Respected sir !

There are no such a thing as reality .. Trying to understand reality is kind of a mental construction ! ( Use artificial things to knowledge to fix unknown knolage ) There fore all filed constructions are mentally constructed tools to explains things

Best regard

Manoj

Dear Manoj

Thank you for the comment that you have shared your approach to reality.

I think fields are a fundamental physical reality.

Dear Sydney

Thank you for your interesting arguments. I understand that in last century physicists were tried to describe universe by mathematical approaches. The mathematical approaches unable to answer new experiment and question. First, we need a new physical approach, and then mathematics tool to solve physics problems.

For more detail see:

Interactions Between Real and Virtual Spacetimes

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270276224_Interactions_Between_Real_and_Virtual_Spacetimes

Sub quantum space and interactions properties from photon structure to fermions and bosons

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237009789_Sub_quantum_space_and_interactions_properties_from_photon_structure_to_fermions_and_bosons

Dear Hossein,

In the first paper, I found: "The field for an electron is the electron; each electron extends over both slits in the two-slit experiment and spreads over the entire pattern"

That seems to confirm my vision as well, because the problem is that of the chicken and the egg. How can a wave be propagating if nothing is present to move in?

The double slit is like a shredder for an electron, which then become only fragments of a wave, and not the original full wave in a closed path, which would form a particle.

When the electron is positioned, it aquires an additional energy, and I would guess that it reinforces the electron against shredding, or by tightning the deBroglie's closed wave-path, maybe by shrinking.

Dear Thierry

It is an interesting approach. Maybe you can explain the reason for the duality of the wave-particle. In my opinion, the reason for the events is more important than the event itself.

Dear Sydney Ernest Grimm

I appreciate your attention and accuracy on QFT, I agree with you “What are quantum fields made of really” is not a pure mathematical subject ..."

In the nineteenth century mathematics related to physical fields were developed fits the physical knowledge of that time.

In addition, it is furthermore well established that the standard model is not capable of answering new questions and physical phenomena.

According to this point of view in pair production and decay 𝑒+ ,𝑒−, we can get interesting results. Before pair production, we have a photon and after pair production, we have two fermions (electron and positron) in which each of them has their own electric fields. It means that electron and positron produce virtual photons that can absorb each other. After pair decay, their electric fields are disappeared along with electron and positron. Therefore, it must be generalized the method of production and physical properties of fields from fermions to the structure of photon and vice versa. Also with such an approach, we can recognize the mechanism of electromagnetic interactions, use it to explain strong and weak interactions, and take a step towards to unify forces.

With Best Regards

Hossein

Dear Sydney Ernest Grimm

I read your comment carefully.

I agree with you that the explanation for such a phenomenon is not so simple, might, even seems impossible.

We really do not know how to describe these fields with particles. Maybe it's next step.

Notice that we are still facing the problem of wave-particle duality.

In addition, although the photons are very hard to interact with each other, (1) there is a possibility of collision.

For now, we say that the field is composed of particles.

If we can explain the results of this approach that is consistent with experience, we have taken a big step.

We are not going to solve all the problems.

1 - http://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6377/783

Dear Sydney Ernest Grimm

In my opinion, the problem of embodying quantum phenomena in quantum particles comes from where we cannot know all of the variables that are effective in a phenomenon. We do not even know what we are talking about.

Let's focus on an example. Consider a large wave of water on the sea.

Can we know all the variables affecting a water molecule in this wave, and according to them, we describe the behavior of this water molecule?

In comparing the wave of water and electromagnetic waves, what I did was that define properties for gravity, virtual photons, and real photons that are consistent with the behavior and properties of electromagnetic waves.

So, in my opinion, to describe and explain fields in quantum scale, we need to find the properties of their constructive particles.

With Best Regards

Hossein

Dear Sydney Ernest Grimm

Understanding and explaining the structure of the fields is a deeper approach than quantum field theory.

The history of quantum field theory shows how physicists encountered problems with its development.

Therefore, describing the structure of the fields is very influential.

I hope success for you

With Best Regards

Hossein

Dear Sydney Ernest Grimm

The standard model is a mathematical tool.

In any case, the description of the structure of the fields and their components is not a small work. It can change the perception of humans towards the world.

Best Regards

Hossein

Dear Sydney Ernest Grimm

Formal physics, including the standard model and relativity, has been accepted.

Therefore, investment in them is feasible.

Nature is also part of the formal knowledge system.

Best Regards

Hossein