Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie, Volume 30 no 1, 2005 15

On de Broglie Wave Nature

Anatoli Vankov

Bethany College, Kansas, USA, [email protected];

[email protected]

ABSTRACT. The de Broglie wave phenomenon was studied in the

framework of Lagrangean formulation of Relativistic Mechanics. The
conclusion was made that the de Broglie wave of a particle is a rela-
tivistic phenomenon related to the field-dependent proper mass. The
wave develops in a process of proper-to-kinetic mass transformation
when the particle is given a momentum. The time-part of the 4-wave
vector is related to the proper mass oscillation while the spacial part
is due to the momentum; both parts can be treated in terms of virtual
(longitudinal and scalar) photons characterizing excitation states of a
mediating scalar field. It is shown that in Relativistic Mechanics with
the variable proper mass both electromagnetic and gravitational force
can be treated on the same footing: both are due to the same source
that is, the proper mass. Consequently, the scalar mediating field pro-
vides a mechanism of unification of gravitational and electromagnetic
forces. The concept of the unified divergence-free field is suggested, in
which the real (transverse) photon represents a pure space-like particle
while the neutrino is a pure time-like particle. In this connection, the
parity problem is discussed.

P.A.C.S.: 04.80 Cc

1 Introduction
The discovery of particle waves was made by Louis de Broglie in 1923-
1924. It is usually assumed that the de Broglie waves are described
by the Schroedinger equation. However, our study showed that the
de Broglie wave phenomenon is essentially relativistic. De Broglie was
never satisfied with probabilistic (“Copenhagen School”) interpretation
of Quantum Mechanics, and since 1924 he kept working on his own idea
of a next-level (“double-solution”) theory [1]. The physical meaning of
16 A. Vankov

the Schroedinger ψ-function as a probability amplitude of particle waves

has been debated for decades, the nature of the De Broglie waves and
so-called “entangled states” being the central issue (see, for example,
[2, 3, 4]). The purpose of this work is to show that the de Brogli wave
is essentially a relativistic phenomenon related to the proper-to-kinetic
mass transformation; therefore, the question about causality versus prob-
ability interpretation of microscopic experiments is ill posed.
First, we discuss the results of our sudsy of a particle motion in the
Relativistic Lagrangean framework. The conclusion was made that the
relativistic proper mass is dependent on the gravitational and electro-
magnetic field. It is constant and equal to m0 in free space, where the
laws of Kinematics of Special Relativity Theory (SRT) hold; the constant
proper mass m0 and kinetic mass mkin are relativistic components
p of the
total mass mtot = γm0 , mkin = (γ − 1)m0 where γ = 1/ 1 − β 2 is the
Lorentz factor for a relative speed β = u/c in a given inertial reference
frame. As concerns Dynamics problems, the proper mass constancy in
General Relativity Theory (GRT) and Relativistic Quantum Electrody-
namic should be considered the linear approximation of a singularity-free
unified (non-linear) field theory to be developed. In the next specula-
tive part of the work the falsifiable concept of unified mediating (boson
and spinor) field is discussed. We suggest the de Brogli wave interpre-
tation in terms of excitation states of the field. In this concept, the real
(transverse) photon should be treated as massles space-like boson, and
the neutrino as a massless time-like fermion. Consequently, the notion
of parity should be revised.

2 Physical principles of SRT Mechanics with gravitational

forces
2.1 The relativistic mass-energy concept and the proper mass variation
In the Lagrangian formulation of Relativistic Mechanics of a single par-
ticle, the rate of 4-momentum change equals the Minkowski force. A
variation of the proper mass follows from the corresponding SRT dy-
namical equations (using Synge’s denotations [5]):

d dxi
[m(s) ] = Ki (i = 1, 2, 3, 4) (1)
ds ds

They describe a particle motion on a world line xi (s), ~x = {x1 , x2 , x3 , ict},

with a 4-velocity dxi /ds, where Ki (s) is a Minkowski 4-force vector, and
On de Broglie Wave Nature 17

s is a line arc-length. By definition of a time-like world line of a massive

particle, we have the fifth equation:
X dxi dxi
= −1 (2)
i
ds ds

that makes the problem definite with respect to five unknown functions:
xi (s) and m(s). The proper mass variation along the world line is ex-
plicitly seen from the next equation obtained from (1) and (2):

dm dxi d2 xi
+ m 2 = Ki (3)
ds ds ds

One may notice that in the common formalism of the Relativistic Me-
chanics the Minkowski force is orthogonal to the 4-momentum. However,
when the proper mass variation is taken into account, the orthogonality
condition does not take place:
dm X dxi
=− Ki (4)
ds i
ds

In this sense, the notion of the Minkowski force should be modified.

