: conventional theories find the idea of the matter-
based aether thoroughly unacceptable, yet ironically all include something
that looks conceptually much like a medium. The Cordus conjecture
provides a conceptual solution for the composition of the vacuum: it
provides a fabric that is granular (similar to quantised) at the smallest
scale, scales up to a continuum, provides a medium for propagation of
disturbances and waves, provides a medium for electromagnetism and
gravitation, is relativistic, is not a matter aether, and includes a time
signal. In the cordus solution the vacuum is made of tangled hyff (force
lines) from all the surrounding matter particuloids. This cordus fabric
concept also provides a descriptive explanation as to why the speed of
light is a finite value. The fine structure constant is given a physical
interpretation, as a measure of the transmission efficacy of the fabric.
Cordus also distinguishes between the fabric that makes up the vacuum of
space, as opposed to the void which has neither fabric nor time as we
perceive it. This model is radically unorthodox in suggesting that the speed
of light is relativistic but not invariant; that it depends fundamentally on
the fabric density and hence the accessible mass density of the universe at
that locality. (Pons, 2011e)

Cordus in extremis: Part 4.3 Gravitation, Mass and Time

Gravitation is conceptually problematic to General Relativity and Quantum
mechanics in that the fundamental mechanisms are unknown to both, and
the theories have different requirements that are difficult to reconcile into
a single model. Cordus gravitation offers a solution to the problem. It
provides a mechanism whereby gravitation is not continuous but in
discrete force (or displacement) increments similar to quanta (but not
uniform increments). Also, the closing force between two masses is
transient. In this idea, gravitation, and therefore also mass, is a
discontinuous property: i.e. a particuloid emits gravity (has mass) at some
moments but not others. Thus gravitation is an effect that a mass does to
the whole universe, not to targeted other bodies, and in this regard
Cordus is consistent with General relativity. Both QM and Cordus agree
that gravitation is quantised. Cordus conceptually integrates the different
effects of mass: Gravitation is a particuloid contributing hyff to the fabric;
Newtonian mass is resistance of the reactive ends to unexpected
displacement; Relativistic mass is decreasing efficacy of hyff engagement
with the fabric as velocity of the reactive end increases; Momentum is a
frequency mechanism that ensures the reactive end re-energises on-time
and in-place; particuloids like nucleons have mass to the extent that they
have frequency. Furthermore, Cordus offers an explanation of how time
arises at a sub-atomic level by the cordus frequency, and how this
aggregates to the sense of time that we perceive biologically. Thus Cordus
offers a radically new way of thinking about the problem of gravitation,
mass and time that is quite unlike conventional physics, yet includes
concepts that might be recognisable to those other physics. (Pons, 2011f)

15
Cordus in extremis: Part 4.4 Quarks
A conceptual model is created for the composition of quarks and the
internal structure of the proton and neutron. In this model the charge of a
quark indicates the number of hyff (force lines) it emits. Cordus also
explains the colour and provides a mechanism for the strong interaction
(both the attraction and repulsive components). The model also explains
why parity violation occurs. A new concept of the ‘level of assembly’ is
introduced and used to explain mass excess and why smaller particuloids
have greater mass. Cordus also predicts non-conservation of mass. (Pons,
2011g)

Fundamental forces
In this extrapolation of the Cordus conjecture, gravitation is caused by
acceleration of the basal cordus particuloid, magnetism by velocity of the
reactive ends, and electrostatic force by position thereof. These are the
only three fundamental forces: the strong and the weak ‘forces’ are aptly
named ‘interactions’ and in the same categories as orbitals and photon
emission respectively, i.e. not fundamental forces.

The important concept here is that one mechanism, the emission of hyff,
provides the underlying mechanism for electrostatics, magnetism, and
gravitation. These forces are intrinsically unified. In contrast, QM
perceives these forces, together with the strong and weak nuclear
interactions, as mediated by virtual particles and tries to unify them on
that basis. Cordus suggests the so called virtual particles are simply
different measurement artefacts of the hyff, not the real interactions.

5 Conclusions

The cordus concept was originally created to explain wave-particle duality

of the photon. It turns out to be much more adaptable and powerful, in a
descriptive way, than simply a solution for the photon. Cordus is a
conceptual solution that shows it is possible to conceive of fundamental
physics in a radically different way.

Cordus challenges the conventional idea of 1D points, and the whole

conceptual edifice of quantum mechanics built thereon. The concept that
emerges here is that ‘particles’ are not actually 1D points, neither are they
waves. Instead ‘waves’ and ‘particles’ are simply the external
manifestations of hidden internal structures. Thus Cordus offers a deeper
mechanics that subsumes both quantum mechanics and wave theory, and
thereby resolves wave-particle duality and several other enigmas. Perhaps
surprisingly, Cordus is also simpler and more coherent across a wider
range of phenomena than quantum mechanics or wave theory on their
own. Radically and contrary to the prevailing probabilistic paradigm of
quantum mechanics, Cordus suggests that the next deeper level of reality
is deterministic.

Cordus is a thought-experiment. The treatment is primarily conceptual and

descriptive, and the cordus mechanics only lightly sketched out. It is a

16
conceptual model, not so much a full theory with all the details worked
out. While it has been thought-tested against many physical phenomena,
it has not been checked against all. Furthermore, it is based on intuition
and conjecture, and makes many assumptions (lemmas) that have yet to
be tested. Thus the validity is uncertain. Nevertheless, Cordus is a
purposely audacious idea: it explores new ways of thinking, and therefore
deliberately puts forward tentative explanations. We don’t believe the
particular design variant developed in this set of papers is necessarily the
only or the final solution, and we are open to the possibility that it could
be totally wrong. Thus the cordus concept and the specific working models
presented here are simply concepts to be critically evaluated.

The conceptual contribution of this work is the demonstration that it is

indeed possible to create hidden-variable models, and that Bell's theorem
is not a limitation. It shows that the application of logic and semantic
inference to existing experimental observations can give interesting new
insights. The beauty of the Cordus Conjecture is that it provides an
explanation that is coherent across wave and particle effects, photons and
matter, ‘particles’ and macroscopic bodies.

Thus the primary contribution of the Cordus work as a whole is that it

provides a new conceptual framework for thinking about fundamental
physics. Cordus may or may not be a robust solution, but it does show that
there are other ways of thinking about the issues. Therefore we do not
need to be discouraged by the staleness of the debates about wave-
particle duality, nor stuck in the fixed paradigms of existing theories, nor
perplexed by their weirdness. Even if Cordus is not the deeper mechanics,
there can now be no doubt that a deeper mechanics does exist. Perhaps
the biggest contribution is simply the intellectual stimulus to think
creatively and more deeply intuitively about topics that we thought we
already understood.

References
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011a).
Cordus Conjecture: Part 1.1 Quis es tu photon? .
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011b).
Cordus Conjecture: Part 1.2 Quo vadis, photon?
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011c).
Cordus Conjecture: Part 1.3 Explanation of fringes.
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011d).
Cordus in extremis: Part 4.1 Electromagnetism.
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011e).
Cordus in extremis: Part 4.2 Fabric of the universe.
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011f).
Cordus in extremis: Part 4.3 Gravitation, Mass and Time.
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011g).
Cordus in extremis: Part 4.4 Quarks.
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011h).
Cordus matter: Part 3.1 Wider Locality.

17
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011i).
Cordus matter: Part 3.2 Matter particuloids.
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011j).
Cordus matter: Part 3.3 Energy cycles within matter.
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011k).
Cordus matter: Part 3.4 Special states of matter.
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011l).
Cordus matter: Part 3.5 Schrodinger’s Cat reconceptualised.
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011m).
Cordus optics: Part 2.1 Frequency.
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011n).
Cordus optics: Part 2.2 Reflection.
Pons, D. J., Pons, Arion. D., Pons, Ariel. M., & Pons, Aiden. J. (2011o).
Cordus optics: Part 2.3 Refraction.

18
Cordus Conjecture: Part 1.1 Quis es tu
photon?

Pons, D.J.,2 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
A new conceptual model is proposed for the internal structure of the
photon, and the mechanics thereof. This internal structure is called a
cordus. The cordus consists of two reactive ends (RE) connected together
with a fibril. The fibril connecting the two reactive ends does not interact
with other matter. Each of the two reactive ends behaves like a whole
photon in its ability to interact with other matter, including reflection,
transmission, and the ability to take two paths, though it collapses to only
one location. The reactive ends emit hyperfine fibrils (hyff) which are force
lines. The cordus structure is neither a particle nor a wave, though can
appear as either in certain circumstances.

Keywords: wave-particle duality; wave theory; quantum mechanics;

double slit;
Revision 1.02
Document: Cordus_AConjecture_E9.77.doc

1 Introduction: Wave-particle duality

Wave-particle duality is a mostly-sufficient explanation of the behaviour of

light, but fundamentally incomplete because of its lack of an integrated
theoretical foundation or a coherent explanation that is consistent with
reality. It gives rise to sometimes weird explanations, for example in the
double-slit experiment, light apparently sometimes behaves like a wave,
and sometimes like a particle, depending on how it is observed.

The Wave theory (WT) part of the duality perceives light as

electromagnetic (EM) waves, and uses this to explain various optical
effects. From this perspective light is a temporally continuous beam. Thus
the light going into an object, e.g. a mirror or a double-slit device, exists at
the same time as it exits and can therefore interfere with itself.
Interference is therefore a core concept throughout the WT perspective.
WT is an effective predictor of large scale optical effects and fringes.
However WT is incapable of dealing with individual photons, and therefore
with certain classes of effects, such as single photons into the double-slit
device with a blocked slit.

The other part of the duality is Quantum mechanics (QM). It takes the
particle perspective and treats light as a series of photons. It can thus
explain effects involving single photons, e.g. the photo-electric effect, that

2
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

19
WT cannot. QM states that the photon’s particle properties are described
by a probabilistic wave-function, and that superposition applies, so that its
location is indeterminate while it is flight: the wave-function supposedly
collapses only when it is observed. QM is an excellent predictor of how
particles will behave, though WT is better for beams of light. However QM
is a mathematical and statistical solution that suffers from poor physically
meaningfulness: ‘mechanics’ is not particularly apt. It is good at providing
a quantitative prediction of what can happen, but weak at giving a
qualitative description of how the causal mechanisms operate.

Wave theory and Quantum mathematics accurately predict physical

outcomes, but neither is completely sufficient as an explanation of reality,
and they do not integrate well. However, if there is a deeper theory, one
that subsumes both wave and particle perspectives, it is not obvious what
that might be. Also, there is reason to believe, per Bell's theorem, that no
theory of internal (or hidden) variables is possible for the photon. Thus the
problem of wave-particle duality may be fundamentally unsolvable. The
null explanation is then to simply accept the paradoxes and consider the
matter intractable.

Is there a way to integrate wave and particle views? Is there a deeper

mechanics, one wherein the paradoxes dissolve? Yes, we think so. This
paper introduces a novel concept, the Cordus conjecture, and shows how
it can resolve elements of wave-particle duality. This primary paper
conceptually sketches out the underlying mechanics, and anticipates the
internal structure of the photon. Companion papers extend the concept to
explain the optics of light beams, matter, and fields. Taken together, the
papers sketch out a conceptual foundation for a proposed cordus
mechanics: a candidate for a deeper mechanics beneath both quantum
mechanics and wave theory.

This paper is part 1 in a bracket of three. The first part describes the
fundamental cordus concepts. i.e. the proposed internal structure of the
photon. The second part solves the apparent path-dilemmas in the
double-slit device, and also interferometers. The third develops a novel
mechanism for the formation of fringes. Other brackets of papers apply
the Cordus concept to optical effects (ref. ‘Cordus Optics’), matter (ref.
‘Cordus matter’), and fields (ref. ‘Cordus in extremis’), and each of those
have several parts.

2 Method

The objective was to identify, at a conceptual level, whether there could

be internal structures and properties to the photon that could explain its
observed behaviour.

The approach taken was a logical rather than mathematical one: by

knowing the behaviour of the photon in various experimental situations,
infer the possible internal variables that could give rise to this behaviour.
This is a typical system-thinking approach to reverse-engineering a product

20
or process. It is a process of working out what the black box might contain
by observing its outputs in different situations. The process is necessarily
conjectural, and is more a thought-experiment with demonstrations than a
conclusive proof.

Existing photon effects are accepted as veritas, including the wave and
particle outcomes in the double-slit experiment: an interference pattern is
created even from single photons (eventually, given enough photons). A
new structure for the photon was then conjectured. This is a conceptual
model of what the mechanisms might be within the photon that could give
rise to those observable effects. The concept was then tested against
various other optical and quantum phenomena. It was deliberately tested
in areas of theoretical incongruence and discontinuous output behaviours,
because these are potentially where the system variables are most
exposed. Also, such cases are opportunities to think of radically new
concepts, less cognitively encumbered by existing theories.

Then additional lemmas (premises, assumptions) were added to the basic

cordus concept to explain these other situations. This process further
defined, constrained, and developed the concept in a process of synthesis
to match the veritas. New variables were added parsimoniously where
necessary for requisite variability.

Cordus is intended to be a thought-experiment rather than a proof, and

therefore seeks to create coherent conceptual links between topics.
Consequently it offers explanations rather than mathematical proofs.
Tentative explanations are put forward, and even speculative
extrapolations. The latter are labelled 'in extremis' to show they are
secondary explanations and not core requirements.

The cordus concept is a class of solutions that permits several design

variants. Where necessary we selected a particular variant, referred to as
the working model. The result is a type of 'hidden-variable' solution, that
identifies internal variables within the photon and shows how they cause
the external behaviour.

3 Cordus conjecture

The cordus conjecture proposes a radically different structure for the

photon. It is a structure that is neither a particle nor a wave, though can
appear as either in certain circumstances. Instead it is proposed that the
photon consists of a cordus: two reactive ends (RE) connected together
with a fibril. The fibril connecting the two reactive ends does not interact
with other matter. Each of the two reactive ends behaves like a whole
photon in its ability to interact with other matter, including reflection,
transmission, and the ability to take two paths, though it collapses to only
one location. Applying some assumptions about the basic sub-structure of
this cord, permits the concept to be expanded and used to explain a
variety of effects.

21
3.1 Cordus model of the photon

The starting concept is that the photon does

pass through both slots in the double slit Reactive
experiment, and therefore has two ends that End
are in communication. This is called a
‘cordus’: two reactive ends (RE) connected
together with a fibril, see Figure 1.
Fibril
Figure 1: The cordus consists of two reactive
ends, functionally connected by a fibril. The
effective mean centre of the photon is at the
midpoint, but the statistical modes are at the Motion of
REs, i.e. the photon is only every found at the photon
ends.

This is a functional concept. Exactly what

geometry or physical sub-structure creates
this cordus functionality is not prescribed at
this point. It is necessary to add further assumptions (lemmas) to construct
a workable model, Hence the following additional. The first focuses on the
path-ambiguity behaviour, and others follow to address fringes.

Lemma L.1 Behaviour of the cordus

L.1.1 Each of the two REs behaves like a whole photon in its ability to
interact with other matter, including reflection, transmission, and
absorption.
L.1.2 The fibril connecting the two reactive ends does not interact with
other matter.
L.1.3 The REs may take different paths to each other: spatially distinct;
angularly distinct; reflect off different surfaces.
See Causa 1 for a working model of the possible underlying explanations.

Causa 1 Cordus underlying mechanisms

Several possible underlying mechanisms may be anticipated. Note that
these are simply a selection of design variants to consider. The cordus (see
Figure 2) may consist of:
C.1.1 Two particle-like reactive ends with a fibril connecting them (‘bola-
fibril’)
C.1.2 Fibril with reactive ends (‘open-fibril’)
C.1.3 Fibril that vibrates, where the vibrations create the functionality of
reflect/transmit/collapse, only appears when the energy is in the
condensed state at the reactive ends.
C.1.5 Fibril where the energy reciprocates and there is a field effect at
reactive ends, i.e. it is the vibration that interacts (‘reactive’) with
other structures (‘thick-fibril’)
C.1.4 Fibril where the energy reciprocates from one side to the other.
The reactive end appears momentarily as a ‘particle’ when the
energy is in its arrested or condensed state before deconstructing
and changing direction again (‘teleport fibril’). Several sub-versions

22
 might include a single ‘particle’ that traverses the entire span, i.e.
the cordus has two ends but only one is active at a time (‘full-span
shuttle’); two ‘particles’ each reciprocating between the centre
and an end (‘twin half-span shuttle’); two particles of which one is
a different type and reciprocating over the full or half span (‘anti-
particle shuttle’). In all cases the energy is non-reactive to other
matter while in transit, and the particle nature, e.g. the ability to
the ends (hyff model, see later). The energy appears at one end
while the other is dormant, and then withdraws and changes to
the other end. At any one moment only one end is active.
C.1.6 In this variant the energy retracts at one end (C+) and extends at
the other (C-), before reversing. There is only an instant when a
reactive end is neither C+ nor C-, unlike the C.1.5 model where one
end is dormant for a full half cycle.

Figure 2: Several different design variants for the cordus structure,

by way of illustration of the concept. No specific variant is
preferred or necessary at this stage. The dashed lines
represent the frequency component.

The preferred design variant is C.1.6, though this only emerges

subsequently as the bigger picture is built up.

The concept now is that the photon does actually pass through both slits in
double-slit experiment, i.e. that the observed behaviour is the reality.
However additional lemmas are required to explain the selective
appearance of the photon.

Lemma L.2 Collapse of the cordus

L.2.1 When one reactive end touches a material that absorbs photons
(i.e. an opaque material) then that RE is ‘grounded’.
L.2.2 Once one RE grounds, the cordus collapses.
One design variant is that the fibril withdraws the other reactive
end and collapses the cordus to the location of the grounded RE.
However the preferred explanation using C.1.6 is as follows:

23
L.2.2.1 Only an energised reactive end can ground.
L.2.2.2 At the time of grounding, the other (free) reactive end
ceases to exist at the next frequency cycle.
L.2.3 Once grounded, the photon appears as a stationary point, and an
injection of energy into the lattice of the material.
L.2.4 The first RE to be grounded collapses the cordus. This corresponds
to the shorter of the two temporal optical paths.
L.2.5 The (statistical) mode of the collapse location is not the mean
photon location. Mode is determined by the location of the two
reactive ends, and this is where grounding occurs, whereas Mean
is optical centre line and the geometric centre of the fibril.

The mode of the collapse location is therefore not precisely on the optical
centreline of the photon, but will instead be at one of the reactive ends.
The non-grounded reactive end simply ceases to exist at the next
frequency reversal. Therefore the reactive end does not need to be
dragged through the material, so the optical properties of the intervening
material is of no consequence at collapse.

With Lemma 2 it is now possible to explain the quantum behaviour of the

double-slit experiment, as will be shown. However to resolve the observer
paradoxes requires another related lemma on detection.

Lemma L.3 Detection and Observers

L.3.1 Detecting the position of a photon requires arresting the cordus
entirely. Detecting the photon’s position is intrusive observation as
it collapses the cordus. Intrusive observation may be used to
detect the position of a single photon or beam of photons.
L.3.2 The cordus is not collapsed, nor the position of the photon
detected, by transparent media or reflective surfaces.
L.3.3 Passive observation is simply looking at the experiment and not
interfering with the cordus. Passive observation is inconsequential
for the photon.
L.3.4 Passing observation is detecting that a photon has passed a point,
e.g. by detecting its effect on other material or fields, without
collapsing the cordus.
L.3.5 The internal variables of the photon are bi-directionally linked
(coupled) to the external electromagnetic (EM) fields that it
generates, see also C.6 hyff lemmas.
L.3.5.1 Passing observation can add or subtract energy from the
photon, via the coupling.
L.3.5.2 Passing detection alters the state of the photon.
L.3.4.3 Passing observation cannot determine location of the
photon.

Thus Cordus differentiates between types of Observers: passive, passing,

and intrusive. Lemma 3 states that detecting a photon’s position
corresponds to intrusively collapsing the cordus entirely, whereas
reflection and transmission through a transparent material do not.
Whether the reactive end strikes an opaque material, absorbing detector,

24
or the eye of an Observer is all the same: the cordus collapses. It is
analogous to measuring the speed of a small moving motor-car by placing
a loaded shipping container in front of it: the car is arrested and smashed
in the process and its previous functional capability is destroyed.
Observation of a photon’s position collapses the cordus and destroys its
functionally expanded state.

However passing observation is unreliable for measuring properties of a

single photon, since the process of measurement changes other properties
of the photon. However it can be more reliably applied to beams of
multiple photons, where the sacrifice of a few is immaterial. Depending on
the measurement, it may unduly preserve the configuration of the photon,
or attract/push it into a different state, transferring energy.

The different types of observation have implications for the detection of

position and velocity, as the next section shows.

3.2 Application to quantum measurement effects

Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle states that it is impossible to
simultaneously know the position and momentum of a photon. Further,
that the effect arises because it is fundamentally unknowable, not from
limited precision of measurement. The Cordus Conjecture is consistent
with this Principle, and suggests that the explanation is that the
momentum and position are measurements of different states of the
photon: in flight vs. arrested. Measure it in flight and only the presence of
the photon can be inferred, using passing observation (L.3.4). The dynamic
and twin-headed nature of the photon in flight means that it
fundamentally has no physically measurable centroid, even if it has modes.
Measuring its location can be done but requires intrusive detection, which
collapses the cordus and destroys the kinetic state. Thus the choice of
measurement constrains the behaviour of the photon and thus the
measured outcome. The flight and static states of the photon are
physically mutually exclusive: so too are the measurements thereof.

Zeno effect
The Zeno effect is that observation of a quantum state can preserve the
configuration or hasten its change, depending on how the measurement is
made. The cordus explanation is that these measurements are of the
passing type, and therefore add or subtract energy from the photon
(Lemma 3.4), thus constraining the photon’s configuration.

4 Conclusions

Wave-particle duality, which has been enigmatic to conventional physics,

is shown to be conceptually solvable by a new way of thinking about the
photon. A particular internal structure, called a cordus, is proposed for the
photon, and the underlying mechanics sketched out. In subsequent papers

25
it is shown that a cordus structure is conceptually able to resolve wave-
particle duality, i.e. explain both wave and particle effects.

26
Cordus Conjecture: Part 1.2 Quo vadis,
photon?

Pons, D.J. , 3 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
Photon path dilemmas are a difficult area for conventional physics. Typical
situations are the double-slit device and interferometers. The problem
manifests as an apparent ability of the photon to simultaneously take all
paths through the device, but eventually only appear at one. It is shown
that a cordus structure is conceptually able to resolve the path dilemmas in
wave-particle duality. Explanations are given for the double-slit device and
interferometers. The Cordus conjecture implies there is a deeper, simpler,
deterministic, and more elegant reality beneath quantum mechanics and
wave theory.

Keywords: wave-particle duality; double slit; interferometer

Revision 1.02

1 Introduction: Photon Path dilemmas

There are various path problems and paradoxes in wave-particle duality,

and are a difficult area for conventional physics. Typical situations are the
double-slit device and interferometers. The problem manifests as an
apparent ability of the photon to simultaneously take all paths through the
device, but eventually only appear at one. Existing theories of physics only
partially explain the phenomena. This paper applies the cordus concept to
conceptually resolve path dilemmas.

2 Existing approaches

Wave theory (WT) apparently adequately explains the situation as

interference. However, that only applies to beams of light, whereas the
behaviour also exists for individual photons. Quantum mechanics (QM)
offers a solution for the particle case, using the concepts of superposition
and wavefunction. However the explanations are strange and inconsistent
with experience in the everyday world. The ideas of ‘wavefunction’ and
probabilistic ‘superpositon’ are intrinsically mathematical, and attempts to
translate these into physical mechanisms have not fared well. For
example, the explanation that relies on virtual (or ghost) particles only
adds more problems, because of the supposed undetectability of these
particles.

3
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

27
There are two easy-to-understand explanations for the path dilemma in
wave-particle duality, intelligent photons and parallel universes, but both
have difficulties. The first is to assume some intelligence in the photon:
that photons know when a path is blocked, without even going down it
(e.g. Mach-Zehnder interferometer), and adapt their behaviour in
response to the presence of an Observer (e.g. Schrodinger’s Cat, Zeno
effect). This also raises philosophical problems with choice and the power
of the Observer to affect the physical world and its future merely by
looking at it. Thus the action of observation supposedly affects the locus
taken by a photon, and thus the outcome. This concept is sometimes
generalised to the universe as a whole. The second, and related solution is
the metaphysical idea of parallel universes or many worlds, i.e. that each
statistical outcome that does not occur in this universe does in another.
This is currently a popular explanation. However it is fundamentally
problematic in that these other universes are beyond contact and
therefore the theory cannot be verified. Nor is it clear who/what keeps
track of the information content of the vast number of universes that such
a system would generate. There is no empirical evidence for the Parallel
universes solution, so it requires faith to trust that as the solution. Both
these explanations are cognitively convenient ways of comprehending the
practicalities of wave-particle duality, but they sidestep the real issues.

The cordus concept provides an elegant solution for the path conundrum.
In particular, an explanation is given here for the quantum particle
behaviour of the photon in the double-slit experiment. Cordus provides a
simple physical explanation for the particle-choice problem. Internal
variables of the photon are inferred, and a physical interpretation is given
of frequency. The concept of hyff is introduced. The path dilemmas in the
Mach-Zehnder interferometer are explained, and in doing so a novel
explanation arises for what a beam-splitter really does.

This paper is part 2 in a bracket of three. The first part describes the
fundamental cordus concepts. i.e. the proposed internal structure of the
photon. The present part solves the apparent path-dilemmas in the
double-slit device, and also interferometers. The third develops a novel
mechanism for the formation of fringes.

3 Particle behaviour in the Double-slit experiment

The Cordus concept offers an explanation of the quantum behaviour of the

double-slit experiment: The photon is a cordus, and one reactive end
passes cleanly through each slit. The fibril passes through the material
between the two slits, but does not interact with it. The cordus
explanation is that the photon does pass through both slots, not as ‘real’
and ‘ghost’ particles, but instead as a twin-ended particuloid. The variable
nature of the cordus span (Lemma 5) permits the photon to go through
gaps of different width, providing the gaps are small and arranged
symmetrically along the path.

28
Default behaviour in double-slit
If a detector is placed proximal behind each slit in the double-slit device,
then whichever reactive end first hits the plate will be grounded (L.2.1)
and the cordus will collapse to a single energy impulse at that detector,
see Figure 1.

One of the detectors will thus register a photon arrival. However there is
random variability in the position of the reactive ends so the next photon
may ground on the other detector. Over time the two absorbent detectors
will each obtain their share of impacts, providing that they are equally
spaced from the slit.

Quantum behaviour in the blocked double-slit

If one of the slits is blocked by a detector, and the other is open, then the
observed reality is that the photon always appears at the watched slit and
never appears on the backplane.

The Cordus Conjecture explains this quantum behaviour as follows, see

Figure 2. Reactive ends pass through both slots as usual. Whereas the RE
at the open slot is free to continue, that at the blocked slot is obstructed
by the detector. This causes the cordus to be always grounded at the
detector (as per L.2.4). The whole photon collapses at the detector, every
time, even though the cordus did pass through both slots. Since the whole
photon is grounded at the detector, there is no photon left to continue
further, so no fringes appear even if a screen is placed behind the
detector.

The Cordus Conjecture thus explains the observed behaviour. There is no

choice in the photon, no free-will. However, there is still the matter of
how if at all the Observer’s watching of the quantum experiment
predestines the outcome.

29
Figure 1: Photon behaviour in the double-slit experiment

30
Figure 2: Photon behaviour in the double-slit experiment with only one
detector.

Observer’s powers
Whether or not an Observer is looking at the double-slit experiment is
irrelevant: it is whether the observation is passive or intrusive that is

31
important (Lemma 3). Simply passively watching from outside the lines of
action (optical paths) does not influence the outcome, according to the
present concept. The only thing that is really important is intrusive
observation: when the Observer’s eye (or her proxies in the form of
photon detectors or screens) are in such a position as to intercept the
photon and suitably constructed (opaque) to arrest it.

If the observer uses passing observation at one slot, then it slows that
reactive end and thereby affects fringe patterns, but more of that later.
The Lemmas 1-3 are sufficient to explain path effects, but not fringes, so
the further explanation of the double-slit is delayed until additional
lemmas are constructed.

4 Mach–Zehnder interferometer

Quantum dilemmas also arise in the Mach–Zehnder interferometer. This

device has two output paths, hence two detectors, see Figure 3. The light
source strikes partial mirror PM1, where the beam is ‘split’ into path 7 and
L, the two beams ‘recombine’ at partial mirror PM2, and then proceed to
detectors DA and DB. However there are some anomalous results,
especially for single photons.

MZ Default mode
In the default mode the photon, and indeed the whole beam, will
selectively appear at one of the detectors. This can easily be explained
using conventional optical wave theory. The paths are not identical
regarding the reflection and refraction encountered, and the usual
explanation is based on the delays, i.e. phase shift in wavelength, for the
different reflection and refraction on the two paths.

32
Figure 3: Mach–Zehnder interferometer in default mode. The photon
appears at DB.

From the wave theory perspective the explanation is that the light beam
experiences a phase shift of half a wavelength where it reflects off a
medium with higher refractive index (otherwise none), and a constant
phase shift k where it refracts through a denser medium.

The beam on path 7 to Detector DB experiences k + ½ + ½ phase-shift (at a,

c, and e), see Figure 3, whereas to reach Detector DA requires an
additional k (at y). Similarly, the beam on path L to Detector DB
experiences ½ + ½ + k (at p, r, and t). As these are the same, the classical
model concludes that the two beams on 7 and L result in constructive
interference at DB, so the whole output appears there, providing that the
optical path lengths around both sides of the interferometer are equal.

33
The L beam into Detector DA experiences ½ + ½ + k + k phase-shift (at p, r,
t, and v) whereas the 7 beam into DA experiences k + ½ + k phase-shift (at
a, c, v). As these differ by half a wavelength, the usual explanation is that
the two beams interfere destructively and no light is detected at DA. This
is a satisfactory explanation for light beams.

Quantum problems
The quantum weirdness arises because this behaviour still occurs for a
single photon, which is supposed to go down only one path. Thus self-
interference seems to be required, or virtual particles.

Worse, if one of the paths is blocked by a mirror that deflects the beam
away, then the beam still appears at DB, regardless of which path was
blocked. The photon seems to ‘know’ which path was blocked, without
actually taking it, and then take the other. Various explanations have been
put forward for how this might happen, but they tend to be weird rather
than physical.

The obvious Cordus explanation is that each reactive end takes a different
path, and the phase difference (which is accepted by the Cordus
Conjecture) through the glass at y means that the reactive end is delayed
at Detector DA, so does not appear there. The existing Cordus lemmas
could be applied, assuming that each reactive end has a 50% chance of
being reflected at a partial mirror, and the phase delay through the glass
at y means that the reactive end gets to detector DB before DA. However
this is unsatisfactory because a decision tree of the Cordus path options
suggests that ¼ of photons should still appear at DA even if DA is precisely
located relative to DB. Something is missing from the Cordus explanation,
and the solution was to add assumptions about the reflection process,
which are shown in Lemma 7. (For precursor lemmas 4-6 see part 1.3).

Lemma L.7 Beam-splitter

This lemma describes a set of assumptions for how a beam-splitter
operates. It identifies the variables that determine which path the exit
light takes.
L.7.1 In a usual full-reflection, i.e. off a mirror, both reactive ends of
the cordus, which are separated by the span, separately
reflect off the mirror.
L.7.2 Reflection does not collapse the cordus: it is of the passing rather
than intrusive type.
L.7.3 When encountering a partially reflective surface, e.g. a beam-
splitter or partially silvered mirror, the outcome depends on the
state (energised vs. dormant) of the reactive end at the time of
contact.
L.7.3.1 A RE will reflect off a mirror only if it is in one state, here
assumed to be the energised state, when it encounters the
reflective layer.

34
L.7.3.2 A dormant RE passes some way into a reflective layer
without reacting. Only if it reacts within the layer will it be
reflected.
L.7.3.3 If the reflective layer is thin enough, a dormant RE might
only re-energise once it is through the layer, in which case
it is not reflected. Hence tunnelling.
L.7.3.4 The thickness of the layer is therefore important, as is the
frequency.
L.7.4 The orientation of the cordus (polarisation) as it strikes the beam-
splitter is important in the outcome.
L.7.4.1 If the reactive ends strike at suitable timing such that each
in turn is energised (dormant) as they engage with surface,
then the whole cordus may be reflected (transmitted).
L.7.4.2 It is possible that only one RE is reflected and the other
transmitted straight through, see Figure 4.

Figure 4: A beam-splitter reflects only the energised reactive end. The

dormant RE passes through. The diagram shows a p-polarised cordus, but
the principles generalise to other forms of polarisation. The key
determinant of path is the state (energised/dormant) of the pair of reactive
ends at contact with the mirror.

The relevant points from that lemma are that a reactive end will only
reflect if it is a suitably energised state at the point of contact. Otherwise it
goes deeper into the material. If by going deeper it passes through the
reflective layer of the beam-splitter, then it continues without being
reflected, see Figure 4. Thus cordus-photons striking the beam splitter will
have two obvious outcomes: both ends reflect, or neither reflect (both
transmit through). These outcomes depend on the orientation

35
(polarisation) of the cordus, the precise phase location of the energised
reactive end when it makes contact, and the frequency relative to the
thickness of the mirror. The lemmas also admit the possibility that the
beam-splitter may send one reactive end each way, if the two reactive
ends differ in their state when they impact. If this is the case then it raises
the possibility that the ‘beam-splitter’ is sometimes a ‘photon-splitter’, i.e.
changes the span.

This lemma also explains the variable output of the beam-splitter: with
one input beam, generally two beams will be observed emerging from a
beam-splitter, because of the variable orientations of the input photons
ensure that a mixture of whole and split cordi will go down each path.
However if the polarisation of the input beam is changed then the beam
splitter will favour one output.

Cordus explanation: default MZ mode

With Lemma 7 the Cordus explanation of the MZ device may now be
continued. We consider a single photon, but the principles generalise to a
beam of many. The photon reaches Partial Mirror PM1, see Figure 5; the
energised reactive ends reflect off the mirror, the dormant ends go
through. Depending on the orientation of the cordi, some whole cordi go
down path 7, some down L, and some may be split to go down both. The
polarisation of the photon is therefore important in the outcome.

Reactive
End is
delayed in
the glass
Partial
Mirror PATH 7
PM1
a b
a1
a2

a2
p
Light
source a1

PATH L

Figure 5: First partial mirror of the Mach-Zehnder interferometer.

The whole photons pose no particular problem, but a split cordus needs
explanation: a1 reflects off the surface and continues on path L (pqrst).
The dormant a2 reactive end passes through the mirror surface,
reenergises too late within the transparent backing, does not reflect, and
continues on path 7 (abcd). Note that the order is unimportant: it is not
necessary that the energised RE reaches the surface before the dormant
RE. Nonetheless, regardless of the order, the RE that was energised at the
mirror (a1 in this case), is always reflected (takes path L). This is important
in the following explanation. Assuming equal optical path length along 7

36
and L, which is the case, then both reactive ends come together again at
Partial Mirror PM2, having undergone several frequency reversals.

The explanation assumes that the path length is such that the reactive
ends are all in the opposite state to PM1, i.e. the path lengths are not only
equal, but a whole even multiple of half-wavelengths. The cordi that have
travelled whole down path 7 or L now divert to Detector DB. For the split
cordi the explanation follows: when reactive end a1 reaches the mirror
surface of PM2 it is now in the dormant state, and therefore passes
through to Detector DB. By contrast reactive end a2, which was dormant
at PM1 is now energised at PM2, and reflects, taking it also to Detector
DB. See Figure 6.

Figure 6: Second partial mirror of the Mach-Zehnder interferometer.

Therefore the photon always appears at Detector DB, regardless of which

path it took. The partial mirrors achieve this by sorting and if necessary
splitting the photons, and the arrangement between the mirrors ensures
that the second mirror reverses the operation of the first. The effect holds
for single photons as well as beams thereof. From this perspective the MZ
interferometer is an unexpectedly finely-tuned photon-sorting device that
auto-corrects for randomness in the frequency phase.

Cordus explanation: open-path MZ mode

Conventionally the wave-particle dilemma occurs when one of the paths is
blocked, since it suggests the weird solution that photon ‘knew’ which
path was blocked without actually taking it. For example a mirror is
inserted at S, but the photon still appears at Detector DB. Likewise a
mirror at D still causes the photon to appear at Detector DB, see Figure 7,
despite the apparent mutual exclusivity of these two experiments.

37
Figure 7: Inclusion of an extra mirror at D still results in photons arriving at
Detector DB.

The Cordus explanation is that the reactive ends are constrained by the
partial mirrors to converge at DB. Regardless of which path, 7 or L, is open-
circuited, the remaining whole cordi and the split cordi (providing they are
not grounded first at g) will always appear at DB.

Cordus explanation: sample mode

The MZ device is used to measure the refractivity ks of a transparent
sample placed in one of the legs, say S. The observed reality when using a
beam of photons is that a proportion of the beam now appears at detector
DA. The wave theory adequately explains this based on phase shift and
constructive (destructive) interference. By comparison the Cordus
explanation is that the sample introduces a small time delay to the (say) a1
reactive end of the split cordus, which means that it arrives slightly late at
partial mirror PM2. If sufficiently late then a2 reaches the mirror in an
energised state (it usually would be dormant at this point), and therefore
reflects and passes to detector DA. If a2 is only partially energised when it
reaches the mirror, then its destination is less certain: a single photon will
go to one or the other detector depending on its precise state at the time.
The proportioning occurs when a beam of photons is involved, as the
random variabilities will place them each in slightly different states, and
hence increase the probability of heading to one particular detector.

If the 7 or L path in the MZ device is totally blocked by an opaque barrier

(unlike the mirror mode), then the whole cordi in that leg ground there, as

38
do the split cordi. However the whole cordi in the remaining leg continue
to DB as before.

5 Conclusions

Quo vadis, photon? Where is the photon going?

One of the central quantum dilemmas of the double-slit device is the
ambiguity of where the photon is going, and which path it will take.
Existing approaches either reconfigure the photon as a wave, or treat the
problem as simply probabilistic. The solution proposed here is simply that
where the photon appears will depend on which of its two reactive ends
are first obstructed. In turn that depends on how the obstruction is made,
and at which instant the Observer does it.

God does not play dice - the Observer does, by selecting the method of
how intrusively or passively to make the observation, and the timing of
when in the cordus frequency cycle to make the intervention. However the
Observer may have little control over the latter, hence the observed
probabilities of QM emerge as a measuring artefact.

Thus Cordus offers a way to reconceptualise the photon and resolve path
dilemmas in a natural way that does not require invisible particles, parallel
worlds, pilot waves, intelligent photons, or the mere presence of an
Observer. We no longer need the weirdness of conventional explanations.
A companion paper (ref. ‘Cordus matter’) shows why Bell’s Theorem is not
a constraint against hidden-variable solutions.

Cordus also implies that the existing paradigm of quantum mechanics is

not the reality, only a mathematical approximation. In particular, Cordus
suggests that superposition, the ability of a particle to be in two places at
once, is only a high-level simplification of the underlying behaviour of
internal variables. While superposition is a useful rough statistical concept
for average particles, it is unreliable as a physical explanation for individual
cases. The implications of the Cordus conjecture are that there is a deeper,
simpler, deterministic, and more elegant reality beneath quantum
mechanics and wave theory.

39
Cordus Conjecture: Part 1.3 Explanation of
fringes

Pons, D.J. , 4 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
The cordus concept is shown to be able to explain wave behaviour in gaps,
and fringes in the double slit device. This is useful because one of the
enigmas of the double-slit device is that single photons form fringe
patterns. Cordus explains fringes in terms of force lines called hyperfine
fibrils (hyff) and their interaction with the edges of the light path. This also
explains beam divergence and near-field effects. The results show that it is
conceptually possible to create a solution for fringes based on a particuloid
interpretation of light, without using the concept of interference. The
biggest difference between Wave theory and the cordus explanation is
their interpretation of the mechanism for fringes. Wave theory explains
fringes as ‘interference’: two separate waves of light differing by full (half)
fractions of wavelengths and thus constructively (destructively) interfering.
From the Cordus perspective photons do not actually interfere or add
together, and 'interference' is only a convenient analogy. The Cordus
explanation is that fringes are caused instead by interaction of the photon
hyff with opaque edges. This bracket of papers therefore offers a resolution
of wave-particle duality by anticipating the internal cordus structure of the
photon and the associated cordus mechanics. From this perspective wave
and particle behaviours are simply the different output behaviours that
the internal system shows depending on how it is measured. Thus Cordus
offers a deeper mechanics that subsumes both quantum mechanics and
wave theory. Surprisingly, Cordus suggests that the next deeper level of
reality is deterministic.

Keywords: wave-particle duality; wave theory; quantum mechanics;

double slit; fringe; interference
Revision 1.02

1 Introduction

One of the enigmas of the double-slit device is that single photons form
fringe patterns, given enough of them. That light waves should do so is
expected, but the puzzling part is what makes individual photons do so
given that the usual mechanism of interference is unavailable.

In this paper the cordus concept is expanded to explain wave behaviour in

gaps, and fringes in the double slit device. This paper is part 3 in a bracket
of three. The first part describes the fundamental cordus concepts. i.e. the

4
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of
Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

40
proposed internal structure of the photon. The second part solves the
apparent path-dilemmas in the double-slit device, and also
interferometers.

2 Wave theory explanation of interference

The Wave theory explanation is that the fringes, e.g. in a gap, form due to
interference based on phase difference along different optical paths:

each point on the surviving wave-front after the obstacle becomes
a point source and radiates its own secondary wave

these points are separated in space

the distances from central and edge points to the screen is
therefore different

this difference will be a full (half) wavelength at some locations on
the screen and therefore cause constructive (destructive)
interference there

Consequently the secondary waves interfere to produce lighter
and darker regions.
The explanation rests on frequency and phase shifts arising from
geometric path differences.

Limitations in Wave Theory

Optical Wave theory sufficiently explains the behaviour of beams of light.
However it does not explain why multiple separate single photons should
also form fringes. Also, the concept of ‘destructive interference’ is difficult
to reconcile from an energy perspective. How do two photons destroy
each other and leave no residue? With water waves, the peak of one wave
A can be higher where that of B is lower. Peak A is above the mean water
level and therefore has positive potential energy, whereas peak B has
negative. When they meet, the energy excess in A exactly balances the
deficit in B and a flat piece of water results. No energy is lost: the mean
water height is the same.

Destructive interference in light is usually explained similarly, by the

electric fields cancelling. That of course does not explain the observed
interference of individual photons that were never in the same place at
the same time. Furthermore, the wave explanation suggests that the
effect should be seen more often, but the reality is that photons do not
observably interfere with each other, despite their vast quantity in the
world.

Existing attempts at reconciling wave and particle behaviour have tended

to preserve Wave theory and make the particle behave like a wave by
‘interfering’ with itself through a 'virtual' particle. The virtual particle is not
detectable and therefore metaphysical, and this is where weirdness arises.

What is frequency?
Frequency is a core mechanism in the Wave theory description of fringes.
It is strange that wave theory is so highly dependent on the concept of
frequency, yet cannot explain how frequency arises. In other wave

41
phenomena such as water waves, the frequency corresponds to a physical
motion of water molecules. What is the comparable phenomenon in light?
The standard wave theory answer is that it is the frequency of oscillation
of the electric and magnetic fields. However this is not entirely satisfactory
as it still does not answer the question, nor explain why the fields reverse
polarity.

Another paradox with wave theory is that many phenomena in optics are
dependent on the wavelength λ, but the dimensions of the experiment are
in the transverse direction. For example, the presence and strength of
fringes depend on the diameter of the aperture or width of the gap. This is
curious, because wavelength is an axial dimension, whereas gap width is
transverse geometry, i.e. the two measurements are perpendicular. If
anything one would expect amplitude to be involved since it is a
transverse measurement. Strangely, amplitude does not feature in the
wave theory descriptors of optical effects, but wavelength does.

Nor can the particle view explain frequency: it hardly even needs the
concept, other than as a measure of energy. Thus neither wave nor
particle perspectives explain the mystery of Frequency. Consequently, a
model that bridges the wave-particle duality and invokes internal variables
will inevitably have to reconceptualise 'frequency'.

3 Cordus solution

The Cordus approach developed up to here can make sense of the photon
path dilemmas, but not of the fringes. The next lemmas show how it can
be extended to solve this, by proposing internal variables for the photon. A
companion paper (ref. ‘Cordus matter’) shows why Bell’s theorem is not a
constraint.

Lemma L.4 Internal and external variables of the photon

This lemma asserts that the cordus has internal physical variables, that
manifest as variables that can be measured (external variables).
L.4.1 The orientation of the cordus is variable.
L.4.1.1 The cordus may be inclined in pitch, roll, and yaw around
the optical centre line of the photon path.
L.4.1.2 The cordus may rotate around the optical centre line.
L.4.1.3 The above internal variables manifest externally as
polarisation states (V.1.2). For example Circular
polarisation is a transverse cordus with roll angular
velocity, and is therefore handed.
L.4.2 The cordus vibrates, or oscillates.
L.4.2.1 This corresponds to the frequency of the photon and its
energy (V.1.1).
L.4.2.2 The nature of the vibration is left temporarily unspecified:
oscillation or rotation motion; vibration of the fibril in
radial or axial displacement; reciprocation of parts. Refer

42
 C.1, in part 1.1 where the dashed lines in Figure 2
represent the frequency component. See also lemma 9.
L.4.2.3 This vibration generates electromagnetic fields (V.1.3),
though the mechanism is left unspecified at this point.

This provides a physical mechanism for frequency among other external

variables of the photon. Though vague, it is nonetheless sufficient to
proceed, and is further developed later.

The explanation of fringes also needs a mechanism to explain the width of

the cordus, and how it is affected by frequency, hence the next lemma.

Lemma L.5 Span length

The distance between the reactive ends (Span) may vary.
L.5.1 The Span is plastic. It may be stretched or shrunk. (Nothing yet
suggests it has elastic recoil).
L.5.2 The Span may be changed by the external optical environment,
e.g. by sending the reactive ends along different paths. When thus
forced by the environment, the Span may be large: at least of the
order of metres. In other situations the Span may be small.
L.5.3 For newly created and unconstrained photons the natural
tendency is for the Span to be small and inversely related to the
frequency. The greater the frequency the shorter the Span. Thus
shorter wavelengths have shorter spans.
L.5.4 The Span varies randomly by quantum amounts.
L.5.4.1 For convenience it is assumed that the Span can take one
of only three changed states: increase, stay the same, or
decrease.
L.5.4.2 The size of the quantum increment/decrement (delta) is
related to the frequency of the photon. Delta span is
inversely proportional to frequency: high frequency
photons (short wavelength) have smaller spans (L.5.3) and
smaller delta span.
L.5.4.3 The changes in Span length do not affect the polarisation
or energy of the photon.
L.5.4.4 The mechanism for span fluctuation is not specified. The
present working model tentatively assumes it is the
resistance to growth of the hyff (see later).
L.5.5 The change in Span occurs at the same time as the frequency
oscillations i.e. synchronised.
L.5.6 Span changes apply symmetrically.

From the Cordus perspective span and frequency are the main variables
for optical fringe effects. Wavelength is thus a proxy variable for frequency
and velocity.

4 Wave behaviour in single gaps: diffraction

43
Diffraction can mean several things, but here refers to the spreading of a
light wave (i.e. breaking into pieces) through a single optical path, (e.g. a
single slit, aperture, or round the edge of an object), with subsequent
fringes.

A single slit will cause diffraction; which appears as a central region of high
intensity, with fringes to each side. The observed reality is that narrower
gaps produce fewer but more pronounced fringes. The distance from the
gap to the screen (far field) needs to be many wavelengths, which implies
that the angular effect is small and in need of magnification.

In searching for a candidate theory for quantum frequency, we noted that

the fringe pattern is independent of the thickness of the opaque barrier:
thin and thick layers are equally effective. This suggests that the diffraction
effect is governed not by the depth or composition of the material but
simply by the existence of an opaque 2D frontal-plane. If so, this means
that the angular deflection of the photon (diffraction) occurs at the 2D
surface, not in the bulk of the barrier. However there are two problems:
First, the individual photon does not have an obvious mechanism to create
its own angular deflection: common sense has it that it either passes
cleanly through the gap, or slams into the barrier and is no more. If it does
not touch the barrier, how can it be affected by it? Secondly, there is no
obvious mechanism to break the angular deflection into angular quanta
and hence fringes. This is where the electromagnetic field is recruited as a
ranged-variable, consistent with the passing observation.

Lemma L.6 Cordus hyff for the photon

This lemma accepts the L.1 conjecture that reciprocal motion of some type
occurs, corresponding to frequency, and then couples the frequency to
the electromagnetic field, as follows:
L.6.1 The energy in the cordus oscillates from one reactive end to the
other, at a rate given by the frequency.
L.6.2 The oscillation causes structural transience: the reactive ends
deconstruct and reconstruct. The energy is shuttled between them
by the fibril. That central fibril is a permanent feature of the
cordus in flight, unlike the transient hyff (see below).
L.6.3 The reactive end has a dynamic electromagnetic (EM) field around
it. For simplicity consider primarily the electric field here. The field
is transient and linked to the frequency.
L.6.4 The field is made of hyperfine fibrils (hyff) that extend like hairy
fluff from the reactive end, and these carry the EM field and force.
The hyperfine fibrils collapse and grow as the reactive ends
deconstruct and reconstruct (C.1.5 and C.1.6 hyff photon model).5
Thus the electric field is emitted and then retracted.
L.6.5 A hyff is attached at one end to a reactive end, and extends
outwards from that base. It can make a temporary bond to other
matter, in which case it exerts a tensile or repulsive force, or
pumps energy into/out of the photon.

5
The number of hyff per photon does not need to be specified here. A companion paper
(Cordus Optics) suggests that the photon probably has only one hyff at each reactive end, in the radial
direction.

44
L.6.6 A hyff exerts a transient force linked to the frequency. The
oscillation of energy along the cordus results in the extension of
hyff followed by their withdrawal, and the collapse of any force.
This also accommodates the reversal in the observed field.
L.6.7 A hyperfine fibril that engages with matter can exert force on the
photon without necessarily terminating the photon.
L.6.8 The trajectory and dynamic properties of the photon can be
influenced by interaction with matter at a distance, the hyff being
the coupling mechanism. This corresponds to passing observation,
i.e. such observation affects the dynamic properties of the photon
through the coupling.
L.6.9 The photon hyff have a range which is potentially infinite but
practically not, as they have decreasing chance of being in the
outer range, see also L.6.16. The range of the hyff is not the
frequency. Instead frequency is the refresh-rate of the fibril and
hyff.
L.6.10 The hyff have stepped (quantum) force increments. The
mechanism for this is not certain. One candidate is that the hyff
extend stepwise outwards, and another is that the hyff force itself
is quantised. Another is that it is simply the number of hyff
renewal pulses (hyffons, see ‘Cordus in extremis’) that manage to
get an engagement with the edge in passing. This is an open
question. Nonetheless the assumption is that the frequency state
of the hyff at the RE at the time of engagement with the gap
determines the force.
L.6.11 Higher frequency gives finer force increments.
L.6.12 The force exerted by a hyff is greater at shorter ranges.
L.6.13 The timing of the frequency events for the two reactive ends is not
prescribed here. It could be alternate (the current working model),
simultaneous, or the general case of disjoint (variable phase
difference between ends).
L.6.14 Taking these assumptions together, the force exerted by an
anchored hyff comes in quanta that are stronger at shorter range.
The force corresponds to the angular deflection of the reactive
end, or retardation (phase delay). The force may be attractive or
repulsive.
L.6.15 The communication across the fibril is practically instantaneous.
L.6.16 The growth of the electromagnetic hyff (e-hyff) is at the speed of
light in the medium. (This may also imply that higher frequency
photons have shorter-range hyff).
L.6.17 The reactive ends fade in and out of existence at the ends of the
span. The ‘particle’ nature is in the reactive ends, and in turn these
exist as hyff.

It may be convenient to think of photon hyff as equivalent to fields, e.g.

the evanescent field, or oscillating electric dipoles. The hyff also replace
the concept of virtual particles in QM. At the same time it provides a
simple means to explain frequency, which is otherwise a problematic
concept for both wave and particle perspectives. In a companion paper
the hyff concept is used to explain fields more generally, e.g. how a
charged particle exerts a force at a distance.

45
Explanation of gap fringes
The Cordus explanation for diffraction in gaps is that the photon cordus is
diffracted (bent) by set angular amounts, by its interaction with the
opaque material surrounding the gap. The hyff become engaged with the
(thin) surface opaque material and thus exert a quantised force that
retards the one reactive end and bends its trajectory, causing fringes at set
intervals. The other reactive end is not affected as much (unless it is close
to its own wall) as the span is plastic.

However that is not the whole story: if only one reactive end of a cordus
goes on a bent trajectory, then the other straight-ahead reactive end will
always ground on the back-plane first, because it is the shorter path, see
point D’ in Figure 1.

e, Cordus
eccentric to
gap

a1 a2

a1
a2

a1

a2

C D'
Figure 1: Path of eccentric cordus through a gap. The grazing reactive end
is delayed and angularly deflected more than the medial RE which is
further from its edge.

For fringes in gaps it is important that the cordus is delayed equally at both
reactive ends. This requires that the incident photon be concentric with
the gap, so that its reactive ends are equidistant from the gap edges, and
both are delayed the same. This stretches the span to form symmetrical
fringes, see E and E’ in Figure 2. The figure shows a simultaneous
frequency model (L.6.13), though it is presumed that the effect would also
operate for the more general case of disjoint frequency providing that the
frequency was sufficiently high that both reactive ends had an opportunity
to sense the edge.

Ironically, non-concentric photons ground closer to the centreline of the

gap than concentric photons. So any deviations cause central rather than
peripheral loading. This is consistent with the observation that the central
fringe is wider and brighter than those further out.

46
Those cordi with span such that a reactive end closely grazes the edge will
have greater hyff force, and therefore be bent more. Cordi that are far
from the edge of the gap will be bent only a little. Thus multiple photons
sent through the gap will bend differently depending on their location
relative to the wall, blurring the fringes.

Cordus
concentric
with gap

a1 a2

a1 a2

a1 a2

E E'

Figure 2: A concentric cordus is equally affected at both reactive ends, and

thus the angular deflections are equal. One of the paths will ground first,
and the fringe will start to be built up there.

Gap width
The observed reality is that narrow gaps produce fewer but more
pronounced fringes whereas wide gaps produce many fine fringes. The
Cordus explanation is that narrower gaps admit smaller-span cordi, which
means fewer quantum states for span width (L.5.4) hence fewer quantum
angular deflection outcomes. The eccentricity is predicted not to be the
major effect, instead it simply degrades fringe quality.

In all cases the incident photons need to have the same frequency and
polarisation. Distinct fringes do not appear in decoherent light, e.g.
sunlight, because the different cordi diffract differently and smudge the
fringes.

Apertures and Airy pattern

Circular apertures form circular fringes or Airy patterns. For example
fringes appear at the output of a Sagnac6 or Mach-Zehnder interferometer

6
The Sagnac interferometer is arranged in a ring, with one path clockwise and the other
anti. A circular interference fringe may be visible at the output detector. The optical explanation is
that the light beam splits into the two separate paths, and these subsequently interfere at the output.
The (say) clockwise path encounters 2+2k phase shift, whereas the anticlockwise 1.5 +2k phase shift.
Therefore there is a half wavelength difference between the two exit beams, and this creates the
interference. Rotation of the device causes a further change in timing, and this is evident in the fringes.

47
when the output beam is focussed by a lens. The lens is necessary: without
it the fringes do not appear. The Cordus explanation is the same for the
gaps considered above: an edge interaction effect for axially-concentric
photons, that causes quantised angular deflection, which appear as
fringes. Thus fringes are an artefact of the lens, and more specifically an
effect caused by the edges of the aperture.

Beam divergence
A laser beam will spread, the divergence from the central axis being
θ=λ/(π.w) where w is the beam waist (approximated by the aperture).
Thus larger aperture beams spread less, as do shorter wavelength. This is
typically explained as a diffraction effect, though the mechanism is
incompletely understood.

Cordus provides several candidate explanations. First a possible

mechanism for spread in a vacuum: the span fluctuates randomly (L.5), but
cannot go negative, and therefore over time some extreme cases tend to
move to larger spans. The span, and span increment, are inversely related
to the frequency (L.5), so high frequency (tight λ) photons grow their span
from a smaller base and therefore more slowly.

In air or a transparent medium, the mechanism for gaps may be involved,

i.e. diffraction, and refraction, with one RE being delayed by an interaction
with matter but not the other, hence bending the overall cordus
trajectory.

For the aperture effect, the starting span cannot be larger than the
aperture w. Whether or not the cordi are symmetrical and span the entire
beam aperture is a second matter. Assuming that they do not, then the
above spread mechanisms can also move a RE towards the centreline, so
the average spread is less. According to this explanation it is not the
aperture per se that is important, but the degree of concentricity of the
photons with the centreline: it is predicted that greater concentricity will
show greater divergence, and the tendency to fringes.

5 Fringes in the Double-slit device

The explanation of conventional optical wave theory is that the incoming

light is a wave that passes through both slits, and the residual waves
interfere with each other constructively (light regions) and destructively
(dark lines). The interference is explained as due to the phase shift in
wave-length, a difference of half a wavelength (λ/2) causing destruction of
the wave. The explanation is adequate for most situations where there is
a beam of many particles. However it does not explain the behaviour of a

The Cordus explanation is that some photons are split down both paths, and delayed
differently. The fringes are formed by the aperture effect. When the device is rotated the delay is
changed, and this changes the timing of REs past the aperture edges, hence changing the fringes.

48
single particle, which also ends up in a fringe location even if there is only
one particle in the device at the time.

The quantum mechanics (QM) explanation is that the particle is a wave-

packet and thus can pass through both slots, interfere with itself on the
other side, and collapse in one of the fringe locations. Alternatively, that
the particle has a twin ‘virtual’ particle that takes the other slit and then
interferes with the real particle.

The Cordus explanation is a straightforward application of the single gap

model, with two additions. First is that the short span cordi are barred
entry by the medulla. Thus the device imposes an upper and lower filter
on the range of spans admitted.

The second is that diffraction occurs at both lateral and medial edges of
the gaps. Lateral diffraction is identical to gaps, and shown in Figure 3.
Symmetrical lateral fringes form. Medial diffraction also occurs, in which
the reactive ends are both angularly deflected inwards, forming fringes as
shown in Figure 4.

49
Figure 3: An Outer grazing cordus is deflected away from the midline by an
angular quantum.

Figure 4: An Inner grazing cordus is deflected towards the midline by an

angular quantum.

For a concentric photon, the deflection paths are symmetrical. For a beam
of many such photons, each will be deflected differently according to its
span. However the deflections are arranged in angular quanta dependent

50
on the frequency. A single photon will therefore collapse to one of the
fringe locations. A whole beam of them will do likewise, but to a variety of
fringes, the visible fringes being the sum of the collapse of many individual
cordi. Non-concentric photons will diffract differently on each side, and
not form fringes but instead tend to collapse medially.

Photon path cross-over

The paths for the smallest span cordi will take them medially, and cause
cross-over. The cross-over of the path itself is not perceived as a problem
in the Cordus interpretation, but it will confuse the fringe picture. This is
consistent with the experimental results, and corresponds to the near-
field. A screen too close to the slits, as in Figure 5, will therefore intercept
a number of cross-over cordi, so the fringes will be indistinct.

Figure 5: Concentric photon cordi of various span will take different paths
a1-a2, b1-b2, etc., and form fringes. Some of the cross-over cordi (shaded
area)will mix with other fringes, at least in the near-field.

51
The problem dissipates in the far-field, because for small slit pitch w and
large screen distance q, the cordus paths are parallel for similar bunches
(same angular deflection φc1 = φe2), thus pce = slit pitch w. This is shown in
Figure 6 with the c1/e2 bunch. Thus the bunch will consolidate to one
fringe that will be at least w wide. For the fringes to be distinct from each
other it is necessary that w be less than the fringe pitch q.tan(Δφf) where
Δφf is the angular quantum, and this requires a sufficiently large screen
distance q.

Figure 6: Geometry for far-field. A tolerance frame is included to emphasise

the necessity for the span to be closely symmetrical with the slots.

The Cordus conjecture thus provides a very different explanation to the

optical wave theory and QM. Cordus does not require destructive
interference of photons, nor wave packets or virtual particles.

Why then should wave theory be such a good explanation for the double-
slit, at least for beams of light? From the Cordus perspective this is
because the hyff, being the EM field, are wave-like and the same
mathematics apply.

Curiously, Cordus offers an explanation for another effect that is not

readily explained by either wave theory or QM: the reason why fringes do
not always appear. It is known empirically that the concentricity of the
incident beam on the slits is important, and indeed such an effect is
required by Cordus.

52
Neither wave theory nor QM explain why the symmetry requirement
should exist for the double-slit device: with both those theories
waves/particles take all available paths, and symmetry issues should not
arise as they do. Experiments on concentricity might test the cordus
principle.

Thus the Cordus model explains both single photon and beam behaviour.
Together with the earlier work on the path dilemma, this concludes the
conceptual explanation of the double-slit device.

6 Discussion

This paper has expanded the cordus concept to explain wave behaviour in
gaps, and fringes in the double slit device. This is useful because one of the
enigmas of the double-slit device is that single photons form fringe
patterns. Cordus explains fringes in terms of force lines called hyperfine
fibrils (hyff) and their interaction with the edges of the light path. This also
explains beam divergence and near-field effects. The significance of this is
that it shows it is conceptually possible to create a solution for fringes
based on a particuloid interpretation of light, without using the concept of
interference. This means that the Cordus solution has coherence over a
wider range than simply the path-ambiguity problems.

Comparison with Wave theory

The biggest difference between Wave theory and the cordus explanation is
their interpretation of the mechanism for fringes. Wave theory explains
fringes as ‘interference’: two separate waves of light differing by full (half)
fractions of wavelengths and thus constructively (destructively)
interfering. From the Cordus perspective photons do not actually interfere
or add together, and 'interference' is only a convenient analogy. The
Cordus explanation is that fringes are caused instead by interaction of the
photon hyff with opaque edges. This suggests a test.

If Wave theory is correct, coherence is not essential and it should be

possible to construct an interference pattern from two independent light
sources, e.g. one into each slit of the double-slit experiment. The light
sources need not be synchronised nor even exactly the same frequency:
according to WT, interference fringes should nonetheless form, though not
necessarily static. Cordus predicts that the outcome will be two
independent gap-fringes (which is not the same as interference fringes). If
interference fringes cannot be achieved then it suggests that light is not
fundamentally a wave, but only shows wave-like behaviour.

Any truly integrative solution should be capable of explaining conventional

optics too, and companion papers shows how cordus is applicable to
optical effects (ref. ‘Cordus optics’).

53
Limitations
Cordus is a thought-experiment that challenges fixed ways of thinking. It
asks the awkward questions, 'Is there really no better way of thinking
about photons other than 1D points, mathematical wave-functions, or
electromagnetic waves? Is there really no deeper integration?' Cordus is a
purposely audacious idea: it explores new ways of thinking, and therefore
deliberately puts forward tentative explanations to stimulate new
thinking. We don’t believe the particular design variant developed in this
set of papers is necessarily the only or the final solution, and we are open
to the possibility that it could be wrong in places. Thus the working model
presented here is simply a conceptual model to be critically evaluated.

The treatment of these topics is primarily conceptual and descriptive, and

the cordus mechanics only lightly sketched out. It is a conceptual model,
not so much a full theory with all the details worked out. Effectively we are
proposing internal variables for the photon: a 'hidden-variable' solution.
Therein lies a potential problem: the general interpretation within physics
is that such solutions are expressly prohibited by Bell's theorem. However
that is not an issue as a companion paper refutes Bell's theorem (Ref.
‘Cordus Matter’).

Not all quantum and optical effects have been considered here, nor are
the quantitative cordus mechanics worked out. However, sufficient of the
idea has been sketched out to allow the concept to be evaluated. Open
questions are the mechanics of the fibril (how is the invisible connection
maintained between the REs?) and the mechanism for quantum hyff
forces.

7 Conclusions

Outcomes: what has been achieved?

The Cordus explanation for the double-slit is that the photon cordus really
does pass through both slits. It can subsequently collapse at one of the
detectors and thereby appear to have taken only that path. This concept
explains the dilemma of single-photon behaviour. It also explains fringe
formation from single photons in gaps and slits. Path dilemmas in
interferometers are also solvable from the cordus perspective.

That concludes the original purpose, which was to explore whether there
could be a deeper mechanics that explains wave-particle duality. The
Cordus conjecture does away with much of the weirdness of wave-particle
duality: there is no need for virtual particles, superposition, observer
dilemmas, pilot waves, intelligent photons, or parallel universes. A simple
deterministic, unintelligent photon with a dual existence is all that is
required.

Quis es tu, photon? What is the photon?

The answer to that question, from the Cordus perspective, is that the
photon is a cordus with two reactive ends, with a physical gap between
them, held together with a fibril. The reactive ends may be energised to

54
various degrees, and in turn consist of hyff force lines. The energy shuttles
between the ends, and this also means that the particuloid does not exist
continuously at one location, but at two, and oscillates between them at a
frequency, see Figure 7.

Hyper-fine fibrils
(hyff) emitted
from reactive end

Reactive end (RE)

energised at
frequency of
particuloid
Motion of Fibril, does not react
photon to matter, maintains
frequency re-
energisation.
Spacing is the span

Other reactive end,

in a complementary
frequency state

ow is this helpful?

Figure 7: Cordus model of the photon

How do Quantum mechanics and Wave theory fit in?

From the cordus perspective both conventional theories, quantum
mechanics and wave theory, are mathematical simplifications of a deeper
mechanics. Those theories represent the output behaviour of the inner
system. The weirdness of conventional wave-particle duality is not
because the photon is fundamentally weird, but because the existing
conceptual frameworks are inadequate: their mathematics are sufficient
for forward propagation of effect (prediction), but give unreliable results
when used for backward inference of causality (explanation).

Comments on the bracket of ‘Cordus Conjecture’ papers as a whole

Wave theory and quantum mechanics are functionally adequate theories
on their own, and powerful in their ability to predict how beams of light
and individual photons, respectively, will behave in a given situation.
However, despite their mathematical sophistication, they are incongruous
explanations of reality when wave and particle behaviours occur in the
same situation, e.g. the double-slit device. In these situations their
explanations are weird, which suggests that the models of causality are
incomplete. The problem has been that wave theory and quantum
mechanics are just so good, that it has been difficult to see what the
deeper mechanics could be, especially as Bell's theorem seems to prohibit
solutions with hidden variables.

Resolution of wave-particle duality

This bracket of papers offers a resolution of wave-particle duality by
anticipating the internal cordus structure of the photon and the associated
cordus mechanics. From this perspective wave and particle behaviours are
simply the different output behaviours that the internal system shows
depending on how it is measured. The duality and the apparent

55
incongruity of Quantum mechanics and Wave theory are resolved: the
conflict no longer exists at the deeper level.

Thus Cordus offers a deeper mechanics that subsumes both quantum

mechanics and wave theory. This bracket shows how it resolves wave-
particle duality, and other papers extend it to other enigmatic effects, as
well as the mundane. Perhaps surprisingly, Cordus is also simpler and
more coherent across a wider range of phenomena than quantum
mechanics or wave theory on their own. Even more surprising, and
unexpectedly contrary to the prevailing probabilistic paradigm of Quantum
mechanics, Cordus suggests that the next deeper level of reality is
deterministic.

The current bracket of papers has described the method and developed some of the basic cordus
concepts, and applied them to path dilemmas and fringes. Other brackets of papers apply the Cordus
concept to optical effects (ref. ‘Cordus Optics’), matter (ref. ‘Cordus matter’), and fields (ref. ‘Cordus in
extremis’), and each of those have several parts.

56
Cordus optics: Part 2.1 Frequency
Pons, D.J. , 7 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
Conventional particle and wave theories struggle to explain the frequency
of photons and matter in a coherent manner using natural physics. This
paper applies the cordus conjecture to develop a model for frequency of
the photon. The interpretation is that there really is a part of the photon
cordus that moves with a frequency. The working model is for a reciprocal
motion: the energy alternates between the two reactive ends across the
span of the cordus, and the hyff represent the observable electric field. This
cordus model for frequency readily explains polarisation and tunnelling,
and the concept is fundamental to other developments of the cordus
mechanics including the reflection and refraction of particuloids. The
implications are that frequency is not just an intrinsic variable, but a
physical effect within the photon. The cordus frequency is a fundamental
conceptual building-block in creating an integrated solution that unifies
wave and particle behaviour. It is a powerful concept that is coherent
across many other phenomena too, including matter particuloids and it
contributes subsequently to the cordus model for granular fields.

Keywords: particle; wave; frequency; internal variable; electric field;

tunnel; hyff; transmissivity; opacity; electron
Revision 1.02
Document: Cordus_BOptics_E9.72.doc

1 Introduction

Frequency is an important concept in wave theory, optics, and quantum

mechanics. However those theories struggle to explain frequency in
physical terms.

From the wave theory (WT) perspective, the frequency of light is the
oscillation of the electric and magnetic fields. However this is not entirely
satisfactory as it still does not explain the origins of those fields, nor
explain why the fields reverse polarity. The conventional answer is that
light is nothing more than a self-propagating field disturbance, but that is
arguably only a trite answer. There is a circular reasoning at work that
suppresses the question of ‘what really is frequency?’

Quantum mechanics (QM) does not help either. It perceives the world
ambivalently, either as point particles or spread out in a probabilistic
wave-functions. Properties like frequency, spin, and momentum are all

7
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

57
acknowledged, but are simply demoted to being intrinsic variables, i.e.
assumed not to correspond to any real geometry or internal functionality.
Usually Bell’s Theorem is interpreted as meaning there cannot be any
internal variables anyway. So QM does not get us any closer in
understanding what frequency might be, because it uses a denial
reasoning of its own to simply avoid the question.

Nonetheless it is an important question to answer, and as this paper

shows, the answering of it leads to the resolution of wave-particle duality
and to a deeper mechanics that underlies both Wave theory and Quantum
mechanics.

This bracket of papers shows how the Cordus concept (ref. ‘Cordus
Conjecture’) can also be applied to conventional optical effects. This is
worth doing since particle solutions have otherwise fared poorly at
explaining wave behaviour in a coherent manner using natural physics.
This bracket is in two parts. The first, which is this paper, develops a novel
model of the underlying mechanism for frequency of the photon.
Frequency is conjectured to be linked to the dynamic internal states of the
photon. Photon tunnelling is explained. The second develops the cordus
mechanics for the interaction of light with surfaces: reflection and
refraction.

The outcome of this work is a set of basic underlying principles of the

proposed cordus mechanics. It is recommended that the ‘Cordus
Conjecture’ bracket of papers be read before this one, as the fundamental
concept of a ‘cordus’ is described there.

Cordus Background
The concept of a cordus is that a photon consists not of a point but of two
reactive ends (RE) connected together with a fibril. The Res emit hyff
(hyperfine fibrils), which are lines of electrostatic force. The companion
paper 'Cordus conjecture', describes the background to this idea, applies it
to path dilemmas in the double-slit device and Mach-Zehnder
interferometer, and uses it to explain fringes. It is shown that the Cordus
conjecture is conceptually able to resolve wave-particle duality.

Method
The approach taken is a continuation of that described in the companion
paper ‘Cordus conjecture’, and not detailed here. Briefly, it involves
reverse-engineering the system: it uses logic, conjecture and intuition to
build on the existing cordus model, thereby postulating a set of
mechanisms that can plausibly explain the known system-behaviour.
Specifically, to postulate internal variables for the photon sufficient to
explain optic effects. It is like trying to work out the contents of a black
box by observing its outputs in different situations, and synthesising a
working-model that is sufficient to explain as many of the situations as
possible.

58
Results
This is a design way of thinking, being very different to the conventional
mathematical analytic approaches, and the outcome is likewise more
qualitative than quantitative. Thus we term the results a conceptual
solution. Being conceptual means that the broad principles are described,
within which a whole class of solutions are possible. Where possible we
single out the most promising of these specific solutions and term it the
working model. Along the way we note the underlying assumptions as a
series of lemmas. These we do not attempt to prove: they are simply to
make the premises explicit so that they can be evaluated later. The
lemmas make up the central strand through the three papers.

The results follow, starting with some basic preliminary premises on

transparency and opacity, then moving on to develop a model of how
frequency arises within the photon, followed by application to the basic
optical phenomena of reflection and refraction.

2 Cordus Transparency and Opacity

In our daily experience we take for granted that light goes through some
matter, but not others. Why is glass transparent while metals are not?
More importantly, why is diamond transparent while graphite is not? As
the latter question shows, even materials with the same chemical
composition can have different optical properties. Why should light even
be able to pass through solid matter at all?

The explanation up to here is that the photon-cordus is energised at a

frequency (ref. ‘Cordus conjecture’), and only interacts with material when
energised. Those concepts are now further developed and extended to
provide an explanation for transmissivity.

Lemma O.1 Electron interaction determines Transparency and

Opacity
This lemma puts forward a set of assumptions for how the photon can
transmit through matter.
O.1.1 Electron arrangements, including bonds, determine optical
properties of a material more than nuclear configuration.
O.1.2 Cordus hyff interact with electrons in the substrate material.
O.1.2.1 The difference between transparency and opacity is
whether the interaction is reversible.
O.1.2.2 We differentiate between stiff and compliant electron
structures, corresponding to reversible and irreversible
behaviour respectively, or elastic and inelastic interactions
resp., and ultimately absorbance for the latter.
O.1.3 Stiff and compliant electron structures engage with the hyff force
lines.

59
O.1.3.1 A reversible interaction occurs when the force is elastically
recoiled (the energy is returned), and this corresponds to a
stiff electron structure. In such cases the electron engages
with the hyff energy but returns it, hence Transparency.
This corresponds to passing observation: the cordus is not
collapsed.
O.1.3.2 If the electrons are able to change energy level or
plastically displace (incl. vibration, phonons, and
plasmons), then this is a compliant electron structure.
Such electrons absorb the energy (absorption is described
later) and collapse the cordus, hence an Opaque material.
This corresponds to intrusive observation.
O.1.4 In transmission through a transparent material, the reactive ends
of the Cordus take time to interact with the material, and this
causes a delay in the respective reactive end. Note that the two
REs may be in different materials and therefore have different
delays. The delay appears as slower speed.
O.1.5 Material variables: Material properties, particularly electron
arrangements, determine reactivity of the material to the photon.
These electron arrangements have their own natural frequencies
and therefore the material properties vary with the frequency of
the photon.8

Transparency
With Lemma 8, transparency exists when the hyff interaction is elastic. The
hyff of the reactive end interact with electrons in the material, but are not
absorbed, though they are delayed in the process. Why should such a
delay even exist? Why not instant? We suggest it is because of the
electron’s mass, and any movement of mass requires velocity and
acceleration, and hence time. Thus surface plasmons are electrons that
move in response to input photons. To put it another way, the change in
momentum p=mv of the electron requires a force operating for a period of
time.

Cordus also accommodates the frequency dependence: a material may be

transparent to photons of one frequency, but opaque at another. The
Cordus explanation is that the interaction between cordus and electron
requires a degree of compatibility of frequency. High-energy photons
cannot easily be absorbed by electrons, and so pass through. Conversely,
low-energy photons may be dormant at the time of contact and therefore
tunnel through the material (see below).

The Cordus perspective is that atomic structure, particularly and almost

exclusively electrons and their bonds, determines opacity and

8
Later in the series, (ref. ‘Cordus in extremis’) a mechanism is given
whereby electrons have different frequencies depending on the bonds they are in,
see the Cordus Time and the Level-of-Assembly lemmas.

60
transmissivity. A specific mechanism for absorption is proposed elsewhere
(ref. ‘Cordus matter’).

3 Cordus Frequency

The observed external behaviour is that light appears to be a electric field

that varies sinusoidally in strength. From the Cordus perspective, the
reactive ends (REs) are the proposed internal structure that creates this
effect, and at this point we need to create a working-model of how the
mechanism might operate. This is necessary in preparation for explaining
reflection and refraction phenomena.

Lemma O.2 Cordus Frequency

The reactive ends of the cordus change with the frequency. Up to here we
have only defined two states: energised and dormant. With this lemma we
set out a set of further assumptions to create a working model about the
frequency behaviour of reactive ends. See also Figure 1.
O.2.1 The electric field of light is the external manifestation of the hyff.
This implies certain features of the cordus frequency mechanism:
O.2.1.1 The electric field does not represent the state of the
photon, nor even the free-body diagram for the reactive-
end. Instead it shows the direction and strength of force
on a small test-charge placed near the photon’s locus. The
electric field therefore indicates how the RE is interacting
with charged matter.
O.2.1.2 The direction of the electric field is the same whichever
side of the locus the test-charge is placed.
O.2.1.3 In turn this implies that the forces on the two reactive
ends, a1 and a2, of the photon must be in a consistent
direction: the direction of hyff force must be preserved
across the span.
O.2.1.4 In turn this implies that the REs must be in opposite
frequency states. See also O.2.3.
O.2.2 The hyff are transient, and manifest externally as the electric field.
O.2.2.1 The hyff are dynamic and grow outwards and then retreat,
at the frequency of the photon.
O.2.2.2 The outward growth of the hyff correspond to say negative
electric field, and retreating to positive field.
O.2.3 We identify four frequency states of the hyff for any one
reactive end:
C- (outward growth of hyff),
C^ (maximum extent),
C+ (hyff retraction),
Co (dormant).
There is a smooth change between these: they are not
discrete states.
O.2.4 The hyff exert forces between the reactive-end and the material in
the medium.

61
O.2.4.1 The strength of the hyff varies between frequency states.
Whether or not the variation is linear or sinusoidal is not
determined here.
O.2.4.2 Hyff forces are strongest at closer range. Thus range and
strength of hyff are inversely related.
O.2.5 The behaviour of the reactive end depends on its frequency state
at the time it encounters a medium or the surface of a second
medium. The current working model follows.
O.2.6 Assume: C- results in the RE being repulsed by the bulk
(tends to move medially towards the cordus centre-line in
many cases), with the force being determined by the
strength (inverse of range) of the C- hyff and material
properties (e.g. refractive index).
O.2.7 C+ results in the reactive end being attracted into the bulk
(tends to move laterally away from the cordus centre-line
in many cases).
O.2.8 The net force on a RE is the cumulative exposure over the
preceding period. Thus the behaviour in the other states is
influenced by the timing of the C- and C+ states alongside
and this introduces an element of variability to the
outcome.
O.2.9 A dormant reactive-end tunnels (embeds) into the
material, or across the interface, when it is in the Co state.
O.2.9.1 This means that it continues in a straight line, and
its future locus is determined by the next
frequency state.
O.2.9.2 Tunnelling occurs regardless of the material
properties (stiff or compliant) and without the
photon reacting to the material.
O.2.9.3 The reactive end can only tunnel through one
dermis (defined below). Thereafter it becomes
reactive with the next frequency cycle, and its fate
is determined by its new frequency state and the
material properties.
O.2.9.4 If a reflective layer is thin enough, a dormant RE
might only re-energise once it is through the layer,
in which case it is not reflected. The thickness of
the layer is therefore important, as is the
frequency of the photon (wavelength).
O.2.10 Hyff are entirely in the (rt) plane (current working model),
see Figure 1.
O.2.10.1. It does not make sense to have hyff in the axial
direction (a), given that both the hyff and the
cordus would both be moving at speed c.
O.2.10.2 Whether the hyff are a flat disk or only a single
filament is unspecified. The current working-
model is illustrated with only a single hyff in the r-
plane. This is consistent with the observed
polarisation of the electric field.

62
If desired for ease of understanding, assign approximate physical
significance to the frequency states: C- is somewhat like an electron, C+ a
positron. They are transient electric fields, but not necessarily a full unit
charge.9 Depending on the frequency model, this gives two or four
change-overs (strokes) per cycle, see Causa 2. The current working-model
is for four strokes.

Causa 2 Working model for frequency

Many variants are possible for how the hyff, electric field, and frequency
operate. The main variables are the number of events (‘strokes’) inside the
photon that are ascribed to one frequency cycle, the relative states of the
reactive-ends (including whether one or both reactive ends are active at
the same time), and the behaviour (including force & extent) of the hyff.
Any model of frequency has to fit the observed electric field of the photon.
Thus we have reverse-engineered a proposed model for frequency, based
on the above lemmas. This working model is shown in Figure1.

The main features of the model are that the C- hyff are outward-
propagating (simply a sign convention), and their interaction with the
surrounding medium is one of repulsion (O.2.6). To the extent to which
the material is able to offer recoil, i.e. higher refractive index, the C- hyff
bends the locus of that reactive end away from the material with higher
refractive index. The C+ hyff have the opposite effect (O.2.7).

9
Later work on quarks and the internal structure of the proton implies
that the photon with its single hyff might have a single +- 1/3 electric charge (ref.
‘Cordus in extremis’). However the exact charge is not relevant at this point.

63
Figure 1: Working model for frequency behaviour of reactive ends.

Journey through matter

The two effects constantly counter each other, partially or completely
undoing the course-corrections made by the previous state. When the
cordus is embedded in a homogeneous material then the reactive ends
move in a sinusoidal lateral wriggle, according to this model. The model
predicts the hyff forces on the cordus will put the reactive-ends into
parallel sinusoidal loci. There is a constant interaction between the
momentum of the reactive-end along its current locus, and the hyff forces
deflecting it into a new path. Thus the photon does not travel in a straight
line but weaves from side to side as it interacts with the medium. Hence
the lateral wriggle causes the speed of propagation of light in a material to
be slower than in a vacuum. This also explains why greater density of the
medium causes slower speed of light.10

The locus of the a1 and a2 reactive-ends is shown in Figure 1. The amount

of deviation depends on how forcefully the medium interacts with the
hyff, i.e. the refractive index. This provides a qualitative explanation for
why the speed of light is slower in denser media: it has to travel a longer
path.

When the cordus encounters two different materials then the size of the
effect depends on location relative to the two media, and this means that

10
However this does not explain why the speed of light in a vacuum is
finite. That explanation is given by the Fabric-of-the-Universe concept in ‘Cordus
in extremis’.

64
the corrective forces do not cancel each other, so consequently the
photon takes a bent path. Thus the behaviour of the C- and C+ hyff is
important in the explanation of reflection and refraction effects, as shown
in part 2.2.

The other main feature of the current working model is that the hyff at the
opposite reactive-end act in the same direction, and this makes them the
complementary frequency state: e.g. when a1 is in C- state, a2 will be C+.
Consequently the dormant phase is only momentary, unlike in some of
the other C.2 models. This concept is important later in the introduction of
a fundamental interaction called complementary frequency state
synchronisation (CoFS), which in turn is proposed as the explanation of
photon entanglement, the Pauli exclusion principle, and strong force,
among other effects (ref. ‘Cordus matter’, ‘Cordus in extremis’).

The current working model is for reactive ends that energise in turn at the
end of a cordus, i.e. a reciprocating frequency model. At this point it is an
open question how the fibril sustains this reciprocation of energy.11

4 Tunnelling

This effect involves a photon occasionally going through a barrier (e.g. the
space between two glass prisms) instead of being reflected. The effect
requires a small gap, and is known to be dependent on frequency. It is
usually explained as a probability from the wave-equation, or the particle’s
evanescent wave leaking through an energy barrier (hence ‘evanescent
wave coupling’).

In the special case where there is a thin later n2, sandwiched between two
other media n1 and n3, then it is known that some photons will pass
through n2 apparently without being affected by it. Specifically, some
photons are not refracted in n2 but continue from n1 to n3 as if n2 did not
exist. This effect is known as tunnelling, and the term is applied to a
variety of situations where a particle appears not to noticing an
intervening barrier, e.g. tunnelling electron microscope.

Tunnelling, from the cordus perspective, is when a reactive end energises

too late for its hyff to respond to the change of media, so the RE goes right
on through into the next medium. Or to put it another way, the RE has a
dormant phase during which it does not react to matter but nonetheless
moves forward.

11
Spin is more easily conceptualised as roll rotation that indexes the fibril
o
in 180 increments. If the Cordus conjecture holds up and there arises a need to
explore deeper mechanisms in the fibril, then there may be value in remembering
that reciprocation is the outward functional behaviour of frequency, not
necessarily the internal mechanism.

65
The Cordus explanation is that the gap geometry (width and angle),
frequency, and polarisation are such that (a) the REs both pass through
the reflective layer without reacting (both dormant in turn, from L.7.3.2),
and (b) there is no imbalance in the number of frequency cycles
encountered by the REs in the media, and therefore no pitching moment
and hence no refraction.

High-energy photons, e.g. X-rays, do not reflect easily but tend to pass
through material. The Cordus explanation is that their frequency is too
high for the electrons to engage with, rather than a tunnelling effect. On
the other hand, low energy photons, e.g. radio-waves, can have
appreciable dormant periods in which they don't react to the change in
medium, so they too can tunnel.

5 Conclusions

The concept of ‘frequency’ is a core theoretical construct within wave

theory, optics, and quantum mechanics. Yet strangely none of these
theories are able to explain frequency in physical terms. ‘Frequency’ is
only a disembodied intrinsic property of the wave or photon. In contrast
Cordus offers a physically coherent interpretation for frequency.

This interpretation is that there really is a part of the photon cordus that
moves with a frequency, The working model is for a reciprocal motion: the
energy alternates between the reactive ends across the span. In this way
it is proposed that the photon has internal variables that create the output
that we observe as frequency. This is a type of ‘hidden-variable’ solution,
and while the conventional interpretation of QM is that such solutions are
expressly prohibited by Bell’s Theorem, that theorem is refuted in a
companion paper (ref. ‘Cordus matter’). The implications are that
frequency is not just an intrinsic variable, but a physical effect within the
photon.

This cordus model readily explains several other optical variables:

polarisation is alignment of the cordus; and tunnelling is travelling through
material when unenergised. The cordus frequency is important in
subsequent explanations of reflection and refraction (part 2.2). As such, it
is a fundamental concept in creating the integrated solution that unifies
wave and particle behaviour.

It is a powerful concept as it is coherent across many other phenomena

too. For example the cordus frequency model developed here in an optical
context is also applicable to frequency in the context of particuloids of
matter (ref. ‘Cordus matter’) and permits a re-conceptualisation of de
Broglie frequency, electron orbitals, atomic structure, proton structure,
and fields.

66
Cordus optics: Part 2.2 Reflection

Pons, D.J. , 12 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
Optical effects such as reflection and refraction are conventionally best
described by Electromagnetic Wave theory, at least when they involve
beams of light. However that theory does not explain why single photons
should also show such behaviour. This paper shows that optical effects can
also be explained from a cordus particuloid perspective. Several principles
are proposed for the interaction of a cordus photon with an optical surface,
and these are used to explain reflection and subsequently refraction. The
formula for critical angle is derived from a particuloid basis. The cordus and
wave theory perspectives are compared and contrasted. The significance
of this work is that the cordus mechanics explains the reflection and
refraction behaviour of both single photons as well as beams of light, so it
is a more universal explanation.

Keywords: electromagnetic wave theory; reflection; refraction;

Revision 1.02

1 Introduction

While Electromagnetic Wave theory (WT) adequately describes optical

effects involving beams of light, the explanation of single-photon
behaviour is fundamentally problematic. This paper shows that optical
effects can also be explained as the interaction of a single cordus photon
with the optical surface. Thus Wave theory is not the only way of
conceptualising effects like reflection and refraction.

Background
Wave theory takes the perspective that a beam of light is not so much a
stream of photons, as a continuously existing electromagnetic wave,
comprising an electric field and a magnetic field. This is a powerful
method, and well-suited to the analysis of optical effects, at least of whole
light-beams. Many of the effects in optical devices can be described as
interference between the electromagnetic fields of the incoming and exit
beams. Notice however that the underlying premise of WT is that both
incoming and exit beams exist at the same time, i.e. the fields are
temporally enduring. This becomes a problematic assumption when
considering how an individual photon traverses the device, because a
point particle cannot be in two places at once.

12
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of
Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

67
The problem may be partly solvable in Quantum mechanics (QM) by
assuming superposition and that the particle is nothing more than a
probability wave-function. Though this solves the mathematical part, it
does little to add explanatory value because of its abstraction and lack of
identifiable natural mechanics.

