During the initial exchange instant of a photon which charge leads the exchange the positive going charge or the negative going charge?

I'm not aware that photons have a charge.

Do you mean an electrical charge?

If a photon has a charge it can't be more than an infinitesimal fraction of the charge of an electron, or we'd notice charge-based interactions.

Do you mean phase?

I can see how phase might matter in the exchange, but the phase would be measured relative to the atom with which the photon is interacting (i.e., the phase would not be absolute).

It is one thing to extrapolate charge from cosmological considerations, and quite another to actually measure it or derive it experimentally.

I'm not familiar with published work on this, though I've read a couple of papers by C. Sivaram online about limits on the amount of charge possible on a photon (based on cosmological considerations).

One of them, in PDF form, is here.

chipdatajeffB :  Thank you for your information. As far as I know, charge is the deferentiating factor of frequency and determines wave length. Each photon consists of oscillating electromagnetic energy, where the magnetic field changes 90 degrees out of phase with the the electric field. It's relativistic energy contained within gamma photons with energy levels on the order of 1.022 MEV produce a pair of one electron and one positron  ( if you can call opposite charged particles, a pair) when it passes through a columb field of a gold or lead atoms nucleus.

Hmmm ... that still doesn't mean the photon itself has a charge. If it had much of a charge we'd see it interact with electrons.

If the charge is extremely small, then okay, but we'd have to figure out how it's generated and maintained, right?

chipdatajeffB : It does not have a static charge but an oscillating sinusoidal change in the electric field with the magnetic field perpendicular to the electricfield at all points and both perpendicular to the direction of propagation. The total of both the positive and the negative charge relative to an observer is determined by the observed frequency or relativistic mass. My question being because the charges are seperated by time and the magnetic poles are seperated by time which part of the wave length propagates first in the wave, the positive change in charge or the negative change in charge? Another way to understand my question is when pair production occurs which particle occurs first, the electron or the positron when the field used is the columb field or an atom. Thank you for your reply.

OK, now I understand the question.

I'm no expert on this, but I think if you're a quantum chromodynamics person, then the answer must be Both. If you're not, then I think to satisfy the idea of particle/wave duality, the answer must be that either is correct "on average."

But if you're in neither of those camps, specifically, and you're just viewing this from the standpoint of the atom ("seeing" an approaching photon) then the answer would be Either, but not Both. That is, I think experimentally it wouldn't matter which occurs first. I'm not aware of experiments showing it in any case, so I can't say.

However, in actuality, we have gamma-ray and x-ray diffraction "images" of atoms, which can only occur if wavefronts are actually passing around the subatomic particle "regions", and that implies that if we have an in-phase condition at the imager then it matters at least statistically that one of them (either) occurs first. That is, I don't know how those interferometric images are possible without phase importance which, to my reckoning, implies that all the wavefronts that have been diffracted at a given instant "share" a wave polarity, and that in turn means one or the other must have occurred first, and at the same time for all the diffracted wavefronts.

Does that make sense?

There are a great many papers turning up in a Dogpile search (I like it better than Google and I haven't tried Bing! yet) on the phrase "phase polarity of a photon" and very few turning up for "charge of a photon" ...

chipdatajeffB : Thanks for your reply. I was  just trying to use Dirac's sea and the emission spectrum to detect antimatter, as each system may invert the photon, due to the columb field's influence on the emission of the photon being inverted, similar to the magnetic effect that jizzles the emission spectrum we receive from sun spots on the sun, or the flip signature in obital electrons, of certain atoms as the spin down.

The idea was based on the idea of the saturated negative energy sea, presented by Mr. Dirac to explain the pair production of the positron (hole in the sea) in the vicinity of matter with negative electrons, however I thought possibly the idea of negative sea saturation might be dependent on the location where charges are reversed due to the dominate influence of the nucleus columb field. Than you for your info.

Does not the experience of the photon in duration imply two underlying momentum axes for this Universe? If you consider the entire duration as momentum for a photon, does that not describe an inherent bias?

dnatech : Good question. But the two monentums one having the characteristic of one leading in time the singularity and the other trailing in time the singularity, must be taken as supporting the singularity of the mass by inducing current as the observable presence of an electromagnetic change into space-time, through which this borrowed momentum can be propagated by division of underlying charicteristics of space-time. Thank you for your response. The way I see it is the universe exists, is in all time, but we only respond to that we observe in the present, presented to us by way of the interactions, of events occurring in our relativistic past. Send me your thoughts.

Well Primordial, I can "see" a fated Universe...even though in an infinite perspective from our point of view, might not imply all events occuring that are possible. I think your implication of backwards and forwards singularity current(s) show a dual matter/antimatter creation that is perhaps completely mirrored in all events between each. I guess this is what you are saying.

You talk of a current, and from what I understand, there has to be a potential from time past to time future for this current to happen. That implies all the photons produced must have some event endpoints in order for them to be induced. In the future Universe in which there should be less free charge due to lower thermal conditions due to entropy, the only pure force that can produce higher frequency photons is gravitational contraction. But, if this future gravitational contraction can induce higher frequency photons, does that not imply that these photons must have endpoints themselves if the gravitating body allows free photon travel outside itself? 

To further state in my reply to you, are you suggesting that there is an absolute balance between absorption and emission events of photons? Is there also a thermal energy balance invoked by such events such that higher frequency emissions diminish in time to be countered by increasing lower frequency emissions? For free photons in the future, does that mean the space matrix must develop charge to provide absorption endpoints? Equilibrium must be assured at all points in time?

dnatech :About your question, quote " are you suggesting that there is an absolute balance between absorption and emission events of photons? " , yes, if the total energy of both the emission and absorption systems are taken into the equation, as you may know the loss of energy between the two inertial systems transfered by the photon, changes due to the relative motion between the two inertial systems.

About your question, quote " Is there also a thermal energy balance invoked by such events such that higher frequency emissions diminish in time to be countered by increasing lower frequency emissions?", I understand your point here, but I feel that is not the case, because all energy is relative between inertial systems, and remains in balance, only the density distribution undergoes changes. I feel there exists mechanisms that support the distribution of energy concentrations, through the action of gravity, virtual particles, with possibly the use of anti-particles, and extremely high energy gamma photons.

About your question, quote "For free photons in the future, does that mean the space matrix must develop charge to provide absorption endpoints? ",  I  would offer you a solution to the question of free photons, the transfer of energy through the exchange of photons requires the request for a transfer through the non-inertial system through which the photon exchange is initiated (the wave function).

About your question, quote " Equilibrium must be assured at all points in time?", true, very much like a swinging pendulum, but utilizing all the mechansms of energy exchange and energy density distribution. I see entropy as a mechansm that demands the configuration of these mechansms, and their functions.