For the sake of convenience, one may consider the description of mo-
tion in 3-space (α = 1, 2, 3) and time t (i = 4) rather than in spacetime
(i = 1, 2, 3, 4) using the relation ds = cdt/γ and formulas for relative
(“ordinary”) forces Fα :
Fα = c2 Kα /γ (5)
Now the equations of motion take the form:
d
(mγuα ) = Fα (6)
dt
d c2 dm
c2 (γm) = F · u + (7)
dt γ dt
where uα (t) = dxα /dt (α = 1, 2, 3) is the 3-velocity, and the proper mass
m is dependent on space and time coordinates in a given inertial reference
2
frame. On the right-hand side of (7) the term ( cγ dm dt ) is recovered to
account for the proper mass variation in a force field. The effect of the
proper mass variation was noted in [5, 6] but was never paid attention
in literature. For example, the fact that a particle speed cannot exceed
18 A. Vankov

the speed of light is often illustrated by the expression of motion of the

particle driven by a constant inertial force F0 = Const :
q
cp(t) = F0 t, β(t) = F0 t/ m2 c2 + F02 t2 (8)

where the momentum p(t) is proportional to the time elapsed. The mass
in (8) is supposed to be a constant proper mass m0 , but this is not true.
To check it, one has to consider a general problem on acceleration of
the particle by a pulse of force with transients specified. It follows from
(6) and (7) that the proper mass varies during transients. When the
force reaches a plateau it becomes constant but different from m0 , the
difference being a binding energy of a particle in the system “particle-
accelerator”. In the end of the pulse the proper mass acquires the initial
value m0 in a new state of free motion with kinetic mass-energy taken
from the accelerator. A dynamical change of the proper mass is a mani-
festation of a potential difference developed between the particle and the
accelerator; consequently, the interaction should be characterized by the
corresponding mass-energy current. A general relativistic mass-energy
formula following from (6) and (7) holds:

E(t)2 = p(t)2 c2 + m(t)2 c4 (9)

It describes the instantaneous state of a single particle in a force field

and leads to (8) under a constant force condition. For a free motion, the
equation (9) is reduced to the known SRT Kinematics formula

E 2 = p20 c2 + m20 c4 = Const (10)

To consider the gravitational force problem in the relativistic framework,

let us introduce a point-like particle of proper mass m0 in a spherical
symmetric gravitational field; the latter is characterized by a classical
potential φ(r) due to a uniform sphere of mass M  m0 and a radius
R:

φ(r) = −c2 (rg /r),r ≥ R (11)

where rg = GM/c2 is a “gravitational radius” (G is the universal gravi-

tational constant), r is a distance from the center of the sphere. So far,
we assume that R ≥ rg . The potential (11) is defined per unit mass; the
latter could be a rest mass of a test particle in the Newtonian Mechanics.
On de Broglie Wave Nature 19

However, in the Relativistic Mechanics the proper mass of the particle

becomes a function of the distance r:

m(r) = m0 exp(−rg /r),r ≥ R (12)

where m0 is a proper mass at infinity. In a weak field approximation

(r  R) we have
m(r) ∼= m0 (1 − rg /r), (13)
with a Newtonian limit m(r) → m0 at rg /r → 0. At (rg /r) → ∞ the
proper mass tends to exhaust.
Once the proper mass variation is taken into account, a gravitational
force takes a kinematical form:

F (r) = m0 c2 (rg /r2 ) exp(−rg /r) (14)

One can find a relativistic generalization of the static potential function

(11):
Z∞
m0 φ(r) = F (r, m(r))dr = −m0 c2 [1 − exp(−rg /r)],r ≥ R (15)
r

The expressions (14) and (15) have a point-like particle limit. In gen-
eral, the proper mass of a test particle at a point r in 3-space uniquely
characterizes a static gravitational field φ(r):
1
m(r)/m0 = [1 + φ(r)] (16)
c2
The potential changes within the range −c2 ≤ φ(r) ≤ 0; therefore, it is
limited by the factor c2 . This is a result of fundamental importance. It
shows that a singularity is absent in the relativistic form of gravitational
potential. One could find the same proper mass exhaustion effect in the
case of the Coulomb attractive potential when the gravitational radius
was replaced by “the annihilation radius” ra = k0 Qq/m0 c2 (k0 is the
electric constant at infinity). In the case of the electric repulsive force
the annihilation radius should be taken negative; therefore, the proper
mass increases with field strength (m(r) ≥ m0 ).
Let us consider Dynamics of a massive particle and a photon in a
gravitational field. Conservative field properties become embedded in
equations (6) and (7) if the total mass is taken constant and equal to
20 A. Vankov

that at infinity. Consequently, for a particle in free fall from rest at

infinity) in the spherical symmetric gravitational field (11) we have:
mtot = γr m(r) = m0 (17)
where γr < 1 characterizes a binding (dynamic) effect dependent on a
radial position. Putting the expression for a gravitational force F (r)dr =
c2 m(r)d(rg /r) into equations (6) and (7), we have for r ≥ R > rg :
m20 = m20 β(r)2 + m(r)2 (18)
p
m(r)/m0 = 1/γr = (1 − rg /r) = 1 − β(r)2 (19)
1 dr
q
β(r) = u(r)/c = = 1 − (1 − rg /r)2 (20)
c dt
The total energy conservation law is given in (18) as a relativistic re-
lationship between the varying proper mass and the momentum. The
expression (19) shows that a kinetic energy gain is equal to the corre-
sponding potential energy change. Finally, the expression (20) describes
a radial speed of a particle falling from rest at infinity. If the particle
has an initial radial momentum γ0 β0 m0 c (γ0 > 1), then, taking into ac-
count the total mass conservation γ02 m20 = γ02 m20 β(r)2 + m(r)2 , we have
γ = γ0 γr , and the expression (20) is modified:
q
β(r) = 1 − (1 − rg /r)2 /γ02 (21)

The solution formally shows that the proper mass vanishes at r = rg .