Wave-particle duality assumes that both WT and QM are needed to model

the behaviour of light: neither is sufficient on its own. However, even
while the combination of theories does cover most of the applications, the
explanatory power is discontinuous. Some explanations rely on QM and
others on WT, and there is no overall integration. It is apparent that
neither WT nor QM fully describe reality, and this raises the question of
whether there might be a deeper or more-integrative mechanics that
does.

What is needed is a mechanics that accommodates both single particles

and beams of light, rather than the separate mechanics at present. The
more problematic area is with the single photons, so the problem may be
reformulated thus: is there a mechanics that shows how a single photon
reflects and refracts, and uses natural mechanics in a coherent manner?

The Cordus conjecture has already shown (ref. ‘Cordus conjecture’) that a
particular internal structure for the photon, namely a cordus, is
conceptually able to explain the photon path-dilemmas in the double slit
device, as well as the fringes that build up from multiple single photons. In
that sense the cordus solution already resolves one important part of
wave-particle duality. However the Cordus conjecture cannot claim to
offer a coherent solution until it is also able to explain conventional
effects, like optical reflection and refraction. This present bracket of
papers shows how the Cordus concept meets that test and is applicable to
explaining conventional optical effects from a particuloid perspective.

Cordus Background
The concept of a cordus is that a photon consists not of a point but of two
reactive ends (RE) connected together with a fibril. The REs emit hyff
(hyperfine fibrils), which are lines of electrostatic force. The companion
paper 'Cordus conjecture', describes the background to this idea, applies it
to path dilemmas in the double-slit device and Mach-Zehnder
interferometer, and uses it to explain fringes.

The first part develops a novel model of the dynamic internal variables
that cause the behaviour we see as ‘frequency’. The second, which is this
paper, uses this to explain the interaction of light with surfaces: reflection.
Mechanisms are provided for reflection, and the critical angle for total
internal reflection is derived. In the third part refraction is explained and
Snell's Law derived.

The method is described in the previous papers, and the lemmas included
here are a continuation of the previous numbering. The results follow,

68
starting with some general premises on how the frequency interacts with
the optical surface, and then extending to determine the specific
mechanics of reflection and refraction.

2 Cordus effects at surface interfaces

Reflection and refraction are effects that occur when the photon
encounters the interface between two media. The following assumptions
are made about the behaviour of hyff in these situations. These form a set
of basic principles that are subsequently applied to more specific reflection
and refraction cases.

Lemma O.3 Surface interaction

O.3.1 The path taken by a reactive-end depends on (1) the frequency
state (see O.2) of the reactive end at the time it contacts the
material, and (2) the material properties.
O.3.2 A reactive-end can therefore take one of many loci as it
approaches a surface, depending on its frequency state (primarily
the strength of C+, C-).
O.3.3 The extreme loci for the reactive-end are termed the C+ and C-
extremes. All other loci are within the envelope of those two.
Assume that the analysis of the encounter of a reactive-end with a
surface is sufficiently characterised by the C+ and C- extremes.
O.3.5 The path of the reactive-end at the surface is not a straight line
but rather a bent locus under the influence of the hyff forces.
O.3.5.1 For reflection the particle does not necessarily touch the
surface.
O.3.5.2 The hyff may repel before or after nominal contact is
made.
O.3.5.3 For analysis purposes the effective locus may be
considered a series of straight lines.
O.3.5.4 Hyff detect the change in medium before the reactive-end
physically reaches that point.
O.3.5.5 The detection range of hyff is limited. There is effectively a
dermis (skin layer), one on each side of the surface. We
term these the cisdermis (near-side skin) and transdermis
(far-side skin).
O.3.5.6 Bending of the locus occurs in both derma.
O.3.9 The reactive-end has momentum.
O.3.9.1 Consequently its current trajectory is determined by its
past locus and the current C+ or C- hyff forces.
O.3.9.2 If the reactive-end penetrates beyond the transdermis,
then it cannot be recovered back to the first medium.
O.3.10 Net force over the hyff determines the resulting force on
the RE.
O.3.10.1 The hyff may span different materials. Hyff that
partly straddle a boundary surface will have net

69
 forces dependent on the electron-interaction
properties of the various materials.
O.3.10.2 The REs of a cordus may be in different materials.
O.3.10.3 A RE that re-energises within the bulk of a
material and beyond the dermis has equal hyff
forces around it and hence no net force to bend its
path. However it still has momentum and will
wriggle about the mean.
O.3.11 Forces on a RE, or displacement, cause angular deflections of the
path of that RE only.
O.3.12 Forces collapse when the hyff collapse. The RE is then free to
continue on its path, unless the whole cordus has collapsed.
O.3.13 Geometric variables: The actual hyff frequency state and
strength at the time of meeting the material, and the orientation
of the interface plane of the material, determine the outcome. It
is the behaviour of the electrons in the plane, in response to the
hyff in their (rt) plane, that is important.
O.3.14 Optical activities of materials, namely reflection, transmission,
and absorption, (RTA), depend on the frequency state when the
reactive end strikes the material. Given that multiple cordi strike
the material, each in different frequency states, one material
may do multiple optical activities.
O.3.14.1 RTo: A transparent material (e.g. light on glass)
reflects on one frequency state and not on
another.
O.3.14.2 Roo: An opaque reflective material (e.g. light on
chrome) reflects on all frequency states.
O.3.14.3 ooA: An opaque non-reflective material (e.g. light
on black paint) absorbs all states.
O.3.14.4 It is assumed that the different optical properties
of materials arise from the different mobility of
the electrons (plasmons).
O.3.15 The electron has a span much less than that of an optical wave-
length photon, and higher frequency, and therefore greater
mobility other than the hindrance of its mass.

Note the implication of O.3.15 is that electrons are much ‘smaller’ than a
photon, and can move around in response to the relatively large and
slower-frequency photon.

3 Cordus model for Reflection

3.1 Reflection in general

From the perspective of Wave theory, reflection is caused by the mirror

surface absorbing and re-emitting its own EM waves. Depending on the
perspective taken, these interfere with each other or with the incident
wave to produce the reflected wave. The mathematics of wave theory

70
accurately quantifies the phenomenon, though its qualitative explanations
are not intuitive.

Cordus model for reflection

The Cordus explanation is that both reactive-ends of the cordus separately
reflect off the surface as their hyff interact elastically with the substrate.
The frequency model within Cordus states that the reactive ends change
their state. Thus in some ways the hyff are the reactive ends. Given the
dynamic nature of the hyff, the state of the reactive end at the time it
contacts the surface will determine the path taken by that reactive end.

Assuming passage into a denser material, as the RE approaches a reflective

surface, its hyff already detect the surface plane some distance before
nominal contact, while in the cisdermis. What happens next depends on
the frequency state:

If the hyff are in the C- frequency state, then they repel the RE
from the electrical plane at the surface. This bends the locus back
into the first medium.

Hyff that are in the C+ state draw the RE towards the second
medium.
The frequency state may change again before the RE has completed the
traverse, in which case the locus may be bent one way and then the other
before the outcome is determined.

Transitional locus at reflection

The Cordus models of reflection suggest that the photon does not reflect
at a single point, but rather at its two reactive-ends. Furthermore, the
precise locus taken by a reactive end depends on its frequency state at the
time it approaches the surface, and the nature of the surface. Thus the
reflection is not a sharp instant change in direction occurring at the
surface, but rather a curved transition. Depending on the situation, that
curve might occur above the surface (cisdermis) or beneath it
(transdermis).

Consequently the centreline of the reflected cordus may be laterally offset

from the nominal: the photon is displaced sideways from where it should
be by simple optics. This effect is known for p-polarised light at total
internal reflection, and is termed the Goos–Hänchen effect. The Cordus
explanation is that the actual reflection occurs in the transdermis in this
situation, and Figure 1 provides a graphical explanation of how the offset
arises.

71
 P
Co ho Centreline of
o to Reflection occurs
sy rdin n’s cordus is co-
st at before the surface incident with
em e
is reached nominal reflection
t a2 line

r
a
a1

n1 cisdermis

(a) Reflection off a

n2
Nominal reflection
transdermis denser material
(denser) centreline (n2>n1)

(denser) Nominal reflection

Centre of cordus
(b) Internal
centreline
is offset from

a2
nominal reflection
line
reflection off a less
dense material
(n2<n1)

a1
cisdermis
n1
n2 transdermis

Reflection occurs
beyond the
surface as the
denser material
pulls the reactive-
end back

Figure 1: Reflection occurs as a curved transition some distance off the

surface (a), not an abrupt change at the precise surface. In the case of
internal reflection (b), the transition may occur in the second medium and
result in the centre of the cordus being offset from the nominal.

This figure only shows the mean loci for the reactive-ends: not shown are
the sinusoidal wriggles that are superimposed. These wriggles add further
braided variability of path (within limits defined by the C+ and C-
extremes). This is a simple representation, nonetheless it introduces the
concept that refection is not a simple point bouncing off a surface, but
rather a complex ranged interaction (see also the later Principle of Wider
Locality, in ‘Cordus Matter’).

72
Steep incidence
If the cordus strikes the surface nearly perpendicularly (low q1) then the
hyff plane RT is parallel to the frontal plane of the material. The alignment
of the planes maximises the potential for hyff-electron interaction. For RTo
material e.g. chrome, the electrons are able to move about to counter all
the frequency states of the photon, so the reactive ends are reflected. The
dormant phases tunnel through and are absorbed, hence the imperfect
reflection.

Shallow incidence
At shallow grazing incidence (high angle of incidence) the reactive ends of
the cordus have many opportunities to engage with the plane of electrons
that make up the surface, and even materials with low mobility of surface
electrons can support reflection.

Ridged mirrors
If the reflecting surface is very small, then the plane for the hyff to engage
with is small, and normal specular reflection and refraction will be
disrupted. Thus ridged mirrors are used to enhance the reflection of
incident atoms. The tentative cordus explanation is that the valleys
between the ridges provide a second opportunity for reflection for those
REs that tunnelled through the plateau on the ridge.

Phase changes at reflection

The phase of reflected light may be the same or opposite to the incident
light, depending on the ratio of refractive indices. For light reflecting off a
denser material (higher refractive index), e.g. air to glass, then the polarity
is inverted. For reflection off a less dense material, e.g. internal reflection
glass to air, then the polarity stays the same. Why?

The external electric field represents the hyff strength, in cordus. So

reversal of the electric field at reflection corresponds to inversion of hyff -
but this only occurs for passage to a denser medium (higher n2). Phase is
not simply a planar effect, or a mirroring about the interface, since the
side from which the light comes determines the phase-change.

The cordus explanation follows. We note in passing that phase changes are
an interesting effect because cordus interprets them as showing the
working of deeper mechanisms, which are useful in understanding other
effects.

Reflection involves an interaction between the cordus and the material

through the hyff or EM field, and this delays the renewal of the reactive
end, but only when the denser material is in the transdermis, e.g. air to
glass. This delay corresponds to the λ/2 phase delay in the Wave Theory.
There is no delay in the glass to air case, because the cisdermis is the
denser material and the delay has already occurred (in the form of the
refractive index).

73
3.2 Critical angle for total internal reflection

Internal reflection is when light passes from a region of high refractive

index n1 to lower n2, e.g. glass to air. Usually some of the light is
transmitted and other reflected back to material 1. The critical angle is
where total internal reflection occurs, i.e. no transmission, and is known
to be: Sin(θc) = n2/n1. Noting that n = c/v and v = f λ where f is conserved
but v and λ change, then: Sin(θc) = λ1/ λ2

The angle is measured off the normal to the surface. At steeper angles (θ1
less than θc) some light reflects and some transmits through. As θ1
increases the refracted ray bends closer to the interface and eventually at
θc the ray is on the boundary. As θ1 increases further refraction ceases
and all light is internally reflected. The usual explanation is that no
refracted ray is possible since it would violate the refraction law. However
that does not explain how the law works.

Also, there is something strange happening from a system perspective.

When total internal reflection occurs, why should properties n2 (or λ2) be
required? Since the light stays on the surface and does not go into the bulk
of medium 2, why should the property n2 affect the phenomenon?

The Cordus explanation is that at the critical angle θc the reactive end a1 is
inserted into in the faster material n2 at t=0, and therefore moves forward
a distance λ2/2, see Figure 2. This motion is parallel to the surface because
this is the angle of refraction. By comparison at the same time reactive end
a2 continues to travel distance λ1 in the slower medium, before it later
also enters the faster medium, at t=1/2 of a frequency cycle. RE a1 is thus
accelerated by the sudden freedom of being in the faster medium. The
angle θc is steep enough to push the RE out of the slower medium, but
only steep enough to place it at the boundary. A moment later the second
RE is likewise positioned at the boundary.

74
Figure 2: Geometry of the cordus at the critical angle θc

The important points are:

Over the period from t=0 to t=1/2 cycles, a1 moves λ2/2 whereas
a2 moves λ1/2, because they are in different media.

The angle θc is such that there is only a half-cycle of frequency
involved.
The angle at which the above two conditions is met is apparent from
inspection of the geometry in the figure, Sin(θc) = λ1/ λ2, and this is the
same as the critical angle derived from optics.

The figure illustrates the neat case where a1 is energised precisely at the
boundary. In reality the timing is not always so neat, nonetheless the
process is believed to work with all incoming frequency states and
polarisations because the process itself is gradual, and providing that the
range of the hyff is large enough.

The result is a cordus that exits in n2 along the boundary of the two media.
The fact that this occurs at all, regardless of the incident polarisation,
suggests that the hyff are all in n2, otherwise there would be path
deflection. This in turn suggests that the hyff are not spherical.

75
Total internal reflection
Why does total internal reflection occur at all? Why should it be that ALL
the photons are reflected? Why is the effect so absolute? The cordus
interpretation is that for shallow grazing incidence, i.e. θ1 > θc then there is
more than one hyff cycle that engages with the interface (at critical angle
θc there is only one hyff cycle), and therefore certainty that the RE will
detect the interface and reflect off it.

But why does the RE always reflect, regardless of the frequency state?
Why does it not consistently refract? The explanation is that the attraction
to the cis and transdermis sides is not symmetrical, but favours an
interaction with the denser material, see O.4.4 part 2.3. For steeper
incidence, i.e. θ1 < θc, whether the hyff detect the interface depends on
their frequency state (phase) at the time of approach. So some reflect and
others go through (and onwards to refract).

External reflection
Why is total reflection possible off internal surfaces, but not off external?
Why is the effect not symmetrical? This is addressed in O.4.7 (part 2.3).
Why is some reflection possible, off almost any surface, with a sufficiently
shallow incidence (large θ1)? The cordus explanation is that this situation
gives the photon cordus plenty of opportunity to be in an energised state
but with a slow normal closing velocity on the surface (normal
momentum). Therefore the surface is able to repel the occasional cordus
that is at peak energised state at closest proximity, even if the surface is
otherwise not a good reflector.

4 Discussion

While the usual explanation for optical effects such as reflection is wave
theory, this paper shows that it is possible to explain the effects using
cordus particuloids, and simple mechanics. Reflection emerges, in the
cordus perspective, as an effect that occurs at interface surfaces, due to
the interaction of cordus hyff with the electrons, particularly the surface
plasmons. In this model, the surface plasmons are able to dynamically
adjust to the hyff of the approaching photon, and therefore do not provide
resistance in the plane of the interface (horizontal direction in the
diagrams here). However the situation is very different in the normal
direction, since the electrons have limited to no mobility. Consequently
the material does interact with the photon in the vertical direction, and
this results in reflection. Or refraction, depending on the frequency state
at the time.

This model is significant because it shows that the cordus structure of the
photon is conceptually valid over a larger set of effects than simply wave-
particle duality in the double-slit and interferometers.

76
Cordus optics: Part 2.3 Refraction

Pons, D.J. , 13 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
Explaining basic optical effects is not possible with classical particle
mechanics, and even with quantum mechanics it is not straight forward
and not particularly intuitive. The problem is much simpler when solved in
the cordus domain. This paper provides cordus explanations for Snell’s Law
and Brewster’s Angle, and quantitative derivations too. This is significant
because the cordus mechanics were derived for single photons, and
immediately generalise also to beams of light. Therefore cordus can
explain particle behaviour, fringes, and optical effects, using a single
coherent mechanics. The cordus explanation does not need the
conventional concept of ‘interference’.

Keywords: electromagnetic wave theory; refraction; Snell’s Law; Brewster’s

angle;
Revision 1.02

1 Introduction

Refraction in general
The bending of light as it enters an inclined boundary is usually explained
in optical wave theory as a change in the speed (phase velocity), such that
the wavelength changes but not the frequency. The angle of refraction θ2
in the second medium 2 is given by Snell's law: sinθ2 = v2/v1 .sinθ1 =
n1/n2.sinθ1 = λ2/λ1.sinθ1 where the angles are measured from the normal
to the surface, and v are the velocities in the two media. Thus the net
angular deflection [θδ = 90o -(θ1+θ2)] is not constant but depends on the
angle of incidence. The refracted ray may be partly polarised. At the same
time, some of the light may be reflected.

The refractive index n measures the speed relative to that of light in a

vacuum. Refractive index is usually linear, but may be non-linear for high-
intensity light. Refractive index increases approximately linearly with
density for glasses of similar chemical composition. Explanations vary for
how the change in speed occurs. The wave interpretation is that the
delay occurs because the electric field interacts with the electrons to
radiate a delayed wave, thereby forming the new but slower wave. Hence
the Huygens–Fresnel principle that each point on the wave propagates

13
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

77
new waves and these interfere. Surface waves of water also refract, and
provide a visual confirmation of the effect.

This paper explains refraction from the cordus perspective. The concept of
a cordus is that a photon consists not of a point but of two reactive ends
(RE) connected together with a fibril. The REs emit hyff (hyperfine fibrils),
which are lines of electrostatic force. The method is described in the
previous papers, and the lemmas included here are a continuation of the
previous numbering.

2 Cordus refraction

The cordus model for refraction uses the frequency lemma from the
earlier paper in the series, and elements of the reflection lemma. It also
requires additional assumptions as follow:

Lemma O.4 Refraction

O.4.1 From the cordus perspective, reflection results from the
interaction of the incoming photon with the electrons in the
surface plane, i.e. surface plasmons. In contrast, refraction is an
interaction with the bulk of the material. Furthermore, that
interaction starts to occur before the photon reaches the bulk
material , and it is that preliminary interaction that bends the
locus.
O.4.2 On approaching the interface (e.g. air to glass) the hyff probe
through both the cis- and trans-dermis. The RE therefore responds
to the upcoming medium before it physically reaches it (Principle
of Wider Locality, see ‘Cordus Matter’). That response varies
depending on the frequency state, and may be attractive or
repulsive.
O.4.2.1 In fact it will be both attractive and repulsive in turn, due
to the frequency effect.
O.4.2.2 See the dermis concept in O.3.5.5, part 2.2
O.4.3 The strength of the response is not constant but becomes stronger
with proximity to the interface.
O.4.4 The material with higher refractive index exerts the stronger
force.
O.4.5 The cumulative effect over several frequency cycles determines
the outcome.
O.4.5.1 Thus the precise frequency state of the RE as it
approaches the surface will the starting point of the
summation and therefore determine the overall outcome
attractive or repulsive result.
O.4.5.2 The immediately previous locus also affects the outcome,
i.e. momentum is involved, see O.3.9, part 2.2
O.4.5.3 The next photon has a different frequency state and
instantaneous direction of momentum may therefore
experience a different reflection or refraction result.

78
O.4.6 The geometric positioning of the dynamic hyff with respect to the
two materials, i.e. the angle of incidence, determines the
outcome.
O.4.7 Note that the effect is not symmetrical for layout. Thus for passage
to a material with higher refractive index, e.g. air to glass, the
denser material at n2 causes refraction to dominate. In contrast, at
glass to air, the denser material is at n1 and reflection dominates.
O.4.8 Photons displace electrons (plasmons) in the medium through
which the light travels.
O.4.8.1 Note that the electrons have the higher mobility as per
O.3.15.
O.4.8.2 An ineffective plasmon transport mechanism means that
the material exerts forces on the reactive end.

2.1 Derivation of Snell’s Law

The Cordus explanation for refraction is that the inclined incoming cordus
strikes the surface and one reactive-end and then the next penetrates into
the second medium n2. Assuming the case where n2 is more dense, e.g.
from air to glass, then the cordus slows down. The case is shown in Figure
1.

Figure 1: Refraction involves a dormant reactive-end penetrating into the

second medium, and being angularly deflected with reduction in speed.

79
Cordus derivation of Snell’s Law
The refraction geometry is shown in Figure 2, this being the two triangles
comprising the incident cordus and the surface, and the refracted cordus
and the same surface. Since dimension d is common to both triangles, and
the cordus is perpendicular to the loci, it follows by trigonometry that d =
λ2/(2.sinθ2) = λ1/(2.sinθ1). This becomes λ2/sinθ2 = λ1/sinθ1 which is Snell’s
law. The frequency and other forms arise by noting that v1=f. λ1 and v2=f.
λ2 and n = c/v where c is velocity of light in vacuum.

1
01 2

d
2
02
2
Figure R: Refraction geometry

The explanation above has been given for the neat case where the second
reactive end neatly strikes the surface in turn, i.e. t=1/2 gives a precise
λ1/2 displacement for RE a2. It may be shown that the explanation also
works for the messy case where a2 strikes not a half wavelength later but
a fraction k.

The above derivation is for a p-polarised photon. The situation for s-

polarisation is believed to be similar in that the denser material pulls the
reactive end in, thereby deflecting it. However this is yet to be validated.

Birefringence
Some materials show birefringence. These materials have different
refractive indices in two (or three) directions and therefore light
experiences different refraction depending on its polarisation. Thus the
refractive index varies depending on the orientation (polarisation) of the
incident light. The effect is generally believed to depend on anisotropic
material structure. This may arise from the arrangement of the molecules,
mechanical strain, strain from cooling of plastics from the melt, or
application of an electric or magnetic field.

The Cordus explanation for birefringence is that the atomic spacing affects
the electron compliance. The different geometric spacing in the different
directions creates, through the bonds, corresponding different tension on
the electrons, and this affects their preferred orientation and thus
availability to engage with incoming hyff. For an anisotropic material those

80
bonds differ with direction. Any strains deform the bonds and thereby
affects the ability of electrons to interact with the hyff, hence changing
refraction. The orientation, i.e. polarisation, of the incoming cordus
determines which bonds it will interact with. The speed of the cordus in
the material depends on the amount of handshaking it has to do with
electrons, and therefore electrons that are less compliant in one direction
than another will affect the passage of the cordus differently. Incidentally,
this is further evidence in support of the idea that the hyff are not
spherical.

2.2 Brewster's angle

Brewster’s angle θB is an optical refraction and reflection effect that is

dependent on polarisation. For p-polarised light (electric field oscillates in
the plane of the incident ray and the normal to the surface), and for given
refractive indices n1 and n2, there exists an angle of incidence Brewster's
angle θ1 = θB, such that there is no reflection, and all the light is refracted,
this angle being tan(θB) = λ1/λ2 = n2/n1 where λ is the wavelength in the
incident (1) and substrate (2) materials. It is approximately 56o for light
from air to glass. The effect may be derived theoretically using the Fresnel
equations of Wave theory. The challenge is to show how the effect occurs
with a single photon.

The Cordus interpretation is that the reactive-end is doomed to refract,

whatever its frequency state C+ or C-. There is an equifinality about the
outcome, and the RE cannot reflect. This arises because in these special
circumstances of incident angle and refractive indices all loci for reactive-
ends are positioned right through the transdermis. Therefore they are too
deep to reflect: no subsequent frequency state can recall them back to the
first medium. However, that is not to say all loci are co-linear, as will be
shown.

Any one reactive-end has numerous loci across an interface, depending on

its frequency state at the time. For purposes of illustration we consider the
extreme cases of a single RE in either the C+ or C- state, see Figure 3. We
define the two extreme loci as defgh and qrstuv. Note that these are for a
single reactive-end, nominally termed a1. The a2 reactive-end is not
shown here, but the same explanation applies even if it is a different phase
at contact.

81
 y Locus horizontal at
t transition (for Locus bent towards
Locus bent away in n2 in C+ phase
C- phase Brewster’s
r conditions)
a
d
Incident 1 Reflected 3
q
1p Cycle completes
e with locus ready to
f
g refract
1
2
1
01 2
n1 r h x
n2 s j
Locus bent towards
n2 in C+ phase
t
Locus vertical at 02
transition (for
Brewster’s For equifinality of
points h and v, Etc.
conditions) u
2 these lines must be
2 perpendicular
v
Cycle completes
with locus on
refraction path Refracted 2
Oscillations
continue around
the refracted
path

Figure 3: Locus diagram for refraction of a p-polarised photon under

Brewster's conditions. The two extreme loci defgh and qrstuv are shown for
a single reactive-end, for one frequency cycle. The frequency states C-
(blue) and C+ (red) are shown. Also included in this diagram is the
simplified path diagram (dark lines), from which Brewster's formula may
be derived. Points f and t are on the perpendicular to incident ray 1.

Extreme path defgh: For a reactive-end initially in the C- state the hyff
detects the heavier transdermis n2 before the RE actually encounters it,
and moves the RE away, at least initially. By the end of that state the RE is
positioned parallel to the interface (f). Thereafter it changes to the C+
state which pulls it in towards the denser material. This puts it onto the
refracted path θ2 at h.

Extreme path qrstuv: For a reactive-end initially in the C+ state the hyff
detect the approaching transdermis n2 and draw the RE into taking a short-
cut into material 2. By the end of that state it is positioned in the material

82
n2 and heading normal to the surface. Thereafter it changes to a C- state
which attempts to undo the changes. However the C- phase cannot bend
the path sufficiently to pull it out of the material and back into a reflection
path, and instead the RE refracts.

The RE refracts regardless of the frequency state or the locus taken. This is
a consequence of the combination of the momentum (direction
determined by the incident angle) and strength of the subsequent forces
(from the refractive indices). These prevent the RE from completing a
reflection manoeuvre. The situation only exists for p-polarisation because
any deviation from this orientation would result in forces that were out-of-
plane.

Derivation of Brewster’s relationship

The above is a qualitative description of the refraction and lack-of-
reflection effect at Brewster’s angle θB. The cordus explanation also
provides a way to quantify the relationship, as shown in the Figure. The
curved loci are simplified by assuming a small n2 close to n1, which makes
straight lines of the loci and moves points f and t in to the nominal optical
contact point. The result are the lines djh and qjv, shown in dark in Figure
3.

On path qjv the a1 reactive-end travels λ2/2 into material 2, along the
normal to the surface. In the same time interval the djh path moves the RE
a distance of λ1/2 parallel to the surface and still in material 1.
Subsequently each path is bent to conform to θ2. The derivation of
Brewster's relationship is given in terms of the wavelength λ and the
geometry:

Since the djh and qjv paths have equifinality regarding time, line
hv must be perpendicular to the exit trajectory θ2.

This allows the angle JHV to be identified as θ2.

Thus from triangle JHV it emerges that tan(θ2) = λ2/λ1 =
sin(θ2)/cos(θ2) (Eqn 1)

Snell's Law identifies angle JVH as θ1. The derivation is:

Snell's Law: Sin(θ1) = λ1/λ2.sinθ2 (Eqn 2)

Substitute Eqn 1: Sin(θ1) = cos(θ2)/sin(θ2).sinθ2 = cos(θ2)


Thus θ2 = 90o - θ1

Thus tan(θ1) = λ1/λ2 = n2/n1 which is the relationship for Brewster's
angle

Note that different REs may take different loci across the surface (O.3.2).
Consequently this model predicts a braiding of the loci through material 2.
The loci will all be parallel to θ2 but laterally displaced to various extents
within the boundary made by the extreme paths. In addition they have a
superimposed sinusoidal lateral wriggle.14

14
Brewster's angle is interesting for its corollary: At Brewster's angle θ1 =
θB all light except p-polarised is reflected, AND emerges s-polarised regardless of

83
Thus Cordus is able to provide qualitative and quantitative explanations of
Brewster's angle, for an individual photon. This demonstrates that optical
phenomena may be explained by particuloid mechanisms too. However it
is not yet a full proof, because it has only been shown for the extreme loci
(as per O.3.4) and by simplifying the paths to segments of straight lines.
We leave a more complete validation as a future task.

2.3 Mixed reflection and refraction

For transparent surfaces some light is reflected and some refracted

(transmitted). The Fresnel equations describe the proportion of light
transmitted (2) or reflected (3). The equations are for either p- or s-
polarisation. Those for p-polarisation follow. These are more commonly
given in terms of refractive index n, whereas here the wavelength λ form is
also given.

The Fresnel equations give the proportions: these depend on the angles of
incidence and refraction, and the refractive indices, also the polarisation
of the incident light.

The basic principle underpinning the Fresnel equations is that the electric
field components in the plane of the interface are continuous, which
means the planar-components (hence the Cosθ terms) of the incident (1)
plus reflected (3) electric field amplitude equals that of the transmitted
(2). Likewise for the magnetic field, which is at right-angles to the electric
field. For p- and s-polarisation the electric and magnetic fields hit the
interface differently, hence the polarisation effect. However, this
explanation does not explain how the path of an individual photon is
determined.

its initial polarisation. The tentative Cordus interpretation for the s-polarised
reflected light is that the same Brewster's conditions (θ1, n2/n1) that provide the
p-polarised RE with only sufficient momentum to stall against n2, also means that
other polarisations have insufficient momentum to penetrate n2, and only
sufficient momentum to get to the minimal reflected state of flat s-polarisation.

84
Being based on Wave theory, the premise underlying the Fresnel
equations is that the incident and exit beams of light exist at the same
time. Thus that particular explanation cannot be applied to a single
photon, which is supposed to exist as a 1D point. The QM solution to that
problem is to instead model the photon as a wave function in
superposition. That has problems of its own, because it is uncertain
whether that mathematical solution is really representative of reality. An
alternative qualitative description is that the incident light causes surface
plasmons (moving electrons) that later recombine to form the exit photon.

The cordus explanation is that this depends on the state of the reactive
end at the time of impact: those RE in or close to an energised state are
reflected, while those that are dormant are refracted (O.4.5).

Phase change revisited

It is useful to consider the mechanism for phase change (see part 2.2) and
elaborate. Consider the interaction of the horizontal and vertical
components of the hyff force, as it approaches the optical interface.
Consider also the mobility of the electrons in that medium, and their
response to the photon. There are two cases to consider

Case A: On entry to a denser material, e.g. air to glass, the surface

plasmons (electrons) can easily move aside and back again (see O.3.15) in
response to the dynamic horizontal component of the hyff electric field.
Therefore there is no net horizontal force applied to the RE (though there
are dynamic forces) and hence the horizontal component of momentum of
the photon is unhindered.

However the vertical mobility of electrons in the transdermis bulk is

limited because doing so would build up electrostatic force resisting
further electron transport. Therefore the normal component of the hyff
electric field is either resisted by the n2 transdermis and the RE reflects
back into n1, or is attracted into n2 the case of refraction.

The outcome depends on the frequency state at the time (O.4.5) i.e. a net
dominance of the C- state gives reflection and C+ results in refraction. In
addition, the angle of incidence provides the direction of initial
momentum, so low angle θ1 (steep incidence) tends to predispose towards
the photon continuing straight ahead, which is refraction. With steep
incidence, a large amount of vertical force impulse is required to turn the
reactive end around and reflect it. This does not happen often, not
because the n2 substrate is unable to provide the reaction, but because it
is sensitive to the timing of the frequency: if the reactive end changes back
to C+ before completing the reflection manoeuvre then refraction will take
over.

Case B: For a photon approaching a less dense medium, e.g. glass to air,
internal reflection is the favoured outcome and occurs becomes the
exclusive outcome when the angle of incidence exceeds the critical angle,

85
θ1 > θc. Consider a photon in denser n1 and approaching an interface.
While the photon has been deep in n1 the plasmon (electron) transport
mechanisms are fully mobile in both the horizontal and normal directions
(actually the radial and axial). However, as the photon approaches the air
interface, the horizontal transport mechanisms are still fine, but the
normal transport becomes increasingly ineffective. An ineffective plasmon
transport mechanism means that the material exerts forces on the
reactive end (O.4.8.2). Therefore the horizontal momentum of the photon
is not impeded, but the normal is. The denser material is at n1 which thus
provides the greater force on balance, so the RE tends to be pulled back
into n1 and reflection. At shallower incidences than the critical angle, the
momentum is sufficient to ensure reflection regardless of the frequency
state.

We acknowledge that this is only a descriptive explanation, not a

quantitative one, of mixed reflection and refraction. The full derivation of
the Fresnel equations from a cordus basis is an open question. In addition
polarisation in reflection and refraction looks to be an area of further
investigation and potentially deeper insights.

3 Discussion

Explaining basic optical effects is not possible with classical particle

mechanics, and even with quantum mechanics it is not straight forward
and not particularly intuitive. The problem is much simpler when solved in
the cordus domain, as this paper shows for several cases of refraction.
Both Snell’s Law and Brewster’s Angle are explained and quantitative
derivations provided. This is significant because the cordus mechanics
were derived for single photons, and immediately generalise also to beams
of light. Therefore a single mechanism can explain both particle and wave
behaviour, which is otherwise difficult to achieve. This becomes even
more significant when considering that the same cordus concept can also
explain the path dilemmas and fringes of individual photons in the double
slit device. Cordus is therefore one of only a few concepts that can explain
the double slit device as well as conventional optics. We do not dispute
that quantum mechanics can do much of this, but that cordus does it
without resorting to metaphysical effects is unique. Note also that the
cordus explanation does not need the conventional concept of
‘interference’.

All the same, we do emphasise that cordus is a conceptual solution, and

while it has been thought-tested against several physical phenomena, it
has not been checked against all. Furthermore, it is based on intuition and
conjecture, and makes many assumptions (lemmas) that have yet to be
tested. There are many open questions still, the Fresnel equations being
one.

86
Contrast: Cordus and EM Wave theory
EM wave theory is the dominant way of thinking for explaining optical
effects, including interference patterns. It has tacit lemmas of its own: e.g.
that light is a disturbance in the electromagnetic field. It relies heavily on
the concept of frequency, particularly that a half wave-length (λ/2) shift
will cause destructive interference. As a theory it is enormously successful.
Even single photons show interference patterns and by implication 'must
be' a wave, hence the wave-function concept in quantum mechanics.

However wave theory has some limitations: the origins of frequency are
mysterious; it does not explain the quantum effects of single photons; and
destructive interference implies destruction of energy.

If the Cordus Conjecture is correct, wave theory is a convenient

mathematical representation of the external behaviour of light en masse,
but not of the internal variables. Light itself is not simply an EM wave: that
is only the physical manifestation of the passage of hyff. The internal
dynamics of the cordus give rise to the externally visible EM fields: the
fields are not the entire existence. Another areas where the perspectives
differ is the interpretation of amplitude (brightness): Wave theory
perceives amplitude to be the strength of the EM field. The Cordus
Conjecture perceives amplitude to be only the cumulative effect of
multiple cordi that are in a similar location at about the same time: an en
masse effect.

The Cordus Conjecture suggests that wave theory is an appropriate

method for modelling photons, with two caveats: it applies to light in
transit; and to light en masse (not single photons).

Conclusion
This paper shows that optical effects can also be explained as the
interaction of cordus photon with the optical surface and the substrate.
Thus Wave theory is not the only way of conceptualising effects like
reflection and refraction.

The conceptual contribution of this bracket of papers is first the creation

of a novel theoretical model for the internal structure of the photon and
the origins of frequency. This model is useful in later work, where it is
generalised to matter particuloids and provides foundational material for a
description of the strong force and the internal structure of the proton.

The second is the evidence, at least at a conceptual level, that the cordus
conceptual framework is able to explain conventional optical effects. This
is significant, because the same framework has separately provided a
resolution of wave-particle duality in the double-slit device (ref. ‘Cordus
conjecture’), and can explain various matter effects that are normally the
preserve of Quantum mechanics (ref. ‘Cordus matter’). Thus cordus offers
a novel mechanics with a high degree of logical consistency across these
various effects.

87
88
89
Cordus matter: Part 3.1 Wider Locality
Pons, D.J. , 15 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
The dominant paradigm in conventional physics is that of a ‘particle’,
which this paper suggests is a badly flawed premise. The cordus particuloid
is a more coherent concept in that it offers explanations of phenomena
that are otherwise puzzling, and does so with one conceptual consistent
framework across a wide variety of phenomena. This paper shows how
entanglement is readily explained as a natural consequence of the cordus.
It also introduces the principle of complementary frequency state
synchronisation (CoFS) as the deeper principle beneath the Pauli exclusion
principle, and coherence. It is suggested that Bell’s Theorem is only
applicable to 1D point particles, and is thus generally irrelevant.
Specifically, Bell’s Theorem is not an obstacle to models of hidden
variables. Furthermore, it is suggested that the principle of locality is not
viable in its present form, and a principle of wider locality is proposed.

Keywords: particle; entanglement; Bell’s theorem; locality; fundamental

physics
Revision 1.02
Document: Cordus_CMatter_E9.81.doc

1 Introduction

Classical mechanics, with its equations for force and motion, are adequate
for the macroscopic bodies in the environment around our human
existence. However, at sub-microscopic scale the behaviour of sub-atomic
particles of matter can be unexpected: entanglement, superfluidity, and
superconductivity, are some examples. Explanations of these effects have
had to rely on adaptations of quantum mechanics (QM) as classical
theories are at a loss.

QM does a good job of providing mathematical descriptions of the effects,

and the fact that it can do so is usually taken as circumstantial evidence
that QM must be correct. Unlike other areas, such as wave-particle duality,
there is no major competing interpretation to QM in the area of sub-
atomic particles. All the same, QM is not particularly effective at providing
a qualitative description of the effects, and this makes it complex and
difficult to understand at an intuitive level, and consequently people
generally, though perhaps not physicists specifically, perceive QM as
strange. Maybe the effects really are intrinsically complex, and the
mathematical formulations are the reality: the simplest possible way to
express the underlying mechanisms of causality.

15
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of
Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011

90
However, there is always the possibility that there might be another way,
different to QM and perhaps even simpler, of understanding the effects.
The purpose of this paper is to explore that possibility, and it does so by
extending the cordus concept (ref. ‘Cordus Conjecture’).

Background: photon cordus

The concept of a cordus is that a photon consists not of a point but of two
reactive ends (RE) connected together with a fibril. The REs emit
directional force lines called hyff, which are detectable externally as a
polarised electrostatic field. The companion paper (ref. ‘Cordus
conjecture’), describes the background to this idea, applies it to path
dilemmas in the double-slit device and Mach-Zehnder interferometer, and
uses it to explain fringes. It is shown that the Cordus conjecture is
conceptually able to resolve wave-particle duality for the photon. Another
paper (ref. ‘Cordus optics’) shows that the idea is applicable to
conventional optical effects, such as refraction. That paper also further
develops the concept of frequency and the dynamic internal states of the
photon. We recommend that at least the first bracket of papers (ref.
‘Cordus conjecture’), be read before this one, as the fundamental concept
and cognitive point of difference are developed there. Also, the frequency
model from ‘Cordus Optics’ (part 2.1) is necessary foundational material.

The present paper conjecturally builds on those ideas, and applies them to
entanglement, the electron, and matter generally. The paper consists of
several parts, of which this is the first and addresses entanglement and
locality. Part two describes a cordus model for the electron, its orbitals,
matter more generally, and part three explains entropy. In part four are
covered several special states of matter – superposition, coherence,
superfluidity, and superconductivity – and these are re-interpreted in a
cordus context, with surprising results. The final part five of this bracket
contrasts Cordus with QM, and reconceptualises the issues with
Schrodinger’s Cat.

Method
The approach taken is a continuation of that described in the companion
paper ‘Cordus conjecture’, and not detailed here. Briefly, it involves
reverse-engineering the system: it uses logic, conjecture and intuition to
build on the existing cordus model, thereby postulating a set of
mechanisms that can plausibly explain the known system-behaviour.
Specifically, the objective is to postulate electron structure and behaviour
sufficient to explain several matter effects. It is like trying to work out the
contents of a black box by observing its outputs in different situations, and
synthesising a working-model that is sufficient to explain as many of the
situations as possible.

Results
This is a design way of thinking, being very different to the conventional
mathematical analytical approaches, and the outcome is likewise more
qualitative than quantitative. Thus we term the results a conceptual
solution. Being conceptual means that the broad principles are described,
within which a whole class of solutions are possible. Where possible we

91
single out the most promising of these specific solutions and term it the
working model. Along the way we note the underlying assumptions as a
series of lemmas. These we do not attempt to prove: they are simply to
make the premises explicit so that they can be evaluated later. The
lemmas make up the central strand through the papers. Where relevant
for continuity, references are made to lemmas in the other papers.

The results follow, starting with some basic preliminary premises on the
particle behaviour of photons, then moving on to electrons, followed by
application to matter more generally.

2 Entanglement

Einstein called entanglement ‘spooky action at a distance’ and it continues

to sit uneasily within physics since a qualitative explanation is lacking even
though the reality is accepted. It is contrary to relativity, and to the
principle of locality. Nor can entanglement satisfactorily be explained with
existing hidden-variable theories. However it is consistent with quantum
mechanics.

The principle of locality is that an object is only affected by its immediate

surrounding. Entanglement appears to require the principle to be violated:
twin particles may be linked, such that changing the state of one instantly
changes the other, even if they are separated by macroscopic distances.
The mechanisms are incompletely understood in conventional physics.

The effect can be addressed by the Cordus Conjecture with the addition of
a further set of assumptions.

Lemma M.1 Photon-photon interaction

This lemma sets out the assumptions for the interaction of the photon
with other photons.
M.1.1 Photons in flight apparently do not interact much with each other.
There is no known evidence of them merging with each other in
flight. However nothing in the Cordus logic requires them to be
incapable of merging. If they don’t merge, the constraint could
simply be that they cannot generally get sufficiently close to each
other, and aligned, and synchronised for long enough to achieve
the union. Nonetheless it is proposed that some interaction is
possible of the passing type.
M.1.2 Photons do not generally interfere with other photons in the sense
of destructively (constructively) creating fringes.
M.1.3 Photons can be initially created identical in certain key regards
(e.g. frequency).
M.1.4 Cordi from different photons may lock onto each other and
become synchronised through the hyff. The hyff provide the
means for coupling into/out of the fibril (hence also passing
observation, see ‘Cordus Conjecture’).
M.1.5 continued below

92
There are two candidate Cordus interpretations for entanglement. The
first is that some entanglement devices might not be doing much more
than splitting the photon (Cordus Conjecture L.1.1): that what appear to
be two particles are only two reactive ends of the same cordus.

The second, and the current working model, is that the fibrils of two cordi
become synchronised through mutual hyff interactions, called
complementary frequency state synchronisation (see below), such that
changes to the one affect the other.

3 Complementary frequency state synchronisation (CoFS)

Since a photon has two reactive ends, and these are not energised all the
time, it is possible for a second photon to occupy the same space, or to co-
exist nearby. This requires that the frequency states be complementary,
i.e. the reactive-end a1 of photon a is in the opposite state to b1 of photon
b, and physically near each other. Similarly for a2 and b2. By
complementary frequency states we mean that the hyff of one photon are
phased to feed into that of the other that is co-located. This concept
originates in the frequency model (ref. ‘Cordus optics’).

Applying this to entanglement, means that it only looks like there is a

whole photon at each location, when actually there are two photons
sharing the space such that only one is visible at either location at any
particular time. The photons are subsequently split (Cordus Conjecture
L.1.3) so that the reactive ends are far apart. What looks like one
complete photon at each site is, according to this version of events, two
half photons. The fibrils of each are stretched to much greater distances
than usual, but still retain their ability to communicate practically instantly
(Cordus Conjecture L.6.15). Changing one reactive end at one site
therefore changes the other, and that change can be immediately
observed at the other site.

From the Cordus perspective the entanglement would be somewhat

delicate, since the cordi could be broken by external disturbances to the
hyff. This macroscopic form of entanglement of photons is apparently an
uncommon event that requires deliberate construction by the
Experimenter.

