B. Spin ½ : Is seeing believing?

In the next few posts, I am going to describe spin in an entirely different way.  Immediately you should be skeptical and doubtful that spin could be anything else from its present description: a point particle of intrinsic angular momentum.  Do an experiment: Stern-Gerlach; coincidence photons; delayed choice, then spin is observed to have two pure states and these are defined with respect to the laboratory frame of reference.

Think of NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance) and MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging).  In these experiments, spins align with magnetic fields and their polarizations are measured.

In quantum mechanics, spin is postulated, but it arises naturally in quantum field theory from the Dirac equation.  Everything is clear mathematically, but parts make no sense. You have to accept that Nature is non-local.

Here are some questions:

Does spin remain a point particle vector when not observed?  Align a bunch of spins in a magnetic field, and then remove the field.  Do those individual spins remain as observed: point particles of spin, or do they change state and become something different?

I am saying they become something different. For me, the most appealing aspect of this different spin is it restores local reality to Nature.  But it does a lot more and I will come to that later.

If the new structured spin is placed in a magnetic field, it cannot be distinguished from usual spin.  Therefore there is no experimental way known that can distinguish the new spin from the usual spin. So who is going to accept something you can’t see it?

My goal is to show that this spin makes a lot of physical sense and might resolve old problems and shed light on new ones. For example this spin has states that are mirror images of each other.  Could these be the mirror matter that Yang and Lee suggested in 1957?  This spin resolves the EPR paradox which means it accounts for all the correlation between EPR pairs without entanglement.  As such, it restores locality to Nature.  This spin also displays both wave and particle nature.  Recall that the wave-particle duality concept says a particle can act either like a wave or like a particle.  The states in this spin carry both wave and particle nature at the same time, and it is this property that leads to the resolution of the EPR paradox.  I am hoping, will also finally resolve the double slit experiment. (a single particle can interfere with itself.)

All this seems a tall order to fill and of course goes right against the current paradigm. So this is my plan (while trying to get the paper published!!).  First I am going to write a few blogs on how this new spin satisfies its own Dirac algebra and has its own Dirac equation.  In other words, I am going to put this unobservable spin on the same sure footing as our usual spin ½.   Then you have a choice between two formulations based upon the same firm mathematical basis.