Because a baryon charge of a single particle cannot be destroyed, we
have to conclude that the above case cannot be physically realized: the
result is valid at r ≥ R > rg . A particle carrying a non-zero proper
mass in free fall can never reach the ultimate speed of light, though it
constantly accelerates (the condition β(r) < 1, dβ/dr > 0 always takes
place).
To consider a radial motion of a photon in gravitational field one
should take into account that the photon does not have the proper mass.
It is seen from equations (6) and (7) that any force changes a momentum
through the action on a total mass. Because the total mass is constant,
the only way the photon can change the momentum is by changing the
speed through a dependence on the gravitational potential φ(r). The
following expression is consistent with SRT Mechanics:
βph (r) = c(r)/c0 = 1 − rg /r (22)
On de Broglie Wave Nature 21

Actually, this is the relative speed of wave propagation c(r) = f λ(r)

with a constant frequency f = Const. The speed is constant on an
equipotential surface r = r0 ; in this case, it may be termed a tangential,
or arc speed. Henceforth the speed of light at infinity will be denoted c0 .
In addition to (22), one can define the radial “coordinate” speed c∗ (r) =
β ∗ (r)c0 . It is measured by the differential time-of-flight method by an
observer at infinity with the use of the so-called standard clock. If a unit
length were found from circumference measurements, the radial scale
would be determined by the field-dependent length unit proportional to
the wavelength of the standard photon emitted from infinity dr/dλ =
(1 − rg /r). Therefore:

dr
β ∗ (r) = β(r) = (1 − rg /r)2 (23)
dλ
As is seen, the photon while approaching the sphere slows down and
tends to stop in a strong gravitational field at r → R → rg < R. Our
analysis of the phenomenon led us to the conclusion that the photon
propagates in space of a gravitational field as in a refracting medium.

2.2 The metric determination by the criterion of agreement with ex-

periments
In the relativistic world basic physical units become dependent on the
gravitational field. How to measure them is the issue of theory foun-
dations. Obviously, there are no absolute measuring units: what we
have from observations are ratios with respect to the asymptotic val-
ues “at infinity”. We consider the problem of metric determination in a
broader sense than measurements of the space-time metric alone. The
complete metric should include also units of 4-momentum vector com-
ponents along with the speed of light, all of them are to be reanalyzed
in a framework of the Lagrangian formulation of Relativistic Mechanics.
(Further, we assume that an electric charge is field-independent). We see
a solution of the problem in giving the proper mass a natural degree of
freedom. In this new mass-energy concept, a test particle and a photon
reveal new gravitational properties of fundamental importance. First of
all, there is “an exhaustion” of the proper mass and, correspondingly,
the potential energy in a strong field; this effect eliminates field singu-
larities. Secondary, an interaction of the photon with the gravitational
field is different from what is assumed in current theories. The pho-
ton behaves in a gravitational field as in an optically active (refractive)
22 A. Vankov

medium rather than like a particle in the field. It means that there is
no coupling of the photon to the gravitational field. Consequently, a
probing the field with the test particle and the photon results in a new
field characterization and new metric relations of physical quantities.
We used the above results in conducting the metric analysis in or-
der to determine basic physical units which could be transportable or
reproducible throughout the space to make it possible to compare their
values in a field and “at infinity”. The standard (stable) test parti-
cle may be chosen to play the role of a quantum-mechanical oscilla-
tor when being used as a resonance emitter or a detector. The “stan-
dard atomic clock” will be the equivalent term for the standard particle.
Then, characteristics of the electromagnetic wave emitted by the stan-
dard clock may be considered in choosing the standard units of length
and time. From previous results, one can see that the frequency f0
of the photon emitted from infinity by the standard clock at rest is a
field-independent standard quantity; therefore, the corresponding pe-
riod δt0 = T0 = 1/f0 is a field-independent standard unit of time inter-
val. We assert that the proper resonance frequency fres of the standard
atomic clock in the field is proportional to the proper mass at the radial
point r0 , as in (19) for a spherical symmetric field. Thus, the frequency
depends on a radial position of the atomic clock in the field, as next:
fres (r0 ) = fres
0
(1 − rg /r0 ) ∝ m0 (1 − rg /r0 ). By definition, the inverse
quantity is the field-dependent proper time interval δτ of the standard
atomic clock at point r0 : δτ (r0 ) = 1/fres (r0 ) = δτ0 /(1 − rg /r0 ), where
δτ0 is the proper time interval at infinity. It should be noted that so far
we do not differentiate between the electromagnetic wave of light and
the photon because the radial dependence of speed (22) is assumed to
be the same for all frequencies (there is no dispersion). We admit that
at ultra-high energy this assumption may be not valid.
Next, let us look for a field-independent unit of length. The instanta-
neous proper wavelength of the photon at any emission point r0 can play
this role. The wavelength is a ratio of the speed of wave propagation and
the resonance frequency of an emitter fres (r0 ); therefore, the standard
emission wavelength λ0 is constant and reproducible everywhere. We
come to the important conclusion that space-time mapping is possible
in terms of field-independent units. In general, the following formulas
describe the field dependent proper time interval of the standard atomic
clock and characteristics of the photon at point r, if emitted by the stan-
dard atomic clock at point r0 (both the emitter and the detector being
On de Broglie Wave Nature 23

at rest in a sphere centered reference frame):

δτ (r0 ) = 1/fres (r0 ) = δτ0 /(1 − rg /r0 ) (24)

fph (r0 → r) = f0 (1 − rg /r0 ) (25)

cph (r0 → r) = c0 (1 − rg /r) (26)
(1 − rg /r)
λph (r0 → r) = λ0 (27)
(1 − rg /r0 )
It is easy to incorporate in these formulas the Doppler effect caused by a
relative motion of an emitter and a detector. The formula (24) describes
the gravitational time dilation caused by a proper mass dependence on
potential (19). From (24) and (25), it follows that there is a shift between
the standard resonance frequency of the emission line at point r0 and the
absorption (detection) line at the point r (taking into account that the
photon does not change the frequency in flight). As is seen from (26),
the speed of the photon is a function of a radial position; it does not
depend on the location of the emitter. From (27), the wavelength of
the photon at the moment of emission at r = r0 is field independent
and equals to λ0 (transportable standard length unit). Notice that the
proper time of atomic clock at some point at rest is measured as the
oscillation period of the photon at the point of emission, and the photon
carries this number during its flight over space of the gravitational field.
In the list of metric relations the speed of light plays a special role.
The arc speed and the coordinate speed are different due to field medium
anisotropy; they are the same in isotropic medium (a uniform field). As
was noted, a field acts on a photon as a refractive medium with the
index of refraction n = 1/γr = (1 − rg /r), which plays the role of the
gravitational gauge factor. If so, there is no coupling of light to the grav-
itational field; therefore, the known argument that SRT is contradictory
with observations of the bending of light in a vicinity of a gravitational
center can be disregarded. The conclusion was made that the metric
concept under discussion is consistent with the principles of Relativistic
Mechanics, and it is falsifiable in the following sense: a) the metric re-
lations (18-27), and their uniqueness can be experimentally tested and
used for space-time mapping and mass-energy scaling in the Minkowski
space framework ; b) integral experimental data related to gravitational
properties of particles and photons can be consistently treated in Rel-
ativistic Mechanics. The known classical “weak-field” GRT tests (the
24 A. Vankov

gravitational red-shift, the bending of light, the time delay of light, the
planetary perihelion precession) are fully explained, their predictions
are in agreement with experimental data. c). Predictions of the new
“strong-field” testable effects are made; one of them is the existence of
superluminal particles in the gravitational field.
Our SRT-based metric analysis showed that our theoretical treatment
of physical quantities is consistent with conservation properties of the
gravitational field. Let us consider, for example, a metric relationship
between the proper time interval dτ and the improper time interval dt of
the particle in the gravitational field ds = c0 dτ = c0 dt/γ where ds is the
arc length interval on the world line. The observer at infinity can verify
it by measuring an instantaneous improper time interval and comparing
it with the rate of his standard clock (similarly to imaginary experiments
in SRT). The interpretation of the comparison procedure follows from
our mass-energy concept: the proper time interval is the measure of
the proper mass of thep particle while the improper time interval is the
Lorentz factor γ = 1 − β 2 bigger, where the relative speed is meant
with respect to the rest observer at infinity. Thus, the improper time is
constant due to the total mass-energy conservation. A bound standard
clock (attached to a shell or in orbital motion) has a smaller amount of
total energy as compared to the similar clock in a hyperbolic motion.
For example, the improper time of a particle in the shell of radius r
is dt = dτ0 /γr . For a free motion at infinity, the SRT relations are
mtot = γ0 m0 and dt = γ0 dτ0 ; consequently, the metric form for a free
floating state of the particle with γ0 > 1 is

ds(r) = c0 dτ (r) = c0 dt(r)/γ (28)

p
with the kinematical Lorentz factor γ = 1/ 1 − β(r)2 = γ0 γr , as in
(21), and the dynamical factor γr = 1/(1 − rg /r). Therefore, relations
between the field-dependent metric form ds, the proper time of atomic
clocks rested at infinity dτ0 and in a free-floating state dτ (r) are:

ds(r) = c0 dτ0 /γr (29)

dτ (r) = dτ0 /γr (30)

In the particular case of the particle in free fall from rest at infinity, we
have γ0 = 1, γr m(r) = m0 , and dt = dτ0 ; it describes conservation prop-
erties of gravitational field with the following identities characterizing a
On de Broglie Wave Nature 25

rotational symmetry in the 4-coordinate and 4-momentum space:

p2 /m20 c20 + m2 /m20 = 1,m/m0 = 1/γr (31)

p
dr2 /dτ02 c20 + dτ 2 /dτ02 = 1,dτ /dτ0 = 1/γr = 1 − β2 (32)