This CoFS principle is not limited to the photon, but applies to particuloids
generally. As will be described later, all ‘particles’ are cordi, and therefore
the CoFS effect is accessible to other particles too. Thus CoFS is suggested
as the underlying principle for the pairing of electron orbitals, coherence,
and condensed states. From the cordus perspective a CoFS means that
both RE modes of the particuloid (e.g. electron) are fully occupied at any
one time, but not by the same electron. It is an important principle with
wider applicability. It is subsequently used to explain superfluidity and
superconductivity (see part 3.3), where it forms the basis for a new
concept of ‘network of orbitals’. The QM use of the term ‘coherence’
emerges as one application of CoFS, and the Pauli exclusion principle is

93
another. It is also important in understanding why quantum effects do not
scale up to the macroscopic world. A derivative of the concept, called
synchronous hyff emission direction states (SHEDS), explains the strong
nuclear interaction (ref. ‘Cordus in extremis’) and is used to predict the
internal structure of the proton.

4 Locality and Bell's theorem

The principle of locality is that the behaviour of an object is only affected

by its immediate surroundings, not by distant objects or events elsewhere.
Hence also local realism: that the properties of an object pre-exist before
the object is observed. Bell’s theorem sets these against each other by
implying that only one perspective can be correct: either superluminal
effects or local realism does not exist. The many actual experimental
results are generally interpreted as supporting non-locality behaviour in
quantum mechanics. The general interpretation is to accept Bell's
Theorem and therefore conclude that no viable hidden-variable solution of
any kind can exist.

The cordus model demonstrates that there is no problem with having all of
superluminal effects, hidden variables, and some degree of locality. The
cordus entanglement mechanism provides superluminal effects through
the instantaneous communication through the fibril (ref. ‘Cordus
conjecture’). But doesn’t Bell’s theorem preclude this? From the Cordus
perspective Bell’s theorem is wrong. It is not applicable to the situation
because it was built on the implicit but limiting premise that a particle is
necessarily a single one dimensional (1D) point. This is a natural
assumption given the prevailing 'particle' perspective in QM physics, but
the theorem can only be valid to the extent that particles actually are 1D
points. As Cordus shows, there is reason to believe that the issue can be
considered very differently: that the ‘particle’ view is only an
approximation of a deeper ‘particuloid’ existence. Therefore Bell’s
theorem is only an obstacle to hidden-variable solutions, if one assumes
beforehand that the solution must be limited to only 1D particle designs.
Cordus is not a 1D particle design and therefore Bell's theorem is
irrelevant.

What about the assumption of ‘practically instant’ communication

between the two sites? It implies an effect faster than the speed of light
(superluminal): How is that explained? We acknowledge that is an
incompletely resolved matter and offer some responses. The first is that
the communication is not totally instantaneous because time is initially
required to create the photons and separate the reactive ends. Second,
the data can still only be transmitted at one or at most a few bits per
frequency cycle. The latter arises because, according to the Cordus view,
the hyff effect occurs at the speed of light (L.6.16), and is clocked at the
natural frequency of the photon. So even if the data are transmitted
instantly, they can still only can be pumped in and out as fast as the speed
of light, and only as many bits per frequency cycle as cordus variables are
being changed (which will be few).

94
Third, there is also the matter of passing vs. intrusive detection (L.3) to
consider: if the photon is consumed in the process, or the entanglement
lost, then a new entangled pair will need to be produced, and will require
finite time to move into position. Thus intrusive detection will never be
superluminal overall. Passing detection could allow the entanglement to
be reused for another bit of information, though point two above still
applies. Furthermore, the process of interrogating a photon consumes
time, even if the photon is not destroyed (ref. ‘Cordus in extremis’, E.5.2).

An alternative perspective is that the cosmic speed limit does not apply to
the fibril, even if it does to the hyff, and this is the current working model.
After all, if a long wire were inside a sheath, i.e. a Bowden cable, then
pushing one end instantly causes the other to protrude. The cordus is
perhaps similar, and it is debatable whether or not any mass is being
moved (or where in the frequency cycle the mass, if any, is being moved).
That matter of speed aside, we have shown that a hidden-variable theory
is indeed possible, and can explain entanglement, Bell’s theorem
notwithstanding. However whether or not locality is violated is a more
complex case, and discussed next.

5 Principle of Wider Locality

Cordus suggests that the principle of locality is not viable in its current
form. The current principle of locality assumes that a 'particle' is only
affected by the values of the fields (electromagnetic, gravitational, etc.) at
the infinitesimally small location of the 1D point. Cordus asserts that
particles are not 1D, but are actually particuloids (appear to be particles).
They have a span, and the reactive-ends have hyff zones around them.
Therefore Cordus suggests that a principle of Wider locality applies: a
cordus particuloid is affected by the cumulative effect of the fields in its
local surroundings, these being the space to which its hyff have access.
Further, that hyff has access to spaces that the physical particuloid with its
reactive ends does not.

Lemma M.1 continued

To sum up, the additional lemmas are:
M.1.5 Cordi may be in complementary frequency states, sharing modes
for their reactive ends.
M.1.6 Communication across the fibril is instantaneous, whatever the
span of the cordus. However the propagation speed of the hyff is
limited to c, the speed of light in a vacuum
M.1.7 A principle of Wider locality applies: a cordus particuloid is
affected by the cumulative effect of the fields in its local
surroundings, these being the space to which its hyff have access.
Further, that hyff has access to spaces that the physical particuloid
with its reactive ends does not.

95
6 Conclusions

What has been achieved?

This part has presented a novel conceptual solution to the otherwise
paradoxical problem of entanglement. The dominant paradigm in
conventional physics is that of a ‘particle’. Cordus suggests that conceptual
framework is flawed, and the cause of the weird predictions from QM. The
cordus particuloid is a more coherent concept in that it offers explanations
of phenomena that are otherwise puzzling, and does so with one
conceptual consistent framework across a wide variety of phenomena.

This particular paper shows how entanglement is readily explained as a

natural consequence of the cordus. This obviates the need for the usual
spooky and metaphysical interpretations. The paper also introduces the
principle of complementary frequency state synchronisation (CoFS). This is
an important concept in that later papers show how it underpins the Pauli
exclusion principle, coherence, and the strong interaction. It even allows
the internal structure of the proton to be estimated.

Cordus suggests that Bell’s Theorem is only applicable to 1D point

particles, and is thus generally irrelevant. It is an artefact of the flawed 1D
particle premise of conventional physics, and is not an obstacle to models
of hidden variables.

Cordus predicts that the principle of locality is not viable in its present
form and needs to be widened to include hyff interactions. The problems
with the current principle of locality, as evident in entanglement, are also
an artefact of the prevailing 1D-particle framework of QM. Cordus
proposes a simple principle of wider locality to solve this problem.

These are unorthodox predictions. The implications are that the ‘particle’
conceptual foundation of Quantum mechanics is invalid. The conventional
disinterest in ‘hidden variable’ solutions is a consequence of over-reliance
on a false-negative from Bell’s theorem. QM only applies at the level at
which small pieces of matter look like point particles, and is invalid at
smaller scales. Thus QM is not applicable to the double-slit device.
Nonetheless its statistical mathematics are useful as measures of average
outcomes, though not as specific predictions. Likewise the QM descriptive
explanations are untrustworthy. QM only describes the average outcome.

96
Cordus matter: Part 3.2 Matter particuloids
Pons, D.J. , 16 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
Some of the most enigmatic effects in the physics of electrons are its wave-
particle duality and the Aharonov-Bohm and Casimir effects. Even
relatively core concepts of atomic physics, like spin and the Pauli exclusion
principle, lack satisfactory descriptive explanations. This paper shows that
application of the cordus principle can explain these effects in a coherent
manner.

Keywords: electron; wave-particle duality; spin; atomic bonding; de

Broglie frequency; matter wave
Revision 1.02

1 Introduction

While matter forms the tangible substance of our world, our

understanding of it at the atomic level is far from complete. Conventional
physics is based on the assumption that the constituent particles of matter
are just that: one dimensional particles.

Thus Quantum mechanics (QM) asserts that the properties of a particle,

e.g. spin, are simply intrinsic, and that the fundamental reality for particles
is probabilistic and described by a wavefunction. This is adequate for
explaining many classes of effects. For example, the electron is known to
pass through the double-slit device and QM has an adequate
mathematical explanation for this. However in the same situation
electrons are also observed behaving as waves, and this wave-particle
duality is poorly explained by QM.

The present paper extends the Cordus concept to the electron and then to
matter generally. It is shown that this yields an explanation for several
electron effects, including wave-particle duality, Aharonov-Bohm effect,
spin, a descriptive explanation of the Pauli exclusion principle, atomic
bonding, and the Casimir effect. This paper is the second of five parts on
the Cordus concept applied to matter.

2 Cordus model of the Electron

Previous Cordus papers have explained how the photon could be a cordus
rather than a single 1D point. Electrons also make fringes, and therefore it

16
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

97
is logical to extend the cordus concept to the electron. This permits the
apparent wave-particle duality of the electron to be explained. It also
handily explains several other features of the electron, including the Pauli
exclusion principle for orbitals. The following lemma extends cordus
concepts to the electron.

Lemma M.2 Electron

The conjecture is that the electron itself consists of a type of cordus.
M.2.1 The electron is another type of cordus (e-cordus) and has an e-
fibril and e-hyff (electrical field).
M.2.2 The fibril of an electron exerts a restoring force on the span.
M.2.3 The electron's fibril is of similar functionality to that of the photon.
M.2.4 The electron oscillates and appears at the end of its fibril
(energised Electron End) at a frequency (approximately the de
Broglie frequency).
M.2.2 The e-cordus gives the electron two RE statistical mode locations
where it can appear, and when the electron is bound to an atom,
these appear as an orbital or energy shell around the nucleus.
M.2.2.1 In this context a mode is an available location for a
reactive end. While the cordus only has two REs, it may
have more than two modes available to it, due to the
space around it.
M.2.2.2 If a cordus has multiple modes available to it, then the
next one it uses will be determined by the hyff of other
cordi in the environment. Thus cordi influence the location
of each other.
M.2.5 The energy shells are in quantum increments because they need
to include whole frequency-cycles (wavelengths).
M.2.5.1 At a deeper level, not that we need the explanation for
present purposes, this is determined by the need for
multiple standard gauges of assembly in the atom, see
‘Cordus in extremis’, competing with the need to maintain
a CoFS state throughout the atom.
M.2.6 Higher energy electrons have higher frequency.
M.2.7 Higher energy electrons have shorter cordus span.
M.2.8 The RE modes of an electron within an atom are shaped (not
necessarily symmetrically) by the hyff of other electrons in the
atom.
M.2.9 continued below

This lemma may be used to provide a Cordus explanation of several

effects. Later it will be shown that other sub-atomic particles may also be
represented as cordi.

2.1 Wave-particle duality of the electron

The Cordus explanation is as for the photon (ref Cordus Conjecture): the
free unbound electron oscillates its appearance between its two reactive
ends. Thus it is able to pass through two slits that are suitably spaced
apart. The fibril passes cleanly through the medulla between the slits,
without interacting. Fringes arise similarly: the reactive ends have

98
electromagnetic hyff, and thus engage with the edges of the slits in
passing, generating forces, thereby incrementally deflecting the electron,
and creating fringes.

2.2 Aharonov-Bohm effect

In the Aharonov-Bohm (AB) effect an enclosed magnet, one from which

magnetic field cannot escape, changes the motion of an electron even
though the particle passes through a magnetic-free region. The
experiment involves a coherent source17 of electrons: one beam passes
through the centre of a toroidal magnet and the other bypasses it; the
electrons thereafter interfere to produce fringes at a biprism (wire with a
positive charge);18 the fringes differ depending on whether or not the
magnetic flux is confined to the magnet (as opposed to leaking into the
hole). The conventional explanation involves use of vector electromagnetic
potentials (in place of electromagnetic fields).

The significance of this effect is that the electron is affected by a condition

(magnetic field) that is some distance away from it, and to which it does
not have access. Thus the principle of locality seems to be compromised,
as in the case of entanglement. The results are usually interpreted as
evidence that QM's mathematical representations of electromagnetic
potentials are not simply mathematical, but are real effects.

The Cordus explanation of the Aharonov-Bohm effect is: one reactive-end

of the electron cordus goes through the toroidal magnet, and the other
goes past it; the reactive-end itself does not get into the toroid but its hyff
do; the hyff penetrate the (thin) outer layer of the solenoid, and therefore
are able to probe that space despite the electromagnetic barriers
preventing the electron as a whole from entering; the hyff interact with
the magnetic field and this causes a displacement force on the reactive-
end; the wire of the biprism provides the edge-effect for the formation of
fringes.19

Thus the AB effect, from the Cordus perspective, is another application of

the Principle of Wider Locality.

17
The quantum mechanics concept of a ‘coherent’ source of light or electrons is
not accepted by Cordus, at least not as QM describes it. Instead Cordus explains
this type of light source as reactive ends that have been split to go down two
paths.
18
The fact that fringes in this case are associated with electromagnetic effects at
the edges of objects, is consistent with the explanation for photon fringes
(‘Cordus conjecture’), which are also edge effects.
19
The present working model is focussed on the reactive-end perspective, and it is
possible that an alternative way of looking at it is that the fibril passes through
and is disturbed by the magnetised region.

99
2.3 Electron configuration, Orbitals, Spin

Electrons that are bound to atoms have specific configurations of shell,

sub-shell, orbital, and spin. The standard perspective is that the energy
levels for the electron are in quanta, i.e. discrete steps. These are
explained as arising from the need for the levels to be spaced at whole
numbers of the particle's wavelength, and Cordus is similar in this regard
(M.2.5).

Synchrotron radiation
One of the difficulties with the classical model of the atom is that if an
electron orbits round the nucleus, then it should emit a photon
(synchrotron radiation) and collapse into the nucleus. Quantum mechanics
partly solves this by providing orbitals in which there is only a probability
of the electron appearing. However this is an incomplete solution as it
does not explain how the electron gets from one location to another, and
why it should not emit a photon while doing so.

The Cordus interpretation is that the electron is not continuously in

existence but appears and disappears at each of the ends of its fibril.
When it is not in existence (dormant) then it does not have to emit
synchrotron radiation. Furthermore, the position of those reactive-ends
changes depending on the rest of the local environment of the atom and
neighbouring atoms, because of the influence of the hyff of other
electrons. The positions of the cordus correspond to the orbitals, i.e. the
RE modes. Existing models of the orbitals suggest they are generally
spherical or contain multiples of two modes (most likely locations). The
two-ended nature of the cordus readily lends itself to this type of
outcome. There is no actual ‘orbit’ in the continuous sense, and hence no
radiation of a photon. This does not mean that the electron is stationary:
only that it steps around its orbital, and moves invisibly between steps.
When it has multiple modes accessible to it, then the choice is influenced
by the hyff of surrounding electrons. (See also superconductivity below).

However, when the electron is free of the atom and flowing en masse in a
circular path then there is a small net rotation and translation of the whole
e-cordus at each frequency cycle, and synchrotron radiation occurs there.

Electron orbital shape

Both QM and Cordus suggest that electrons are not orbiting balls. QM
predicts that the shape of electron orbitals is not a circular orbit, but
rather a shaped region of probable location. For example, the s orbital is
spherical and has zero angular momentum, whereas the p orbital has
polar modes. The higher orbitals are not necessarily symmetric. However
all the orbitals have a bipolar shape, even if distorted. This is consistent
with the cordus concept of an electron with two RE modes (M.2.2), where
the modes are shaped (not necessarily symmetrically) by the other
electrons in the atom (M.2.8) and molecule (M.3.5).

Note that higher energy electrons in an atom, will according to cordus,

have shorter spans (and higher frequencies). They will therefore need to

100
either be closer in to the nucleus, or arrayed around the outside. This is
counterintuitive in that conventional models suggest higher energy
electrons are further away from the nucleus.

Spin angular momentum

Particles, including the photon, are known to carry spin angular
momentum. In classical mechanics angular momentum is rotation of a
body around an axis. From the QM perspective, spin refers to a property of
the particle, and it is quantised. QM believes it to be an intrinsic property,
i.e. there is no internal structure nor any actual spinning about an axis.
The spin for fermions (e.g. electrons, quarks) is in ½ units of spin. For
bosons (e.g. photon) it is integer units. It is also known that the spin of a
particle is functionally identical to angular momentum, as shown in the
empirical Einstein–de Haas effect (electric current in a coil causes a
magnet to rotate), and the complementary Barnett effect (an object
becomes magnetised when spun). Trying to reconcile those is not easy, so
spin is conventionally left as a disjoint concept: Classical mechanics can’t
explain quantum spin, and Quantum mechanics can’t explain angular
momentum of a particle.

From the Cordus perspective there is significance in the magnitude of spin:

it comes in discrete quanta of ±1/2 multiples of the reduced Planck's
constant ħ = h/(2π), which is termed the spin quantum number. Why ½?
Why not 1/3 or some other fraction?

Cordus suggests that the ½ spin arises from a cordus with two rather than
any other number of reactive ends. Each time the cordus re-energises, the
next reactive end is 180o offset from the previous one, not 120o as would
be for three REs. The implication is that the re-energisation of the cordus is
functionally equivalent to a single reactive end that rotates in 180o
increments.

Cordus suggests that the conventional concept of spin confounds two

similar but different effects: the frequency oscillation whereby the two
reactive ends take turns at being energised, vs. the hyff (force field) that
those REs emit. Thus the following clarifying lemmas.

Lemma M.2 continued

M.2.9 Spin is compound concept and more usefully partitioned into
different types, based on the underlying mechanics.
M.2.9.1 Cordus-spin: Half-spin fermions (matter particles: electron
& leptons, quarks, & composite particles) are cordus
structures with two reactive ends.
M.2.9.1.1 The re-energisation of the cordus is functionally
equivalent to a single reactive end that rotates in
180o increments. This creates angular
momentum.
M.2.9.1.2 The whole photon cordus can rotate in roll about
its flight a axis. Thus a photon may have either left-
or right-handed circular-polarisation: neither more
nor less states than two.

101
M.2.9.2 Reactive-end spin: Half-spin fermions can share locations
of their REs providing they are in complementary
frequency states. Specifically, two electrons can be in the
same location, including an orbital, providing they have
opposite spin.
M.2.9.3 Hyff-spin: Integer-spin (±1) bosons have two variants.
M.2.9.3.1 The elementary type are what Cordus calls hyff,
and contribute to the Cordus theory of fields.
These are what QM calls virtual particles. Multiple
hyff force fields can share the same space.
M.2.9.3.2 Atoms with full orbitals, e.g. helium-4, have
integer spin overall. This only means that they
have zero net angular momentum.
M.2.9.4 The photon (but not the virtual photon, which is covered
by M.2.9.3)20 is an exception in that it has elements of
multiple spin behaviours. This is an artefact of the way
compound-spin is defined.

Thus plain ‘spin’ is an overloaded concept that should not be used without
clarification. It primarily refers to the number of reactive ends in the
cordus, and secondly to the ability of cordi and hyff to share space. Thus
spin refers to the frequency model of the particuloid.

Pauli exclusion principle

The Pauli exclusion principle is that electrons (and protons, neutrons, and
fermions in general) must have opposite spin if they are to occupy the
same space. In contrast the photon (and bosons in general) have integer
spin and can co-locate.

From the Cordus perspective, this is covered by M.2.9.2: the exclusion

principle represents the fact that each orbital in the atom can be filled
with only two electrons (no more), and these electrons must have
opposite spin.

The cordus explanation for the Pauli exclusion principle is straightforward:

the electron cordus has two ends, only one of which is fully energised at
any one time, and two such cordi can co-habit, providing they are in
different phases. They achieve this by making complementary frequency
state synchronisations (CoFS), mediated through their hyff.21 Cordus
further suggests that these pairs of electrons are entangled, i.e. they are
actively influencing each other. The hyff are never completely off, except

20
The photon and the ‘virtual photon’ are very different structures according to
Cordus: the photon is a cordus, whereas the virtual photon is just the hyff
component of the cordus. Cordus questions the validity of the term ‘virtual
photon’ since it implies a particle.
21
This is a stable configuration for the electron because it means that
when it is dormant or out of its second mode then another electron is looking
after the mode. The two electrons guard each other’s modes, and this strengthens
their ability to resist disruption by hyff from other electrons within the atom and
externally, hence the stability, and lower chemical reactivity.

102
momentarily, so the two electrons can affect each other’s location and
frequency states.

2.4 Atomic bonding

The cordus idea extends to explain how bonds operate between atoms.
Each orbital around an atom has two modes (locations) and requires two
full-time-equivalent electrons to fill. However a electron does not have to
be dedicated to the atom: it may be part-time, with only one cordus-end
in the atom under consideration, and the other in a neighbouring atom.
Doing this creates a bond between the atoms. As every electron has two
cordus reactive-ends, it therefore has two possible RE mode locations.

Cordus suggests that the ability of the electron cordus to have one end
associated with one atom and the other end with a different atom is the
underlying mechanism for all bonding between atoms. See M.3.1 below.
Multiple electrons can therefore bind (M.3.2) a series of atoms together
into larger molecules, providing the atoms are sufficiently close that a
geometrically suitable orbital can be offered to the valence electron
(M.3.3).

Cordus does not specify whether or not, within one atom, all the electron
cordus-states are synchronised to just two complementary states, for all
orbitals: i.e. whether the atom as a whole is in a CoFS state. Presumably it
is, at least to some extent, since the relationships between the inner
electrons and the nucleus would seem likely to impose constraints on the
outer electrons (M.2.8). Regardless, the bonds between atoms will
presumably propagate synchronisation across at least the orbitals involved
(M.3.4), and this means into other atoms in the molecule. Thus to some
extent the molecule as a whole will be in an entangled state. Thus cordus
predicts rapid transmission of information within a molecule.

These concepts are summarised in the following lemma.

Lemma M.3 Electron-mediated covalent bonds

M.3.1 Electron covalent bonds are created when one end of the electron
cordus is in a different atom.
M.3.1.1 A covalent bond is effectively a shaped orbital, but
between two atoms rather than only inside one.
M.3.2 The electron cordus is elastic and can exert force that keeps the
ends from separating, i.e. generates a force that bonds the atoms
together. (The photon may not have this capability).
M.3.3 Suitable geometric arrangement of the atoms is necessary for
bonding to occur: the valence electron needs to have access to an
orbital that is sufficiently within the constraints imposed by its
span, and therefore by its energy. Electron energy, span, available
orbitals, and geometric spacing are therefore bonding factors.
M.3.4 Electrons that are shared between atoms are in CoFS states with
both atoms.

103
M.3.5 Covalent bonds within the molecule distort the shapes of the
electron orbitals.

Electron bonds have some strength. This is presumed due to the restoring
force of the fibril. When the span is increased, i.e. two reactive-ends of the
electron are separated, then the fibril (or the hyff) exert a force that brings
them closer together (M.2.2). However the restoring force does not close
the span completely, but only keeps it within some range of default-span.

Free electrons have a default span inversely proportional to their

frequency (M.2.7).22

Ionic bonds are electrostatic attraction effects, caused by the metal having
less affinity for its electron than the non-metal. Van Der Waals force may
be caused by the hyff of electrons protruding beyond their orbitals,
especially when existing covalent bonds within the molecule distort the
electron orbitals (M.3.5) and thus cause polarisation effects.

Casimir effect
The Casimir effect is a closing force between two conductive plates that
are close together. The effect also occurs in a vacuum, i.e. when there is
no intervening matter. The conventional explanation is that
electromagnetic quantum fluctuations occur around the plates, but those
in a narrow gap are weaker than outside, so a force arises pushing the
plates together, i.e. a type of pressure effect.

The Cordus explanation for the Casimir effect is that the plates are so close
that some electrons have a reactive end in each plate, and thus their fibrils
exert a closing force, just as in any other electron bonding situation. The
Casimir effect requires that the plates be conductive, and Cordus
interprets this as necessary for the provision of mobile electrons.
According to Cordus it is the way the electron hyff are free-ranging that
causes the effect, which in turn depends on the material properties (which
can be manipulated). The cordus explanation is similar for the Jospehson
effect, where electrons can cross a thin insulating barrier.

3 Application to matter generally

de Broglie equations
The de Broglie equations describe the wavelength of matter: (a)
Wavelength λ = h/p, i.e. is inversely proportional to momentum p, and (b)
frequency f =E/h with kinetic energy E, and Planck's constant h.

This wavelength is for moving particles. Such a particle appears to behave

as a wave in its ability to diffract into fringes at gaps or double-slits. For

22
However the span in a bonded situation is different: any span-deviance
is accommodated by loaned energy from the other electron, via a small phase
difference in the complementary synchronisation. See also the Level of Assembly
concept in ‘Cordus in extremis’.

104
example, electrons form fringes in the double-slit experiment. From a
classical perspective this is unexpected behaviour for a 'particle', and the
usual explanations are that the particle behaved as a wave with the de
Broglie frequency. Quantum superposition of states and probability theory
is another explanation. The de Broglie equations imply that a particle at
rest does not have a wavelength or frequency.

Curiously, the direction of the frequency is ambiguous. The same problem

was encountered with frequency in the case of light waves and photons
(ref. Cordus Conjecture). The quantum perspective is a wave-packet
interpretation: that the particle is a travelling packet of waves. This
conveniently also provides an explanation of a sort for Heisenberg's
uncertainty principle. However the wave packet idea introduces issues of
its own, namely the need for not one but many frequencies to make up
the packet. What does the de Broglie frequency correspond to in a wave
packet? What does ‘frequency’ correspond to in a particle, and to what do
all the wavefuntion frequencies physically correspond? To those
existential questions quantum mechanics has no answer other than the
mantra that there is nothing deeper, not any internal variables, but that
the mathematics is the reality.

Cordus frequency for a particuloid

The Cordus perspective is that all fermion matter ‘particles’ are cordi
(M.2.9.1), and oscillate their appearance at the ends of their span. This
readily accommodates the idea that matter has a frequency.

Cordus goes further than de Broglie to state that matter has a frequency
even at rest. The Cordus and de Broglie concepts of frequency are very
different, and should not be confused. 23 The cordus frequency concept is
further developed in the following lemma.

Lemma M.4 Matter

This lemma extends cordus concepts to matter generally.

M.4.1 All particles including the electron, proton, neutron, and quarks,
may be represented as cordi. Thus they have a fibril, reactive ends,
and hyff of some type.
M.4.2 The cordi oscillate with a frequency. This means that matter does
not exist as single-point particles that are continuously in
existence. Instead matter oscillates its appearance at either end of
the cordus span. The cordus frequency is tentatively assumed to
be the de Broglie frequency.
M.4.3 The direction of frequency oscillation represents a polarisation
variable. It is assumed to generally be transverse to the direction
of particle velocity, but not exclusively so.
23
The cordus frequency is not the same as the de Broglie frequency. Cordus
frequency applies to all particuloids, whether or not they are moving, whereas de
Broglie only applies to moving particles. Cordus does not have a specific frequency
for moving particles, but instead includes a motion effect on frequency in ‘Cordus
in extremis’.

105
M.4.3 The cordus frequency exists even when the particle is not moving.
M.4.4 The larger the mass the higher the frequency.
M.4.5 The higher the frequency the shorter the span.
M.4.6 Bonds, e.g. those between protons and neutrons, and also those
between atoms, carry forces that can synchronise the phase of
particles with compatible frequencies, hence coherence.24
M.4.7 Increased kinetic energy of the particle causes increased
frequency.25
M.4.8 Temperature does not apply to a single particle, but to aggregates
of matter, being the vibrational energy stored in the bonds
between atoms (phonons), in turn caused by electrons in
stretched orbital modes.
M.4.9 Assemblies of particles, e.g. molecules and bodies, generally do
not have an observable overall body cordus frequency, unless they
are brought into a state of coherence.

Matter waves
The 'matter wave' phenomenon is explained as a cordus particuloid with
velocity. The oscillation is transverse to the velocity. Heavier cordus
particles have higher frequency and shorter span. Hence a microscope
using electrons has greater resolution than one using photons. The moving
cordus particle has hyff and these engage with the edges of gaps and
cause quantum angular deflection of that reactive end, hence fringes. See
also ‘Wave particle duality of the electron’ above, and 'Large-body matter-
waves' below.

From the Cordus perspective the phenomenon is not really a 'matter

wave' but only looks like a 'wave' because the fringes happen to also
follow wave mathematics.

What is the diameter of a particle?

Physics has several interpretations for what a particle consists of.
Mathematically it is treated as a 1D point source, without internal
structure. At other times it is considered to be a sphere. And at yet other
times it is considered to be made up of further 1D points. For example, the
proton has three quarks (UUD) held together by gluons.

The general premise is that a particle is a stable aggregate of one or more

semi-permanently existing sub-particles, hence that it is meaningful to ask
questions like ‘what is the diameter of the particle, e.g. proton?’ From a
cordus perspective this is an invalid question: it is not meaningful to talk
about the diameter of say a proton, as if it had a hard surface.

From the Cordus perspective the elementary particle, e.g. photon or

electron, is not a sphere in the first place, but rather a two dimensional

24
When the internal coherency fails, the atom decays.
25
This lemma is included for consistency with de Broglie's equation. However it is not immediately
needed, and the mechanism is unclear. An in extremis speculation is that the motion of a particuloid
may cause the span to realign normal to the direction of motion, and that the effect is dependent on
mass (hence momentum).

106
rod (or multiple rods), with fuzzy ends too. Nor does it permanently exist
in one location, but instead oscillates its existence at its reactive ends.

Cordus suggests that the zone of influence of the particle extends well
beyond its geometric modes. The proton is likely to have hyff that create a
zone of influence: this may be somewhat diffuse, perhaps shaped, and the
outer zone may be considerably larger (though weaker) than commonly
perceived.

Existing methods of attempting to measure the ‘diameter’ of the proton

involving measuring its interaction with electrons, either in bonding
situations or impact-scattering. From a Cordus perspective these
experiments are measuring the average interaction geometry of the
electron and proton, not a physical diameter. It is natural to call this the
‘diameter’ of the proton, but that really is only an interpretation based on
the a priori assumption that a particle should be a sphere of charge.
Cordus further suggests that the measurement is dependent on the
probing particle. This is consistent with the observation that the diameter
of the proton is measured to be smaller when the muon is used as the
probing particle.26 Any cordus particuloid, the proton in this case, adjusts
its span depending on the other particuloid it needs to interact (bond)
with. Thus the effective interaction geometry depends on the participants
in the interaction, and presumably their energies too. There is no solid
physical diameter for a particuloid.

Cordus predicts that a proton will have many ‘diameters’ depending on

what interaction is being measured, and the nature of the probe.

So it does not make sense to think of a particle as a sedate, stable, solid,

in-one-place, well-defined sphere (of mass or charge), as if it were a
planet. It is more like a moving cracking whip. Cordus suggests that
composite ‘particles’, e.g. the nucleus as a whole and the individual
proton, have complex interactions within, as the multiple internal cordi all
seek their place to exist. Furthermore, as the photon cordus relates in
some way to that of the electron, so it seems possible that other sub-
atomic cordi-particuloids could also be comprised of yet smaller cordi
interacting in various ways.

It is not meaningful, from the Cordus perspective, to perceive the atom as

hard little balls orbiting around a nucleus made of compacted other balls,
as shown in the popular symbol for the atom.

4 Conclusions

Some of the most enigmatic effects in physics have been wave-particle

duality generally, and in the case of the electron specifically, the
Aharonov-Bohm effect, and the Casimir effect. Even relatively core

26
The proton would be expected to be slightly heavier in this case, see ‘Cordus in
extremis’.

107
concepts of atomic physics, like spin and the Pauli exclusion principle,
have not previous had satisfactory descriptive explanations. The
conceptual contribution of Cordus is that it provides explanations for these
effects. Moreover, these explanations are consistent with its explanations
in other areas, as the companion papers show, so the emergent model has
a high degree of coherence.

This paper has provided a re-conceptualisation of the electron. It is implied

that the same principles apply to matter generally. The better
understanding of the electron that emerges from this paper is useful in
developing a model of other electron functions, particularly its interaction
with the photon, and the energy cycles within matter. These are the topic
of part 3 in this series. The cordus model for the electron is also important
for the special states of matter discussed in part 4.

108
Cordus matter: Part 3.3 Energy cycles within
matter
Pons, D.J. , 27 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
The interaction of light with electrons is one of the fundamental perceptual
realities of what we see. Yet that interaction is only partly understood.
Cordus concepts are applied to develop a descriptive model of the
mechanisms whereby photons are absorbed into electrons and emitted.
From the Cordus perspective, the temperature of a body is primarily a
measure of its phonons (lattice-vibrations). Cordus shows why entropy
occurs, despite the individual mechanisms being reversible. An
understanding of the mechanisms for entropy is relevant to the
understanding of coherence, superfluidity and superconductivity. Cordus
suggests that a failure to adequately conceptualise entropy leads to
misapplication of coherence and ultimately to unreliability in the premise
of superposition.

Keywords: absorbance; emission; photon; electron; entropy

Revision 1.02

1 Introduction

The starting focus of this set of papers was the behaviour of the photon,
and the loci it takes. However the photon is only the specialist flight-mode
of a larger energy cycle, which we term the life-cycle of the photon. The
electron is the primary device for capturing and emitting these photons.

Photons generally start as energy within matter, are ejected, fly free for a
while, and are then reabsorbed into other matter. Photons are therefore a
way for matter to transfer energy to other matter. Thus light is a
distribution and energy-rebalancing mechanism for matter. Photons do
not exist as identifiable entities within matter: their energy is spread into
it. There is therefore a life-cycle for the photon. Understanding this could
help better understand the photon. This paper, which is part 3 in a series
on matter, explores emission and absorbance of light from the perspective
of the Cordus conjecture.

Also, there is the problem of entropy to deal with. Where does the
inelasticity occur in the life-cycle of the photon? What is the relationship
between photon and heat? Such questions on the interaction of light and
matter are addressed by quantum electrodynamics (QED), but extension
of the Cordus conjecture suggests other novel ways of looking at the
problem.

27
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of
Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

109
2 Cordus model for photon absorption

The mechanism for absorption of a photon into matter is uncertain. The

general interpretation of physics is that photons are absorbed into
electrons. Absorption is not an instant event - it requires some depth to
the material and mass density is one of the factors though known to be
non-linear (Beer-Lambert law). It is known that the process may be
saturated, i.e. dependent on the light intensity - explained as atoms being
excited into upper energy states quicker than they can decay. Also, the
fine-structure constant is (among other things) a constant for the
interaction between electrons and photons.

High energy photons (Compton scattering)

It is possible for the electron to absorb only part of the energy of the
photon, and send the photon on its way with lower energy (hence
frequency), as Compton scattering shows. In this effect a high energy
photon, e.g. X-ray, collides with an electron, and bounces off. The photon
exits with lower energy (lower frequency) on a deflected path, the change
in frequency being related to the angular deflection of the exiting
photon.28 The electron is physically displaced and may be ejected from
the atom. The effect, or at least the equations thereof, are based on the
conservation of energy and momentum, and the assumption that the
photon has momentum. The Compton effect is generally accepted as
evidence for the particle nature of photons, and hence also quantum
theory. In principle the process may be at least partially reversible, since
the inverse also occurs, where low energy photons may be energised to
higher frequencies by interaction with energetic electrons. The Compton
effect only occurs for high-energy photons such as X-rays.

There are two output variables in the Compton effect: the angle of
deflection and the frequency of the leaving photon. Though related by an
equation, neither variable can be directly controlled. So what is the
independent variable and how does the effect work? Cordus suggests that
the photon cordus comes close to that of the electron; the frequencies are
too asynchronous to readily permit their joining (absorption), however
their hyff affect each other; the hyff exert forces between the cordi even if
they are near misses; at comparable frequencies the second reactive end
will experience a similar force to the first. Consequently both ends of the
photon are deflected, rather than one just being delayed. The angular
deflection occurs depending on the positional and angular alignment, and
the phase differences between photon and electron cordi. If the electron
is not quick enough to move, then it gives the energy back to the photon,
which continues on a deflected path with no change in frequency.

28
However it may be that the photon is not partly absorbed, but rather totally
absorbed and a new photon emitted.

110
Mid energy interactions
Mid energy photons also interact with electrons, in the photoelectric
effect. In this case the photon is absorbed completely, and the electron is
moved to a higher orbital band, or emitted from the atom. The effect is
dependent on the frequency (not the light intensity), and for a given
substrate requires a minimum threshold frequency of the incident
photons. Electrons appear to require a minimum quantum of energy to be
released: any excess is converted to kinetic energy. Light intensity
determines the number of electrons emitted (current), not their energy
(voltage).

The Cordus explanation of absorption is as follows: the incoming photon

comes close to the electron orbital; the hyff of the photon connect to
those of the electron; the two fibrils join; the energy of the photon is
added to that of the electron. If there is sufficient energy in the photon to
make up the requirement for the next energy quantum shell, then the
electron will appear at that higher position at its next frequency cycle.
Now that the electron has more energy it will have faster frequency too,
and shorter span, and can therefore dance around the slower moving
electrons. However, with sufficient energy, the electron-to-nucleus bond is
overloaded and the electron escapes entirely from the atom (photoelectric
effect). If there is not enough to bridge the gap in the first place, or left-
over energy, then it goes into heat, i.e. vibration of the lattice, or phonons.

Having absorbed a photon, the electron can also emit a new one, which
does not have to be the same frequency. This gives rise to the effect we
perceive as colour of an object. The absorption effect is dependent on
frequency of the photon. If the incident light is 'white', i.e. made up of
many frequencies, then photons of some frequencies may be absorbed
and others left to transmit through. Thus a body may be opaque to some
frequencies and transparent to others. If it is light, then the exit light has a
particular colour corresponding to the frequencies not absorbed.

We conclude that the energy of a photon can be partly changed, i.e. the
quantum is not strictly fixed.29 The hyff pump energy into and out of the
cordus (photon or electron), as per the concept of passing observation
(ref. ‘Cordus Conjecture’).

3 Recycling the energy: reversibility, elasticity, entropy

Energy from incoming photons is distributed into the receiving electron

system in several ways: boosts the energy level of the electron (quantum
shell-increment); ejection of the electron with kinetic energy;

29
The term ‘quantum’ is a good one for the energy levels of the electron orbitals
in an atom (see M.2.5) because these are set quantitative increments, albeit non-
uniform. However the ‘quantum’ word has been indiscriminately, even if
enthusiastically, applied to just about everything, and now confounds several
effects. We use ‘quantum’ in the original sense of set intervals, and otherwise use
the word ‘granular’ for fine-scaled discontinuous phenomena.

111
displacement of free electrons (plasmons); and vibrational strain between
the electrons making up the inter-atomic bonds (phonons).

The latter energy fragment is distributed to the bulk by vibration, hence

conduction or phonons. That vibration is diluted as it is spread to further
atoms. While it is theoretically possible to reassemble the heat fragments
and recreate the photon, e.g. the thermionic effect, this is impractical as a
spontaneous event as the heat is spread too far away into the bulk of the
matter.

Phonons, heat, and temperature

In thermodynamics, heat is the energy transferred from one body to
another. The nature of that energy is generally left unspecified, so ‘heat’
has many meanings. The cordus perspective suggests that ‘heat’ can be
differentiated into radiation heat, for which the mechanism is photon
transfer, and conductive heat, which uses phonons. Thus what we
perceive as conductive heat is the movement of phonon vibrations
between atoms in a bulk, and Temperature is the measure of the severity
of the phonons. This is why there is an absolute zero temperature: it is
simply when all phonon motions cease. It is also why light does not have a
‘temperature’: light is different to phonons.

The concept of phonons is readily understandable as vibrations in the

lattice of solids. However liquids, and especially gases, do not have
crystalline structures, but they do have conductive heat, so how do
phonons apply there? The cordus perspective is that the e-hyff are able to
communicate force and thus move neighbouring atoms, even if they are
not formally bonded together. This also results in the Brownian motion of
gases. In a gas with many atoms (or molecules), the position of each atom
is determined by the hyff (in different phases) from many other atoms,
and this results in disorderly systems. This is not to say that the systems
are inherently disorderly or probabilistic. Instead the underlying
mechanics is deterministic, but the complexity rises so quickly with the
number of participating atoms, that the system behaviour is practically
disorderly because it is too difficult to predict.

From a Cordus perspective, temperature is phonons, i.e. the relative

motion between atoms, transmitted through the electron bonds. However
the frequency of the electron cordus is intrinsic energy, and is not the
same as temperature. The two are different forms of energy.30

Thus higher temperature increases the number and magnitude of

phonons, and thereby adds to the disorderly regime within the material.
Phonons and electron-modes affect each other. Effectively a phonon is a
temporary displacement of one RE mode of the electron from its preferred
position. Energy can be transferred between phonons and electrons, and
again between electrons and photons. Thus electrons are the mediator for
both conductive heat (phonons) and radiation energy (photons), and can
30
Hence in photovoltaic effect, the energy of the released electron is
determined by the frequency of the incident photon, not the temperature of the
substrate.

112
transfer energy between the two forms of energy, albeit with some
dilution losses on the way. In summary temperature is a matter property
determined by phonons. This also implies that the conventional term
‘heat’ is unhelpful as it fails to distinguish between multiple phenomena.

Entropy
Taken together, the implication is that an atom that has surplus energy
can dispense it in five main forms: electron orbital change (including
bonding), electron ejection, photon ejection, electron flow (plasmons),
and phonon propagation. If phonons, then another atom some distance
away receive some of the energy and will likewise use what it can and
dispense with the rest. That remote atom might emit a photon for
example. Even if that photon was sent straight back to the original atom
(which is not generally the case), there would still be less energy in the
feedback loop because of the phonon dilution in the bulk, and the time
required for the photon flight. Thus the individual mechanisms are all
reversible (elastic), but the system as a whole is not, and we suggest this is
what creates entropy.

Both photons and phonons tend to be dispersed out into the surrounding
space or material (respectively), and this dilution of the original energy is
the primary mechanism for thermodynamic irreversibility and entropy.
The geometric and micro-structural complexity of the matter accessible to
the photons and phonons introduces so many dilution paths that it is
extremely unlikely that the energy fragments will spontaneously
recombine.

Geometric separation is another contributory factor: when the matter

separates or radiates photons across space, then the dilution is further
increased and the number of paths reduced by which the energy can come
back together. The enormous radiative loss of photons from stars
contributes to entropy, because that energy cannot realistically all be
recovered after it has travelled billions of years and stopped in our eye,
and even if it were reflected back it would be more billions of years to
travel back.31 In the meantime space expands, which adds to the delay.
The expansion of space in the universe contributes to entropy.

Separation causes the photon to arrive late, the more so if it involves

transmission through denser material. Thus the energy is not delivered at
the time it might have been, but is instead postponed into the future, i.e.
an arrow of time. If that postponement is indefinite, it takes energy out of
the system. This is another barrier to recombining the original energy, and
thus another contribution to entropy.

31
As the next bracket of papers, ‘Cordus in extremis’ shows, that smoothing out of
energy means that the fabric of the vacuum is relatively smooth, and the fabric
determines time at the local sub-atomic level. Thus in a way entropy is linked to
the consistency of the universe and the mechanisms whereby space and time
operate.

113
4 Photon Emission

From the Cordus perspective, photon emission is a reversal of the

absorption process. It starts with the electron being in an energised state
due to other energy input. If there is an unfilled lower energy vacancy then
the e-fibril is drawn to that space by the lack of hyff emanating from that
location. At the next frequency cycle the RE switches its mode to
terminate at that inner vacancy, and the electron now appears there. This
releases a photon containing the surplus energy. The size of the energy
fragment corresponds to the separation of the energy shells, and this is
also associated with the frequency. Hence the frequency (wavelength) of
the emitted light depends on the change in orbitals.

Assuming that multiple atoms in a material generally do not synchronise

their electron frequencies, so each atom will emit a photon when it is
appropriate for it to do so, and the resulting photons will not be in phase
with each other, though they could be the same frequency.

Special case: stimulated emission

In stimulated emission, the incoming photon triggers an electron to drop
energy level and emit another photon. The original photon survives: it
engages with the electron only in passing. The new photon has the same
kinetic properties: frequency, phase, polarisation, and also direction of
travel. If there are other atoms in a similar state of readiness then they too
may be triggered to release photons, and the cumulative effect is the
laser.

The Cordus explanation is that the interactions are of the passing type:
that the hyff attract (repel) the roving electron to align with the photon
cordus, and then precipitate emission of the second photon. The
alignment causes the second photon to have the same phase, polarisation,
and direction of travel as the first. It is a dynamic, on-the-spot form of
CoFS. It is presumed that for the passing interaction to have no
consequence on the flight of the first photon, that the electron must
require negligible energy to change states. In turn this means that the
electron’s surplus energy available to put into the second photon must
closely match that of the incoming photon. Thus the composition of the
medium determine its electron properties and thus frequency of emitted
light. From a Cordus perspective, the second photon is not necessarily
emitted from the same space as the incoming one: it may be offset
laterally or axially.

5 Conclusions

The interaction of light with electrons is one of the fundamental

perceptual realities of what we see. Yet that interaction is only partly
understood. Applying the Cordus concept allows a better description of
the mechanisms whereby photons are absorbed into electrons and
emitted. The model also provides an explanation of how the irreversibility
occurs in physical systems, because conventional physics tends to provide

114
elastic interactions between atoms. From the Cordus perspective, the
temperature of a body is primarily a measure of its phonons (lattice-
vibrations). Cordus shows why entropy occurs, despite the individual
mechanisms being reversible.

An understanding of the mechanisms for entropy is important in the next

paper (part 4) which deals with special states of matter. It is shown that
the conditions for superfluidity and superconductivity are effectively low-
entropy states, where the phonon transmission is suppressed. This is also
relevant to the understanding of coherence. Cordus suggests that a failure
to adequately conceptualise entropy leads to misapplication of coherence
and ultimately to unreliability in the fundamental premise of superposition
that underpins quantum mechanics. The cordus re-conceptualisation of
entropy might seem basic and almost self-evident in hindsight, but it is a
core concept in understanding why QM does not scale up to the
macroscopic world. It is the Achilles heel of Quantum mechanics.

115
Cordus matter: Part 3.4 Special states of
matter
Pons, D.J. , 32 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
The Cordus principle of complementary frequency states (CoFS) is used to
develop a novel descriptive model for the mechanisms underlying
superfluidity and superconductivity. In both cases Cordus explains the
effects as synchronisation of forces between electrons and atoms. Several
associated effects are likewise explained, including quantum vortices, heat
conduction in superfluids, and the Meissner effect in superconductors.
Cordus also asserts that superposition does not exist, at least not the way
QM conceptualises it. In particular, that the mathematics of superposition
and the wavefunction are not the reality, only mathematical
approximations of deeper effects, and are unreliable qualitative descriptors
of those underlying mechanisms. The concept of ‘coherence’ is re-
conceptualised and the reasons why that state cannot be readily achieved
are discussed. Cordus also explains why Quantum mechanics, which seems
to apply at the level of individual particles, does not scale up to
macroscopic bodies.

Keywords: superfluid; superconductivity; Meissner; superposition;

coherence; hyff; Josephson; quantum vortex; entropy; scale
Revision 1.02

1 Introduction

The cordus concept was originally created as a test solution for photon
path dilemmas, but has been shown to provide insights about a much
wider range of effects. This paper provides a cordus interpretation of
several special states of matter: superposition, coherence, superfluidity,
and superconductivity. The treatment of these topics is conceptual and
descriptive, as opposed to the mathematical approach more
conventionally used.

This particular paper is fourth in a series that apply the Cordus conjecture
to matter. The first part explained entanglement, debunked Bell’s
theorem, and proposed a new principle of locality. The second showed
how the electron, and indeed matter generally, could have a cordus
structure. The third re-conceptualised entropy and showed why
interactions that were individually elastic at the atomic level nonetheless
created entropy at the level of the body as a whole. Those concepts are all
foundational to the present paper, particularly the models for the electron
and entropy.

32
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of
Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

116
2 Superposition

Superposition from the perspective of Quantum mechanics (QM) is that a

particle occupies all possible quantum states simultaneously, and only
collapses to one when the variable is measured. According to QM it is only
probability that drives this, there is no underlying variable.

From the Cordus perspective, superposition is simply that the cordus

particuloid is actually physically oscillating between two positions. These
positions are the reactive ends at the end of the span. The cordus particle
(e.g. photon cordus) collapses to one of these ends when it is grounded
(L.2.2).

The QM and Cordus perspectives predict a similar overall effect, but their
explanations are very different. Cordus is particular about the type of
observation (L.3.5) and identifies this as an important variable. Also,
Cordus does not support the concept of superposition in terms of
statistical indeterminacy as QM perceives it, but instead states that the
location of the particuloid alternates according to underlying deterministic
physical mechanics, and the probabilistic nature only emerges because the
observer inserts indeterminacy by selecting, even inadvertently, the
moment to make the measurement, and therefore the frequency state of
the cordus and ultimately the position at which it will be found. Thus from
the Cordus perspective, the perception of probability is only an artefact
caused by measurement-timing and epistemic uncertainty about the
underlying mechanisms. The underlying mechanisms are effectively
deterministic, and only look probabilistic because QM's mathematics only
go as far as averages. The probability is therefore not the reality, and
superposition is not a state in itself but simply a consequence of the
mathematics being unable to determine the state.

Furthermore, Cordus suggests that Superposition confounds two different

effects: positional and causal variability. Positional variability corresponds
to the cordus modes of the two reactive ends: there is positional
ambiguity in where the particuloid actually ‘is’ at any one moment.
However only one end is actually reactive, it is just that if the
measurement frequency is not high enough then it appears that the
particuloid is simultaneously in both positions. QM’s concept of
superposition strictly only applies to this positional variability, and even
then is only approximate as it’s statistical methods can only work with
average position.

Causal variability is multiple consequences in time, i.e. divergent system

states. Consider an event that has two possible outcomes, A or B. Once
either of these states occurs, then there are say two more outcomes: A1
or A2 for the A path of the tree, and B1 or B2 for the B branch. Thus after
time the system state has diverged into various outcomes, hence ‘causal
variability’. Quantum mechanics routinely assumes that causal variability
necessarily occurs with positional variability. Thus the QM thinking goes

117
something like this: ‘the particle is in two places at once, but the choice of
which has not yet been made. There are subsequent events <notice the
insertion of a time and causality premise here> the outcome of which will
depend on which location the particle chooses. Therefore those
subsequent events are also in superposition, i.e. exist simultaneously’.
Therefore the object or person <notice the insertion of a premise of
coherence here> in question will simultaneously be in several states, i.e. in
different futures.’

From there it is a very short logical step to the idea of a separate universe,
one for every causal outcome of every superposition states, hence the
‘many worlds’ theory. The combinatorial branching on that tree of
universes must be enormous if every superposition of every quark for all
of time, is to be accommodated. It is currently one of the favourite
contenders for a qualitative description of how QM works, but from a
logical perspective it creates more problems that it solves, and is hardly
parsimonious or even physical.

Cordus cuts this whole idea off at the root. It asserts that that causal
variability does not occur in the situation. Quantum mechanics makes the
mistake of assuming that causal variability occurs with positional
variability. Thus from the Cordus perspective, a particuloid that oscillates
between two reactive ends (modes) does not have dual futures. The
confounding of these two types of variability drives the paradox of
Schrodinger’s Cat, as will be shown.

Thus superposition is an adequate mathematical representation of the

uncertain in average position of the reactive ends, but an unreliable
qualitative description of what is actually happening, and altogether not
applicable to causal variability. Consequently, cordus rejects the way
superposition is conceptualised in QM, and asserts that it does not occur
for macroscopic physical bodies, including cats.

The next section explains the fallacy of ‘easy coherence’, which is another
unreliable premise in QM, and commonly associated with the
superposition problem.

3 Coherence

From the QM perspective coherence is the ability for particles to interfere.

The Cordus interpretation is different. First, Cordus rejects the
conventional concept of interference as a physical effect, though still
accepting it as a generally-adequate mathematical analogy. Cordus
suggests that separate particles, including photons, do not interfere or
cancel each other, and nor is interference is the mechanism for effects
such as fringes.

Body coherence
Coherence, from the Cordus perspective, is when all the cordus
particuloids, which may be photons, electrons, protons, and possibly

118
atoms & molecules, etc., have synchronised frequencies and phases
thereof, i.e. a form of complementary frequency state synchronisation
(CoFS). The bonds between any cordus particles are hyff and carry forces
that synchronise the cordus frequency and phase of particuloids, providing
the frequencies are compatible. We term this ‘body coherence’. For
photons in light beams, where the bonds are weak if they exist at all, the
coherence may be mainly temporal and coincidental.

Cordus predicts that body coherence requires a sufficiently stiff structure:

one where the bonds between particles and atoms are firm and able to
sustain the synchronicity. From this perspective coherence becomes
difficult to sustain when one part of the body goes in a different direction,
e.g. internal motion or flows. Internal inhomogeneity increases entropy.
Apparently it is not impossible to achieve synchronicity, as superfluidity
shows. However that effect occurs under constraints of homogeneity of
material and low temperature. Coherence is therefore not practical for
realistic every-day bodies: there is too much temperature (phonons) and
diversity of atomic composition.

Cordus predicts it will be impractical to achieve coherence for macroscopic

bodies at ambient conditions. It is particularly incompatible with living
creatures. These bodies cannot practically be put into coherence, nor for
that matter into superposition. Single cordus particles, such as electrons,
are self-coherent under any conditions. Assemblies such as atoms and
molecules are not necessarily self-coherent, but may be brought into
coherence (M.4.6).

Large-body matter-waves
A popular idea in conventional physics is that even large bodies, such as
motor cars, have a de Broglie frequency and should therefore be able to
diffract through a double-slit and form fringes. This arises from an
extrapolation of the QM wave-function idea. It is also a weird idea, i.e.
difficult to reconcile the prediction with the reality of every-day
experience. Cordus offers an explanation of what should be possible, and
not. This may be a testable area for the cordus principle.

Small bodies: From the cordus perspective, sufficiently small bodies,

typically atoms and molecules, should be able to diffract, form fringes
through gaps, and pass through the double-slit experiment with the usual
outcomes, providing they are in body-coherence. The Cordus explanation
is that all the atoms in the molecule translate in CoFS lock-step at the
same time. So the whole assembly effectively appears at one end of its
span, and then reappears at the other, generating hyff in each location,
and hence fringes. However smaller particuloids will need closer spaced
double-slits, and that will be a practical limitation.

Large bodies: Macroscopic bodies cooled to near zero should be able to be

placed into coherent states of internal oscillation (coherence). Such bodies
should be able to diffract and form fringes through sufficiently large gaps
(or at edges), though the effects may be miniscule. Quite which mass
determines the span and frequency of an assembly in body coherence is

119
uncertain: the heaviest cordus particle, or the body mass.33 The present
working model assumes the former, hence small diffraction effects. Even
so, getting a large body into body-coherence is likely to be next to
practically impossible, especially for something like a motor car with
moving parts and fluid flows. The above applies to gaps.

Cordus predicts that the double-slit experiment is infeasible for

macroscopic bodies, even if they are in body-coherence. This is because
the slit spacing (pitch to centrelines) will need to be similar to the span and
therefore very small. In contrast the slit widths will need to be large to
accommodate the macroscopic body, and will therefore delete the
medulla. The experiment will simply turn into a single large gap. Double
slit experiments are predicted to be feasible only where the outer limit of
size for the composite body (maximum material condition) is equal to or
smaller than the cordus span.

Cordus predicts that practically every object at ambient temperature and

visible with the naked eye is not going to form matter waves.

Quantum mechanics’ scaling problem

One of the puzzling features about QM has been why the effects it
predicts are only visible at sub-microscopic scale. For example, particles
seem to be able to appear in more than one place, and the act of
observing them influences their location. Yet macroscopic bodies show no
such tendency. Why does QM not scale up properly? If it is valid at
subatomic scale, what is preventing it from working at macroscopic scales?
Cordus shows why.

Cordus asserts that QM is only approximately accurate at the sub-atomic

scale (Cordus refutes the principle of superposition), and not at all at the
large scale. Briefly, the reason is that large bodies have too much internal
entropy (disorder) to have the necessary coherence to appear in more
than one location. Even if they did have body-coherence the results would
be miniscule (small span) and not as dramatic as popularly imagined. The
mathematics of QM are premised on coherence, and thus the explanations
of QM are unreliable where body-coherence fails. In most room-
temperature applications this is the atomic level. Quantum mechanics
therefore does not practically apply to large bodies, living creatures, or the
universe as a whole.

4 Superfluidity

Superfluidity occurs at low temperatures in materials such as helium, and

is characterised by unusual flow and thermal properties: the fluid can self-

33
The concept of level of assembly in ‘Cordus in extremis’ is applicable here, but
note that principle only applies to objects in body coherence, not large
discoherent bodies like those that exist at our level of reality. Cordus suggests
there is no single de Broglie frequency for a macroscopic discoherent body.
Instead that such a body has multiple frequencies, a bit like white light. Therefore
fringes will not be observed: the effects will be small and they will be smudged.

120
siphon out of an open container; it has no viscosity (hence behaves
differently when rotated); and it has infinite heat capacity. It is known
that the superfluid properties of helium-4 and -3 are different, and
quantum mechanics offers specific theories for each: Bose–Einstein
statistics, and Cooper pairs respectively. Helium-4 has two protons and
two neutrons, and integer spin, and is therefore considered a boson. In
contrast helium-3 has only one neutron, ½ spin, and is therefore a
fermion. Fermionic condensed states require lower temperature. First two
electrons with opposite spin pair-up (Cooper pairs), and this creates an
integer spin assembly.

From the cordus perspective superfluidity is an application of

synchronisation (coherence), but between atoms not photons. The
current working model is that the interaction occurs through either the
electrons, or the vibrations (phonons) between the atoms (mediated by
electrons too).

Synchronisation of atomic forces

The explanation uses electron-to-electron complementary
synchronisation. This might be more relevant to fermionic condensed
states with ½ spin. The cordus explanation is that each electron is a cordus
and oscillates its appearance at its reactive ends. Thus two electrons from
different atoms may alternate their existences and thereby share the same
space. They achieve this by making complementary frequency state
synchronisations (CoFS), mediated through their hyff. The low
temperature is necessary to reduce vibrations of the electrons and atoms
(phonons).

Once the two electrons are entangled, they move together. So where
electron A goes, so does B, and the reciprocal. These correspond to the
conventional concept of Cooper pairs. The electrons themselves are
bonded into atoms, and those atoms also have other electrons. Those
electrons also become synchronised with other electrons in still other
atoms, either through entanglement, or phonons (see below). The result is
a connected network. The connecting force is from electron to electron,
through the nucleus and onwards through other electrons.

For helium-4, which is a boson with spin 1, the two electrons in the orbital
are already in a CoFS together, and this state is extended to neighbouring
atoms by the electron hyff. Spin in this case refers to the CoFS ability of
the atom as a whole, since both forms of helium have two electrons. The
hyff bump the neighbouring atoms, and push them into synchronous
frequency states. The low temperature is necessary to reduce the
background phonon noise. With bosons, many particuloids (e.g. atoms in
this case) may be in the same frequency state simultaneously, i.e.
‘complementary’ does not necessarily mean opposite in this case. One can
equally view the mechanism as synchronisation of phonons, because
phonons represent the dynamic nature of the electron bonds between
atoms.

121
Cordus suggests superfluidity will become compromised at relativistic
speeds. (See ‘Cordus in extremis’).

Fluid mechanics effects

Either way, mechanical movement of one atom takes others with it. Hence
the observed effect that a surface tension pulls a whole film along with it.
The whole body of liquid has complementary synchronised frequency
states. The body has some plasticity, presumably arising from both the
electron entanglement and in the orbital position of the electrons around
the nucleus. This plasticity means that individual atoms can move slightly
relative to their neighbours. The plasticity allows a film of fluid to be
flexible, and able to wet complex shapes, hence the observed Rollin film
and the self-siphoning behaviour.

A bowl of superfluid is known to rotate as a solid body at low speeds,

otherwise not at all at higher speeds. The Cordus explanation is that
rotation of the whole solid body occurs when the speed is sufficiently low
that imposed external shear forces (circumferential forces between bowl
and fluid due to surface tension) are lower than the capability of the hyff-
hyff forces at that location. The hyff forces can handle that level of shear
force, and therefore rigidly join the fluid to the container, and maintain
rigidity of the rest of the body of fluid.

At faster rotation the container rotates but the fluid stays still. The cordus
explanation is that the shear force between the container and the fluid is
too great for the hyff forces to cope with, so the fluid abandons that bond
with the container and instead preserves its own internal CoFS. This is a
natural consequence of the geometry: the radius of the bowl's surface
changes across the section, so if the fluid were to try and partially follow it,
then different velocities would be required at different radii, hence
internal turbulence, and this is incompatible with the CoFS coherence
condition.

There are three choices available to the fluid: (1) match the peripheral
velocities of the bowl and thereby generate internal vortices; (2) rotate as
a solid block with the bowl; or (3) decouple from the bowl by staying
stationary while the bowl rotates. Option (1) is the default for
conventional fluids, but for superfluids is prevented by the CoFS state.
Hence also the observed lack of viscosity of a superfluid. Only (2) and (3)
are available to a superfluid, and the choice depends on the relative
strength of the shear force at the wall compared to the hyff strength.

Cordus also explains phase effects in superfluids. The phase of the

superfluid refers to the CoFS state, i.e. the polarisation state of the
electrons. The phase may change slightly over distance, due to the
flexibility (above). But in a connected region it must, via any closed path
through the fluid, meet up at the same phase as before. This means that if
there is a hole in the fluid or a loop of fluid that reconnects, then the same
phase must be reached at the end of the loop, whichever path is taken.
However, it does not have to be exactly the same phase: a whole number
of phases different is also sufficient (but the total Berry phase effect must

122
be zero). Hence the known effect that the phase of a superfluid is
quantised. Hence also quantum vortices, these being loops where there is
an integer whole phase difference.

The cordus explanation for the rapid heat conduction of a superfluid is

that the state synchronisations and physical co-location of electrons mean
that the structure is stiff regarding phonon transmission. Phonons are the
mechanism of conductive heat transfer and the measurement of
temperature. Thus excess energy is rapidly dispersed through the fluid, by
phonons. This stiff direct coupling provides a wave-like propagation of the
energy, more similar to propagation of sound (hence 'second sound').
The speed is presumed finite due to the compliance in the electron
orbitals, and the ultimate limit is probably the cordus frequency of the
electron.

5 Superconductivity

Superconductivity is zero resistance to electrical current, and occurs in

some but not all materials, and below a critical temperature. The
temperature is dependent on the material properties. Denser isotopes
need lower temperatures to superconduct.

The existing explanation (BCS theory) is that electrons cause phonon

interactions that link electrons into pairs (Cooper pairs). The initial
attraction between electrons, which otherwise should repel, is held to be
caused by the interaction of the electron with the positive charges in the
lattice. These pairs then flow unimpeded by the material, whereas usually
the residual impurities would cause resistance.

CoFS network of orbitals

The Cordus explanation is that conventional resistive current flow involves
whole electrons hopping from one atom to the next, and having to get
past impurities, grain boundaries, and lattice imperfections on the way,
hence resistance. In the usual warm state the positions of each electron
(there are two, one at each end of the electron-cordus), are determined by
the medium, particularly the location of other hyff generators. Under
usual conditions the overall external hyff environment perceived by any
one electron is disorderly and over-prescribed. Therefore the electron is
forced to rapidly change its position. That electron also generates hyff and
contributes further to the disorderly regime. Note that the hyff range of an
electron is considerably larger than simply the immediate atom, so one
hyff affects multiple atoms, and this causes the over-prescription (see the
Principle of Wider locality). Individual electrons are forced to keep
changing their modes to accommodate the disorderly regime. These
modes are necessarily higher-energy states, i.e. with some tension along
the span, because the lower-energy resting states are non-accessible
solutions.34 Brownian motion results. This is what causes resistance in a

34
It is comparable to a rough sea, where the tops of the whipped-up waves
are higher than the average sea-level.

123
conventional conductor. The energy is partly dissipated in phonons during
these impacts.

Superconductivity arises from the electrons forming a network of

complementary frequency states (CoFS) across the entire body, i.e. any
one electron oscillates its modes of existence between two separate
atoms, and shares those positions with other electrons. When the
temperature is lowered, the phonons are reduced, and the number of
degrees of freedom within the material is thus reduced. The displacement
forces on the electron become calmer. Eventually, at the critical
temperature, the bulk hyff generators become synchronised so that the
electrons can start to appear in regular positions. The material properties
are such that those positions are also convenient for the electron. The
electron thus obtains regular modes. Moreover, these modes are
synchronised in a complementary manner across the entire bulk of the
material. This is a phase transition to a lower-energy phase.

From the perspective of an individual electron, the external hyff in the

bulk have moved into a complementary client state. Brownian motion
then ceases. As the electrons are in complementary states, and their
modes are at convenient and similar spans, the bulk becomes like a
network of orbitals. Individual electrons can readily move to a different
part of the network in response to flow of electrons (applied voltage).

Applying a voltage, which is the same as withdrawing electrons from one

side and injecting fresh ones at the other, then causes the existing
electrons in the bulk to index along in an orderly fashion (reminiscent of
the Jacob’s ladder falling-tile toy, except that the electrons do actually
move along). For an electron to adjust the next appearance of one of its
reactive-ends is effortless, so there is no resistance to that ‘movement’.
The reactive-end of one electron is guided to its next place of existence by
the surrounding hyff, which are in complementary states.

The nature of the current flow is then radically different. In usual

conduction the whole electron has to move through the bulk: and move its
reactive-ends (modes) while they are energised, which generates velocity
forces (i.e. magnetic fields).35 In superconduction the ‘movement’ takes
place while the electron-cordus is in the dormant state: the reactive-end
disappears as usual from one mode, and but when it reappears it is at a
different position, one in the CoFS network conveniently vacated by some
other electron. Thus the electron moves in stealth-mode (tunnelling). The
reactive-ends do not need to physically move while they are energised, so
they generate no magnetic field.

From the perspective of an individual electron, it finds that one of its

modes is already taken by an interloper electron, so it simply swaps into
one of the other equivalent modes available to it. This displaces the next
electron in the network, and the result is current-flow. If this explanation is

35
The Cordus field theory states that magnetism arises from movement of a
reactive end while it is energised, i.e. curvature of the hyff (ref. ‘Cordus fields’).

124
correct, the current should be quantised at the frequency of the electron.
This may be a testable cordus principle.

The idea of a CoFS network accommodates loops of material with whole

phase differences around ‘holes’ within the network, hence vortices and
fluxons (see superfluidity for similar effects).

Meissner effect
The Meissner effect is that a weak externally-applied magnetic field is
expelled from the interior of the superconductor, the usual explanation
being that surface currents cancel the internal magnetic field, except in
the skin layer (hence London penetration depth). The Cordus explanation
is somewhat similar, but approaches it from a different direction.

In a normal conductor, an externally applied magnetic field displaces the

moving reactive-ends sideways, whereupon that moved electron
contributes further to interfering with other electrons and adds to the
disorder. In a superconductor the CoFS network provides lateral stiffness:
the hyff from neighbouring electrons lock the modes of the entire network
in place. Therefore an external magnetic field cannot displace the modes:
its effect is resisted, and the flux lines are denied passage so they go round
the wire instead. Surface currents arise as compensatory consequences of
the load on the CoFS network. If the external magnetic field is too strong,
then its forces on the modes overwhelm the CoFS force, and the network
degenerates: the superconductivity is lost. Thus an external magnetic field
can destroy superconductivity by breaking the network of orbitals

Temperature
In the superconducting state the material can still accommodate some
phonons, as seen in the fact that the critical temperature is not absolute
zero but rather a higher value. The Cordus explanation is that temperature
refers to the rate density of phonon production, and that superconductors
are able to accommodate a certain amount of phonons (hence
temperature) by small adjustments to orbitals and phase. However if the
rate density of phonons exceeds this basic carrying capacity, then phase-
dissonance arises and the superconductivity is lost.

Note in passing that the electron hyff extend some distance. This explains
why there is an ordering effect that takes hold at the critical temperature.

Cordus predicts that multiple domains of alignment may form at the

critical temperature for superconductivity, followed by a subsequent
coalescence into one single domain, i.e. the process of initiation of
superconduction may be marked by some interesting transitional states.

Related effects
Note also that the hyff may even extend through intervening material,
even an insulator. Thus electrons on the other side of a thin insulator may
also be recruited to the client state. More radically, Cordus states that an
individual electron may have one reactive-end in the one material, and the
second end in the other, with its fibril spanning the conductor, since the

125
fibril is non-reactive. Hence also the Josephson effect: current may cross a
thin insulating layer. See also the Casimir effect, which is a similar
spanning effect, according to Cordus.

6 Conclusions

The special states of matter are particularly interesting from a modelling

perspective because they show where the system variables are most
exposed. Superfluidity and superconductivity are two such situations.
Both are enigmatic to classical mechanics, and partly explained by
quantum mechanics. However the QM explanations cannot be said to be
intuitive, nor easy to comprehend: i.e. the descriptive power of QM is
inferior to its mathematical ability in these areas. On the other hand,
Cordus readily provides a description of the effects. The principle of
complementary frequency states (CoFS), which was established earlier in
the series, explains why and how superfluidity occurs, and likewise for
superconductivity. These are radically different explanations to those
provided by conventional physics, but are not necessarily in disagreement
about the mathematics. The primary difference is that Cordus suggests
different underlying mechanisms than are usually assumed to operate.
This situation arises because conventional physics has a paradigm that is
limited by its premises of 1D particles, whereas Cordus has a two
dimensional model for particuloids.

Critical analysis of superposition

Cordus makes the unorthodox assertion that superposition does not exist,
at least not the way QM conceives of a whole particle or body being fully
in two places at once. Cordus provides for positional variability: the two
reactive ends of a cordus are in different places, and extends that to larger
assemblies of matter only if such objects can be placed in full body-
coherence (which is rare). However Cordus rejects the QM superposition
concept of causal variability: the idea that the whole particle or body is
simultaneously in both and neither positions and therefore has two
futures before it, which can diverge. Cordus asserts this is a fallacy and a
potential flaw within quantum mechanics.

In the Cordus analysis the root cause is deficiency in the formulation of

superposition: a statistical average is fundamentally an unreliable
predictor of longitudinal future outcomes when the population is bimodal.
Quantum mechanics is built with a methodology that elected, at its
founding, to approach the problem as a cross-sectional statistical design
(single point in time). Therefore the mathematical representations that
QM developed are only applicable to average particle behaviour, because
that is all that a cross-sectional design is valid for. Quantum mechanics is
outside its base of validity when it tries to provide physical interpretations
for longitudinal effects (multiple consecutive points in time). Quantum
mechanic’s interpretations of what is happening in the double-slit device
are therefore irrelevant artefacts of its statistical methodology.

126
The weirdness of QM’s explanations is not because reality is weird, but
because QM is fundamentally wrong. Nonetheless QM’s mathematical
machinery is useful for small particles: it is not applicable for large objects,
nor for very small pieces of matter either.

The second error overlaid on that methodological root cause was QM’s
assumption that a whole macroscopic body should likewise be in
superposition. This is the fallacy of easy coherence, which is described
below. Cordus asserts it is generally impractical to create the level of
coherence required by QM, and therefore that QM does not apply to
objects in general.

The third flaw is the assumption that whole bodies therefore exist in two
places at once. In some interpretations of quantum mechanics this led to a
logical fourth assumption that any event in the whole universe had two
possible outcomes in time, i.e. the many-worlds interpretation. Cordus
rejects all those assumptions and asserts they are the consequence of the
flawed concept of superposition at the root of quantum mechanics.

Outcomes
Cordus re-conceptualises, or at least conceptually clarifies the concept of
‘coherence’, and describes why that state cannot be readily achieved. Thus
Cordus predicts what size bodies should and realistically cannot be made
into matter-waves. Thus the concept of large macroscopic objects, such as
motor-cars, being able to go through a double slit, is proposed to be a
fallacy. This also allows Cordus to explain why Quantum mechanics, which
seems to apply at the level of individual particles, does not scale up to
macroscopic bodies: something that QM itself has been unable to explain.

One of the major benefits of the Cordus approach is that its explanations
are coherent across a broad swath of physical phenomena. Thus the same
mechanisms that are used to explain the Meissner effect also explain
entropy, wave-particle duality, and indeed many other effects.

127
Cordus matter: Part 3.5 Schrodinger’s Cat
reconceptualised
Pons, D.J. , 36 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
Quantum mechanics is the dominant conceptual foundation for
fundamental physics. Nonetheless there are effects that it does not explain,
or explains only by reference to metaphysical effects. While many have
wondered whether there could be a more-complete explanation, the
solution has been elusive. Cordus suggests that the necessary deeper
mechanics is only accessible by abandoning the premise of ‘particle’, and
shows how to achieve this. The resulting Cordus mechanics provides a new
way of thinking and a radically different conceptual foundation. This paper
primarily contrasts Quantum and Cordus mechanics. In the process, Cordus
re-conceptualises Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. It also provides an
explanation for the paradox of Schrödinger’s Cat, and shows it to be based
on unrealistic and unattainable premises.

Keywords: quantum mechanics; superposition; coherence; Schrödinger’s

cat; Heisenberg uncertainty principle; cordus; string theory
Revision 1.02

1 Introduction

This is the last in a series of papers on the application of the Cordus

conjecture to matter. The first part created a novel explanation for
entanglement and proposed a new principle of locality. Part 2 described a
cordus model for the electron, its orbitals, and matter more generally.
Entropy was re-conceptualised in part 3, and this was used in part 4 to give
new explanations of superfluidity and superconductivity. That part also
came to surprising conclusions about some core concepts of quantum
mechanics (QM): that QM’s concept of superposition was flawed, and that
coherence is a special state that cannot be assumed to be applied to any
object. Thus it is appropriate that this final paper contrasts Cordus with
QM. In doing so it re-conceptualises the issues with Schrodinger’s Cat.

2 Contrasting interpretations: Quantum and Cordus

mechanics

Quantum mechanics
Quantum mechanics originated with the idea that electrons can only take
up certain steps in energy, hence quanta. However with time QM has
come to mean more: that reality for particles is fundamentally

36
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of
Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

128
probabilistic; and that the wavefunction is the complete reality
(Copenhagen interpretation). QM is now a set of mathematics and beliefs
about reality, that include probabilistic origins, wave-particle duality,
wavefunction mathematics, and the uncertainty principle. QM views all
matter as discrete particles that may be made of still smaller particles. The
concept of 'particle' is generally one of 1-dimensional points, and this
becomes the implicit premise for many applications of QM including
photons. Bell's theorem is typically taken as sufficient evidence that there
is no underlying set of hidden variables, thus further confirming the belief
that the wavefunction is the complete reality.

At the same time the particles are understood to behave like waves. QM
offers a solution, first by positing that particles are wave-packets, second
by assuming that particles can be in multiple places at once (through
superposition or virtual twins), third by assuming that the state of a
particle can only be known as a probability, and fourth that the actual
position of the particle is only determined when it is observed, hence
collapsing the wave-function. Thus the QM mechanism for diffraction into
fringes is wave self-interference between the wavefunctions of the particle
and its virtual ghost particle.

As a mathematical method QM has impressive predictive power and

ability to quantify the outcomes. Unfortunately the qualitative
explanations rely on metaphysics, and this incongruence creates a
perception of weirdness. There are other problems too: the idea of
probabilities, e.g. path choice in interferometers, almost implies external
look-up tables, or someone assigning a probability to the outcome before
it takes place. This leads to observer paradoxes and causality conundrums,
or to the many worlds interpretation with its own metaphysical problems.
From QM perspective the weirdness is just a perception caused by our
inadequate human cognition.

Cordus
The Cordus interpretation is very different. First, Cordus proposes the
photon-cordus as a particuloid in place of the idea of a single small point
particle. It does not support the QM ‘particle’ view of light and matter, but
instead that the cordus can look like a particle (hence ‘particuloid’) from
further away. Cordus debunks Bell's theorem as being constructed on the
unnecessarily limiting premise of 1D particles, and therefore cannot be
used to rule out hidden-variable solutions. Second, Cordus proposes that
photons, and indeed all 'particles' are cordi that oscillate into and out of
existence across a finite span separation, and that consequently the
particuloid is effectively in two places at once. It does not support the idea
of the wavefunction (hence the Copenhagen interpretation), nor of
superposition (hence the many-worlds interpretation), nor the probability-
is-the-reality interpretation. From the Cordus perspective these are all
usefully convenient mathematical analogies that are sufficient for
predictive purposes, but are invalid descriptors of reality. 37

37
For example, Cordus would disagree with just about everything in the following statement:
'When a photon's state is non-deterministically altered, such as interacting with a half-silvered mirror
where it non-deterministically passes through or is reflected, the photon undergoes quantum

129
Third, From the Cordus perspective the probabilities of a particle being in a
particular location arise simply and naturally as the cutting points on the
frequency. Stop the experiment with the photon in a different part of its
frequency cycle and the outcome may be different. The paradoxes
disappear, and there need be no violations of causality, providing one is
careful and does not confound the various types of observation. Cordus
proposes there are three different types of observation, with very
different outcomes for the photon.

3 Heisenberg uncertainty principle

Another area of difference is towards the Heisenberg uncertainty

principle, particularly the explanation thereof. For QM the explanation is
in the wave-packet, which represents the probability of finding the particle
in that place. The position of the particle is indeterminate as it could be
anywhere along the wave packet, and compressing the wave packet to
reduce that problem will change the wavelength and therefore the
momentum, and thus make the momentum indeterminate, and the
converse. The Uncertainty principle is typically expressed in terms of the
standard deviations of position and momentum, and the product thereof.

The Cordus perspective supports the principle, but not necessarily that
particular formulation. Heisenberg's statement was built on the standard
QM probabilistic premise: that variables are statistically distributed e.g.
with a normal distribution. In contrast, Cordus does not specifically require
that assumption, nor the product operation.

The Cordus explanation is that the free-flying cordus particuloid has no

sharply measureable position, because it is not a single point particle in
the first place. Position can be measured (reasonably precisely but not
absolutely) by arresting it, but then it is not a free-flying cordus particle
any longer, and the momentum is indeterminate. For a photon, the flight
and arrested states cannot occur at the same time, because they are
different stages in the life-cycle of the photon, and therefore cannot be
precisely measured at the same time.

In the QM formulation there is a smooth trade-off between position and

momentum. However Cordus implies that the relationship is more
granular, and consists of two mutually exclusive sub-conditions: that
passing observation can measure momentum and mean position, and
intrusive measurement constrains position and measures force or energy.

Complementarity principle
QMs use a complementarity principle: that photons have multiple
properties that are contradictory. QM assumes that wave and particle

superposition, whereby it takes on all possible states and can interact with itself. This phenomenon
continues until an observer interacts with it, causing the wave function to collapse and returning the
photon to a deterministic state.' (Wikipedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elitzur%E2%80%93Vaidman_bomb-tester last accessed 3 March 2011).

130
duality means that both are simultaneously in existence, that the photon
is truly a both a wave and a particle at any instant in time.

For Cordus the particuloid is neither a wave nor a particle but behaves as
either depending on the measuring method. The measurement method
unavoidably changes how the particle behaves, and this is particularly
pronounced with the photon. The Experimenter's choice of method
therefore limits the type of results that will be observed. Wave and
particle duality are only measuring artefacts, not the reality.

4 Schrodinger’s Cat

The thought-experiment
Schrodinger’s Cat38 is a thought-experiment in superposition: the basic
idea is that a cat is placed in a box with a radioactive sample rigged up so
that decay emits a particle which breaks a vial of poison that kills the cat. If
the box is closed and no-one can see inside, what state is the cat in?

This is an extension of an idea in quantum theory that a physical system

can be in multiple configurations (dead vs. alive), and therefore from the
quantum perspective is simultaneously in all those configurations until the
act of observation forces it to one particular configuration, i.e. collapses
the waveform. An extrapolation of the idea is that each of the other non-
selected configurations does continue, but in another parallel universe,
hence the ‘many worlds’ theory.

While it might initially have been intended as a thought-experiment,

Schrodinger’s Cat has taken on a more mythical status, and is almost
considered fact. It has become the visible poster-child representative of
QM, particularly of superposition.

The cordus explanation is that Schrodinger’s Cat is only a conundrum

because of fallacious premises. First, note that there are several effects:
whether or not the radioactive material decays and emits a photon; the
dilemma about the state of the Cat before opening the box
(alive/dead/simultaneously alive and dead); and the Observer dilemma
about the effect of opening the box and looking.

Type of observation is critical

The Cordus Conjecture distinguishes between types of observation:
passive, passing and intrusive. Passive does nothing (L.3.1), passing can
change photons, but only intrusive detection collapses photons. Therefore
opening the lid on Schrodinger’s Cat and passively observing makes no
difference: it does not affect whether or not the radioactive material will
emit a photon. The photon will be emitted when it is emitted.

38
The basic idea is that a cat is placed in a box with a radioactive sample rigged up
so that decay emits a particle which breaks a vial of poison that kills the cat. If the
box is closed and no-one can see inside, what state is the cat in?

131
However there are some additional observer effects that could change the
emission, the first being that letting more light (external photons) into the
poison system could trigger radioactive decay. Second, if the Observer
changes to an intrusive mode, then the emission outcome can be affected
and even controlled. For example, intrusively detecting whether a photon
has been emitted will prevent it ever reaching the poison. Or,
interrogation of the radioactive material could force it to emit a photon or
prevent it from doing so: the Zeno effect. Passing measurement of already
flying photons will change their properties.

Then there is the matter of what the inside surface of the box was made
from. If mirrors, then there are multiple paths by which an emitted
photon’s reactive end could get to the poison vial. Opening the box and
thereby removing mirrors will deprive the photon of some path
opportunities: it could escape the box altogether. However these are all
complications, and simple passive observation, which is all the original
dilemma proposed, is inconsequential. Simply looking passively does not
change the cat’s fate.

No superposition of undead states

A simple act of passive observation does not affect the emission of a
photon nor the transmission thereof. Nor does it cause the Cat to suddenly
collapse to the dead or alive state. The Cat need not exist in any
superposition of undead states before the box was opened: it is simply
either alive or already dead, nothing else. In an inverted way, the cat
thought-experiment is often misunderstood as evidence that quantum
coherence applies to macroscopic objects. From the Cordus perspective
this is misplaced. The matter lemma states that superposition of states
only occurs for bodies that are internally coherent. Something as large and
internally dynamic (nerve impulses, flowing blood, etc.) as a Cat cannot
have that CoFS coherence in the first place: initially imposing the
coherence would deprive it of life. Only small, cold, inanimate things of
relatively homogeneous composition can be put into body coherence.

Nor does the presence of the passive Observer do anything. Hence

existential Observer dilemmas are void. Simply passively looking at the
universe does not cause it to change, nor necessitate creation of another
world.

Try Superposition of something smaller?

If Schrodinger’s Cat dilemma collapses because of lack of coherence of the
Cat, then what about replacing the Cat with an electron: something that
can generally be thought of as in ‘quantum superposition’? Will the
dilemma still be sustained then? Is the electron simultaneously blasted
and not-blasted by the radioactive decay? QM states that the electron
occupies all possible quantum states simultaneously, so the electron
should be in normal and high energy states simultaneously, and only
collapses to one when measured.

132
The answer, according to the Cordus Conjecture, is no. While an electron
does have two position modes, it does not occupy them simultaneously,
nor are these different energy levels. Consequently simple passive
observation does nothing to force the electron into one particular energy
level. Not-observing the electron makes no difference either.

As the previous discussion noted, superposition is merely a mathematical

representation of the uncertain in average position of the two reactive
ends, and cannot be applied to two different temporal causal outcomes
such as dead vs. alive. That’s an important point that tends to get
overlooked when QM is being interpreted, and is the fallacy at the core of
the many-worlds theory.

Hidden premises in the Box

To sum up, Schrodinger’s Cat thought-experiment is flawed in several
crucial areas. First, it confounds passive and intrusive observation to
suggest that the act of non-observation causes indeterminacy. A second
erroneous premise is that of superposition: that the cat's states are
simultaneously life and death. We do not see this in reality either, and
Cordus asserts this premise is invalid in any situation: QM’s superposition
is only a mathematical simplification of a deeper and different effect. The
third fallacious premise is that that the entire contents of the box,
including the cat, are in macroscopic quantum coherence (this being
necessary to support the superposition premise). This is not a particularly
practical premise, as we never see coherence at this level, only at atomic
and molecular scales, and Cordus explains why. Cordus also asserts that
coherence of a whole living cat will be next to impossible to achieve.

The Cordus conjecture implies that all three premises are wrong. The Cat is
either dead or alive, and opening the box (at least in the way originally
proposed) is inconsequential. Nor need there be other worlds in which the
Cat is in a different state. So for any one of these reasons on its own the
Cat experiment is not physically realisable. The lesson it teaches is that
superposition is strictly only a mathematical approximation for handling
positional uncertainty, not a real physical effect, and macroscopic physical
bodies cannot be assumed to be in body coherence just because some
atomic structures can be in the state.

Where the weirdness arises

Coming back to the starting point, which was the weirdness of existing
explanations of wave-particle duality, we can now identify why QM’s
descriptive explanations are weird. QM assumes that particles are 1D
points (hence over-reliance on a single limited paradigm); QM assumes
that coherence effects at a particle level always generalise to whole bodies
(hence the conundrum of Schrodinger's Cat); QM extrapolates
mathematical solutions for the problem of indeterminacy, namely
superposition and wavefunction, to the physical reality. Cordus suggests
those premises are all unreliable. More than anything else, the premise of
1D point particles pervades QM, and in a self-reinforcing way Bell’s
theorem has been influential in sustaining the belief that there are no
hidden-variable solutions, i.e. that the particle really is 1D. Cordus cuts

133
across that way of thinking: it unexpectedly delivers a hidden-variable
solution, debunks the 1D premise, and expands the debate beyond the
constraints of Bell’s theorem.

5 Contrast: String Theory

The Cordus Conjecture relies on fibrils, and the obvious question is

whether there is an implication for string theory. The similarity, at least
for some versions of the Cordus conjecture, is in the idea that matter and
energy are made of oscillating lines (strings). Also, String Theory suggests
that the photon is an open string, as opposed to a closed loop. Most of the
cordus variants here are similar to a string, but include additional concepts
that are not necessarily string-like.

String theory is a mathematical rather than empirical approach. It requires

the universe to have multiple dimensions, most of which are presumed
hidden or too small to detect. It posits that variation in the properties of
the string give rise to different particles, e.g. photons and electrons, but is
not specific about what these situational variables might be or the
causality. It has many flavours and mathematical variations, and it is not
always easy to determine which describes our universe except by relying
on the anthropic principle. It is a theory of the structure of the universe,
rather than a predictor of sub-atomic structure.

The Cordus conjecture does not explicitly require String Theory, though it
does not preclude it either. The two approaches start from entirely
different premises, and use completely different methods. Despite some
apparent similarity in results -the prediction of string-like sub-structures –
there is considerable space between the two models and it would be
premature to consider them conceptually linked.

6 Discussion

Quid est atomos?

What is the atom made of? This work proposes that sub-atomic particles
have a cordus structure: two reactive ends joined by a fibril, with the
structure being energised at a high frequency and emitting one or more
hyff lines of force. They are not really particles at all.

Implications
The cordus concept was originally created to explain wave-particle duality
of the photon. It turns out to be much more adaptable and powerful, in a
descriptive way, than simply a solution for the photon. Cordus is a
conceptual solution that shows it is possible to conceive of internal
structures for the photon and other sub-atomic particles, without the
usual weird metaphysical explanations.

The conceptual contribution of this work is the demonstration that it is

indeed possible to create hidden-variable models, and that Bell's theorem

134
is not a limitation. It shows that the application of logic and semantic
inference to existing experimental observations can give interesting new
insights. The beauty of the Cordus Conjecture is that it provides an
explanation that is coherent across wave and particle effects, photons and
matter, ‘particles’ and macroscopic bodies. Perhaps the biggest
contribution is simply the intellectual stimulus to think differently about
topics that we think we already understand.

Cordus challenges the conventional idea of 1D points, and the whole

conceptual edifice built thereon. The concept that emerges here is that
‘particles’ are not actually 1D points, neither are they waves. Instead
‘waves’ and ‘particles’ are simply the external manifestations of hidden
internal structures.

In this regard, Cordus suggests that Quantum Mechanics and Wave theory
are subsets of a deeper and simpler reality. Cordus also shows that reality
to be deterministic. It is not clear that ‘quantum’ is the best term to
describe such mechanics, and in some ways Cordus is more about
‘mechanics’ than QM ever was. From this perspective Quantum Mechanics
is of dubious validity as a descriptor of reality even if its mathematics is
sufficient for quantitative purposes. Now we finally understand why
quantum mechanics, which seems sufficiently accurate for individual
‘particles’, does not scale up to macroscopic bodies, something which QM
itself has been unable to explain.

