**tick (t)**, are (1) precise definition of the phenomenon of

**electromagnetic (EM) resonance**at the most elemental level possible, (2) recognition of the

**particle time phase**phenomenon due to elemental EM resonance and (3) complete explanation of the previously mysterious quantum mechanical (QM)

**particle up-down spin**property. These advances mark the

**demise of the 72-year-old up-down particle spin mystery, born with the Stern-Gerlack experiment in 1922 [2] and ending with the BM postulate of quantized time in 1994 [1].**These perhaps milestone developments illustrate failure of QM formalism to elucidate physical observations due to its obsolete assumption of continuous space-time.

**Fig. 1: Elemental EM resonance from space-time quantization**

Legend: Five spot units at integer coordinates form part of a

**spot unit channel**. Each spot unit consists of a mite (circle) and lite (arrow) bit locus. 1-state bits (yellow) at T = 0 shift in the lite direction (right) in unconditional bit operations (T = 1, 2, 3).

**1. Elemental Electromagnetic Resonance.**

*Background.*In BM, the

**bit function**(Eq. 2 in [1]) may represent the state vector of any physical entity or system as a spatial distribution of 1- or 0-state binary bits and replaces the QM wave function. For example, adept physicists can specify the bit function defining any fermion or boson, whether widely recognized or proposed. Four fundamental

**bit operations**-- unconditional, scalar, vector and strong -- describe the exact time development of a physical system and replace the infinitesimal QM time evolution operators. In particular, a consequence of space-time quantization is realization that QM infinitesimal operators are at best approximations at the microscopic level of fineness treated in BM and therefore, strictly speaking, do not exist as real physical processes where only integer increments in quantized spatial coordinates and time are allowed. In a

**tick cycle (T = 4t)**, the four bit operations are sequentially applied over four quantized time ticks.

*Results.*Considering a single spatial dimension (X = 1, 5), Fig. 1 shows the effect of the unconditional bit operation in tick cycles T where forces due to scalar, vector and strong bit operation potentials [3] are zero and thus do not affect results at T = 1, 2, 3. In the initial state (T = 0), all mite loci are 1-state with a net negative charge (3 negative - 2 positive). However, each of these 1-state mite bits

*are*the electric field, namely 1-state potentials acting on any 1-state mite bits in their concurrent spot units (not shown) [4]. At T = 1, all 1-state bits are lites which

*are*the magnetic field potentially affecting 1-state mite bits in their countercurrent spot units (not shown; see Fig. 3) [4]. Further, at T = 2, the T = 1 magnetic field loci are now another electric field slightly different from the T = 0 initial state. Finally, in this very simple example of the possible permutations, the electric field (T = 2) "oscillates" back to yet another magnetic field at T = 3. Note the 1-state negative mite at X = 1 represents the 1-state "carry bit" from a lite at X = 0 (not shown).

To summarize, as a system state evolves, mites become lites and lites become mites and these transitions due to the unconditional bit operation (Eq. 8 in [1]) are the most common instances of bit motion in all physical systems. That is, with each tick cycle T, the simplest, most frequent result is that the magnetic field reflects the previous electric field, while the electric field reflects the previous magnetic field. In other words, the electric and magnetic potential fields are different on odd and even T tick cycles, defining BM

**elemental electromagnetic resonance**. Thus, physical analysis of any system at microscopic time intervals might well consider that two electric and two magnetic fields might be in play, given elemental EM resonance.

**Fig. 2: Elemental EM resonance example**

Legend: Five spot units at integer coordinates form part of a

**spot unit channel**. Each spot unit consists of a mite (circle) and lite (arrow) bit locus. 1-state bits (yellow) at T = 0 shift in the lite direction (right) in the unconditional bit operation (T = 1).

The BM fundamental time constant t is presently reckoned to be in the approximate order of magnitude of 10E-25 seconds (unpublished work). Since this tick time t is about six orders of magnitude less than the smallest unit of time that has been directly measured, elemental EM resonance implies that for practical purposes, both experiment and theory must assume that there are two electric and two magnetic fields evolving in any presently observable short time interval including odd and even tick cycles T. This is the first component of a complete account of up-down particle spin in this report.

**2. Particle Time Phase.**

*Background.*Particle observation requires spot unit emission of at least one unit of energy (a 1-state bit) else 1-state bits would appear to be not directly observable and may be thought of as "virtual" or dark matter or energy [6]. A bonus of BM formalism is that these previously vaguely defined "virtual" or "dark" objects are explicitly defined, removing the associated "mystery factor" and requiring increased intellectual discipline for investigators.

When the

**inertia**property

**p**of a spot unit evaluates to one (two 1-states bits or logically {mite AND lite}), in the next unconditional bit operation, its lite bit (X= 3, T = 0) will emit one energy unit by shifting to the next spot unit (X = 4, T = 1) [7]. Notice that the 1-state bit shift (unconditional bit operation) results in inertia

**p**= 1 at X = 5, T = 1, so that this spot unit will emit a 1-state bit at T = 3 (not shown). Further, the spot unit at X = 3 absorbs one unit of energy at T = 1 from the 1-state lite bit at X = 2, T = 0).

*Results.*Elemental EM resonance implies that elementary particles may exist in at least two time phases -- odd or even time T. The electron spot [8] exhibits a relatively simple case.

**Fig. 3: XYZ parity 111 electron spot in spot cube context**

Legend: Electron spot (yellow). Matter d quark spots (dark red, green, blue). Antimatter d quark spots (light red, green, blue). 001 to 111: integer XYZ spot position coordinates.

Consider an electron spot populated with only one 1-state bit. At any time cycle T, one of its spot units will look like X = 1, T = 0 in Fig. 2. With each time cycle T, the 1-state mite bit will "scatter" via action of the strong bit operation [7], changing direction by 90 degrees -- X to Y, then Y to Z and Z to X. This is the three T electron bit cycle (12 t ticks).

As shown in Fig. 2, if the spot unit with a 1-state mite (T = 0, X = 5) "absorbs" a 1-state lite bit, then its inertia evaluates to one (T = 1, X = 5) blocking strong operator scattering. As a result, the electron spot unit will "emit" a unit of energy (1-state bit) in the T = 3 time cycle. In this case, the two possible outcomes -- scatter or not -- may account for many cases of electron beam splitting.

Among the many permutations of 1-state bit patterns in an electron and its adjacent "input" spots, consider that 1-state bit scattering (strong bit operation) may be blocked if the destination bit locus in the destination spot unit is occupied already by a 1-state bit [3]. Since the strong force requires a 0-state destination bit, note an electron beam may split according to 0 or 1 destination bit status in each instance.

Note that while all bit scattering between perpendicular spot units has a nominal 90 degree angle at the microscopic spot level of fineness discussed, at much greater distances, the aggregate result of a large number of such scattering events produces the observed variations in scattering angles which appear to be completely analog variables at the macroscopic levels of the observations.

**3. Particle Up-Down Spin.**

Elemental EM resonance and particle time phase can account for up-down spin observations.

For a given particle time phase, one of two EM spatial bit patterns in odd or even time T may act to result in a 1-state bit scattering or continuing motion in the same direction as presented in section 1 above.

For a given time T, odd or even, a particle may exist in at least two different phases. First, 1-state bits may be in the mite (fermion) position or lite (boson) position. Second, either the scalar and vector bit operations in a time cycle T may accelerate 1-state mite bits to the lite locus in spot units. In the present context, these events may be viewed as cases of change in particle time phase within the interval of a single time cycle T. Third, in the electron spot discussed above, a 1-state mite may successively occupy any of the three spot units over time that comprise an electron spot, a phenomenon known as intrinsic electron angular momentum and spin. Compared to the 3 T electron bit cycle [8] (generating its observed magnetic moment), the 21 T baryon central bit cycle [9] presents many more permutations regarding scattering outcomes and therefore, particle up-down spin classification in particular observations. Fourth, where a spot contains two to five of the six possible 1-state bits in higher energy states, the distribution of these additional 1-state bits among its three spot units presents further (more advanced) instances of particle time phase effects in beam splitting in inhomogeneous magnetic fields.

**Discussion**

*Today's lead story.*

**Elemental EM resonance and possible particle time phase changes on the time T scale may account entirely for up-down particle spin observations.**This BM success story is enhanced by the ease with which the underlying physical mechanisms of up-down spin may be visualized and comprehended. The present account may finally end the 93 year (1922 to present) mystery of quantum up-down particle spin, which persisted so long because investigators failed to question the assumption of continuous space-time. Indeed, the author has not found any justification for this assumption in physics literature. And given the trend to quantize everything in atomic and nuclear physics, this failure to quantize space and time is the true mystery, not up-down spin. Score: BM formalism, 1; QM formalism, 0.

*Handicapping physicists.*Although up-down spin has been portrayed as a mysterious, abstract quantum number in physics literature, the present report may provide a complete and satisfactory account in principle of the underlying mechanisms in all observations of particle beam splitting in inhomogeneous magnetic fields. The literature typically warns the reader that use of the word "spin" does not imply a simple physical image of something "spinning", but rather is just a naming convention for the up-down quantum number. However, this report indicates the success of both space and time quantization where the physical mechanisms of up-down spin may be easily visualized and understood. That is, the so-called up-down spin mystery in physics literature is clearly a direct consequence of the apparently antiquated assumption of continuous space-time, which may be fairly deemed to be a sad case of self-handicapping by investigators, wasting intellectual resources. On the other hand, the simple postulates of BM directly lead to a simple elucidation of up-down spin.

*Mysterious crime scene.*When a particle beam is split into up and down beams, a further splitting of either beam results again in two beams -- up and down. So is up-down spin a property of the particle or what? How can a particle be up at one time and down at another later time? In this "crime scene", the present results indicate two factors may be in play. First, given a specific particle time phase state, the elemental EM resonance phenomenon may explain all instances of up-down beam splitting. That is, the different EM fields in odd or even time cycles T in which the four fundamental time-evolution bit operations are applied may entirely account for this sort of beam splitting. If true, the conclusion would be that up-down spin is, in fact, not a particle property at all, but rather a consequence of elemental EM resonance. Second, many variations of particle state over time were enumerated above and there is no reason at present to exclude these variations in the account. Thus, the present conclusion is that up-down quantum number is not exclusively a particle property, but likely caused by both elemental EM resonance and particle time phase, consistent with the sequential beam splitting observations mentioned above.

*Place your bets -- odd or even.*The conclusion that up-down particle spin observations result from a combination of elemental EM resonance and particle time phase properties may address a significant question -- namely, do physical observations occur in only one time T parity -- odd or even? That is, do we exist only in an odd or even time T parity world? Consider that position parity determines mite electric charge according to BM postulates. In Figs. 1 and 2, integer spot position coordinate modulo 2 parity determines mite charge sign. For example, negatively charged mites exist only at odd parity positions. Thus, it is reasonable to raise the question of what exists (defined by what is observable) with respect to time T parity. Do we exist only in odd or even T time intervals? The present results suggest that elemental EM resonance which by definition includes both odd and even T times, could play a role in up-down spin observations. If so, the answer to the question is that the observed world probably exists in both odd and even time parities. Alas, the foregoing represents present thinking, but not a definitive proof.

*That pair has chemistry.*In atomic level chemistry, spatial quantum numbers allow two electrons of opposite up-down spin for each electron "orbital" set --

*n,*. The present results suggest that these electron pairs may in fact be particles with different time phases.

**l**, m_{l}*Tea for two?*Elemental EM resonance may be a stellar new player in elucidating unusual physical observations. Consider that all current literature on EM subjects has yet to even consider the implications of elemental EM resonance. Typical equations assume just one electric or magnetic field (e.g., Lorentz equation [5]). Is the time-wise microscopic elemental EM resonance simply ignored or averaged over more macroscopic time intervals? Well, yes, and this may prevent both better understanding of otherwise mysterious phenomena as presented above and discovery of new physical phenomena where investigators are not guided toward posing productive research questions.

*Blind men inspect an elephant.*Technically, the unconditional bit operation was defined to implement the momentum operator in the QM relativistic Dirac spinor equation formalism (Tables 1 and 5 in [1]). Setting aside the handedness H value (arising from use of pair of Dirac equations of opposite handedness), the momentum operator is mathematically similar if not identical to the "mysterious" rotation math applied to up-down spin expressions. Start with the motion of a 1-state bit from mite to lite positions in a spot unit as shown in Fig. 1, X = 1, T = 0, 1. This may be seen as a 180 degree rotation if the bit function for the spot unit is expressed in its complex wave function form. With this sort of correspondence, fermion mites are seen to change sign with two applications of the unconditional bit operator resulting in 1-state bit motion over a two T time interval. That is, the mite changes sign with the equivalent of 360 degrees of motion, interpreted as "rotation" in contemporary treatments of up-down spin, adding to the purported mysterious behavior of the up-down quantum number. This behavior is said to be mysterious because a similar "rotation" of a boson (as in EM wave polarization) through 360 degrees results in what is said to be an identical boson object. In Fig. 1, a boson 1-state lite motion with two sequential unconditional bit operations results in another boson lite, but at another position. Thus, the conventional "rotation" interpretation results in an identical physical object with a 360 degree rotation, while the BM interpretation using similar math shows that, yes, the motion corresponding to a 360 degree rotation does result in an identical object -- a 1-state boson lite, but not completely identical because this lite bit has changed location.

The plot thickens when the current rotation interpretation is applied to fermions which populate the beams split in up-down spin experiments. Whereas boson rotation of 360 degrees results in the same object, fermions such as a proton or electron require a 720 degree rotation in QM formalism to return to an identical up-down state. In every-day experience, if an object is rotated 360 degrees it will appear to be the same as it appeared before. Thus, this 720 degree rotation result is deemed to be hyper-mysterious and is said to be another instance where QM is counter-intuitive, but nonetheless wonderful and the top of human intellectual achievements. One only has to believe it. On the other hand, if the 720 degree "rotation" is seen as four sequential applications of unconditional bit motion (180 degrees each), fermion mites are seen to move four units of distance to be identically charged (positive or negative) 1-state mites. The bonus delivered in this BM interpretation of the conventional QM rotation math, is that the result is not fully identical. Namely, for both fermion mites and boson lites (relevant to the related topic of EM wave polarization), spatial position has changed.

In summary, the conventional interpretation correctly alleges that the fermion rotation results are counter-intuitive, but avoids common sense by appealing to the meme that "quantum mechanics is often difficult to understand, but it works". The present interpretation fully accounts for the so-called mysterious up-down spin behavior as a simple 1-state bit motion over successive time T intervals that even a child who can count to four can see and understand, without any appeal to believe in spooky, weird events hidden behind a curtain decorated with fancy bells and whistles such as quantized parameters, complex amplitudes, spinor matrices and the like. Further, the rotation interpretation, in fact, does not work as alleged, since it ignores the 1-state bit position changes described above which may be detectable experimentally.

**Editor's note: The reader is invited to post comments in agreement or disagreement with this or other**

*Journal of Binary Mechanics*articles at the Binary Mechanics Forum. The Journal also welcomes on-topic articles from other investigators and persons considering serving on the Journal's editorial board.**References**

[1] Keene, J. J. "Binary mechanics" J. Bin. Mech. July, 2010.

[2] Gerlach, W. and Stern, O. "Das magnetische Moment des Silberatoms". Zeitschrift für Physik 9: 353–355, 1922.

[3] Keene, J. J. "Fundamental forces in physics" J. Bin. Mech. October, 2014.

[4] Keene, J. J. "Electromagnetic bit operations revised" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2011.

[5] Keene, J. J. "Lorentz force in binary mechanics" J. Bin. Mech. July, 2010.

[6] Keene, J. J. "Dark matter and energy" J. Bin. Mech. May, 2011.

[7] Keene, J. J. "Strong operation disabled by inertia" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2011.

[8] Keene, J. J. "Physical interpretation of binary mechanical space" J. Bin. Mech. February, 2011.

[9] Keene, J. J. "The central baryon bit cycle" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2011.

© 2015 James J Keene