The corresponding metric relation is ds2 = c20 dτ02 − dr2 ; the angle and
the rate of the Minkowski space rotation can be found. Having a solu-
tion to equations of motion (1) for some specific problem, one can find
scalar products of 4-vectors s2 = x · x, p2 = p · p and construct the anti-
symmetrical tensor Mik = xi pk − xk pi to check the angular momentum
conservation as well. The “gamma” transformation q(r) → q0 /γr ) of
basic metric units in Minkowski space reflects the rotational symmetry
being identical in the 4-coordinate and 4-momentum space. Obviously,
this is the reflection of conservation field properties.
One may compare our SRT space-time metric of the static spherical
symmetric field
ds2 = c20 dτ 2 = c20 dt2 − dr2 (33)
with the corresponding GRT (Schwarzschild) metric, in the polar coor-
dinate system, for simplicity:

ds2 = c20 dt2 (1 − 2rg /r)2 − dr2 /(1 − 2rg /r)2 − r2 dφ2 (34)

In the weak-field approximations, which is convenient for the purpose of

our comparison, it is equivalent to the form

ds2 = c20 (dt/γr )2 − (γr dr)2 − r2 dφ2 (35)

where γr = 1/(1 − rg /r). Then, the Schwarzschild solution reflects GRT

metric relations, as follows:

dr0 = γr r, dt0 = dt/γr , c0 = c0 , m 0 = m0 (36)

It is apparently consistent with gravitational experimental data, which

have been obtained essentially from “weak-field” experiments.
One can deduce the coordinate speed and the arc speed from (34) by
putting the “light-cone condition” ds2 = 0; the expressions will appear
the same as we have in (23) and (22), but they should be regarded
as “metric induced” quantities. In the GRT treatment of experiments
the speed of light c0 and the proper mass of elementary particle are
26 A. Vankov

considered field-independent physical constants. This assumption is a

part of the GRT metric methodology of operations with “wristwatches”
and “rigid measuring rods”. It is not possible to establish a relationship
of those operations with physical processes of probing a field with test
particles, and the role of the photon in a metric determination is not
clear. Recall that our metric of basic physical quantities is

dr0 = dr, dt0 = dt, c0 = c0 /γr , m0 = m/γr (37)

which has uniquely resulted from the analysis of a photon and particle
motion in the gravitational field and the methodology of transportable
and reproducible standard units. While the GRT metric contains singu-
larities under strong-field conditions, our metric is free of singularities in
the whole range of energy.

3 The hypothesis of boson and spinor mediating fields, and

the de Broglie waves
3.1 The de Broglie wave in the massless boson field concept
Next, the concept of the 4-vector field mediating the gravitational and
electromagnetic interactions is described. At this point, we do not sug-
gest field equations; instead, we invite readers to discuss speculative
issues of the new idea of field unification on the basis of the relativistic
generalization of the classical 1/r-potential. The field is expected to be
non-linear; therefore, conventional field formalism needs to be changed.
One shall see that understanding of the relativistic nature of the de
Broglie wave phenomenon could be an important step towards the de-
velopment of the unified divergence-free theory.
We found that both gravitational and electromagnetic field, though
having different structure, are related to the common source that is, the
proper mass; clearly, this is the clue for the unified theory concept. Our
general idea of the field unification is to add the gravitational (mass)
source and mass-energy (neutral) current to corresponding parts of the
electromagnetic field in the covariant form. Consequently, field strength
parameters will be automatically coupled; they will play the role of dy-
namical “feedback” variables. Obviously, the variable proper mass makes
the unified field theory non-linear. One can try to realize this concept
within the Lagrangian formulation by applying the variational principle
to the extremal proper mass problem. It is expected that equations of
motion will consistently describe the total energy-momentum tensor of
On de Broglie Wave Nature 27

the particle system and yield an electromagnetic field and a massless

mediating boson field. However, it is not immediately clear how to for-
mulate the problem of multiple interacting sources of unified field. In the
linear field concept with the proper mass being constant the superposi-
tion principle holds, and the 1/r-potentials are usually meant retarded.
In our field concept a point-like source and a point-like test particle form
a system of two interacting particles with the radius of interaction (field
strength parameter) determined by properties of both particles. It seems
that retarded and advanced potentials are needed to account for both
outgoing and ingoing interfering waves. It would be reasonable to con-
sider a massless boson mediating field in the Klein-Gordon framework
with the variable proper mass. Spin properties of sources are not speci-
fied there. We assume that force transmitting virtual (pure imaginary)
photons are of two types: longitudinal and scalar (time-like) photons; the
latter have to contribute to the mediating scalar gravitational interac-
tion. Real (transverse) photons are not mediators; they have the status
of free particles which can exist independent of sources and be utilized
in cross-section measurements. This is in agreement with the Gupta-
Bleuler formalism [7, 8] distinguishing between observable (Hermitian)
and mediating (anti-Hermitian) particles. Thus, we want to interpret
it in a “strong” form: all interactions are due solely to anti-Hermitian
photons. They are physical vacuum excitation states resulting from mas-
sive particle interactions. In this scheme gravitational properties of real
photons should be explained in terms of their interaction with the boson
field. This concept allows us to gain a new insight into the de Broglie
wave nature.
The de Broglie waves are commonly known from observations of free
moving particles, first of all, in interference experiments. Let us consider
the dynamics of the wave origination. In the familiar example of an
attractive interaction, the following equation describes the dynamical
energy conservation balance:

p2 /c20 + m2 = m20 (38)

with m/m0 = (1−xs /x) ≤ 1 where xs is a field strength parameter. The

de Broglie wavelength λdB due to the momentum transfer may be derived
from the Einstein’s and de Broglie’s quantum-mechanical expressions
p = h/λdB and m0 = hf0 /c20 together with our formula for the particle
momentum p = m0 c0 β. Then, the equation (38) in terms of frequencies
28 A. Vankov

is equivalent to the following:

