**Introduction**

“Working Assumptions” serve as foundational principles that guide further investigations and analyses. Although they have not yet reached the status of postulates, these assumptions provide a basis for evaluating and exploring theories that diverge from established paradigms or for elucidating discrepancies in observed phenomena. Specifically, they offer a preliminary framework for understanding the interplay between electromagnetic forces and gravity, recognizing the potential influence of gravitational fields on electromagnetic energy. These assumptions lay the groundwork for experimental inquiries aimed at validating or refuting the proposed dependence of electromagnetic energy on gravity, as well as for theoretical developments that seek to refine our understanding of fundamental physical interactions. By embracing these working assumptions, researchers are equipped to embark on a journey of discovery, potentially uncovering new principles that reshape our comprehension of the universe’s underlying dynamics.

Using the concept of a “working assumption” until it fails mathematically is a reasonable approach within the scientific method for several reasons:

**Hypothesis Testing:** Science often progresses by formulating hypotheses or working assumptions and subjecting them to empirical testing. By adopting an idea as a working assumption, its implications and predictions can be explored within a framework that allows comparison with empirical observations.

**Iterative Process:** Science is an iterative process of refinement and revision. Working assumptions serve as starting points for inquiry, enabling researchers to develop theories and models that can be refined based on experimental data and mathematical analyses. If the assumption aligns with observations and holds up mathematically, it can become a foundational concept within the theory.

**Flexibility:** The scientific method encourages flexibility and openness to new evidence. If a working assumption eventually fails to align with experimental data or mathematical rigor, it can be revised or discarded in favor of alternative explanations that better account for observations.

**Progression of Knowledge:** Even if an assumption is ultimately proven incorrect, exploring its implications can lead to valuable insights and contribute to the progression of scientific knowledge. Failed hypotheses often provide valuable lessons and opportunities for refinement in scientific understanding.

Given the speculative nature of working assumptions and their potential significance, it is recommended to treat them as “highly speculative” until further validation and refinement have been conducted. Sharing these concepts within a trusted circle of researchers and collaborators allows for open discussion and critical evaluation without premature dissemination to the broader scientific community.

As with any working assumption in scientific inquiry, hypotheses are subject to empirical testing and mathematical scrutiny. Through experimentation, observation, and theoretical analysis, we aim to refine and validate these assumptions, contributing to our understanding of the fundamental nature of photons and energy within the universe. Below are some of the working assumptions that have been explored:

**Time**

Time can be likened to an elevator with an infinite x-y dimension floor that continually ascends along the timeline. In this analogy, we progress steadily through time, with all physical entities moving alongside us in their respective spatial dimensions. This perspective mirrors our experience of time’s seamless progression, where events unfold in a continuous sequence. Time is a specified dimension like meters used in the spatial domain.

**Constants**

Constants in mathematics serve as foundational pillars upon which mathematical models and theories are constructed. They are often perceived as immutable values representing fundamental properties or relationships within a given context. However, the concept of a constant implies stability or lack of change, which may not always hold true in all scenarios. Instead, constants should be viewed as provisional placeholders, subject to refinement or revision based on evolving understanding or new observations.

For example, the speed of light, cc, is a fundamental constant in the theory of relativity, derived from observations in vacuum conditions. However, in different mediums, such as air or water, the speed of light varies, challenging the notion of its absolute constancy. Similarly, mathematical constants like ππ are derived from idealized concepts and may require approximation in practical applications.

Thus, within the SEEP framework, constants in mathematics are regarded as valuable tools for describing and predicting phenomena but are also subject to scrutiny and adaptation as our understanding progresses. By embracing the dynamic nature of constants and acknowledging their contextual dependencies, we ensure the robustness and flexibility of mathematical models and theories in exploring the mysteries of the universe.

**Origin of Planck’s Constant**

The spacing, equivalent to half the wavelength specified by the photon’s frequency, establishes the critical threshold beyond which the photon’s rotational speed cannot maintain phase relationships with the background permeability of free space, denoted by ε_{0}μ_{0}.

**Constant Energy Regardless of Wavelength**

Regardless of their wavelength, photons contain the same amount of energy in their null mass configuration. This principle aligns with relativistic physics, where massless particles like photons carry energy solely through their motion or frequency. Exploring the energy distribution and rotation within photons offers valuable insights into the mechanisms governing their behavior and may inform future experimental investigations.

**Photons**

Considering the hypothesis that particle-antiparticle pairs arise from the vacuum of nothingness due to the charge values being only half the total amplitude of the diameter of the photon, further exploration of this concept as a working assumption is warranted. This speculation suggests that particles and antiparticles may spontaneously form in the near field of the zero-energy plane, potentially influenced by the angles at which they appear with respect to each other. As with any working assumption, this hypothesis should be subjected to rigorous examination and further analysis to determine its validity and implications.

We propose a working assumption regarding the composition of photons, suggesting that they are composite particles made up of two fundamental charges. Each of these charges carries a spin value of 1/2, contributing to the overall spin of the photon.

This assumption stems from the postulate that the fundamental unit of energy arises from the interaction of two dissimilar charges spinning around a common barycenter. By extending this concept to photons, we posit that the photon’s energy and spin emerge from the dynamic interaction between these two charges.

In the Standard Model of particle physics, the spin of a photon is conventionally described as 1. However, we propose that this apparent spin of 1 may be a composite arising from the combination of two half-spin charges within the photon structure.

This working assumption provides a theoretical foundation for understanding the quantum nature of photons. It offers a starting point for exploring the implications of photon composition and its potential impacts on phenomena such as polarization, wave-particle duality, and interactions with matter.

The photon is conceptualized as an energy dipole composed of an electron and a positron spinning around their barycenter. This nullifies the mass of the photon, as the masses of the electron and positron cancel each other out. The energy associated with their motion and electromagnetic fields contributes to the total energy of the photon.

Understanding the photon as an energy dipole with null mass provides insights into its fundamental properties and behavior within different contexts, such as gravitational fields.

The observation of shape change in gravitational fields has profound implications for our understanding of redshift and cosmological phenomena, potentially offering alternative explanations beyond traditional interpretations reliant on the Doppler effect. The charges (electron and positron) spinning around the circumference of a photon must rotate at a velocity of 2πrc2πrc, where rr is the radius of the photon’s orbit. This assumption is based on the premise that a wavelength of energy travels at the speed of light (cc), and thus, the rotational velocity of the charges must match the speed of energy propagation.

Aligning the rotational velocity of the charges with the speed of light ensures consistency with the fundamental principles of electromagnetism and relativity. This assumption maintains coherence with established physics theories and provides a foundation for further investigations into photon behavior.

The rotational velocity of the charges contributes to the overall energy distribution within photons. Understanding the relationship between rotational motion and energy transmission sheds light on the mechanisms governing photon dynamics and interactions.

**Electrons**

In conventional models of particle physics, electrons are considered fundamental particles with a negative electric charge. However, recent observations and theoretical considerations suggest the possibility of a more nuanced understanding of electron structure.

Based on Planck’s constant energy content, it is hypothesized that electrons may consist of a multitude of fractional electric charges contained within photons, rather than a single, indivisible negative charge. Specifically, electrons could be composed of a combination of complete photons, each containing both positive and negative charges that cancel each other out, along with residual half-charges. These residual half-charges contribute to the net negative charge of the electron.

Further investigation is warranted to explore the validity of this working assumption. Experimental studies, theoretical modeling, and computational simulations could be employed to test the hypothesis and elucidate its implications. Additionally, interdisciplinary collaboration between physicists, mathematicians, and computational scientists may be valuable for advancing our understanding of electron structure and charge distribution.

**Fields and Forces**

When considering electromagnetic interactions between charged particles, we posit that the establishment of electric and magnetic fields may involve a finite time for propagation, during which the fields extend through space. Once these fields are established, the forces exerted between charged particles occur nearly instantaneously. This implies that while there may be a delay in the establishment of fields, the interactions between charges manifest as forces without appreciable time delay once the fields are present.

It is essential to distinguish between electromagnetic fields and forces in any serious investigation. Electromagnetic fields represent the spatial distribution of electromagnetic interactions, while forces arise from the interactions between charged particles within those fields. Understanding their distinction is crucial for a thorough analysis of electromagnetic phenomena.