At this stage Cordus is simply a conceptual model and some starting

mechanics that have been calibrated against several physical phenomena.
Cordus started from an intuitive conjecture, and through a set of lemmas
developed into a descriptive conceptual framework. What is needed next
is scrutiny: does this concept stack up to the reality of other observed
quantum and optical effects? Exploring this question may well require
further adjustments to the concept or show it to be an unworkable
conjecture. Thus the validity of the concept is an open question which is
put to the wider community of scholars.

7 Conclusions

The Cordus conjecture provides a radically new perspective on

fundamental particles. The conventional theories of electromagnetic wave
theory and quantum mechanics, are shown to be external simplifications
of the deeper set of hidden variables described by a cordus. Cordus is an
integrative theory: it provides a single coherent conceptual framework for
a wide range of physical effects both wave and particle. It provides natural
explanations of otherwise weird quantum phenomena.

Cordus does not follow the conventional method of physics, which is

derivation of beautiful mathematics and subsequent extrapolation to
explanation, but it is a logical theory nonetheless: that of creating a system
model by reverse-engineering known phenomena, adding conjectures and
intuitive material, and noting the necessary assumptions along the way.

135
There are many of these lemmas, and thus many potential flaws in the
cordus mechanics. Notwithstanding, if the cordus conjecture is even partly
correct, the consequences for conventional theories of matter are
profound. Cordus suggests there is a more fundamental and coherent
theory of reality than Quantum mechanics can provide. Perhaps
surprisingly, this deeper theory is deterministic.

Sub-atomic particles of matter exhibit strange behaviours such as

entanglement, superfluidity, and superconductivity. These effects are
usually explained by quantum mechanics (QM): at least the mathematics
are. This paper proposes an alternative explanation, based on the cordus
conjecture. In this concept, the basic structure to any ‘particle’ is a cordus:
a fibril connecting two reactive ends, with hyff force lines protruding from
the ends. This structure is used to explain matter waves and the wave-
particle duality thereof, entanglement and interaction at a distance,
electron orbitals, coherence, superfluidity, and superconductivity. It is
shown that that a hidden-variable theory is indeed possible for the photon
and ‘particles’ in general. The limitations of conventional concepts of
‘particle’ are identified, and a counter argument is developed to Bell’s
theorem. A revised principle of wider locality is proposed. Mechanisms are
proposed for the absorption of the photon into matter, and the origins of
entropy on a sub-atomic scale. Cordus questions the validity of quantum
superposition, reinterprets coherence, and predicts what should be
achievable (or not) for macroscopic bodies. Schrodinger's Cat is explained
and shown to be based on unrealisable premises. Cordus also explains why
quantum mechanics, which seems applicable at the sub-atomic scale, fails
to scale up to macroscopic scales. Cordus offers a new conceptual
framework for a deeper internal mechanics for atoms and sub-atomic
particles. It provides an explanation that is coherent across multiple
physical effects. Perhaps unexpectedly, cordus suggests that the internal
mechanics for ‘particles’ is deterministic after all, and the probabilistic
nature as recognised by QM is only an artefact of the measurement
process.

136
Cordus in extremis: Part 4.1 Electromagnetism
Pons, D.J. , 39 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
The Cordus conjecture is extended to create a conceptual model for
electromagnetic fields. The resulting model shows how a cordus particuloid
generates small transient units of force at the sub-atomic level, thereby
creating the apparently smooth and continuous electric field that we more
commonly perceive. Cordus also reconceptualises how magnetism is
generated at the sub-atomic level, and likewise explains how the
granularity arises. It is shown that the electric field cannot be shielded, only
neutralised. Cordus electromagnetism is applied to explain the electric field
surrounding a wire carrying current, the locus of moving test charges in a
magnetic field, and the mechanism for how force arises in permanent
magnets. The contribution made by this paper is a description of
electromagnetism that goes to the next deeper level: it explains the
underlying mechanisms for how the forces arise. Also, it provides a
mechanism for fields to be granular and directional at the small scale, but
smooth and continuous at larger scale.

Keywords: cordus; electric; field; electrostatic; magnetism;

electromagnetism; quantum field; hyff; particle
Revision 1.2
Document: Cordus_4Fields_E2.96.doc

1 Introduction

The Cordus conjecture provides a radically different interpretation of the

photon, and by extension, sub-atomic particles in general. Companion
papers have applied the Cordus concept to show that it provides a
conceptual resolution of wave-particle duality for the photon (ref: ‘Cordus
Conjecture’), explains optical effects (ref: ‘Cordus optics’), and explains
‘particle’ effects (ref: ‘Cordus matter’). This paper extends the concepts to
fields in general, and in doing so provides a reconceptualisation of
electromagnetism, gravitation, vacuum, mass, and quarks. The Cordus
conjecture offers some suggestions for thinking about these subjects,
though the treatment should be considered in extremis, i.e. a thoughtful-
experiment rather than a necessary core concept. This paper is the fourth
in the Cordus series, and itself consists of four parts. It is recommended
that these parts be read in the numbered series, since the concepts are
cumulative.

39
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of
Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

137
Background: Cordus
The Cordus concept is that the photon and all massy ‘particles’ are not
one-dimensional (1D) points as conventionally assumed, but consist of
two reactive ends (RE) connected together with a fibril. The reactive ends
emit hyper-fine fibrils (hyff), which are threads of transient force, see
Figure 1. The periodic renewal of the reactive ends corresponds to the
frequency of the photon or ‘particle’. In the case of the photon the hyff are
extended and withdrawn during each complete frequency cycle. The
Cordus concept has also been shown to be applicable to other so-called
particles, e.g. the electron (see ‘Cordus matter’). From the Cordus
perspective there are no such things as 1D point particles, only small-span
cordi that only appear to be particles. Thus matter is made up of cordus
particuloids. For matter cordi like the electron, the electrostatic hyff (e-
hyff) are not withdrawn at each frequency cycle, but continue to
propagate outwards. Each frequency cycle sends a renewal-pulse down
the hyff, so the force is transient and quantised. This force makes up the
electric field.

A companion paper (Cordus conjecture), describes the background to this

idea, applies it to path dilemmas in the double-slit device and Mach-
Zehnder interferometer, and uses it to explain fringes. It is shown that the
Cordus conjecture is conceptually able to resolve wave-particle duality for
the photon. Another paper (Cordus optics) shows that the idea is
applicable to conventional optical effects, such as refraction. That paper
also further develops the concept of frequency and the dynamic internal
states of the photon. A third paper (Cordus matter) applies those ideas to
matter generally and the electron specifically. It explains matter waves and
the wave-particle duality thereof, entanglement, locality (a revised
principle is proposed), electron orbitals, entropy, coherence, superfluidity,
and superconductivity. It also shows why quantum effects do not scale up
to the macroscopic world. We recommend that ‘Cordus conjecture’ and
‘Cordus matter’ be read first, as the present paper extends on concepts
described there.

One of the positive features of the Cordus idea is that it is coherent across
many physical effects, as shown in the companion papers. The
implications are that both electromagnetic Wave theory (WT) and
Quantum mechanics (QM) are only external manifestations and
measurements (respectively) of a deeper mechanics. Neither of them,
singularly or jointly, is the reality.

Purpose
The Cordus concept as a whole is conjectural, although the previous
papers have grounded the concepts by comparing them against well-
known physical phenomena. The present bracket of papers is less
cautious. The purpose here is to audaciously push the concept to see if it
has novel suggestions about deeper mechanisms, particularly the
propagation of light and fields in general.

138
Method
The approach taken is a continuation of that described in ‘Cordus
conjecture’, and not detailed here. The purpose is to synthesising a
working-model that is sufficient to explain as much of the observed reality
as possible. The outcome is qualitative rather than mathematical, and is
termed a conceptual solution. Along the way the underlying assumptions
are notes as a series of lemmas. These we do not attempt to prove: they
are simply to make the premises explicit so that they can be evaluated
later. In the other papers the causality is relatively linear, but here the
concepts were found to depend on each other, and the process of
generating the conceptual solution was more iterative. The way the model
is presented is therefore for convenience of explanation rather than
necessarily descriptive of the method. Unavoidably, concepts are
sometimes mentioned at the start but only defined later. The lemmas
make up the central strand through the papers. L lemmas are in ‘Cordus
conjecture’, O in ‘Cordus Optics’, M in ‘Cordus matter’, and E in ‘Cordus in
extremis’.

The results follow, starting in part 1 with some basic preliminary

constructs for the electric field, then magnetism. Part 2 introduces a
concept for what the vacuum consists of, and why the speed of light is
finite. Gravitation, mass, and time are explored in Part 3 and new models
developed for each. Part 4 introduces a conceptual model for quarks and
the internal structure of the proton and neutron.

2 Field forces

The fundamental forces are electromagnetism (EM), strong and weak

nuclear forces, and gravity. Electromagnetism and gravitation are the only
forces with infinite range.

2.1 Quantum mechanics interpretation of fields

The QM explanation is that the forces arise between matter by the

exchange of gauge bosons. These bosons are the force-carriers, and the
photon is held to be the gauge boson for the electromagnetic force. The
other forces are carried by W & Z bosons (weak) and gluons (strong). The
force effects are described using bosons as virtual particles, which can only
be detected as forces not individual particles. Thus electromagnetism is
proposed to be carried by virtual photons, the strong interaction between
quarks by the gluon, and the weak interaction (e.g. quark flavour-changing
between left-handed fermions) by W and Z bosons. Thus the standard
explanation is that electromagnetic forces arise between matter when
they exchange virtual photons. These forces can cancel each other if the
bodies have both protons and electrons in equal numbers.

Gravity is the odd one out. All the others can be explained by QM.
Gravitons may be the force-carrier for gravity, though this is more
controversial and the particle has not been observed and detection is

139
generally expected to be difficult though perhaps feasible. The other
approach to gravity is general relativity, where gravity arises from the
warping of space time, i.e. the effect is a geometric one. However this
does not integrate very well with QM. The Cordus interpretation of fields
and bosons is very different, and is progressively developed in several
sections following.

2.2 Cordus electrostatics

The starting premise is that all fields are hyff, of one sort or another. The
following lemma sets out the assumptions more explicitly.

E.1 Hyffon lemma

E.1.1 All field forces are carried by hyff.
E.1.1.1 The hyff are persistent structures and each particuloid of
matter has a finite number of them.
E.1.2 Some hyff continue to propagate outwards (gravity,
electromagnetism) and hence have long range, whereas others are
withdrawn (photon hyff).
E.1.3 A hyff is a persistent structure even when not energised. Hyff are
in pairs: one part at each reactive end (RE) of the cordus.
E.1.4 A hyff line is directional but may be bent, e.g. by movement of the
basal generator.
E.1.5 The hyff carries a transient quantum of force (‘hyffon’) directed
back down the hyff towards its origin. Each re-energisation of the
reactive end sends another renewal-pulse of force down the hyff.
We term that pulse a hyffon since it is reminiscent of phonons and
plasmons in their distortion of the medium. The hyffon
corresponds approximately to ‘gauge bosons’.
E.1.6 Each hyffon renewal-pulse of hyff force has the ability to interact
with other ‘particles’ of matter that it meets. The force is transient
and is relinquished as the pulse decays, at least for the
electrostatic hyff (e-hyff).
E.1.7 The hyff propagate forward and the force is not consumed but
reapplied to the next most distal particuloid of matter.
E.1.8 Hyff penetrate everything. No field can be shielded.

Therefore hyff are directional force lines that extend out into space from
their basal particuloid, and where the force appears in pulses that travel
outwards along the line (hyffons), see Figure 1. The hyff themselves are
not being continuously created, but they are being energised by pulses
(hyffons) that travel down the line.

140
2.3 Electric field
Applying the lemma to the electric field, the Cordus interpretation is that
the charged cordus particuloid at the base emits an electric hyff (e-hyff) at
the moment of its creation, and that hyff continues to propagate outwards
with each pulse of renewal. This implies that charged particles created at
the birth of the universe will tend to have their hyff moored at the edge of
the expanding universe. Each electron is not necessarily bound to a single
proton somewhere else in the universe, so electric charges may be
monopoles, at least at the level that we perceive.

Figure 1: Cordus structure showing hyff and their periodic re-energisation

via hyffons emitted consecutively from the reactive ends. A fibril joins the
two reactive ends and perpetuates the frequency and the reciprocating
energisation of the reactive ends. Only one pair of hyff is shown. Later

141
works suggests that the proton and probably also the electron have three,
in orthogonal directions. Photons are thought to have only one pair of hyff,
but they are not persistent as shown here.

Thus fields consist of a rapid sequence of discrete impulses of transient

force, radiating out from a cordus at the centre. However we do not see
this granularity at our level of perception. Instead we perceive fields to be
smooth, continuous, and uniform in all directions. This is because of the
en-masse effect of many particuloids being involved, so the hyff lines are
numerous and in different directions, and the frequency is too high to
detect the individual pulses.

For a test charge in an electric field, the overall effect is a steady rain of
hyffons that are individually small transient units of force. The overall
effect is a smooth force. If the remote body has depth, then the incoming
hyffons apply force to the fore-most parts of the body, and then pass
through and apply force to the deeper layers.

Cordus predicts that the field will be granular at the frequency of the basal
charge, and not uniform quantum increments. Also, that the frequency
should depend on the level-of-assembly – for example a free electron will
have the same magnitude of field as one involved in a bond, but different
frequency. This may be a testable prediction.

Hyff lines for permanent charges like the electron are persistent, though
renewed periodically by hyffons. By comparison, the photon is odd, in that
it emits an electric field and then promptly withdraws it: the next pulse is
in the opposite direction.

Electrostatic Shielding
It is commonly known that an electric field can be shielded, whereas
gravitation cannot. For example, a Faraday cage is a container made of
conductive mesh, and is conventionally understood to block external
electrostatic fields from entering: no electric field is experienced inside.
However Cordus suggests that something different is happening, and
proposes a different principle.

Cordus predicts that hyff penetrate everything, and no field can be

shielded. In a Faraday cage the electric field only appears to be shielded.
That in turn is because electrons in the cage material, which has to be
conductive, have sufficient mobility to move rapidly to the other side of
the cage in response to the external field. There they set up own field
countering response fields, i.e. an induced voltage across the cage. The
external hyff (and field) still exist inside the cage, but the net force on a
test charge is zero because it is balanced by the induced voltage field
across the cage. The fineness of the cage-mesh determines the roughness
of that field, so better results are had from finer or continuous materials.

Electrons in the cage need to make this balancing at the frequency of the
externally applied field. For static electric fields this is straightforward, as
the electrons need to move into position only once, hence the

142
requirement that the cage be conductive. When the frequency of the
electric field is too high then the electrons cannot respond fast enough: in
which case the balancing fails and shielding is lost.

Note that it is the hyff that cannot be shielded. The electron or photon or
particuloid itself can be denied passage: shielded or reflected. Thus when
considering shielding or reflecting, it is important to note that the effects
are different for hyff and reactive-ends. Also, the effect is different for
photons because the do not have persistent hyff but rather extend and
then withdraw them. Photon hyff do not pass through everything, or at
least do not go far. Therefore the photon can be shielded against: it can be
absorbed. So light can have a shadow but not the electric field.

Applying this to reflection of radio-frequency photons, as the frequency

increases so the span of the photons decreases (see ‘Cordus conjecture’),
and the available current loops in the shield need to be correspondingly
smaller if the photon is to have a chance of meeting them: hence the
mesh-size of the reflector needs to be finer. As the frequency rises still
further, the required loops are of the order of atomic spacing, i.e. the
shield must be of a continuous material. For even greater frequencies the
electrons cannot counter the hyff so the photon passes straight through.

According to cordus the level of apparent electromagnetic shielding

achieved should be dependent on frequency of the field, the mobility of
the charge carriers in the shield material, and the geometry of the shield.
Further that shielding may be achievable for one species of charged
matter within a space, but not for much smaller charge species.

The hyff always go through everything, but the cordus particuloid itself,
represented by its REs, can be blocked, reflected, or collapsed. Once the
RE has been displaced, then the next hyffon is emitted from the new
location. So the inside of the Faraday cage appears to be free of electric
fields, whereas Cordus suggests the fields are not shielded but merely
balanced. The implication is that hyff penetrate everything, and no field
may be shielded, though some may be balanced (E.1.8). This is may seem a
trivial distinction, but is important in what follows regarding gravitation.

Virtual particles
The conventional perspective is that the virtual photon is the gauge boson
(force carrier) for the electromagnetic force. As shown above, the Cordus
interpretation is different: the electrostatic hyff carry the force and there
is no invisible additional particle per se. From the Cordus perspective
conventional references to ‘virtual particles’ of any kind can generally be
re-interpreted as a hyff effect (E.1.1). The hyff have a renewal frequency,
and travel as a hyffon pulse in the fabric of space (see part 4.2) A hyffon
only looks like ‘virtual particle’ because it involves transient disturbance of
the medium, and is not an identifiable real particle. Cordus suggests that
the term ‘virtual particle’ is misleading and confounds two very different
effects: the REs of the cordus particuloid, and the quantum hyff force
fields.

143
If this is true, then it means that seeking to find gravitons as the force-
carrier for gravity, can be re-interpreted as a search for hyffons. These can
be expected to be small disturbances in the fabric hyff (see Part 2), not
particles as such.

Cordus predicts that ‘virtual’ particles are fundamentally different to

normal ‘particles’, and should be massless. This includes any bosons for
gravitation.

Cordus suggests that hyff are permanent for matter. Assuming nominal
units of charge q- and q+, which are not necessarily those of the electron
and proton, then the q-hyff are outward propagating, whereas the q+hyff
are inward (a nominal sign convention). As the universe expands, so the
hyff get stretched out. Note that the hyff are not straight lines, but are
distorted into curves by the velocity and acceleration of their basal
particuloid.

2.4 Cordus magnetism

There are different perspectives on magnetism. The classical electrostatic

description is that static charged particles create only an electrostatic field,
whereas moving charged particles create a magnetic field too. The two
components are primarily related by change: when an electric field
changes or is moved it generates a magnetic field (and a changing
magnetic field creates an electric field). Thus a charged particle placed in
the fields will move accordingly under the Lorentz force, F = q(E + VxB)
where F is force, q is electric charge, E is electric field, V is velocity, B is
magnetic field, and x is the cross product using the right-hand-rule.40

From the perspective of special relativity, electric- and magnetic-fields are

part of the deeper phenomenon of electromagnetism. The two are
interchangeable depending on the frame of reference: what looks like a
magnetic field from one frame could be electrostatic in another. The
quantum perspective is that electromagnetism occurs by the transfer of
(virtual) photons. From the wave theory perspective, light is an
electromagnetic wave, with the electric and magnetic fields perpendicular
to each other.

Cordus provides a different explanation. Magnetic fields, from the Cordus

perspective, just represent the motion of the charge (basal generator) that
is emitting the e-hyff. This is based on the following assumptions.

E.2 Magnetism Lemma

E.2.1 Movement (velocity) of a charged reactive end causes magnetic
field. The mechanism is presumed to be bending of the hyff at the
basal emitter.

40
Right-hand-rule: V along thumb, B on index, and then the force is in the
direction of the middle finger, for a positive charge

144
E.2.2 Curvature of e-hyff is magnetism. The hyff are bent when the base
charge moves, and this curvature is propagated out on the hyff by
the hyffon pulses.
E.2.3 The direction of magnetic field is perpendicular to the plane in
which the curvature occurs.
E.2.4 The electric field is the fundamental effect, and the magnetic field
is a derivative.
E.2.5 A remote particuloid responds to the hyffon pulses and the
curvature embedded therein.
E.2.7 The mechanism for magnetic interaction is a yaw moment on the
remote moving particuloid. (Expanded below).

From the Cordus perspective, a static charge only generates an

electrostatic force, without magnetism, because the hyff are straight
outwards. However a moving charge causes bending of the e-hyff, and this
is what we perceive as magnetism, see Figure 2. The sharper the radius of
curvature the greater the magnetic field. Thus electrostatic forces are a
position effect, while magnetism is a velocity effect. However the same
basic structure, the hyff, is responsible for both.

Fields are granular directional effects

Cordus suggests that both the electrostatic and magnetic effects should be
directional for a single moving charge (the ‘base charge’), i.e. the force
should be orientated in a particular direction, and granular, at sufficiently
small scales. This is a consequence of the assumption that a single charge
has a limited number of hyff, and the effects travel out on the hyff. It is
easiest to understand as a single radial hyff, but that is a simplification for
convenience of explanation.

The emission direction of the hyff at the reactive end (proximal) can be
changed, but if the charge has existed for a long time, which will generally
be the case, then the far (distal) end of the hyff will be in another point in
space, and at a different orientation.

For a stationary base charge, the hyff lines are straight outwards. Thus any
small stationary test charge placed at some remote location along the hyff
will feel only the electrostatic force from the base charge. A granular
electrostatic force occurs when a hyffon reaches a remote test charge. The
force, which is momentary, is directed tangent to the hyff at that remote
location. The electrostatic effect is directional, so Cordus predicts that a
test charge should only feel the force if it happens to be sufficiently close
to the hyff line, and otherwise not. So the electric field is both granular
and directional, at small scales. However in most practical settings the
number of charges involved is large, they all point in different directions,
and the cordus frequency is high. These cause a smoothing effect, and
consequently the resulting field is continuous and uniform. So the overall
effect is not directional. The same smoothing applies to the magnetic field.

Generation of magnetism from a single moving charge

When the basal charge moves, then the hyff line is bent or displaced at the
proximal origin, see Figure 2. The resulting piece of curvature moves

145
outward with the hyffon pulses, reforming the mature line ('combing') as it
moves out to the distal end. Thus a remote test charge placed somewhere
on the hyff receives updates about where the basal charge is now located,
which means that the electrostatic force is more accurately aimed back at
the base. The test charge will also feel the magnetic force, depending on
its own velocity. The hyff process of propagating this information occurs at
light speed.

Figure 2: Magnetism is curvature of the hyff in the Cordus model. This

curvature creates a fragment of magnetic force, which moves outwards
with the hyffon.

146
In this particular working model,41 the magnetism effect is an impulse of
force that can act on a remote moving charge that gets in its way. The
directional hand42 of magnetism VxB ensures that the magnetic impulse is
in the opposite direction at the other reactive end. However it is not
sensible to speak of a magnetic field in this simple case of a single charge.
The overall field is generated by aggregation of the many small discrete
fragments of magnetism. Each moving charge creates part of a magnetic
looplet, not necessarily continuous, and the effect of multiple charges
moving together is to aggregate those into a what we perceive as a
continuous field.

Any moving mass generates curvature of the hyff, and these generate the
magnetic field, except that neutral-charge mass has no observable
magnetic field because it emits positive and negative hyff.

Cordus suggests that at a sufficient small scale neutral mass should show
magnetism, because the positive and negative basal generators are
separated slightly. This is a type of lack of parity.

Cordus predicts that the electric and magnetic forces apply

simultaneously, and with gravitation too. The curved path of the hyffon is
a discrete impulse of both electrostatism and magnetism. These forces
travel together, and as they move outward they are diluted across the
surface of an enlarging sphere, and thus the field effects becomes weaker.
This advancing front is an area effect (A = 4πr2), not a volume effect, which
is consistent with the observation that the electrostatic, magnetic and
gravity forces all reduce with radius squared (r2) rather than any other
power.

The faster the base charge moves, the greater the distortion of the hyff,
and the greater the magnetic impulse (so the force is not a fixed
quantum). Having more charges q moving in the same direction does not
increase the curvature but simply means that there are more hyffons
reaching the remote test charge, i.e. the effect is simply additive.

When the base charge stops moving, then the curvature of the hyff is
quickly (again at light speed) swept straight by the hyffons. The end-result
is a straight hyff line. So magnetism subsides and only the electrostatic
effect remains. Magnetism is thus only evident when the base charge has
velocity.

Thus one mechanism, the hyff, simultaneously transmits the electric and
magnetic forces. Thus Cordus accounts for all the terms in the Lorentz

41
In a different model the magnetism corresponds to positive and negative
curvature of the hyff, in which case there is a looplet around each hyff. This is not
the currently preferred model, but at this relatively high level of conceptual
abstraction there is often not a lot to differentiate the models, so we have to be
open to the possibility that the model might need changing.
42
Why is the effect right-handed? What are the deeper variables that
cause this hand? E.6.11 suggests it is the way the quarks assemble into matter, i.e.
the way the hyff are orientated in the assembly of matter particuloids.

147
force, F = q(E + VxB). The strengths of the two forces are not equal, being
determined by the electric constant (or vacuum permittivity) and the
magnetic constant (or vacuum permeability). Cordus explains this as
different efficacy of the two sub-mechanisms of the hyff.

Generation of magnetism in a wire

An electric current in a wire generates a magnetic field that wraps around
the wire (right-hand thumb rule). Cordus explains this as follows. When
electrons flow en-masse in a wire, they each emit a few hyff, and these
aggregate to create a smooth magnetic field. The component of any hyff
emitted axially forward or backward will neutralise with those of other
electrons, so the net result is hyff emitted radially. Thus the looplets (see
Figure 2) join to form the observed cylindrical field structure.

Reaction of a remote moving charge to magnetic impulse

How does a curved hyffon create the magnetic force on the remote test
charge? If the remote test charge is stationary, then any curvature of the
incoming hyff (i.e. external magnetic field) only re-orients the direction of
the electrostatic force. However, if the test charge is also moving, and
encounters a magnetic field, then the magnetic force arises. The basic
principle is that the force tries to realign the moving test charge to the
same direction of motion as the basal charge. For example, if the magnetic
field is large and uniform, then the transecting moving test charge is
forced into a circular path: which is the same as the large basal current
required to make that magnetic field. The principle applies also when the
two moving charges are the same, except that they mutually influence
each other to try to become co-linear. Thus magnetism is one moving
charge attempting to force another to conform to the same direction of
motion: it is a type of synchronisation effect.

2.5 Magnetic interaction

The classical interpretation is that a test charge moving in a magnetic field

experiences a sideways Lorentz force that is perpendicular to its direction
of travel and the external magnetic field (i.e. excludes the magnetic field of
the test charge itself): F = qVxB. However the mechanism for how this
forces arises is obscure.

The following is a speculative model for the mechanism underlying cordus

magnetism. This is an explanation for Lemma E.2.7 which states ‘The
mechanism for magnetic interaction is a yaw moment on the remote
moving particuloid.’

Progressive model
The magnetism effect starts as an angular deflection of the emergent
hyffon at the basal charge (E.2.1), and this propagates outwards on the
hyff as a pulse of curvature (E.2.2), eventually reaching the remote
moving test charge (E.2.5). But how does the hyffon interact with the
remote charge in E.2.7? The following working model is suggested, though

148
it is speculative. The basic principle is that the pulse of magnetism
interferes with the re-energisation of the reactive ends of the remote test
charge, thereby encouraging that remote charge into a different position
than its momentum would usually have provided, and this is what is
experienced as the magnetic force.

E.2.7 Magnetic interaction lemma

The mechanism for magnetic interaction is a yaw moment on the remote
moving particuloid:
E.2.7.1 Velocity of any massy particuloid delays the re-energisation of its
reactive ends and thus the emergence of its hyffons.
E.2.7.2 Delay corresponds to energisation of the reactive end in a
geometrically retarded position on its locus, i.e. the fibril is
momentarily not perpendicular to the direction of motion. The
hyffon is emitted slightly rearwards, which corresponds to a
transient kink in the hyff.
E.2.7.3 All charged particuloids are assumed to have mass. The
momentum of the moving particuloid subsequently carries the
reactive end forward to where it should be in the locus. Thus the
retardation does not accumulate.
E.2.7.4 At the remote moving charge the process is complementary.
E.2.7.5 Particuloids always line up their span to be perpendicular to their
direction of motion, and will adjust their spin to achieve this.
(However the roll angle is variable).

Cordus explanation
A somewhat fuller explanation follows. Within the basal moving charge,
the a1 reactive end is delayed slightly by the velocity (E.2.7.1), and the
need to emit the hyffon onto the fabric of space (see part 4.2). The a1
reactive end therefore energises in a geometrically retarded position on its
locus (E.2.7.2). Thus the fibril is rotated in yaw, momentarily, and the hyff
is temporarily bent as it is emitted. The momentum of the moving
particuloid resets the system by subsequently carrying the reactive end
forward to where it should be in the locus.

Cordus predicts a retardation of the frequency for the remote charge

during the operation of magnetism.

When the hyffon curvature pulse reaches the remote moving test charge,
it likewise interferes with the geometric location for the emergent reactive
end b1 of the moving test charge. Whether it delays or advances that
reactive ends depends on the sign of the magnetic field, i.e. the relative
direction of the velocity of the test charge. The pulse may prevent the b1
reactive end advancing forward as far as it usually might during a
frequency cycle, or it might push it forward. Recall that momentum
determines the nominal location on the locus where the reactive end is
expected to re-energise. Remember also that a reactive end will
preferentially re-energise in a location prepared for it by the external
environment. So the basal charge remotely interferes with the location of
re-energisation of other particuloids. This sets up a yaw moment across

149
the fibril, thereby adjusting the direction in which the remote charge is
moving.

The curvature pulse is not consumed but passes on outward to the other
RE b2. We assume that the effect is additive rather than being negated,
since the hand is reversed when it reaches that other reactive end.

Particular cases
If the test charge is not moving, then the curvature pulse only interferes
with the spin of the test charge: it rotates it on the spot. This may be
testable.

If the test charge is moving in the same general direction as the base
charge, then the pulse yaws the cordus of the test charge towards the
direction of the basal charge. Of course the moving test charge is not
simply a passive participant, but also radiates its own hyff with electric and
magnetic effects. If the basal charge is of similar size, it will be affected in
turn by the magnetism of the test charge, and the two charges will
progressively synchronise their positions towards each other, i.e. the loci
converge, or the magnetic force is attractive.

The magnetism effect depends not simply on the speed of the charges, but
also their relative directions. This is economically explained in cordus by
adding lemma E.2.7.5: that particuloids always line up their span to be
perpendicular to their direction of motion. (However the roll angle is
variable). Thus magnetism only works in remote particuloids that already
have some degree of alignment with the velocity of the basal charge.

If the remote test charge is moving in some other deviant direction, then
the hyff it emits are orientated differently to that of the base charge. The
field of the base charge partly forces the remote test charge to comply.
This means that it will be forced to partly synchronise its hyff emission
with the base charge, (a weak form of CoFS in action) and in turn this
means that its reactive ends will have to energise in a different position
and orientation than their own momentum had originally intended. Thus
the general result of magnetism on two similarly sized moving charges, is
to redirect their trajectories towards each other.

Cordus predicts a tendency to mutual synchronisation of frequency for

identical moving charges.

The common case shown in physics texts is of a moving charge being

forced into a circular trajectory in the presence of a uniform magnetic
field. In this case the magnetic field dominates the interaction, and the
moving test charge tends to move into a circular or helical trajectory.
However the uniform field is not a particularly useful way of representing
magnetism because it obscures the important fact that creation of that
uniform field requires charges to be moving in a circular path too. Uniform
magnetic fields are a very special case and thus an artificial way to
approach magnetism, and it is the dance of two moving particuloids where
the more interesting mechanics becomes visible.

150
The implication of the E.2.7.5 lemma is profound, because it means that
any motion of a massy object results in all the internal particuloids
adjusting their spin. This sounds radical, and it may or not be valid.
Nonetheless there are several situations where we do see something
similar albeit with magnetism, namely permanent magnets, and magnetic
resonance imaging. In both these cases the spins of all the electrons in the
whole body are aligned, and in the latter case it is the human body which
is affected, to no obvious detriment.

Cordus suggests that particuloid orientation is affected by magnetism and

motion. This may be testable, but falsification would not be a serious
impediment to the cordus concept since this an extreme prediction.

To sum up the magnetism mechanism, the incoming hyffon interferes with

the intended re-energisation of the reactive ends, and changes the
preferred location. Thus there is a transient displacement effect that we
interpret as the magnetic force. Magnetism thus interferes with
momentum processes.43 Note that the force and displacement
perspectives for magnetism are equivalent. Thus the classical
interpretation of the Lorentz force F = qVxB and the cordus displacement
mechanism are different aspects of magnetism considered at different
scales.

Permanent magnets
A permanent ferro-magnet has a magnetic field, but no apparent electric
field. The usual explanation is that that the electron and nucleon spins are
aligned across a domain (region of atoms).

The Cordus interpretation extends this by saying that that the alignment of
the cordus (spin) of electrons and nucleons result in the hyff pointing in
the same direction. More accurately, that the hyff are orderly aligned
along the axis of the magnetic poles, but randomly orientated in the
transverse directions and there neutralised laterally. The electrostatic
force on an external test charge is balanced, because of the equal
contribution of positive and negative charges. So the magnet does not
appear to be charged or to emit an electric field. Nonetheless it emits hyff.

From the Cordus perspective, the magnetic domains are formed in the first
instance because electron hyff extend to neighbouring atoms and
encourage alignment: a complementary frequency state synchronisation
(CoFS). This is an important concept throughout the cordus mechanics,
and ‘Cordus matter’ describes the concept more fully. Within the magnetic
material the electrons themselves move, either through their unfilled
orbitals, or current flow within the sub-lattices of the material, and this
generates curvature of the hyff and thus magnetic fields. These curved
pieces of hyff propagate outwards to reach a remote magnetic material,
e.g. a piece of iron. At this point they induce the remote electrons and
43
It should therefore not come as a surprise that cordus predicts a
coherent system behaviour across electricity, magnetism, momentum, mass, and
gravitation, as the following papers show.

151
atoms to align with the hyff and move with the direction of curvature, if
the atomic structure permits (paramagnetism). While the electrostatic
forces are balanced, the magnetic components are not, and the residual
component of force is attractive (or repulsive if the atomic response is
diamagnetic).

How does the force itself arise? The piece of iron is attracted to the
magnet, and the hand must exert force to prevent it closing the gap. How
does this work? The explanation for this working model, is that the force is
a perception: the real effect is displacement at the sub-atomic cordus
level. The hyffons of the magnetic field put pressure on the electron
cordus in the iron test piece, and this encourages the reactive ends of the
electron to re-energise in a slightly closer position than they would
otherwise. These are lower-energy positions in the environment external
to the cordus, so the reactive ends naturally prefer to re-energise in these
locations. The REs can be prevented from doing so, but this requires a
force. For an electron deep inside the iron test piece, that force is carried
by the neighbouring electrons, and the stability of those bonds. The force
is therefore carried from electron to electron through the bulk of the iron
until it reaches the outside surfaces, where the pressure of the hand
provides (again through electron interactions between iron and tissue) the
force to resist the movement of the iron piece.

So, to answer the question, when holding two magnets apart, the force is
required to prevent the sub-atomic cordi (e.g. electrons) from inching
closer to the other body. If that force is not there, then the two bodies
accelerate towards each other.

Acceleration of a body in a field

If the hand is not there, or the biomechanics not strong enough, then the
REs of the electrons in the iron creep closer to the magnet, by a small
increment each frequency cycle. Once they start moving, the test piece of
iron obtains a body speed, and this with its mass creates momentum. In
turn the momentum predisposes the reactive end to re-energise ahead on
its locus, i.e. the velocity is maintained. The steady rain of magnetic
hyffons keep pulling the REs in the test piece even further ahead, and this
creates acceleration. The mechanism is similar for a body accelerating in
any field: electrostatic, magnetic, or gravitational.

Thus from the cordus perspective all three fundamental forces are caused,
at the sub-atomic level, by displacement effects of the reactive ends. The
fabric provides the medium that interlinks all these effects, see part 4.2.
Thus what we perceive as force is more fundamentally a constrained-
displacement effect. This is also why the speed of light is a common
limiting constraint on all the field effects. The three fundamental forces
electrostatic, magnetic, and gravitational, all use the same hyff, but just
different information channels thereon, see part 4.3.

3 Conclusions

152
A conceptual model has been shown for cordus electromagnetism. The
starting premise is that all fields are hyff, of one sort or another. Hyff are
directional force lines that extend out into space from their basal
particuloid, and where the force appears in pulses that travel outwards
along the line (hyffons). Thus fields consist of a rapid sequence of discrete
impulses of transient force, radiating out from a cordus at the centre.
However we do not see this granularity at our level of perception. Instead
we perceive fields to be smooth, continuous, and uniform in all directions.
This is because of the en-masse effect of many particuloids being involved.

For a test charge in an electric field, the overall effect is a steady rain of
hyffons that are individually small transient units of force. The overall
effect is a smooth force. From the Cordus perspective, a static charge only
generates an electrostatic force, without magnetism, because the hyff are
straight outwards. However a moving charge causes bending of the e-hyff,
and this is what we perceive as magnetism. Any moving mass generates
curvature of the hyff, and these generate the magnetic field, except that
neutral-charge mass has no observable magnetic field because it emits
positive and negative hyff. Thus electrostatic forces are a position effect,
while magnetism is a velocity effect. However the same basic structure,
the hyff, is responsible for both.

Cordus electromagnetism is applied to explain the electric field

surrounding a wire carrying current, the locus of moving test charges in a
magnetic field, and the mechanism for how force arises in permanent
magnets.

The contribution made by this paper is a description of electromagnetism

that goes to the next deeper level: it can explain the underlying
mechanisms for how the forces arise, where conventional theories do not
go. Also, it provides a mechanism for fields to be granular and directional
at the small scale, but smooth and continuous at larger scale. What is
particularly valuable is that the overall coherency of the cordus concept, in
that the same mechanics that resolve wave-particle duality can also be
used to explain fields, i.e. the creation of a consistent conceptual
framework.

The cordus explanation for electromagnetism is unorthodox in several

areas. First, it dispenses with the need for additional particles, and
conventional references to ‘virtual particles’ of any kind are thus re-
interpreted as a hyff effect. Second, conventional theories tend to portray
electric fields and magnetic fields with equal standing: they are
interchangeable concepts. By contrast, Cordus suggests that the electric
field is the fundamental effect, and the magnetic field is a derivative. Thus
electrostatics is a reactive end position effect, magnetism a RE-movement
phenomenon, and (yet to be shown) gravitation a RE-acceleration effect.
Third, Cordus is unconventional in asserting that the electric field cannot
be shielded, and that what looks like shielding is only localised
neutralisation.

153
The results show that the Cordus conjecture can be extended to
electromagnetic fields. Doing so permits novel re-conceptualisation of
some fundamental paradigms of conventional physics. In particular,
Cordus shows that it is conceptually easy to explain how granularity of the
electromagnetic field arises at a sub-atomic level, and also how the
macroscopic perception arises of fields being smooth. Furthermore, the
cordus concepts of fields are important in what follows, when the
composition of the vacuum is considered and gravitation is added to the
model.

154
Cordus in extremis: Part 4.2 Fabric of the
universe
Pons, D.J. , 44 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
The concept of the vacuum is problematic for conventional physics.
Electromagnetic wave theory models it as consisting of nothing at all, but
yet paradoxically having finite electric and magnetic constants. Quantum
mechanics models it as consisting of temporary particles, but no average
substance. General Relativity theory includes a spacetime medium,
without describing the composition. In all cases the underlying physical
mechanisms are obscure. Furthermore, these existing perspectives conflict
in their expectations, so the integration is poor. The treatment is not
always logical either: conventional theories find the idea of the matter-
based aether thoroughly unacceptable, yet ironically all include something
that looks conceptually much like a medium. The Cordus conjecture
provides a conceptual solution for the composition of the vacuum: it
provides a fabric that is granular (similar to quantised) at the smallest
scale, scales up to a continuum, provides a medium for propagation of
disturbances and waves, provides a medium for electromagnetism and
gravitation, is relativistic, is not a matter aether, and includes a time
signal. In the cordus solution the vacuum is made of tangled hyff (force
lines) from all the surrounding matter particuloids. This cordus fabric
concept also provides a descriptive explanation as to why the speed of light
is a finite value. The fine structure constant is given a physical
interpretation, as a measure of the transmission efficacy of the fabric.
Cordus also distinguishes between the fabric that makes up the vacuum of
space, as opposed to the void which has neither fabric nor time as we
perceive it. This model is radically unorthodox in suggesting that the speed
of light is relativistic but not invariant; that it depends fundamentally on
the fabric density and hence the accessible mass density of the universe at
that locality.

Keywords: cordus; vacuum; void; quantum fluctuations; magnetic

constant; aether; relativity; spacetime; speed of light; fine structure
constant
Revision 1.2

1 Introduction

There is a finite limit to the speed of light in a vacuum, but it is not known
what determines the value. Wave theory defines light as a self-
propagating field disturbance. From that perspective the speed of light is
determined by the electric constant and magnetic constant. This of course

44
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of
Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

155
begs the question of what determines those constants. Why should a
region of space, with nothing in it, have a resistance to the growth of
electric and magnetic fields?

Answers to these questions are not needed to explain the double-slit and
other quantum effects. Nonetheless the Cordus conjecture offers some
suggestions for thinking about the questions, though these should be
considered in extremis, i.e. a thought-experiment rather than a necessary
core concept.

This paper is the second in a set of four. The first extended the Cordus
conjecture to create a conceptual model for electromagnetic fields. The
resulting model showed how a cordus particuloid could generate small
transient units of force at the sub-atomic level, thereby creating the
apparently smooth and continuous electric field that we more commonly
perceive. That paper also reconceptualised how magnetism is generated at
the sub-atomic level, and likewise explained how the granularity arises. It
showed that the electric field is not shielded, only neutralised.

The present paper builds the concept further by creating a working model
for how the vacuum operates. This is termed the ‘fabric’. The concept is
used to explain why light has a finite speed in the vacuum. This has
interesting implications for distinguishing between the ‘vacuum’ of space
and what we call the ‘void’ beyond the vacuum, and it also suggests a
physical interpretation for the fine structure constant. The concept of
fabric is important in the parts that follow, in that the fabric is proposed to
be a core element in the unification of gravitation with electromagnetism,
and it provides an explanation for time.

2 Temporal capacitance

The photon is unusual in that it emits and then withdraws its hyff, unlike
the electron and proton (E.1.2). Therefore it is more self-contained than
other particuloids. Light slows down in denser media because the cordus,
through its hyff, exerts forces on nearby charged particles (particularly
electrons). This takes time because the electrons have to move, hence
plasmons, and their mass resists that. The photon has to delay while this
happens - it cannot race ahead – because the hyff of the photon and
electron are momentarily joined. This is the same as saying that the
reactive-ends have to increase their lateral deviation zig-zag through the
material and thus take a longer path. Note that the whole process is elastic
and there are no losses: even though the photon slows down, it does not
lose energy. (This counter-intuitive fact is useful in what follows.) For
example, when it leaves a glass medium and goes back into air, it speeds
up again. The glass does not provide resistance per se, instead it simply
wastes the photon’s time, and we call this temporal capacitance.

That explanation is fine for light passing through matter, but what about a
vacuum, where there is no matter or charged particles? What provides the
temporal capacitance? Saying it is the electric and magnetic constant is

156
simply circular reasoning. The logical explanation is that there is some kind
of invisible medium, perhaps matter-based, that provides temporal
capacitance and keeps the photon’s speed down. What could that
substance be made of?

One candidate might be quantum vacuum fluctuations: particles and

antiparticles that pop into existence and almost immediately interact and
then disappear. If so, this suggests that the speed of light would be
determined by the rate density at which electron quantum fluctuations
occur. For that to be a workable solution would require a uniform
distribution of electron energies, so that the speed was the same for all
energies of photons. Nor is that the only limitation. Why should the
vacuum need to fluctuate in the first place? The conventional explanation
is that it is an outcome of the probabilistic nature of the wave-function.
However Cordus does not accept the wave-function as the reality (see
‘Cordus matter’), so cannot accept that explanation either.

What about the concept of aether: that there is a fluid of otherwise

undetectable particles through which light travels? That is an ancient
concept, first disproved by the Michelson-Morley experiment, and now
thoroughly discredited by modern physics. Yet the Michelson-Morley
experiment merely disproved the concept of a static or moving-matter
aether through which the Earth was moving – the wind. Is it possible to
conceive of a different type of aether that is invariant to velocity, a
relativistic aether? After all, c is invariant to Observer speed. This leads us
to the fabric conjecture.

3 Cordus Fabric-of-the-universe conjecture

The fabric conjecture is based on the following assumptions.

E.3 Fabric hyff Lemma

E.3.1 The fabric of the universe is made of the hyff of all the other
massy particuloids in the universe.
E.3.2 All ‘virtual particles’ are actually hyffons.
E.3.3 There is only one type of hyff, which is electrical, and is created by
charged particuloids, but the frequency varies. The low frequency
hyff generated by electrons are termed e-hyff, whereas high
frequency hyff from quarks are termed q hyff, but they are
otherwise all the same.
E.3.4 The frequency of the basal generator determines the spacing of
the hyffons. Therefore the frequency of the hyff varies for
different types of cordus particuloids. There is a spectrum.
E.3.5 The density of the hyff in the vacuum determines the temporal
capacitance and therefore the propagation speed through the
vacuum. We term this the saturated speed of the fabric. This is the
speed of light in the vacuum.
E.3.6 Propagation of light through matter, e.g. glass, involves additional
hyff generated by the matter of the medium. This increases the
hyff density and lowers the speed of light.

157
While we use the term ‘fabric’, this should not be taken to mean a 2D
structure, nor a regular lattice like cloth. Instead the fabric weave a
complex and disorderly mesh of 3D force lines, more like a bowl of
spaghetti.

Speed of light explanation

Cordus suggests that light has a finite speed in a vacuum because the
cordus has to interact with the fabric of the vacuum.

Origins of the fabric hyff

All the positive and negative charged particuloids in the universe, even
those in neutral matter, contribute to the fabric hyff. The relatively low
frequency hyff (e-hyff) from unit charges (electrons and protons) create
electric fields which travel through everything. These low frequency hyff
exert the electrostatic force on other charged particuloids of comparable
frequency, i.e. on other protons and electrons. The e-hyff are also
compatible with some energies of photons, and therefore electron
mobility is important in many optical phenomena: it is no coincidence that
polished metal reflects light. These e-hyff can apparently be shielded, by
electrons in a Faraday cage setting up a counter field that balances the
electrostatic force. However the original hyff are still there.

Deeper particuloids, e.g. quarks, also emit hyff. These particuloids have
short span and high frequency, and their hyff have corresponding high
frequency (q hyff). These hyff penetrate everything, but do not react with
nominally charged particuloids like the electron and proton. These q hyff
correspond to the gluons in QM. It is important to note that these q hyff
are the same effect as the electrostatic hyff: just different frequency.

The hyff are weak at vast distances, but still finite. And they never expire,
unlike those of the photon. All the positive and negative charges in the
universe contribute to the hyff fabric. The electromagnetic force may
seem to be zero at any one point, but this is merely because the hyff fields
balance: the underlying hyff still exist. At sufficiently small scale there
should still be electric fields even if there is no field at macroscopic level.

These fabric hyff are themselves propagating outwards. These fabric hyff
interact weakly with each other in passing, providing temporal
capacitance. The interactions mean that the whole fabric operates at a
certain saturated speed, c, and this also applies to the temporary hyff of
any photons trying to move through. Since the whole hyff fabric operates
at c, this provides the invariance to the observer’s speed. It is not an
‘aether’ because it is not made up of particles, 45 but it is relativistic. So
everything that travels in the fabric of the universe is limited to a finite
saturated speed, which is the speed of light in the vacuum.

45
However if one wished to use the nomenclature of QM, one could say
that the fabric was composed of virtual bosons.

158
In this model, the fabric itself provides the temporal capacitance: it uses
up the time of photons and other particuloids that travel through it. The
mechanism for using up time becomes apparent later in the gravitation
and time paper (part 4.3), as interference by the fabric with the re-
energisation of reactive ends. Thus the vacuum is not empty, but contains
a tangle of moving hyff lines, each propagating hyffon pulses down its
length at high refresh frequencies, so that the overall effect is a busy
congested and dynamic network. The photon has to fight its way, albeit
elastically, through this fabric, and this slows it down to the speed that we
know as the speed of light in the vacuum. Thus the fabric itself contributes
to entropy in that it delays the redistribution of radiant energy by photons.

Cordus also suggests that, by contrast, there is something emptier than

the vacuum: something where the tangle of hyff has never been, and time
perhaps has not yet existed. We term this the void. Conventional theories,
including wave theory and quantum mechanics, do not have this concept.
Instead they perceive of the vacuum as containing either nothing at all, or
a sea of transitory particles (which is effectively also nothing on average).
The electric and magnetic constants of the vacuum become much easier to
comprehend when the concept of the fabric is included.

As a lemma in the previous paper noted (E.2.4), the electric field is the
fundamental effect, and the magnetic field is a derivative. The fabric
model derived here is consistent, in that it proposes that the fabric is
fundamentally constructed of plain electric hyff. That does not need to
stop it also transmitting magnetism, and as we shall see, gravitation too,
but the fabric itself is electric. This is also consistent with the known fact
that the vacuum has an ‘impedance of free space’, which is in units of
electrical resistance (approx. 376Ω). Those units are unfortunate, because
from the cordus perspective it is better to think about the fabric in terms
of 3E-09 sec time lost per metre travelled, because that emphasises that
the impedance is not loss of energy in drag or resistance, but rather the
loss of time in transit.46

The fabric as a whole is charge-neutral, because it consists of hyff from

positive and negative charges. Thus the electromagnetic force on a
stationary test charge seems to be zero at any one point, and it does not
get moved by the fabric. This is merely because the hyff fabric-forces
balance: the underlying fabric hyff still exist. In addition, the
electromagnetic force only looks like a photon-effect, hence QM’s ‘virtual
photon’, because the hyffons create transient disturbances in the fabric
hyff and these have a similar signature to a photon.

Quantum vacuum fluctuations

The fabric is granular at sufficiently small scales. It will also appear as
noise, since there are q+ and q- hyffons to the fabric. Thus it can look like
short-lived particles of electrons and positrons suddenly appearing and
then disappearing.

46
Both electrical capacitance and inductance are time effects, and lossless
regarding energy.

159
Cordus suggests that what QM perceives as quantum vacuum fluctuations
are the passage, past the Observer, of disorderly hyffons, not real
particuloids of matter. Thus cordus predicts that 'virtual particles' should
be massless.

Gravitational bending of light

If the above conjecture were true, then it has some other implications. The
first concerns nearby masses. What happens when light goes close to a big
lump of matter – won’t that change the strength of the fabric hyff? Yes,
and that is what we interpret as gravitational bending of light. In this idea,
it's not so much the mass that the photon is responding to, but the
charges within that mass. The bending of the locus would be caused by
more fabric-hyff leading towards the mass. Note that hyff are force lines,
and while the general background fabric-hyff apply a balanced force on
any particuloid, the hyff from the local mass are strongly directional.
Therefore the fabric in the vicinity of a mass will have a preferred
direction, i.e. it is a vector field not a scalar field.

Fine structure constant

One implication of the hyff fabric concept is that the density of the
universe affects the speed of light. The fine structure constant α appears
in several places in physics, and thus can be explained in various ways.

From the Cordus perspective α is a measure of the transmission efficacy of

the hyff-fabric, i.e. it determines the relationship between the electric
constant of the vacuum fabric, and the speed of propagation c through the
fabric. To explain this another way, the fabric is made of electrical hyff,
and the saturation thereof crates the temporal capacitance, which in turn
results in the electric constant and limits the speed of light to a certain
finite value. Thus Cordus suggests that the dependent variable in the
equation is the velocity of light c. Thus:

e 2e 2
cc == (4π hα )ε o
(4π hα )ε o
where e is electric charge; ħ is reduced Planck’s constant; α fine structure
constant; εo electrical constant of the vacuum. Assuming all of these are
constant bar the last, then the speed of light depends on εo, the electrical
constant of the vacuum. Cordus suggests that εo represents the density of
the fabric hyff, and thus depends on the mass density of the universe.
Thus the speed of light in the vacuum depends on the mass of the universe
and the local density of the fabric hyff.

Thus the Cordus perspective is that the fine structure constant α refers to
the relationship between electrical hyff and the speed of propagation of
hyffons. Thus it is to be expected that α will appear wherever electrical
hyff and propagation of fields occur, and this includes the cases covered by
CoFS such as electron bonding.

160
If this is correct then the speed of light in the vacuum should be locally but
not temporally invariant, even if it is always relativistic. Perhaps this is
testable? Light may have been faster in the very first moments of the
universe when there was not much matter about, hence driving inflation,
then slower when matter formed and the universe was much denser than
now. Finally it could be increasingly faster as the universe expanded and
the mass density dropped. The speed of light may not even be
directionally invariant. These are unorthodox predictions of cordus in
extremis, and there may be other factors to consider. But if true then the
structural implications would be large: it would imply that many of the
supposedly fundamental physical constants may not be as exact as
thought. On the bright side, the differences are likely to be negligibly
small, at least for engineers who need to make things work in this present
epoch and local region of space.

Vacuum vs. void

In conventional electromagnetic wave theory there is no aether and EM
waves can propagate through nothingness. However Cordus in extremis
differentiates between the vacuum of space and the void. The vacuum is
that region of space in which the hyff-fabric has become established, but
where there is not-yet any matter. As later extensions of the idea show,
the fabric is also where time, as we perceive it, exists. By contrast the void
is beyond the universe and has neither fabric nor time as we perceive it.
The fabric expands into the void and colonises it.

The fabric concept is that the hyff expand space into the void, and that
gravitational attraction is carried by the fabric. The expansion might not
occur at the outer edge of a spherical universe, but throughout the space
of the universe, in which case space is also expanded, and matter
accelerates outwards (the expanding universe). It is also possible that the
fabric simultaneously carries the hyffon pulses that create specific
gravitational attraction between bodies, while the fabric itself exerts a
repulsive force on space (‘dark energy’).

If matter continues to accelerate outwards, and were to approach

relativistic speeds, then parts of the fabric might become disconnected
from each other and the hyff Lorentz-compromised (see part 4.3) in the
radial direction. In this speculative model, the eventual physical fate of the
universe should be a 2D shell, or rather a set of disconnected shells like an
onion, where the only possible interaction was laterally.

4 Conclusions

Conventional theories of physics model the vacuum in one of two ways.

Electromagnetic wave theory models it as consisting of nothing at all but
yet paradoxically having finite electric and magnetic constants. Quantum
mechanics models it as consisting of particles that randomly pop in and
out of existence, though the underlying physical mechanisms are obscure.
General Relativity theory also has a fabric, in this case of spacetime, but

161
likewise is not specific as to what that contains, though by implication it is
smooth rather than granular. Even more problematic, the existing
perspectives do not integrate together, and thus are part of the wider
discontinuity that is ‘wave-particle duality’. Gravitation has been
particularly difficult to integrate into the particle paradigm of conventional
quantum mechanics. This is because relativity has a smooth spacetime,
whereas QM expects gravitation to be quantised to particles.

Existing theories implicitly require that there is something in the vacuum:

something that is a medium for the propagation of waves, or provides the
random fluctuations required by QM, or carries the spacetime curvature
for relativity. While conventional theories find the idea of the matter-
based aether thoroughly unacceptable, they ironically all include
something that looks conceptually much like a medium, though none are
specific about its composition.

Cordus provides a solution that does provide an integrated solution for the
composition of the vacuum: it provides a fabric that is granular47 at the
smallest scale, scales up to a continuum, provides a medium for
propagation of disturbances and waves, provides a medium for
electromagnetism and gravitation, is relativistic, is not a matter aether,
and includes a time signal. Cordus is a radically different theory to the
conventional physics of wave theory, quantum mechanics, and general
relativity, and was not derived from any of them. Yet the fabric that it
predicts still includes features that are recognisable, even if subtly
different, to those other theories.

In the cordus solution the vacuum is made of tangled hyff (force lines)
from all the surrounding matter particuloids. This cordus fabric concept
also provides a descriptive explanation as to why the speed of light is a
finite value. The fine structure constant is given a physical interpretation,
as a measure of the transmission efficacy of the fabric. Cordus also
distinguishes between the fabric that makes up the vacuum of space, as
opposed to the void which has neither fabric nor time as we perceive it.
This model is radically unorthodox in suggesting that the speed of light is
relativistic but not invariant; that it depends fundamentally on the fabric
density and hence the accessible mass density of the universe at that
locality.

The Cordus fabric concept is a useful component in the next level of

exploration, which is the creation of a model for mass and gravitation, and
for time, see Part 4.3.

47
Granular, not quantised, as the fabric is not composed of uniform
increments as the term ‘quantum’ suggests.

162
Cordus in extremis: Part 4.3 Gravitation,
Mass and Time
Pons, D.J. , 48 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
Gravitation is conceptually problematic to General Relativity and Quantum
mechanics in that the fundamental mechanisms are unknown to both, and
the theories have different requirements that are difficult to reconcile into
a single model. Cordus gravitation offers a solution to the problem. It
provides a mechanism whereby gravitation is not continuous but in
discrete force (or displacement) increments similar to quanta (but not
uniform increments). Also, the closing force between two masses is
transient. In this idea, gravitation, and therefore also mass, is a
discontinuous property: i.e. a particuloid emits gravity (has mass) at some
moments but not others. Thus gravitation is an effect that a mass does to
the whole universe, not to targeted other bodies, and in this regard Cordus
is consistent with General relativity. Both QM and Cordus agree that
gravitation is quantised. Cordus conceptually integrates the different
effects of mass: Gravitation is a particuloid contributing hyff to the fabric;
Newtonian mass is resistance of the reactive ends to unexpected
displacement; Relativistic mass is decreasing efficacy of hyff engagement
with the fabric as velocity of the reactive end increases; Momentum is a
frequency mechanism that ensures the reactive end re-energises on-time
and in-place; particuloids like nucleons have mass to the extent that they
have frequency. Furthermore, Cordus offers an explanation of how time
arises at a sub-atomic level by the cordus frequency, and how this
aggregates to the sense of time that we perceive biologically. Thus Cordus
offers a radically new way of thinking about the problem of gravitation,
mass and time that is quite unlike conventional physics, yet includes
concepts that might be recognisable to those other physics.

Keywords: cordus; hyff; gravitation; mass,; time; spacetime; sense of time;

fundamental physics; Lorentz; fabric; time dilation
Revision 1.2

1 Introduction

Existing approaches to gravitation are primarily space-time of general

relativity, and gravitons of quantum mechanics. However neither explain
how the underlying mechanisms work. This paper extends the Cordus
principles to gravitation and mass as an in-extremis development, i.e. as a
conceptual exploration.

48
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of
Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

163
Mass is strange because it is the coupling for effects that otherwise might
be independent:

Gravitation: two masses attract each other. The gravitation force
(or interaction) has an unusual set of properties compared to the
other forces: (1) it only acts on matter with mass; (2) it always
attracts, never repels; (3) it has infinite range; and (4) it cannot be
redirected or shielded. Mass is the fundamental strength variable
for gravitation.

Resistance to acceleration (Newtonian mass): the greater the
acceleration a or mass m of a body, the greater the force required
to change its speed v, F=m.a or more generally F = d(m.v)/dt

Relativistic mass: as the speed v of a body of rest mass mo
approaches that of light, so the effective mass tends to infinity, or
at least the resistance to acceleration does, m = mo (1-v2/C2) 0.5.
This effect applies even if there is no acceleration.

From the perspective of relativity, momentum is a separate
property to mass and the full energy-momentum formula is
E = [ (p.c)2 + (mo.c2)2 ]0.5

In that case, what physical structure carries the momentum, and
what carries the mass?

Mass originates with particles, e.g. protons and neutrons (among
others), hence atomic number.

This paper is the third in a set of four that extrapolate cordus ideas to the
extremes. The first paper covers the electric and magnetic fields and
shows conceptually how they are formed by hyff from cordus particuloids.
The second creates a working model for the composition of the vacuum,
and shows how this fabric is made of the hyff of all the other particuloids
in the universe. It also shows how this fabric limits the speed of light to a
finite value that is relativistic but not necessarily invariant. This third paper
applies the Cordus concepts in extremis to create a conceptual model for
gravitation. This model uses the hyff and fabric concepts from the previous
papers, and offers an integration between electromagnetism and
gravitation. It also provides a working model for mass. Finally, it creates a
Cordus model for time, and shows how that integrates with gravitation
and the fabric.

2 Cordus Gravitation

We suggest that gravity is a hyff effect, and simply an extension of

electromagnetism. There are several variants of this idea. In the first
variant, which is not the preferred working model, each massy particle
sends out a specialised gravity hyff in addition to any electrostatic hyff.
The difficulty with this idea is that it requires extra hyff (is not
parsimonious) and it is not immediately apparent why a different
mechanism should also be subject to c.49

49
Also, it suggests by analogy with the electrostatic case that there should
be another force for movement of the basal generator, like magnetism is for
electrostatic. But there is no obvious missing force.

164
Why is c involved in mass? Variable c is the flight speed of the photon, not
an atomic variable. From the Cordus perspective c is the propagation
speed of hyff in general. This leads to the second and preferred model:
that there is only one type of hyff (E.3.3), and gravitation is therefore
carried by the hyff of the fabric. The following lemma sets out the
assumptions.

E.4 Gravitation and mass Lemma

E.4.1 All sub-atomic particles, including quarks, are cordi.
E.4.2 All massy cordus particuloids emit hyff.
E.4.2.1 All hyff are the electric field type hyff, but smaller
particuloids emit higher frequency hyff (q hyff).
E.4.2.2 The hyff of quarks are much higher frequency than the
electric field of the electron, because the cordus frequency
is higher for a quark, in turn due to shorter span.
E.4.3 Gravitation is carried by the hyff.
E.4.3.1 The current working model is that the hyffon carries a
torsional twist down the fibril.
E.4.3.2 The transmission of gravitation is therefore at the
saturated speed of the fabric, c.
E.4.4 Gravitation is attractive.
E.4.4.1 The current working model is that remote particuloids
respond in the same way to the hyffon twist, regardless of
the particuloid charge and other properties.
E.4.5 Higher cordus frequencies result in more frequent hyffons, and
hence greater mass and gravitation effects.
E.4.6 continued below

Cordus proposes that the hyff of particuloids, including quarks and any
free sub-quark cordi, carry gravitation. More specifically, even when the
quark is stationary, it still oscillates at the cordus frequency. The frequency
also relates to ‘spin’.

In the Cordus gravitation working model hyff do not create gravitation by a

direct pull, because that is the electrostatic force itself. Instead the force
of gravitation on the remote matter particuloid is caused by the
interaction of that particuloid with the hyffon spin: the re-energising
reactive end of the particuloid is pulled closer, which is equivalent to
saying it is constrained to re-energise in a closer position. This is similar to
the magnetism mechanism. The mechanism is elaborated below.

2.1 Mechanism for gravitational interaction force

It is an open question as to how the oscillation of the quark emits the

gravitation effect at the basal mass, how that effect is carried on the
emitted hyff, and how it interacts with the remote test mass to create
gravitational attraction.

165
It is tempting to say that whatever mechanism is behind the known strong-
force phenomenon of quarks always attracting each other, is also that for
gravitation. However that will not do, as the later work on quarks
identifies the mechanism for the strong force and it is not obviously also a
mechanism for gravitation. Thus gravitation does not correspond to what
QM might call a gluon field.

The preferred candidate is the hyff twist idea. This model has the hyffon
carrying a torsional twist down the fibril. According to this model, all
massy matter comprises charged particuloids, and thus there is
electromagnetism to consider. Consider a basal mass of a single
particuloid, and the a1 reactive end thereof. Assume a single radial hyff in
the <r> direction. As a1 re-energises, it emits a hyffon that carries the
electrostatic direct-force fragment, as well as magnetism curvature, and
gravitational twist. The process of re-energisation of a reactive end, i.e. the
hyffon emission, involves a 3D interaction, driven by the underlying right-
hand rule (E.6.11, see part 4.4): the emission of the electrostatic
component causes the reactive end to displace radially δr in the <r>
direction as per E.7.8 (see part 4.4), there is a linked displacement δa in
the <a> direction due to magnetism,50 and a coupled displacement δt in
the orthogonal <t> direction. The combined effect is that the RE describes
a localised spiral motion at the moment of re-energisation, and the
corresponding hyffon that propagates outwards on the hyff is likewise a
spiral pulse.51 The reasons for the chirality of matter are not evident at this
level.

Assuming such a spiral hyffon, this twist is transmitted out along the hyff,
and gravitation is the response of other particles to that twist.

Remote particuloids should be able to affect each other’s spin through

gravitational interaction, though it would only be evident when both
bodies were in (separate) full body-coherence. The usual massy bodies of
the universe do not have such a degree of coherence, (see ‘Cordus
matter’).

Emission of the hyff occurs as part of the frequency cycle for the
particuloid. Outward propagation of the hyffon occurs at velocity c, and
does not consume energy. The above explanation was for a single hyff.
There is reason to think that massy particuloids have three pairs of hyff:
one in each of the three orthogonal directions (E.6.2 in part 4.4). Therefore
there is always a component of the hyff that is oriented in such a way to
interact with another particuloid, regardless of the orientation of that
particuloid, at least at macroscopic level if not for individual particuloids.

When this torsional pulse reaches a remote test mass comprising cordus b,
with reactive end b1, the handedness of matter ensures similar reactive
forces along the hyff of b1. These forces correspond to lengthening the

50
The magnetic curvature effect, which exists even for a nominally
stationary particuloid because it still has spin angular momentum, causes and is
caused by a displacement δa in the <a> direction (which is tangential to the spin).
51
The chirality of matter could be an interesting area for further research.

166
span of the b cordus. Since there three pairs of hyff, the net effect is a
motion of the b1 reactive end directly towards that of a1. Note also that
the emission process at a1 also moved that reactive end outward. So the
overall effect is that the two reactive ends move closer together, if these
are the only two masses operating. We term this effect geometrically
constrained re-energisation, and suggest it is the deeper mechanism for
force (see E.6).

The hyffon twist-pulse moves on further outwards and encounters the

second reactive end b2. However the hand is conserved across the span
(E.6.7, part 4.4) and the hyffon is approaching from the opposite direction
so the force also moves this reactive end closer. The net result is that the
whole of cordus b shuffles one increment closer to that of a. Thus
gravitation is attractive.52 In the meantime, cordus b also exerts a similar
gravitational effect on cordus a.

At small scales gravitation should be dependent on the directional

alignment of the particuloids, similar to magnetism.

We also speculate that the work that can be extracted from gravitational
interaction arises from the changed spans of the cordi involved. Recall that
the gravitational twist hyffon first encountered reactive end b1, and
moved it outwards, i.e. increased the span. The pulse then moved outward
and moved reactive end b2 towards a1, i.e. shortened the span again.
However in the intervening distance the overall gravitational field, which is
made up of many such hyffons, is diluted because it propagates across the
surface of an expanding sphere. Thus on average reactive end b2 will not
be moved quite as much as b1, i.e. the span will be increased. This
corresponds to lower frequency and lower energy stored in the fibril. Thus
there is more energy in the hyff field component.

As two bodies move closer together under gravitational attraction, so they

release energy for other purposes, and their frequency and mass should
decrease slightly, according to this model.

The concepts of force and displacement are complementary in this model.

This is similar to the magnetism model. Thus force is the high-level effect,
whereas the effect at the deeper level is constrained displacement of
reactive ends.

We acknowledge that the mechanics of all this at the next level deeper are
indistinct, so the mechanism should be considered simply a speculative
working model.

52
If this explanation is correct then the handedness of matter is
responsible for gravitation being only attractive. Therefore the logical implication
is that if one particuloid was left handed then gravitation would be repulsive.

167
2.2 Features of cordus gravitation

Why can gravity not be shielded?

The above lemmas explain why gravity cannot be shielded: the hyff
penetrate everything, and there is no mobile particuloid that can set up a
counter field, as the electron does in the Faraday cage for the electric field.
Quarks are locked into atoms and are consequently not mobile enough to
create such a cage, and even a quark plasma would be insufficient (unless
quarks can repel). Only the electric field can be apparently shielded (more
accurately neutralised), because the electron is the smallest particuloid
that is freely mobile: anything smaller is only available in higher levels of
assembly (see part 4.4).

Operation of Cordus gravitation

Cordus suggests that gravitation is not continuous but in discrete force (or
displacement) increments (similar to quanta but not uniform). Also, the
closing force between two masses is transient. The hyff is not consumed in
the process, but momentarily exerts the closing force, then relinquishes it
as the particuloid phases back into the de-energised state, and the hyffon
moves on outwards. It passes through like a wave to react with other
particuloids and even bodies beyond the first. A following renewal pulse
along the hyff renews the force. What is perceived as gravitational
attraction is the sum of many repeated interactions from different hyff.

Thus gravity propagates outwards in a granular manner from sub-atomic

particles. The gravitational field of a particuloid therefore consists of a
series of discrete forces. The hyff have infinite range, and are not
retracted as in the case of the hyff of the photon. They maintain a
connection thread to their base particuloid even at large range. As the
particuloid moves, even spins on-the-spot, the subsequent hyff of the next
frequency cycle may be released in a different direction. This frequency is
very high, and there is an en-masse effect of multiple asynchronised
particles, so the overall effect is what we perceive as a smooth field.53

In this idea, gravitation, and therefore also mass, is a discontinuous

property: i.e. a particuloid emits gravity (has mass) at some moments but
not others.

Comparison
The Cordus perspective of gravitation emerges as being similar but also
different to General relativity (GR). In that other perspective gravitation
arises from the curvature of spacetime, and is not so much a force as a
geometric interaction of the moving body with that curvature. GR does not
explain what makes up spacetime. By comparison Cordus also includes a
concept that there is something in the vacuum (fabric), and is more
specific about what is in there (tangled hyff). Cordus uses a quantised

53
To even measure the hyffons will require having an ‘instrument’
particuloid with smaller span (higher frequency) than the particuloid that
generates them. A free quark could be a good start, though not without practical
difficulties.

168
force (hyffons) as the mechanism rather than geometric curvature. Both
perspectives agree that gravitation is an effect that a mass does to the
whole universe, not to targeted other bodies.

Plain Quantum mechanics does not have much of an explanation for

gravitation, but Loop quantum gravity does: it proposes the mathematical
concept that the fabric consists of spin networks. A region of Cordus
fabric contains multiple hyff, and conceptually these momentarily define
small dynamic domains: perhaps these correspond to spin networks?
However from the Cordus perspective the underlying mechanism is force
lines and force pulses, and loops in the fabric are likely to be only
transient, and artefacts rather than the mechanism itself. Both QM and
Cordus agree that gravitation is quantised.

3 Mass

The Cordus explanation for gravitation involves hyff: the same hyff as
transmit electrostaticism and magnetism. This gravitation force only acts
on matter with mass, always attracts, has infinite range, and cannot be
shielded. We now need to show how mass arises, and why it is affected by
motion.

The difficulty is integrating mass and gravitation. If an object is just

stationary in space, then it is impossible to determine its mass, other than
through measuring its gravity. What we perceive as mass only becomes
apparent when we try to move the body. So mass is resistance to
acceleration, or force required to accelerate the body. Yet the same body
just sitting there, also creates gravity, and mass is the common variable.
Another complication is that mass increases as velocity approaches the
speed of light. How can we integrate all these disjoint concepts?

Cordus model for mass

Additional lemmas are required to integrate mass and gravitation:

E.4 Additional lemmas continued

E.4.6 The mass effect is created at the level of the cordus particuloid by
acceleration of energised reactive ends.
E.4.6.1 The reactive ends do not energise and de-energise
instantly, so ‘energised’ above includes partially energised
states.
E.4.7 Momentum provides the cordus with the ability to accommodate
translational velocity in the position at which the reactive ends re-
energise, i.e. there is an interaction between momentum and the
frequency process.

Why is mass a motion effect? From an in-extremis perspective, the reason

velocity and acceleration are linked to mass, is because what we perceive
as ‘mass’ is the resistance to acceleration of the basal reactive end while it
is energised (E.4.6). The hyff are force threads into the external
environment, all attached to the reactive end. They maintain that force

169
connection even when they are extended far, and they never expire: they
just keep propagating outwards, and the force quanta are periodically
renewed by new hyffons travelling down the hyff.

Velocity can be accommodated

The hyff are able to accommodate velocity of the basal mass (E.4.7).
Velocity generates curvature of the hyff, and thus magnetic fields. At
constant velocity the hyffons propagate the new curvature out towards
the extremities, i.e. a combing effect. Thus for a stationary particuloid the
curvature will eventually be combed out: there will be no magnetic field,
and the hyff lines will simply travel radially outwards. The magnetism
process does not consume energy per se. So once a velocity is established
for the mass or charge, then it can continue moving indefinitely if there is
no external resistance: the velocity does not expire. This property is
momentum.

Thus the reactive ends resist a change in velocity. The greater the
acceleration a or mass m of a body, the greater the force F required to
constrain the reactive ends of its particuloids into positions they would not
naturally take. Thus F = d(m.v)/dt or F = m.a.
Thus a Cordus model offers explanations for the resistance to acceleration
(Newtonian mass).

Relativistic mass and the Lorentz

It is known that as the speed v of a body of rest mass mo approaches that
of light c, so the effective mass tends to infinity, or at least the resistance
to acceleration does, m = mo (1-v2/c2) 0.5. Thus the mass of a body appears
heavier when it travels at higher velocity. This effect does not slow the
velocity, so the body can continue at this speed indefinitely, but it does
mean that disproportionately more force will be required to further
accelerate it.

The Cordus explanation is that process of the hyff engaging with the fabric
becomes progressively less effective as the velocity of the mass also
approaches c. Thus from the Cordus perspective the concept of ‘relativistic
mass’ is incorrect: the mass does not increase as the velocity approaches
the speed of light, nor does the mass grow more hyff. Instead the
mechanism of communicating with the distal regions of the hyff becomes
compromised. Another perspective is that the fabric cannot be informed
as easily of the changes, so the moving mass clashes more with the fabric.
But the fabric is immense, being backed by the rest of the universe, and
resists. To an observer it looks like the mass is increasing.

A partial quantitative explanation is also available, see Figure 1. In one unit

of time, as the mass moves forward at v, so the hyff length has to maintain
range c. The range contracts to B whereas usually it would be A. Then γ =
c/b is the ratio of contraction of the hyff in the direction perpendicular to
the motion, and is the degree to which the hyff are compromised in their
interaction with the fabric. By simple trigonometry b = (c2-v2)1/2 and hence
after rearrangement γ = (1 – v2/c2)0.5, which is the Lorentz.

170
Figure 1: Degree to which hyff engagement with fabric is compromised as
velocity of particuloid increases.

Thus greater force is required to accelerate a mass that is already at higher

velocity, than slower. As the velocity approaches c, so the efficacy of the
hyff compensatory mechanism tends to zero, and therefore the inertial
resistance to further acceleration becomes infinite. From the Cordus
perspective, mass is invariant (well, approximately): it is the number of
hyff a body emits and the frequency thereof. From this perspective the
mass only appears to increase at relativistic speeds because another force
is acting that happens to look like mass.54

Momentum mechanism
Everyday experience, and classical mechanics, suggests that a body needs
to have mass to have momentum, and therefore if the photon has
momentum it should have mass. However, relativity states that mass and
momentum are separate properties, related to energy through the energy-
momentum formula:
E = [ (p.c)2 + (mo.c2)2 ]0.5

In that case, what physical structure carries the momentum, and what
carries the mass? Cordus suggests that a frequency effect at the fibril level
drives both mass and momentum. The working model is that a moving
cordus has a persistent gait for its reactive ends: at constant velocity the

54
On the other hand, we are open to the possibility that at higher speeds
the interaction with the fabric makes the reactive ends re-energise sooner than
they would have. Thus the frequency of the particuloid may increase with speed,
and hence the mass too. So perhaps the two views are complementary after all. If
we could measure the frequency of a particuloid at speed, we might know.

171
momentum gives the cordus frequency mechanism the required position
of the RE that will energise next (E.4.7). Change in velocity interferes with
the location, determined by momentum, where the reactive end was due
to re-energise. Thus the reactive end re-energises later or sooner than it
should have, which affects the frequency of the whole cordus including
the hyffons. The engagement of hyff with the fabric becomes less
effective. We cannot answer the question of momentum as clearly as we
would like, and it looks to be an interestingly open question for future
research. The place to start looking for a better understanding is probably
the photon.

Relativity has no issue with a particle having momentum but no mass, and
the photon is usually considered such an example. The photon is
conventionally thought to be massless at rest, and in flight to be massless
but with momentum. Several effects are known: its trajectory is affected
by gravity, as is the frequency. Compton scattering, whereby an incident
photon is deflected by an electron and changes energy, is explainable
assuming conservation of energy and momentum, with the photon having
momentum p=hf/c.

Cordus suggests the issue may need reconsideration, for several reasons.
The first is that it is not sensible to speak of a stationary photon (see
Cordus conjecture), so what it appears to be at rest is totally irrelevant to
flight, since they are different forms. Furthermore, Cordus suggests that
mass is a transient phenomenon, not the enduringly stable property
conventionally assumed. Specifically, the Cordus construct is that mass is
created by acceleration of energised reactive ends (E.4.7). Since the
photon meets that criterion, and there is no other lemma preventing it, we
have to logically assume that there is a possibility that the photon has
dynamically transient mass during flight. If this were to be true, then the
conventional partition of mass and momentum might need to be
reconsidered too.

Integration of gravitation and mass

Cordus conceptually integrates the different effects of mass: Gravitation is
a particuloid contributing hyff to the fabric; Newtonian mass is resistance
of the reactive ends to unexpected displacement; Relativistic mass is
decreasing efficacy of hyff engagement with the fabric as velocity of the
reactive end increases; Momentum is a frequency mechanism (as yet
incompletely described) that ensures the reactive end re-energises on-
time and in-place; particuloids have mass to the extent that they have
frequency; mass arises from particuloids like the proton and neutron.

Thus a stationary object floating in space contains particuloids that are

oscillating cordi, and these engage with the fabric. They contribute to the
fabric and thus gravitation, and are constrained by the fabric hence the
mass effects. The Cordus mass model is therefore consistent with that for
gravitation, and both depend on the concept of cordus frequency. What
the model has not yet explained is gravitational time dilation. That comes
at the end of the next section on time.

172
4 Cordus Time

The following is a Cordus model for time. Cordus offers an explanation

whereby time is determined at a sub-atomic level by the cordus frequency,
and this aggregates to the sense of time that we perceive biologically.

E.5 Time Lemma

E.5.1 The cordus frequency for a particuloid determines its time unit
(tick). Time is determined at the sub-atomic level by the re-
energisation of the reactive ends at the cordus frequency. The
cordus frequency is therefore the minimum time unit for that
particuloid. Each particuloid has its own tick, which is determined
by its span (E.5.6).
E.5.2 Anything that delays or interferes with re-energisation of a
reactive end, changes time for that cordus particuloid. This is the
Principle of delayed re-energisation.
E.5.3 The fabric, to which every matter particuloid contributes,
transmits information about the phase of other particuloids, and
provides an opportunity for a degree of disorderly synchronisation
between particuloids and atoms. (Not necessarily full body
coherence).
E.5.4 Interactions between atoms are not temporally continuous but
occur when the particuloids are energised.
E.5.5 Biological sense of time is a neurological perception overlaid on
the molecular time units.
E.5.6 The smaller the span of the cordus particuloid the higher the
frequency.
E.5.7 The higher the cordus frequency the greater the contribution to
the fabric, and the greater the mass of the particuloid.
E.5.8 Assembly of particuloids into structures may cause the spans of
some to change to accommodate the others. This changes the
frequency of the particuloid and also its mass.

Tick of time for the particuloid

The Cordus perspective is that time, or at least the tick (time unit) thereof
if not the flow, is determined at the sub-atomic level by the re-
energisation of the reactive ends at the cordus frequency (E.5.1). Each half
cycle of frequency is the tick of that particular particuloid. It eventually
becomes the time unit for the rest of the local environment: that
particuloid interacts with the rest of the atom, and in turn is influenced by
the other particuloids in the atom. That atom is linked to others to form
molecules (E.5.3).The maximum speed that an effect can occur within that
molecule, e.g. the making or breaking of a bond, is one tick of the involved
particuloids.

Therefore the frequency of the cordus becomes time for the particuloid: if
for any reason the cordus was prevented or delayed in its re-energisation
of a reactive end, then time for that cordus is likewise stopped or delayed
(E.5.2). We term this the Principle of delayed re-energisation.

173
The degree of synchronisation of re-energisation (CoFS) is very strong
within one electron orbital (see ‘Cordus matter’), and between the quarks.
It can be strong between atoms, as superfluidity shows, but is not always
dominant like that. In everyday materials the CoFS is not strong, but we
assume that some degree of loose co-ordination exists between the
matter particuloids (E.5.3). We conceptualise it as radiating out from each
particuloid in the form of the hyffons in the fabric, that encourage but not
prescribe other particuloids to synchronisation. So the fabric provides a
relativistic, dynamic and flexible partly-synchronised fuzzy-tick for the
universe.

Irreversibility of time
Thus ‘spacetime’ is an apt descriptive term for the fabric: it encapsulates
space, and it includes a universal (if disorderly) time synchronisation
signal. The fabric guides reactive ends to reform in accessible locations, by
interacting with the hyff emerging from the RE as it phases into existence.
The fabric is a mechanism for all matter in the universe to influence all
other matter. The one-way irreversibility arrow of time is then the
internal continuity of the cordus that ensures that the opposite reactive
end will re-energise, but where it does is influenced by the fabric hyff
(E.5.3). Given the fine and disorderly nature of the fabric, and that every
particuloid (including the one under consideration) contributes to that
fabric, no cordus will necessarily re-energise in exactly the same place as
previously. So there is an irreversibility of geometric position, and that
contributes to the irreversibility of time too. The actual mechanism for
controlling the frequency is then time itself, from this perspective, the
cordus provides the tick or quantisation of time, and the fabric of the
universe provides the irreversibility.

It is important to note that the span of the cordus particuloid is a

fundamental driver of the irreversibility. If matter was a 1D point particle,
then there would be no irreversibility in time, because the second reactive
event would be exactly where the first was located. The fact that the REs
are in different places provides a small increment of time in which the
universe can partially re-arrange itself in response to what the first RE did
in the previous time unit. Larger particuloids like the proton are buffeted
by the higher-frequency of the fabric hyff. Thus the fabric, with its higher
frequency, has plenty of time to respond to the first RE. Thus the
irreversibility of time becomes stronger as the level of assembly of the
system becomes higher, i.e. tending towards larger bodies. There is also
entropy in those bodies (see 'Cordus Matter'). The corollary is that the
observed CP violation is also due to cordus span. As Cordus Matter
concluded, the 1D point paradigm of conventional physics is an unreliable
premise and the cause of many unnecessary problems.

Sense of time
Our biological perception of time is apparently smooth and continuous.
We think, and move our hand; our fingers touch the paper; we feel the
sensation of touch; we pull the book towards us; the book does actually
move; we see the letters on the page; we comprehend. The whole of the
physical reality is apparently consistent. We do not perceive the

174
underlying individual atomic interactions, the agitation of the electrons
throughout both bodies, the chemical bonds being changed. But they are
there, happening faster than our senses can detect.

Our perception of time is at that higher level of squishy biology. We see

physical cause and effect around us, and we can participate in moving
objects and interacting with the rest of the world – and enjoy the world
interacting with ourself, like the touch of another or the simple pleasure
of the fresh air on our face. Each quark has a unique personal time
determined by the fabric of the universe in its location. But that frequency
is so high that it really does not matter at our level of perception, since the
effects are averaged out. The brain constructs a personal sense of time out
of the neurological events, which in turn are based on physiology, which in
turn is based on chemistry, which in turn is based on atomic physics, which
in turn is based on the frequency of cordi. That biological sense of time is
subjective and sufficient rather than necessarily accurate.

When we look at atomic clocks then we see closer to the sub-atomic level
of time. The electrons in that clock change energy levels at a higher
frequency than we can perceive biologically. That clock frequency in turn
depends on the cordus frequency for the electron (E.5.4). The atoms in our
own body likewise react at a cordus frequency to create bodily functions,
so our sense of time is a neurological phenomenon overlaid on a physical
foundation.

Matter, fabric, and time

The above interpretation of time is at the level of particuloid physics, and
thus closer to the quantum mechanics perspective. Conventionally the QM
and general relativity perspectives of time do not integrate well. With
Cordus the integration is conceptually straightforward: cordus frequency
determines local time for matter particuloids, and simultaneously all the
matter particuloids in the universe contribute hyffons to the fabric and
thereby affect local time everywhere: a causal arrow.

So all of the universe, including the vacuum, has a time signature. At any
one point in space these hyffons might conflict with each other, so the
signature might not be clear, but it exists nonetheless and it is relativistic.
Thus spacetime does have a time signature, though Cordus does not
conceptualise time as a fourth dimension.

If this is correct, then the fabric itself carries the time signature for the
whole universe. If we accept that the unit of time exists at the sub-atomic
level, and that sub-atomic mechanisms create the irreversibility, then
philosophically the next deeper question to ask is, ‘Why does the cordus
fibril have a frequency?’ Even so, if we accept that time is fundamentally
an effect whereby cordi interact with the fabric, then it suggests that time
only exists where the fabric exists.55

55
Thus the void is timeless. A universe of fabric and time expands into the
void. The universe is granular and therefore the void is also within the universe. A
time-full universe is overlaid on a time-less void.

175
The Cordus concept of time therefore explains time at the ‘particle’ level,
biological level, and for general relativity.

Time dilation
Time dilation (slowing of clocks) is known to occur for bodies that are
accelerating or in higher gravity. Cordus explains this as the reactive ends
of the particuloids in the body encounter the fabric at a greater rate or
density (respectively). This compromises the hyff emission process (see
the Lorentz above) and the re-energisation of the reactive ends, which
then slows the frequency of the cordus. This applies also to a body
travelling at relativistic velocity.

5 Force and the Principle of Geometrically Constrained re-

energisation

The above conceptual exploration has identified the action of forces in

several contexts. The concepts of force and displacement are
complementary: force is the high-level effect, whereas the deeper
mechanism is constrained displacement of reactive ends. For convenience
these scattered ideas are collected together and summarised in the
following force lemma.

E.6 Force Lemma

E.6.1 The three fundamental forces are electrostatic, magnetism, and
gravitation.
E.6.1 These forces are all transient pulses. In this working model they
are carried by hyffons.
E.6.2 These forces are all directional at sufficiently small scales. They
aggregate to apparently smooth and continuous fields at
macroscopic scales and when many particuloids are involved.
E.6.3 None of these fundamental forces may be shielded.
E.6.4 The deeper mechanism for force is prescribed geometric location:
that the reactive end of the affected particuloid is geometrically
constrained to re-energise closer (or further) to the body doing the
forcing.

Thus we identify a Principle of Geometrically constrained re-energisation,

underpinning force. Note that time also operates on the re-energisation
frequency. Anything that delays the re-energisation changes time for that
particuloid; the Principle of Delayed re-energisation. Thus there is a
relationship between force and time at the deeper level, through the
common concept of frequency. If cordus is the fourth mechanics, after
classical mechanics, electromagnetic wave theory, and quantum
mechanics, then the fifth mechanics would seem to be the mechanisms
that drive frequency.

Cordus predicts that knowing the mechanisms for particuloid frequency

should significantly enhance our understanding of momentum, time, and
force.

176
6 Conclusions

Gravitation is conceptually problematic to conventional theories of physics

in that the fundamental mechanisms are unknown, and the theories have
different requirements that are difficult to reconcile.

Cordus gravitation offers a solution to the problem. It provides a

mechanism whereby gravitation is not continuous but in discrete force (or
displacement) increments (quanta). Also, the closing force between two
masses is transient. In this idea, gravitation, and therefore also mass, is a
discontinuous property: i.e. a particuloid emits gravity (has mass) at some
moments but not others. Thus gravitation is an effect that a mass does to
the whole universe, not to targeted other bodies, and in this regard
Cordus is consistent with General relativity. Both QM and Cordus agree
that gravitation is quantised, though Cordus diverges in suggesting that
the effect is granulation rather than uniform indivisible increments.

From the Cordus perspective ‘mass’ is the resistance to acceleration of the

basal reactive end while it is energised. Cordus conceptually integrates the
different effects of mass: Gravitation is a particuloid contributing hyff to
the fabric; Newtonian mass is resistance of the reactive ends to
unexpected displacement; Relativistic mass is decreasing efficacy of hyff
engagement with the fabric as velocity of the reactive end increases;
Momentum is a frequency mechanism (as yet incompletely described)
that ensures the reactive end re-energises on-time and in-place;
particuloids have mass to the extent that they have frequency.

Furthermore, Cordus offers an explanation of how time arises. It is

proposed that time is determined at a sub-atomic level by the cordus
frequency, and this aggregates to the sense of time that we perceive
biologically. The fabric therefore carries an elemental time signature,
though it is not a fixed quantised system. The concept of time is
conceptually consistent with General relativity’s spacetime, and with the
QM expectation that time is quantised. Thus Cordus offers a solution to
reconcile those competing perspectives into a new way of thinking.

177
Cordus in extremis: Part 4.4 Quarks
Pons, D.J. , 56 Pons, A.D., Pons, A.M., Pons, A.J.

Abstract
A conceptual model is created for the composition of quarks and the
internal structure of the proton and neutron. In this model the charge of a
quark indicates the number of hyff (force lines) it emits. Cordus also
explains the colour and provides a mechanism for the strong interaction
(both the attraction and repulsive components). The model also explains
why parity violation occurs. A new concept of the ‘level of assembly’ is
introduced and used to explain mass excess and why smaller particuloids
have greater mass. Cordus also predicts non-conservation of mass.

Keywords: cordus; quark; colour; spin; proton; neutron; parity violation;

strong interaction; weak interaction; fundamental forces; unification;
Revision 1.2

1 Introduction

It may seem strange to addresses the structure of quarks when describing

fields and cosmological effects of the wider universe, but the two are
linked. The connecting effect is the fabric (see part 4.2), because this
determines the macroscopic features of the universe, as well as the
locations at which the quarks can exist, and therefore the stability of
matter. And in the reciprocal direction the existence of the quarks creates
the fabric hyff. So the systems are co-determined.

This paper, which is fourth in a set that applies the Cordus concept to the
extremes. The first paper covers the electric and magnetic fields and
shows conceptually how they are formed by hyff from cordus particuloids.
The cordus concept itself is described in a companion set of papers (ref.
‘Cordus Conjecture’, ‘Cordus matter’). The second part creates a working
model for the composition of the vacuum, and shows how this fabric is
made of the hyff of all the other particuloids in the universe. It also shows
how this fabric limits the speed of light to a finite value that is relativistic.
The third paper creates a conceptual model for gravitation that is
integrated with electromagnetism, and a model for time. The present
paper applies elements of those previous concepts to predict the basic
structure of the quarks within protons and neutrons, and creates a model
for the strong interaction, thereby reconciling another of the fundamental
interactions.

56
Please address correspondence to Dr Dirk Pons, University of
Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. Copyright D Pons 2011.

178
2 Existing interpretations for the strong interaction

The nuclear force, or strong interaction, holds neutrons and protons

together in the nucleus, overpowering the electrical repulsion. The nuclear
force, by extending a short distance beyond the nucleus, is also
understood to give rise to van der Waals forces. The same effect holds the
quarks together within the proton and neutron.

The Quantum mechanics (QM) interpretation is that the force is

transmitted by the exchange of particles called gluons between quarks. It
is generally accepted that quarks attract each other (strong force): this
creates the force binding quarks together inside the proton and neutron,
and holds the protons in the nucleus despite their same electric charge.

Quarks have six types (flavours): down, strange and bottom; up, charm,
and top, with the first three having -1/3 charge and the latter +2/3 charge.
Of these, up (U) and down (D) are lightest and most stable, hence
abundant. Quarks also have spin (+- ½) and colour charge (RBG). Quarks
can transform into other types. Protons consist of UUD, and neutrons of
UDD. It is believed that the strong interaction is repulsive at small
separations, and that this maintains the spacing of protons and neutrons.
QM does not provide physical explanations for these parameters: it
portrays them as intrinsic variables devoid of physical meaning.

3 Cordus quark mechanics

The Cordus interpretation is that quarks are also cordi, not particles. It is
then relatively easy to assign physical interpretations to the various
properties. The spin refers to the frequency state: there are two reactive
ends for each quark, only one is active at any one time, and two quarks
may share space if their frequency states are opposite (+- ½), as per
lemmas provided previously (ref. ‘Cordus Matter’). Several additional
assumptions, as follow, are required to build a working model for the
quark.

E.6 Quark lemma

E.6.1 Quarks are cordi and alternately energise their reactive ends at
the cordus frequency
E.6.2 The magnitude of the charge of a quark refers to the number of
hyff emitted at a reactive end, out of three possible directions, i.e.
the arrangement is 3D geometric.
E.6.2.1 We term these hyff emission directions (HEDs).
E.6.2.2 Particuloids with unit charge have one hyff in each of
three orthogonal directions.
E.6.3 The colour (red, blue, green) refers to the arrangement of the hyff
in the orthogonal 3 axes of the HEDs.
E.6.3.1 The axes are named (r) radial outwards co-linear with the
span, (a) and (t) perpendicular to the span and to each
other.

179
E.6.3.2 A single hyff (e.g. D -1/3) may be arranged in one of three
ways: (a), (r), or (t).
E.6.3.3 A double hyff (e.g. U +2/3) may be arranged in one of
three ways: (a, r), (a, t), (r, t)
E.6.4 The operative principle governing the sharing of spaces is
Complementary frequency state synchronisation (CoFS). A
maximum of all three directions (a, r, t) may be filled with hyff, i.e.
a synchronous hyff emission direction structure (SHEDS) is created.
E.6.5 Opposed charge hyff may be considered to cancel each other’s use
of the hyff emission directions. However they do not cancel the
contribution to the fabric.
E.6.6 A hyff can change to a different HED. This corresponds to a colour
change.
E.6.7 Hyff come in pairs, one at each end of the span, and the emission
directions at the two reactive ends are complementary (parallel
but opposite directions).
E.6.7.1 The hand of the hyff at one RE is consistent with that at
the other RE, i.e. colour is conserved across the span.
E.6.7.2 The span of the particuloid provides a small offset
between the two hyff of any pair, i.e. the hyff are not co-
linear. At higher frequencies the span decreases and this
lack of parity also decreases.
E.6.8 Charge is reversed for antiquarks: hyff go in the opposite direction.
E.6.9 The HED alignment force locks hyff into synchronisation, and is
also repulsive to intrusion.
E.6.10 A particuloid becomes unstable and decays to a photon or
alternative structure when there is no place for its reactive end to
form, i.e. the external constraints of the fabric and the hyff of the
immediate environment dominate and preclude the emergence of
the particuloids’s hyff.
E.6.11 The nature of the SHED process within a nucleon creates the
handedness (chirality) of matter, e.g. the right-hand rule of the
Lorentz magnetic force.

Note that the Pauli exclusion principle does not apply here. That principle
applies only where the hyff emission directions are already all fully
occupied, which happens in the electron. In the more general case of the
quark there are three HEDS which may be filled in three ways. The more
universal principle, that subsumes the Pauli principle and covers several
other effects (see Cordus matter) is the complementary frequency state
synchronisation (CoFS).

4 Quark structures

180
What is the structure of a quark?
Thus Cordus proposes that quarks like D have a single hyff giving a -1/3
charge and three hyff emission directions available for that single hyff,
hence three colours. Quarks like U have two hyff, energised in turn at
each of two reactive ends. There are three ways of arranging these hyff
across three HEDs. The conceptual layout for an isolated U quark is shown
in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Hyff arrangement for a U quark, with +2/3 charge. The reactive
ends are Ua1 and Ua2, and the former is energised in this diagram. The
arrow shows that the hand is consistent across the span (E.6.7). The hyff
emission directions are presumed to be orthogonal.

The implication of this lemma is that while the current working model for
the photon has only one hyff at each reactive-end, in the (r) axis, this is not
a universal limitation. Thus the quark lemma provides for the proton, and
by implication probably also the electron, to have three pairs of hyff, one
in each HED. The corollary is that that the fundamental electric charge of -
1 for the electron is actually not the base unit of charge: instead that is a
single hyff of -1/3 (except that separate quarks do not exist naturally).
Note that whereas the photon emits and recalls its hyff, the quarks have
permanent hyff.

Cordus predicts that the proton and probably the electron have three pairs
of hyff, in orthogonal directions, but the pairs are offset across a small
span.

Internal structure of the proton

A proton and neutron each have three quarks: UUD and UDD respectively.
This gives +1 charge to the proton and nil charge to the neutron. It is now
straightforward to propose a model for the internal quark structure of the
proton for example. Each subatomic baryon particuloid is known to have
three quarks. Cordus requires that these must be arranged without their
hyff being superimposed so that slots in all axes are filled: the E.6.4 CoFS
exclusion principle, with the E.6.5 concession. This means that the local
axes of some the quarks will have to rotate relative to the others (change

181
colour), thereby accessing the slots in 3D. Three colours (RBG) for three
rotations.

The previous figure showed what a single free quark might look like.
However, when the quarks condense into the proton, their hyff mutually
influence each other to rotate, synchronise, and snap into the available
emission directions, i.e. SHEDS. Once they are in, they are locked in by the
high degree of CoFS.57 Thus the arrangement of the quarks inside the
proton is proposed as per Figure 2.

Figure 2: Proposed components of the proton. Two up quarks (U) and a

down (D) quark align themselves to fill all three orthogonal hyff emission
directions. They also synchronise their three frequencies, polarisations of
their spans, and phases of their frequencies. This high degree of
complementary frequency state synchronisation gives the assembly high
stability against perturbations in the fabric.

All the above comments apply also to the neutron, and the structure of
that particuloid is a simple adaptation of the proton but with a UDD
structure such that all the hyff are cancelled out, so there is no net electric
charge. However, that does not mean that there are no hyff emitted, only
that they are balanced (E.6.5).

Cordus predicts that the quarks should be arranged in a co-linear manner.

Stability through SHEDS

An individual quark is known to be unstable. Cordus suggests the reason is
the fabric locally disrupts the hyff differently at the two reactive ends, so
that the hand or colour cannot be conserved across the span (E.6.7), hence

57
One could say that there is a high degree of ‘coherence’ across the
structure. However we avoid that term, because it is so mixed up with multiple
other meanings in QM, that it is a cognitively ambiguous concept and therefore
semantically unreliable. We deliberately use ‘CoFS’ because it does not come with
prior connotations.

182
instability of the RE. The quark may be intrinsically stable, but no quark
exists in a void of its own. The combination of three quarks creates a
structure that also has external stability. The hyff of the three quarks guide
each other to persistently stable locations (hence emission directions).
This is consistent with the QM perspective that quarks of different colour
are ‘attracted’ to each other. The whole structure is in a CoFs state. The
hyff support each other, and this reduces their vulnerability to the fabric
variability, and hence increases stability.

Cordus suggests that if the localised gradients in the fabric were too high,
then the proton structure could disintegrate.

Decay model
We anticipate a general mechanism for decay in E.6.10.

Cordus suggests that a particuloid becomes unstable and decays when

there is no place for its reactive end to form, i.e. the external constraints
of the fabric and the hyff of the immediate environment dominate and
preclude the emergence of the particuloids’s hyff. This prevents re-
energisation of the RE. We further speculate that the particuloid escapes
this untenable situation by converting to a photon and transmitting away,
and/or changing its internal structure and level of assembly. This decay
model may be a testable cordus principle. This principle may also underpin
the absorption of photons into matter.

Parity violation
The reason parity is not conserved by quark interactions is a geometric
consequence of E.6.7: that the arrangement of the hyff is conserved
across the span, but the span is a finite length of separation. Therefore the
particuloid has an orientation of its span, and is not a simple 1D point.
Thus a mirror image of quark Ub in the above figure is not identical to Ub
itself, about every mirror plane. If quarks were points, which is the
conventional QM paradigm, then they would be. At a high enough level of
abstraction the cordi can effectively be considered particles, hence parity
violation only occurs at small scales.

Comparison with QM
What then of QM’s gluons? Cordus suggests there are no such 1D
particles, but that instead the interaction is mediated by the CoFS
interlocking of hyff. The nearest match to a ‘gluon’ is therefore a single
hyff, or perhaps the hyff renewal pulses (hyffons), but this is not a
particularly apt or useful concept. Cordus suggests it is better to abandon
the ‘particle’ view altogether, and not try to translate the concepts back
into Quantum mechanics. The glue is in the SHEDS, not the particles.

What is the strong interaction (force)?

Cordus suggests that the strong interaction is simply an application of the
CoFS principle to three axes. Thus the force that bonds quarks together is
the positional convenience of their interlocked hyff, i.e. SHEDS. The hyff
themselves are the same as those that create the electrostatic force, but it
is not electrostatic attraction that does the bonding in this case. Thus the

183
‘strong’ force is not a fundamental force, but rather an interaction. It is the
same class of effect as electron orbitals and bonds between atoms.

What is the weak interaction (force)?

The ‘weak’ interaction is the activity whereby quarks can change flavour
and emit/absorb electrons. It apparently involves short-lived particles, the
W and Z bosons, that carry away charge, spin, or momentum etc., and
thereby change the properties of quarks, before decaying into a
conventional particle and a photon.

Cordus suggests the weak interaction is not a fundamental force or

interaction, but rather an effect: a transitory form in the decay of matter.
It is the same class of effect as electrons emitting/absorbing photons to
change energy shells. From a Cordus perspective it is likely that there are
still deeper internal variables driving those behaviours, but it is not a
different category of force.

Fundamental forces
Thus, from the Cordus perspective, there are only three fundamental
forces: electrostatics, magnetism, and gravitation. There are also several
different ways that hyff interact, including electron orbitals and a
predicted synchronous hyff emission for the quark.

5 Level of assembly

The concept of mass developed above (part 4.3) is not what it seems at
the everyday level of our existence. Mass is not a permanent property of
matter, but a dynamic consequence of the frequency of the cordus, and
the interaction thereof with the fabric (part 2). If true, this has some
interesting implications regarding the absoluteness of mass.

The atom is known to have a ‘mass excess’, whereby the assembled

nucleus is lighter than the individual masses of the protons and neutrons.
From the Cordus perspective the reason for mass excess is that smaller-
span cordi have greater frequency. This means, in a counter-intuitive way,
that smaller-span particuloids have more mass. By implication any
particuloids that exist within the quarks will have shorter span and hence
greater mass: at least for particuloids that are isolated. However the
distinction between assembled and isolated particuloids is an important
one. The process of aggregating particuloids into a higher assembly results
in less mass than the separate particuloids. This means that mass is not
conserved at assembly/disassembly. The Cordus explanation is the spans
of the assembled particuloids are longer than their free spans, and
therefore their frequencies are higher and their mass lighter.

When particuloids are assembled into CoFS states, e.g. the SHEDS of the
quarks in the proton and neutron, then their spans are stretched to
accommodate the standard gauge of the assembly. Thus the span of the
assembly determines the mass of the assembled particuloid, not the

184
masses of the individual parts. This applies within the nucleons, within the
nucleus, within atoms, and within molecules.

Conservation of mass – or not

Why then is there a conservation of mass in physics and mechanics?
Cordus suggests that the conservation exists in our everyday living,
because the interactions of matter generally do not deconstruct the body
very much. However, when the interaction has sufficient energy to break
the protons apart, then the fragments have the potential to have greater
mass than the assembly.

The conventional interpretation is that the energy is converted into mass,

i.e. E = mc2 mass–energy equivalence. Cordus does not disagree with that,
but merely shows there is another way to look at it: that mass depends on
the level of assembly. Thus changing the level of assembly exposes or
incorporates more mass. It involves energy to change the assembly level.
So mass is the dependent variable: m = E/c2.

The level of assembly concept suggests that at smaller scales the

relationship between mass and energy is not smooth but should become
granular as whole assemblies are changed. This applies also to electron
bonding, and the effects are visible even at room temperature, e.g. the
specific heat capacity of matter and latent heat.

Matter does not have an invariant mass: it depends on the level of

assembly. Conservation of mass therefore only applies when the masses
do not change assembly level. Even then the conservation is only
approximate, because even changes to electron bonds change the mass of
the assembly, albeit small.

Another implication concerns the binding energy required to disassemble

a molecule or atom.

Cordus interprets a positive binding energy as meaning that the span of

the assembly should be greater than the parts. This is somewhat counter
intuitive as we tend to think of molecular assemblies as bonds that pull the
atoms closer.

Mass, span and Level of Assembly are related

Thus the mass of a particuloid depends on the span that the external
environment requires it to adopt. For a quark in a proton, that constraint
on span is determined by the other quarks in the assembly in a negotiation
process of exchanged constraints, and we term this the ‘Assembly gauge’.
For an electron in a bond, the constraint on span is determined by the
joint structures of the two atoms. For a free electron in space, the span-
constraint arises from the fabric.

The assembly gauge concept suggests that a coherent body will have only
one frequency, not many.

185
Coupling between mass and field
That suggests another interesting conceptual development. We call this
the Principle of mass-field coupling. The Cordus mechanics already
provides that the hyff and the fibril are coupled. So if a free cordus
particuloid, say a free electron, is forced by the fabric to take a different
span, say shorter, and therefore increase its frequency, then there is a
consequence for the hyff (read ‘field’ in conventional physics). The
increase in frequency causes the mass of the electron to increase too. In
conventional physics this would be called the mass of the ‘shell’, but of
course Cordus does not hold with that notion of spherical particles. If the
situation is adiabatic, i.e. the electron has not been given additional
energy or absorbed a photon, and assuming conservation of energy, then
by implication the electron has to withdraw energy from the hyff system
to support the increase in its mass.

It is to be expected that the hyff system will resist this. Consequently there
will an element of stability for the cordus system as a whole (fibril, span,
frequency generator, reactive-ends, hyff, hyffons). Thus the cordus
particuloid can adjust its frequency and span in response to sufficiently
strong external demand, but it has internal stability mechanisms that
moderate the changes.

It may be that this is what the photon is doing. In other words, this might
explain why the photon emits and withdraws its hyff, a feature of Cordus
that has been commented on above.

Singularities
One of the problems in conventional physics including quantum field
theory is the singularities that arise when diameters of ‘particles’ are
condensed to zero. The resulting infinities have to be treated with
‘renormalisation’ processes which seem to work even if of dubious
fundamental validity.

Cordus offers a totally different way to view the problem: matter is not
points in the first place, and the smallest size of a particuloid is not zero
but the span of its cordus. The inertia of an electron is not infinite, because
it never is a point. Nor do interactions become infinitely strong at shorter
distances: the particuloid is not always energised to be able to react. There
are no actual singularities: those only appear in physics as artefacts of the
1D point premise. Thus the appearance of a singularity in physics implies
that the mechanics and its mathematics are deficient and unable to be
applied to the next level down: they only apply on-average to the next
higher level of assembly. That is why quantum mechanics is only
applicable, and only on-average, to larger aggregates of particuloids, and
starts to break down at the level of the double-slit device where individual
particuloids become involved. Cordus thus asserts that we cannot
complacently accept ‘renormalisation’ as a self-consistent process, but
instead need to recognise it as a warning sign that the limits of validity for
that theory have been reached and that a fundamental re-
conceptualisation may be required in that area, with a switch to a deeper

186
mechanics with a different mathematics, if the next deeper level of reality
is to be accessed.

Nucleon masses
The interconnectedness of mass, span and Level of Assembly also allows
an explanation of the mass difference between the proton and neutron.
The neutron is known to be heavier. The Cordus explanation is that the
natural span of the D quark is smaller than that of U, for reasons
uncertain.58 Thus a proton of UUD causes the D to be stretched, hence
lowering its mass, because the UU dominate the outcome. The neutron of
UDD causes the U span to be compressed, increasing its mass. True, the
DD will be stretched slightly, decreasing their mass, but there are two of
them so the effect is disproportionally smaller. The overall effect is that
the neutron is slightly heavier.

Thus considerations of cordus span and frequency could be useful in

understanding the mass differences in other sub-atomic assemblies.
Cordus suggests that mass is determined by the frequency of the
assembly. This may be testable.

We summarise the above with the following lemma.

E.7 Level-of-assembly lemma

E.7.1 Higher frequency (smaller) particuloids have more mass.
E.7.2 Mass is not conserved at assembly/disassembly.
E.7.3 Particuloids that have their span stretched at assembly into atomic
structures reduce mass, and the converse.
E.7.4 The span of the assembly as a whole (assembly gauge) determines
the mass of the assembled particuloid, not the masses of the
individual parts.
E.7.5 Matter does not have an invariant mass: it depends on the level of
assembly.
E.7.6 Span (assembly gauge) tends to increase at higher levels of
assembly. Hence higher levels of assembly are lighter.
E.7.8 In adiabatic conditions a conservation of energy applies between
the fibril energy and the hyff energy of a cordus matter
particuloid. Thus the emission of a hyffon momentarily extracts
energy from the fibril, which causes the span to increase (reactive
end to move radially outward).

Atoms in SHEDS
Previously, in ‘Cordus Matter’, it was suggested that the electron in a shell
was influenced by the hyff arrangements of the inner shells, and those
inner shells in turn by the outer shells. Presumably something similar
applies to the nucleus. The hyff that protrude from the three quarks inside
the proton will interact with those from other protons and neutrons.

58
Probably the U quark is an assembly of smaller cordi, and the assembly
gauge is thus stretched (E.7.3).

187
The whole nucleus is therefore an extended SHED structure. The protons
and neutrons have to fit their hyff around each other. The electrons also:
they cannot simply go anywhere, but have to fit around the hyff from the
nucleus and the other electrons, hence the orbitals. The addition of more
electrons neutralises some of the proton hyff, and thus allows more
protons to be added to the assembly. The whole atom is therefore very
much more than simply an electrostatic interaction between electrons and
protons.

Thus we have provided a model for the inside of a proton, and

conceptually identified the possible structural principle for the larger
nucleus and the atom itself, but the details remain an open question. This
might be a good place for a mathematically based optimisation method to
make a contribution, because intuitive the structure of a large atom is
going to be complex and beyond the power of the simple logically
descriptive method used here.

According to cordus, the mass of any particuloid should depend on the

level of assembly.

6 Conclusions

By pushing Cordus to the extremes, a conceptual model has been created

for quarks and the internal structure of the proton and neutron. In this
model the charge of a quark indicates the number of hyff (force lines) it
emits. Cordus also explains the colour and provides a mechanism for the
strong interaction (both the attraction and repulsive components). The
model also explains why parity violation occurs. A new concept of the
‘level of assembly’ is introduced and used to explain mass excess and why
smaller particuloids have greater mass. Cordus also makes some more
radical predictions, such as non-conservation of mass.

Fundamental forces
In this extrapolation of the Cordus conjecture, gravitation is caused by
acceleration of the basal cordus particuloid, magnetism by velocity of the
reactive ends, and electrostatic force by position thereof. These are the
only three fundamental forces: the strong and the weak ‘forces’ are aptly
named ‘interactions’ and in the same categories as orbitals and photon
emission respectively, i.e. not fundamental forces.

The important concept here is that one mechanism, the emission of hyff,
provides the underlying mechanism for electrostatics, magnetism, and
gravitation. These forces are intrinsically unified. In contrast, QM
perceives these forces, together with the strong and weak nuclear
interactions, as mediated by virtual particles and tries to unify them on
that basis. Cordus suggests the so called virtual particles are simply
different measurement artefacts of the hyff, not the real interactions.

188
Comment
The macroscopic world is very beautiful. Despite the large gaps at the sub-
atomic level, and the dynamic turmoil within even the simplest atom, the
overall effect at our level of being is of a reliable, smooth, persistent
world. The paint on the aircraft is durable and behaves the same, day after
day, despite what is happening in its sub-atomic structure. The
macroscopic stability of matter is all the more surprising. It is also beautiful
because it creates the world in which our bodies can exist.

7 Closing summary

This series of papers is an extrapolation of the basic Cordus concept to the

extremes. We are not saying that the resulting concepts are necessarily
true, only that they are challenging ideas that are worth considering.

What has been achieved here?

Cordus in extremis offers novel concepts for several effects, starting with
fields. It proposes a mechanism for granular field-forces that aggregate to
the apparently smooth field at our level of everyday perception. The hyff
carries a transient quantum of force (‘hyffon’) directed back down the hyff
towards its origin. Each re-energisation of the reactive end sends another
renewal-pulse of force down the hyff. Therefore hyff are directional force
lines that extend out into space from their basal particuloid, and where
the force appears in pulses that travel outwards along the line (hyffons).
For a test charge in an electric field, the overall effect is a steady rain of
hyffons that are individually small transient units of force. The overall
effect is a smooth force.

Cordus proposes that the electric field cannot actually be shielded, only
locally neutralised, and it provides a new way to conceive of the
connection between electrostatics and magnetism. Cordus does not
consider electromagnetism as equivalent concepts, but suggests they are
quite different physical effects and that electrostatics is the more
fundamental and magnetism the derivative.

Unconventionally, Cordus predicts a fabric to the universe: a type of

massless relativistic aether, but made of tangled hyff force lines not
particles. The fabric is made of the hyff of all the other massy particuloids
in the accessible universe. This fabric limits the speed of light to a finite
value. An even more drastic proposal is that the speed of light is not
invariant, even if it is relativistic.

Another radical outcome is that Cordus proposes an integration with

gravitation through the same hyff mechanism underlying electrostatics
and magnetism. The important concept here is that one mechanism, the
emission of hyff, provides the underlying mechanism for electrostatics,
magnetism, and gravitation. It is proposed that these are the only
fundamental forces and are intrinsically unified. The hyff provide a
mechanism whereby gravitation is not continuous but in discrete force (or
displacement) increments, and the closing force between two masses is

189
transient. In this idea, gravitation, and therefore also mass, is a
discontinuous property: i.e. a particuloid emits gravity (has mass) at some
moments but not others. Thus gravitation is an effect that a mass does to
the whole universe, not to targeted other bodies. Cordus conceptually
integrates the different effects of mass: Gravitation is a particuloid
contributing hyff to the fabric; Newtonian mass is resistance of the
reactive ends to unexpected displacement; Relativistic mass is decreasing
efficacy of hyff engagement with the fabric as velocity of the reactive end
increases; Momentum is a frequency mechanism (as yet incompletely
described) that ensures the reactive end re-energises on-time and in-
place; particuloids have mass to the extent that they have frequency.

Less radical, but nonetheless a useful integration, Cordus offers an

explanation of how time arises at a sub-atomic level by the cordus
frequency, and how this aggregates to the sense of time that we perceive
biologically. Thus time is carried in the fabric, and this is a similar concept
to spacetime in General relativity, though Cordus does not see time as a
fourth dimension.

The fabric itself is proposed to be made from the hyff of sub-atomic

particles, including the quarks. Cordus goes on to suggest a composition
for quarks, and the structure of the proton and neutron. The fractional
charge of the quark is explained in terms of hyff, and the colour by the
combinations of hyff emission directions. The strong interaction then
emerges as a hyff interaction effect, not a fundamental force as such.
Cordus suggests the weak interaction is not a fundamental force either,
but rather an effect: a transitory form in the decay of matter. Thus Cordus
proposes that there are only three fundamental forces: electrostatics,
magnetism, and gravitation, and they are all carried by the same hyff.
Those same hyff also contribute to the fabric and to time, so the concepts
are interlinked. As a by-product, an explanation emerges for why parity is
violated by quark interactions: this is explained as a geometric
consequence the cordus having a finite span.

Cordus is unconventional in suggesting that mass is not generally. Instead

it is proposed that matter does not have an invariant mass. Mass depends
on the level of assembly of the particuloid into sub-atomic, atomic and
molecular structures. It predicts that mass is determined by frequency,
which in turn is related to cordus span, hence size of particuloid and the
way it is bonded into other assemblies.

Thus Cordus in extremis provides a coherent explanation across a wide

variety of phenomena that otherwise are only partially explained by
conventional theories of physics, see Figure 3. Compared to the
conventional theories, Cordus offers greater explanatory power, greater
coherence with less reliance on metaphysical explanations, and greater
integration across a broader range of phenomena. This is particularly
evident when considering the effects also described in the companion
papers, which resolve many of the paradoxes of wave-particle duality and
provide explanations where conventional theories are limited to abstract
mathematical interpretations or reliant on metaphysical effects.

190
Figure 3: The core idea of the cordus conjecture is that all ‘particles’ have a
two-ended cordus structure. This basic idea may be extended to create a
conceptual framework that provides a logically consistent description
across a variety of effects. The result is a high-level descriptive integration
across fundamental physics, and the emergence of a deeper mechanics.

The purpose of this paper was to push the Cordus mechanics into extreme
predictions, out of curiosity for any new concepts that it might suggest.
The original Cordus concept was created to explain wave-particle duality
of the photon in the double-slit device. When applied to the extremes, the
concept has yielded unexpected new insights, novel re-thinking of things
we thought we already knew, explanations for things that were paradoxes,
and some unconventional contrary predictions. Cordus provides a radical
re-conceptualisation of several areas of fundamental physics.

Cordus is fundamentally different to conventional thinking. It departs

radically from both quantum mechanics and general relativity in its
suggestions of the underlying mechanisms. Yet in many cases it offers
concepts that will be recognisable to those other areas.

The primary contribution of the Cordus work as a whole is that it provides

a new conceptual framework for thinking about fundamental physics.

191
Cordus may or may not be a robust solution, but it does show that there
are other ways of thinking about the issues, and we do not need to be
discouraged by the staleness of the debates about wave-particle duality,
nor stuck in the fixed paradigms of existing theories, nor perplexed by the
weirdness of quantum mechanics. Even if Cordus is not the deeper
mechanics, there can now be no doubt that a deeper mechanics does
exist.

Possibly testable predictions of cordus mechanics

Neither wave theory nor QM explain why the symmetry requirement should
exist for the double-slit device: with both those theories waves/particles
take all available paths, and symmetry issues should not arise as they do.
Experiments on concentricity might test the cordus principle.................... 53
If Wave theory is correct, coherence is not essential and it should be possible to
construct an interference pattern from two independent light sources, e.g.
one into each slit of the double-slit experiment. The light sources need not
be synchronised nor even exactly the same frequency: according to WT,
interference fringes should nonetheless form, though not necessarily
static. Cordus predicts that the outcome will be two independent gap-
fringes (which is not the same as interference fringes). If interference
fringes cannot be achieved then it suggests that light is not fundamentally
a wave, but only shows wave-like behaviour. ............................................. 53
Note the implication of O.3.15 is that electrons are much ‘smaller’ than a
photon, and can move around in response to the relatively large and
slower-frequency photon. ............................................................................ 70
The Cordus models of reflection suggest that the photon does not reflect at a
single point, but rather at its two reactive-ends. Furthermore, the precise
locus taken by a reactive end depends on its frequency state at the time it
approaches the surface, and the nature of the surface. Thus the reflection
is not a sharp instant change in direction occurring at the surface, but
rather a curved transition. Depending on the situation, that curve might
occur above the surface (cisdermis) or beneath it (transdermis). .............. 71
Cordus suggests that Bell’s Theorem is only applicable to 1D point particles, and
is thus generally irrelevant. .......................................................................... 96
Cordus predicts that the principle of locality is not viable in its present form and
needs to be widened to include hyff interactions. ...................................... 96
Free electrons have a default span inversely proportional to their frequency . 104
Cordus goes further than de Broglie to state that matter has a frequency even at
rest............................................................................................................... 105
Cordus suggests that the zone of influence of the particle extends well beyond
its geometric modes. The proton is likely to have hyff that create a zone of
influence: this may be somewhat diffuse, perhaps shaped, and the outer
zone may be considerably larger (though weaker) than commonly
perceived..................................................................................................... 107
Cordus predicts that a proton will have many ‘diameters’ depending on what
interaction is being measured, and the nature of the probe. ................... 107
Cordus predicts it will be impractical to achieve coherence for macroscopic
bodies at ambient conditions. It is particularly incompatible with living
creatures...................................................................................................... 119
Small bodies: From the cordus perspective, sufficiently small bodies, typically
atoms and molecules, should be able to diffract, form fringes through gaps,
and pass through the double-slit experiment with the usual outcomes,
providing they are in body-coherence. ...................................................... 119

192
Large bodies: Macroscopic bodies cooled to near zero should be able to be
placed into coherent states of internal oscillation (coherence). Such bodies
should be able to diffract and form fringes through sufficiently large gaps
(or at edges), though the effects may be miniscule................................... 119
Cordus predicts that the double-slit experiment is infeasible for macroscopic
bodies, even if they are in body-coherence. .............................................. 120
Cordus predicts that practically every object at ambient temperature and visible
with the naked eye is not going to form matter waves............................. 120
Cordus suggests superfluidity will become compromised at relativistic speeds.
..................................................................................................................... 122
Cordus predicts that the field will be granular at the frequency of the basal
charge, and not uniform quantum increments. Also, that the frequency
should depend on the level-of-assembly – for example a free electron will
have the same magnitude of field as one involved in a bond, but different
frequency. ................................................................................................... 142
Cordus predicts that hyff penetrate everything, and no field can be shielded. 142
According to cordus the level of apparent electromagnetic shielding achieved
should be dependent on frequency of the field, the mobility of the charge
carriers in the shield material, and the geometry of the shield. Further that
shielding may be achievable for one species of charged matter within a
space, but not for much smaller charge species. ....................................... 143
Cordus predicts that ‘virtual’ particles are fundamentally different to normal
‘particles’, and should be massless. This includes any bosons for
gravitation. .................................................................................................. 144
Cordus suggests that both the electrostatic and magnetic effects should be
directional for a single moving charge (the ‘base charge’), i.e. the force
should be orientated in a particular direction, and granular, at sufficiently
small scales.................................................................................................. 145
Cordus suggests that at a sufficient small scale neutral mass should show
magnetism, because the positive and negative basal generators are
separated slightly........................................................................................ 147
Cordus predicts that the electric and magnetic forces apply simultaneously, and
with gravitation too. ................................................................................... 147
Cordus predicts a retardation of the frequency for the remote charge during the
operation of magnetism. ............................................................................ 149
Cordus predicts a tendency to mutual synchronisation of frequency for identical
moving charges. .......................................................................................... 150
Cordus suggests that particuloid orientation is affected by magnetism and
motion. ........................................................................................................ 151
Cordus suggests that what QM perceives as quantum vacuum fluctuations are
the passage, past the Observer, of disorderly hyffons, not real particuloids
of matter. .................................................................................................... 160
Remote particuloids should be able to affect each other’s spin through
gravitational interaction, though it would only be evident when both
bodies were in (separate) full body-coherence. ........................................ 166
At small scales gravitation should be dependent on the directional alignment of
the particuloids, similar to magnetism....................................................... 167
As two bodies move closer together under gravitational attraction, so they
release energy for other purposes, and their frequency and mass should
decrease slightly, according to this model. ................................................ 167
Cordus predicts that knowing the mechanisms for particuloid frequency should
significantly enhance our understanding of momentum, time, and force.
..................................................................................................................... 176
Cordus predicts that the proton and probably the electron have three pairs of
hyff, in orthogonal directions, but the pairs are offset across a small span.
..................................................................................................................... 181
Cordus predicts that the quarks should be arranged in a co-linear manner. .... 182

193
Cordus suggests that if the localised gradients in the fabric were too high, then
the proton structure could disintegrate..................................................... 183
Cordus suggests that a particuloid becomes unstable and decays when there is
no place for its reactive end to form, i.e. the external constraints of the
fabric and the hyff of the immediate environment dominate and preclude
the emergence of the particuloids’s hyff. .................................................. 183
Cordus suggests that the strong interaction is simply an application of the CoFS
principle to three axes. Thus the force that bonds quarks together is the
positional convenience of their interlocked hyff, i.e. SHEDS. ................... 183
Cordus suggests the weak interaction is not a fundamental force or interaction,
but rather an effect: a transitory form in the decay of matter. ................ 184
The level of assembly concept suggests that at smaller scales the relationship
between mass and energy is not smooth but should become granular as
whole assemblies are changed. .................................................................. 185
Cordus interprets a positive binding energy as meaning that the span of the
assembly should be greater than the parts. This is somewhat counter
intuitive as we tend to think of molecular assemblies as bonds that pull the
atoms closer. ............................................................................................... 185
The assembly gauge concept suggests that a coherent body will have only one
frequency, not many................................................................................... 185
According to cordus, the mass of any particuloid should depend on the level of
assembly...................................................................................................... 188

194
Index
absorption ..............................60, 110, 183
acceleration ..................................152, 169
aether ...........................................157, 158
Aharonov-Bohm .....................................99
Airy pattern ............................................47
aperture..................................................48
assembly gauge ............................185, 187
BCS theory ............................................123
Beer-Lambert law .................................110
Bell’s theorem ........................................94
Bell's theorem.....................................3, 20
Berry phase...........................................122
binding energy......................................185
biprism....................................................99
birefringence ..........................................80
blocked path.....................................29, 34
bonds ....................................................103
boson....................................102, 121, 139
Brewster’s angle .....................................81
Brownian motion..........................112, 123
Casimir effect........................................104
causal variability ...................................117
chirality .................................................180
circular-polarisation .............................101
cisdermis.................................................69
CoFS ..65, 93, 114, 160, 174, 180, 182, 185
coherence.............106, 118, 132, 166, 185
body..................................................119
coherent conceptual framework..........191
collapse...................................................24
colour............................................179, 180
colour, change ......................................180
complementary frequency state93, 121,
124
Compton scattering......................110, 172
concentricity...............................46, 50, 52
conductive heat....................................112
conservation of momentum.................110
Cooper pair...................................121, 123
cordus .................................................1, 58
Cordus Principle of Complementary
frequency states (CoFS)......................93
Cordus Principle of Wider Locality .........95
covalent bond.......................................103
critical angle ...........................................74
dark energy...........................................161
de Broglie..............................................105
de Broglie equations.............................104
decay ............................................180, 183
delay, time ........................................... 113
delayed re-energisation149, 172, 173,
176, 183
dermis .............................................. 69, 76
detector ................................................. 29
dice ........................................................ 39
diffraction ........................................ 44, 46
displaced re-energisation .................... 167
displacement ....................................... 151
divergence ............................................. 48
double slit .....................23, 28, 49, 97, 120
elastic..................................................... 60
electric constant .......... 148, 156, 159, 160
electron............................................ 59, 97
electron, transport................................. 85
electrostatic ......................................... 140
emission............................................... 114
entanglement ........................ 92, 102, 121
entropy ........................ 112, 113, 119, 159
evanescent wave ................................... 65
expanding universe.............................. 161
expansion of space ...................... 113, 161
fabric .................... 152, 157, 158, 160, 174
Faraday cage ................................ 142, 168
fate of universe.................................... 161
fermion ........................................ 102, 121
fibril.................................................. 21, 95
field ...........................45, 61, 139, 141, 186
fine structure constant ................ 110, 160
force............................................. 150, 152
fourth mechanics................................. 176
free will .................................................. 29
frequency......41, 43, 58, 61, 105, 175, 184
Fresnel equations .................................. 84
fringes .................................. 40, 41, 49, 99
fundamental constant ......................... 159
fundamental forces.............................. 184
gap ......................................................... 46
gap width ............................................... 47
general relativity.......................... 169, 176
geometrically constrained re-energisation
......................................... 165, 167, 176
gluon .................................... 166, 179, 183
Goos–Hänchen effect ............................ 71
granular................................................ 168
granularity............................................ 142
gravitation............................ 164, 165, 168
gravitational bending........................... 160
graviton........................................ 140, 144
195
hand......................................150, 167, 180
heat.......................................................112
heat conduction ...................................123
Heisenberg uncertainty principle ...25, 130
helium...................................................121
hidden variables .......................................3
hyff....................................44, 95, 140, 165
hyffon .....................................45, 140, 157
hyperfine fibril ........................................45
impedance of free space ......................159
incidence, grazing...................................73
incidence, steep......................................73
interface .................................................69
interference................................19, 33, 41
interferometer........................................32
internal reflection...................................76
invariance, speed of light .....................161
ionic bond.............................................104
irreversible............................................113
Josephson effect...........................104, 126
laser ......................................................114
level of assembly ..........................184, 187
locality ..............................................92, 94
location of re-energisation ...........150, 152
locus..................................................64, 69
loop quantum gravity ...........................169
Lorentz..........................................161, 170
Lorentz force ........................144, 148, 180
Mach-Zehnder ........................................32
magnet..................................................151
magnetism............................................144
many world theory9, 28, 39, 118, 127,
129, 131, 133
mass......................................164, 167, 169
mass excess ..........................................184
mass of photon.....................................172
mass, non-conservation of ...................185
mass-field coupling...............................186
matter wave .........................................106
measurement timing ............................117
Michelson-Morley ................................157
mirror................................................37, 73
mode.............................................100, 124
momentum60, 69, 150, 164, 169, 170,
172, 176
monopole .............................................141
muon ....................................................107
near-field ................................................51
Newtonian mass...........................164, 170
next deeper level of mechanics............176
nucleon mass........................................187
observation.............................. 24, 32, 114
observation............................................ 39
opacity ................................................... 59
open question45, 54, 73, 80, 84, 86, 94,
166, 167, 172, 175, 176
orbital........................................... 100, 104
orbital, shape ....................................... 100
parallel universe .................................. 131
parity............................................ 174, 180
parity violation..................................... 183
partial mirror ......................................... 37
particle ................................................. 106
particle diameter ................................. 106
particuloid............................................ 138
Pauli exclusion principle ...................... 102
phase change ................................... 73, 85
phase shift.............................................. 33
phonon......................... 106, 112, 121, 125
photoelectric effect ............................. 111
photon ................................................. 186
pilot wave .......................................... 9, 39
plasmon ................................................. 86
polarisation................................ 42, 80, 86
positional variability ............................ 117
prescribed re-energisation .......... 167, 176
principle of locality ................................ 99
principle of wider locality .......... 72, 95, 99
proton .................................................. 182
proton diameter .................................. 107
QM fallacy of Bell’s Theorem................ 94
QM fallacy of causal variability ........... 118
QM fallacy of easy coherence............. 118
QM fallacy of easy superposition ....... 118
QM fallacy of large-body matter-waves
......................................................... 119
QM fallacy of one dimensional particles
........................................................... 94
QM fallacy of wavefunction being the
reality............................................... 129
quantum fluctuation............................ 157
quantum fluctuations .......................... 104
quantum mechanics .......19, 27, 39, 55, 58
quantum vortices................................. 123
quark.................................... 106, 165, 178
quark, colour........................................ 179
quark, flavour....................................... 179
reactive end ........................................... 21
reflection................................................ 71
refraction ............................................... 78
refractive index...................... 60, 156, 157
relativistic mass ................................... 164
196
renormalisation ....................................187
ridged mirror ..........................................73
right hand rule ..............144, 147, 166, 180
Rollin film..............................................122
Schrodinger’s Cat..................................131
second sound........................................123
SHEDS ...................................................187
shielded ........................140, 142, 158, 168
singularity .............................................186
Snell’s Law ..............................................79
spacetime .............................................174
spaghetti...............................................158
span ........................................43, 184, 185
speed of light45, 60, 64, 155, 158, 159,
160, 164
speed of light, variable .........................161
spin .......................100, 102, 151, 165, 179
spin angular momentum ......................101
spin network.........................................169
standard gauge.....................................185
string theory .........................................134
strong force ..........................................166
strong interaction.................179, 180, 184
superconductivity.................................123
superfluidity..........................................120
superluminal.....................................45, 94
superposition..............20, 27, 68, 117, 132
synchronous hyff emission direction
structure (SHEDS) .............................180
synchrotron radiation...........................100
temperature .................................106, 112
temporal capacitance...........................156
test for cordus principle53, 119, 120, 125,
142, 143, 144, 145, 147, 149, 150, 151,
158, 160, 166, 167, 181, 182, 183, 184,
185, 187, 188
thermionic effect ................................. 112
time.............................................. 161, 173
time dilation......................................... 176
time, general relativity......................... 175
time, irreversibility............................... 174
time, quantum ..................................... 175
time, sense of ...................................... 175
transdermis............................................ 69
transmissivity......................................... 59
transparency.......................................... 59
tunnelling......................................... 60, 65
twist ..................................................... 166
unification............................................ 152
unit charge................................... 179, 181
vacuum ................................ 159, 161, 169
vacuum fluctuation.............................. 160
valance electron .................................. 103
van der Waals ...................................... 179
Van der Waals force............................. 104
vector field........................................... 160
virtual particle.................. 27, 41, 139, 143
virtual photon ...................................... 159
viscosity ............................................... 122
void .............................................. 159, 161
wave theory ..............19, 52, 55, 57, 67, 87
wavefunction ....................................... 129
wave-function........................................ 20
wavelength ................................ 42, 48, 74
wave-packet........................................... 49
wave-particle duality ................... 3, 56, 99
weak interaction.................................. 184
wire ...................................................... 148
X-ray....................................................... 66
Zeno effect............................................. 25
197