2
fdB + f 2 = f02 (39)

(λ0 /λdB )2 + (m/m0 )2 = 1 (40)

The field-dependent frequency f (t) is related to the proper mass of the
atomic clock. The corresponding proper wavelength of the atomic clock
oscillation is λ(t) = c0 /f (t) = h/m(t)c0 , at initial moment being equal
to λ0 = h/m0 c0 . According to our metric, it increases during a particle
acceleration. Note that the de Broglie wavelength is determined by the
spatial part of the 4-wave vector; the proper mass component is a time-
like quantity, which vanishes in the annihilation process. Thus, the de
Broglie wave characteristics are momentum (space-like) quantities. Un-
like the proper wavelength, the de Brogli wavelength decreases during the
particle acceleration in free fall. The particle wave should have the form
2
a(x, t) ∝p cos(f t − kx)), where f (t) = c0 m(t)/h, k(x) = c0 m0 β(x)/h,
β(x) = 1 − (m/m0 )2 , m/m0 = (1 − xs /x), x = x(t).
The connection is seen between conservative field symmetries previ-
ously discussed and the de Broglie waves. Characteristics of the waves
are present in relativistic metric relations, which we derived from com-
pletely different principles. The whole picture can be visualized. Imagine
a particle at rest producing a static spherical symmetric field. The parti-
cle has one degree of freedom (the scalar mode) what may be thought of
as the sphere pulsation. The pulsating sphere in motion exhibits known
relativistic effects of length contraction and time dilation giving rise to
the vector mode of oscillation that is, the de Broglie wave phenomenon.
The group speed is the particle speed while the corresponding phase
speed exceeds the ultimate speed of light. In traditional interference ex-
periments the wave becomes polarized in a plane after coming through
a single slit. An experimentalist can rotate the plane of polarization of
electrons, for example, by creating an accelerating field between the slit
and a screen. The plane rotation is the predicted relativistic effect which
could be verified, in principle.
It is seen now that the “probability wave” concept in the non-
relativistic quantum-mechanical theory should be considered an approx-
imation, which could be somehow justified under weak-field conditions
(a proper mass constancy). In our relativistic picture, the source of the
de Broglie waves is the moving particle in a fixed reference frame (the cp
term in the equation cp = hfdB ). Thus, a particle interference pattern
On de Broglie Wave Nature 29

is frame dependent. At the same time, the de Broglie waves are associ-
ated with an excitation of physical vacuum states (virtual photons) in
the process of transformation of the proper mass into kinetic one. The
excitation process propagates in space with the ultimate speed of light
and should be treated in terms of coherent ingoing and outgoing waves
of the boson field. From this point of view, the wave nature of particles
(the de Broglie waves, tunneling effects and entangled collective states)
may be fully understood; however, the concept of “physical vacuum”
and the term “at infinity”need to be clarified. Intuitively, one may think
of a spherical shell of universe matter as the source of “physical vacuum
field” with a finite energy density. Then, the physical vacuum in the shell
is a background field for local fields in a cosmological potential well. In
this sense, to reach “infinity” means to get rid of all local fields. For an
atomic electron it could be a fraction of millimeter away. A single free
particle moving in the space of a constant residual potential is in equi-
librium with the physical vacuum (with the universe): there is no net
mass-energy, or a virtual photon, current between the particle and the
universe. This is a local particle-particle interaction, which breaks this
equilibrium and results in the net current between interacting particles
and the universe. The direction of current is determined by the field gra-
dient depending on the type of interaction. The process is traditionally
described in the quantum-mechanical concept of the photon exchange
mechanism to be revisited in the future non-linear theory. We empha-
size here the importance of relativistic mass-energy concept (a proper
mass variability) with cosmological connections as well as a possible uni-
versal role the 4-vector boson field (virtual photons) in a unified field
theory. In fact, we assume that virtual photons mediating gravitational
and electromagnetic forces are revealed in the form of the de Broglie
waves, which should be subject to further theoretical and experimental
study.

3.2 On symmetries in the spinor field concept

A consideration of particle spin properties will require the next-level the-

ory, presumably, in the spinor (Dirac) framework. Again, the concept
of variable proper mass should be incorporated in the theory. Then,
the boson field could be treated as a composite field. A spin is both
quantum-mechanical and relativistic quantity and, as such, seems to be
poorly understood. A massive fermion spin, which appears in a helic-
ity operator of a massive particle (σ·p), is not Lorentz invariant; but it
30 A. Vankov

is invariant in the case of a massless Dirac neutrino. This conundrum

should be esolved. In classical terms, one can associate the spin with the
particle rotation. But what can give a neutrino a rotational mode when
there is no neither proper mass nor magnetic moment? We think that
our treatment of the de Broglie waves allows us to gain a new insight into
the nature of spin. As was shown, a massive particle is a relativistic ob-
ject characterized by the 4-wave vector having a spatial (the de Broglie
wave) and a time-like (the scalar wave) parts. The corresponding source
of virtual photons is the momentum of a massive particle. In a process
of proper-to-kinetic mass transformation, real (transverse) photons can
emerge as the result of the proper mass annihilation or electromagnetic
transitions between resonance states in a bound systems (for example, in
atoms) formed by attractive forces. Thus, the photon having no proper
mass may be considered a kinetic mass-energy quantum, that is the
quantum of a vector field, or electromagnetic energy carrier. In this
sense, the photon is a pure space-like real object. Could a pure time-
like real “photon” exist as a proper mass quantum? We think that this
question relates to the fundamental issues of space-time-matter symme-
tries. These issues are further discussed in the form of brief speculative
questions-answers.

Could the mediating boson field be considered in terms of composed

virtual neutrino pair states?
We suggest considering virtual photons in the Dirac framework to
be field states composed of virtual neutrino pairs; they play the role of
“force transmitters” (but not energy carriers) in gravitational and elec-
tromagnetic interactions as well as in “weak” reactions. Bosonic modes
of the field in terms of virtual neutrino pair ν̃, ν could be presented
in symbolic (conjugation) form (νν), (ν̃ ν̃), (ν ν̃). This would provide
a natural connection between the Klein-Gordon and Dirac framework.
Moreover, one can try to reveal “glueing” properties of the virtual pho-
tons when considering the intimate relationship between particles.

Is the neutrino a time-like massless real fermion? Does the real

bosonic electron exist?
We admit that in a future theory a massive particle will be consid-
ered a physical vacuum resonance in a cosmological field; a resonance
state could be treated as “a droplet” of the field Bose-condensate with
the “proper mass” proportional to the number of condensed virtual pho-
On de Broglie Wave Nature 31

tons. This hypothetical picture provides a future theory with oppor-

tunities of new physical ideas about matter structure. For example,
an elementary fermion, like an electron or a proton, could be a stable
ground-state formation finished with a valence proper mass fermionic
quantum. Therefore, one may think of the fermion particle being “entan-
gled” through the boson field with universe matter. Then the neutrino
seems to be a natural candidate for the proper mass quantum. Let us
assume that neutrinos are produced in interactions due to the so-called
degenerate-pressure force, for example, between the proton and the elec-
tron at distances smaller then the Bohr radius. In accordance with our
mass-energy concept, the electron proper mass under such conditions be-
comes greater than that at infinity. When it reaches the resonance state
about 106 Mev, the muon is created, which interacts with the proton
to produce the neutron. The muon should be considered an exited elec-
tron being subject to decay with neutrino-antineutrino emission. When
the muon interacts with the proton, the electron undergoes the stage of
coupling to neutrino. If this picture is true, the electron-neutrino bound
state is real that is, the electron can exist in a free baryon state (as a
real bosonic electron), which could be detected. One cannot exclude that
hypothetical bosonic electron plays the important role in superconduc-
tivity. In the inverse reaction of the neutron decay the bosonic electron
decays with the neutrino flying away. Thus, the neutrino could indeed
be the proper mass quantum able to form pairs of coupled virtual pho-
tons or to couple to any fermionic particle. Thus, we hypothesize that
the bosonic proton and the bosonic electron exist as real particles (most
likely with short lifetime).

In the above picture, there is a principle difference between the real

photon and the neutrino. The photon carries the momentum but does
not have an angular momentum: in a circular polarization mode it re-
veals a rotation of a plane polarization due to the phase shift with no
rotational kinetic energy. Unlike the photon, the neutrino being the
proper mass-energy quantum carries inner angular momentum with no
linear momentum (“screw-type particle”). Such a particle has one de-
gree of freedom. It should be called a pure time-like particle. One may
expect that the neutrino does not produce the de Brogli waves, neither it
does the Doppler shift. The neutrino should behave in the gravitational
field as the proper mass quantum: the frequency icreases with the field
strength while the speed remains equal to the ultimate speed of light.
This is in agreement with small cross-sections of neutrino interaction
32 A. Vankov

with matter. The “unusual” predicted neutrino properties should be

subject to further theoretical and experimental investigation.

Is there a violation of P, CP or T symmetry?

Given the neutrino being the proper mass quantum, considerations
of the parity issue gives us the thought that there is no physical rea-
son for the mirror symmetry in particle physics; “the neutrino” and
“the antineutrino” automatically have opposite handedness by virtue
of the angular momentum conservation; therefore, the question of exis-
tence of both right-handed and left-handed neutrinos (or the world being
left-right symmetric) becomes ill-posed. The parity is a concept of non-
relativistic (“probability wave”) quantum mechanics. We assert that the
CPT theorem should be replaced by a relativistic invariance concept of
the 4-coordinate reverse symmetry with a properly defined conjugation
operator in a boson and spinor field. In other words, the concept of
antimatter needs to be revised.

Do neutrino flavors exist?

Reactions with neutrinos are called “weak interactions” in the so-
called electroweak model of spontaneously broken symmetry [9]. The
model is a part of the Standard Particle Model (SM), which introduces
special neutrino properties called “neutrino flavors” emphasizing a phys-
ical difference of neutrinos in electron and muon reactions. In our view,
both the model of “electroweak unification” (by introducing massive me-
diating bosons) and the neutrino flavor concept have no physical grounds.
In the above concept of the bosonic electron, typical neutrino reactions
should be expressed in the following form revealing the mediating role
of massless boson field. For a certain reason, the electron is considered
the antiparticle, then the conventional “antineutrino” becomes “the neu-
trino”.
µ̃ → ẽν + ν → ν̃ + ν + ν̃. (41)
ν + p = νneν̃ → n + µ → n + eν̃ + ν → n + e + ν + ν̃ (42)
ν̃ + n = νpẽν̃ → p + µ̃ → p + ẽν + ν̃ → p + ẽν + ν̃ → p + ẽ + ν + ν̃ (43)
n → p + ẽν → p + ẽ + ν (44)
According to the Standard Model (SM), the above reactions are different
for incident so-called muon neutrinos (typically, from a muon decay) and
On de Broglie Wave Nature 33

so-called electron neutrinos (typically, from fission and fusion reactions).

The SM predicted muon-type and electron-type neutrino reactions are

νµ + p → n + µ,ν̃µ + n → p + µ̃ (45)

νe + p → n + e,ν̃e + n → p + ẽ (46)

The muon-type reaction was confirmed by the experiment conducted in

1961 – 1962 at the Brookhaven AGS Facility with a high time-resolution
technique [10]. However, a similar experiment with “electron neutrinos”
required to check the prediction of electron-type reaction (46) was never
performed. In our concept, neutrinos in all above reactions are the same
massless Dirac neutrinos, which are physically indistinguishable.

4 Conclusion
The de Broglie wave is essentially relativistic phenomenon closely related
to the problems of mass origin and self-energy divergence. In our SRT-
based approach, the problem of 1/r field singularities is recognized as
the metric problem of dependence of basic (space-time and proper mass)
units and the speed of light on the gravitational potential. The metric
problem was analyzed in the Lagrangean formulation of Relativistic Me-
chanics. The criteria of our metric determination were the consistency
with the covariant form of equations of motion in a conservative force
field and the agreement with experimental data. It was found that the
proper mass and the speed of light are field dependent; they uniquely
characterize the gravitational field. Consequently, the new metric pro-
vides a unique mapping of the field with the use of a light signal and a
test particle. Experimental data and predictions (de Brolie wave proper-
ties included) are consistently treated in terms of Relativistic Mechanics.
Among the important results are, as follows:

• There is no reason for the exclusion of gravitational forces from

the theory of Relativistic Mechanics. Gravitational Physics differ-
ent from General Relativity Theory follows from the consistently
formulated Relativistic Mechanics. The corresponding SRT-based
approach to the gravitational field problem is suggested in agree-
ment with observations. One of the predictions is an existence of
superluminal particles in a gravitational field; the prediction can
be experimentally verified.
34 A. Vankov

• A field due to the gravitational and electric sources is shown to be

inherently free of singularities; therefore, a renormalization proce-
dure is not needed. The idea of the unified field concept based on
the massless boson and spinor fields is suggested. In the concept,
the neutrino does not have “flavors”. It plays the fundamental
role of a proper mass quantum having new physical properties. In
particular, an inability of the neutrino to produce the de Broglie
waves is predicted.
• The de Broglie waves are characterized by the 4-wave vector (spa-
tial and time) components and should be treated in terms of ex-
citation states of the mediating boson field. In this concept, the
parity notion is the product of non-relativistic quantum mechanics.
Consequently, the parity violation problem becomes ill-posed; the
physical treatment of the discrete space-time symmetries should
be revised in the future unified field theory.

References
[1] Louis de Broglie. “Non Linear Wave Mechanics (A Casual Interpreta-
tion). Translated by A.Knodel and J.Miller. Elsevier Publishing Company
(1960).
[2] A.Einstein, B.Podolski, and N.Rosen. Phys.Rev., 41, p.777 (1935).
[3] D.Bohm. Quantum Theory. Dover, New York (1957).
[4] J.Bell. Rev.Modern Phys., 38, p.447 (1966).
[5] J.L.Synge. “Relativity: The Special Theory”. North Holland Publishing
Company, Amsterdam (1965).
[6] C.Moller. “The Theory of Relativity”. Oxford University Press (1982).
[7] S.N.Gupta. “Theory of longitudinal photons in quantum electrodynam-
ics”. Proc.Phys.Soc. (London), A 64, 681 (1950).
[8] K.Bleuler. “Eine neue methode zur behandlung der longetudinalen und
scalaren photonen”. Helv.Hys.Acta, 23, 567 (1950).
[9] S.L.Glashow. Nucl. Phys. 22, 597 (1961); S.Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett.
19, 1264 (1967); A.Salam. Proc. of the 8th Nobel Symposium on Elemen-
tary particle theory, relativity groups and analiticity, edited by Svartholm
(1969).
[10] G.Danby, J.L.Gaillard, K.Goulianos, etc. Observation of high-energy neu-
trino reactions and the existence of the two kind of neutrinos. Phys. Rev.
Lett. 9, 36-44 (1962).

(Manuscrit reçu le 2 décembre 2003)