Theoretical model demonstrates micro-particle charge and spin arising from trapped photon clusters, suggesting alternative foundations for particle physics.
The spin-1/2 framework and the fractional-charge quark model in the Standard Model of particle physics stem fundamentally from misinterpretations of micro-matter structure made by early physicists. Under the limitation of observation technologies in early times, pioneers mistakenly assumed elementary particles were rigid solid spheres, on which the whole system of spin theory and quark hypothesis was constructed. Later generations of physicists have accumulated abundant experimental evidences conflicting with the old framework. Nevertheless, bound by academic inheritance, authority worship and mentorship conventions, most subsequent researchers hesitate to overthrow conclusions established by forerunners. To preserve the traditional theoretical framework, scholars keep introducing new hypotheses, hypothetical particles and ad-hoc mathematical corrections to remedy logical defects layer by layer. A self-perpetuating theoretical system gradually takes shape, which deviates further from physical reality with each supplementary remedy. Based on the Light-Origin Theory and the strong-force self-locking mechanism, this paper reconstructs micro-particle structure, charge generation and spin essence with intrinsic properties of gamma-ray photons: zero geometric volume, unlimited superposition capability and constant light-speed motion. It demonstrates that quarks are not real physical entities, stable fractional charges do not exist in nature, and spin-1/2 is merely an equivalent mathematical illusion generated by collective light-speed gyration of trapped photon clusters. Unit integer charge of stable particles is the only surviving steady-state configuration after long-term cosmic natural selection, rather than an artificial result of mathematical division. Physical reality governs mathematical fitting instead of being defined by mathematical models.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jiaqing Yan (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: