Gary:
Basically, a short explanation of the paper. When I mentioned relative gravity, I was describing theoretically a situation where the particles have a surface flow of the magnetic substance. The particles also have a size, surface flow and size being determined relatively based on relative energy absorbed or released. The curvature of the surface flow could then be changing and the surface flow itself could be changing. The proton is theoretically the only particle which, relative to itself and relative to the rest except possibly the other particles with severe gravity, attracts in both ways and this is because the singularous surface flow and the speed of the flow itself draws not only itself, but all of the other particles except the minimal gravity particles. Charge is based on the same principles of spherical one directional singularous surface flow draw based on curvature and flow speed. Directionality of substance surface flow is also a consideration. From pole to pole there is a direction to the flow in any magnetic particle. Everything is magnetics. The electron preamble was stuck on to magnetism because of it's earliest discovery and the discovery of various other particles.
According to this theory, even if they had the money for more cyclotrons they would never be able to discover a graviton because the proton is the largest particle and the one with the most gravity because of surface flow and curvature. The cyclotronies are only breaking the elementary particles into smaller and smaller pieces rather than getting to the root of gravity.
The theory of the structure of my postulated photon fits into the present theory of polarized light quite well if you realize that an interferometer is based on either bouncing light particles against each other or somehow passing them through each other and canceling or reinforcing. They bounce into either a variable elliptical pattern or the right and left oriented elliptical pattern producing particles can be combined producing a linear interference pattern. I seem to have trouble visualizing it absolutely at this point, but the postulated structure of the photon would allow for multiple theories.
So logically according to this theory, one should be able to polarize a laser beam by splitting it and putting it back together variably by differentiating the beams' length in increments of the wavelength before focusing the split beam back together. Whether the beam would be left circularly polarized, right circularly polarized, or linearly polarized would depend on the photons' orientation relative to one another.
I am frankly surprised that this theory has not been tested for truth and then the sorry results published and put into a text. It would be a possibility.
It is up to you whether you would like to try out my theory on a laser or not. If you can find proofs that my theory is wrong, please call me or send them. This is basically a feeble mechanical theoretical attempt to explain simply and logically what has baffled physicists and engineers for a good long time. The age of the cyclotron is over. This is a theory based on what is theoretically the smallest and most energetic of particles.
Richard S. Tolley