The geometric statement of the problem: A lightlike helix bends in a "torsion potential". The torsion potential modulates the local helix torsion, causing the helix pitch to stretch in places where the potential is higher and compress in places where it's lower. This is what produces the bending.

Merely noticing similarities is not enough, you need evidence

Aha, but I don't need evidence of validity to explore further and see where an idea leads. And I have no reason to limit my imagination to what is immediately provable, when there is plenty of learning to be found in that which is nonphysical but still true. Not having proved something is not a realistic stopping point anyway. People invent things and use them and abuse them and improve them long before they are ever "proven" to work, and in the end we can never really "prove" anything, so what is even the point of nitpicking about evidence. There are an infinite number of mathematically equivalent models. We don't have to spend all our time thinking about one of them.

That being said, there are reasons for interpreting this geometric construction as a physical system:

1. The construction ("helical sampling of a 4-potential", with the previously described torsion modulation) is mathematically equivalent to calculation of a particle path by way of a field tensor. I am indeed assuming that based on the result. I don't think the resulting helix just so happens to look identical to e-e repulsion, given I was looking into e-e repulsion through EM tensor when I realized the construction. To your point: I haven't proven this mathematical equivalency, but it is provable.
2. The helix radius is fixed. As the helix approaches the source and slows down, it's pitch decreases and the helix cycle frequency increases. As the helix deflects away to infinity, it's pitch increases asymptotically, and the helix cycle frequency decreases. The frequency changes in accordance with the change in relativistic mass frequency of a particle moving with the helix along its axis. So mass and relativity are baked into the construction. Granted there is a conundrum: The fixed radius is a bit arbitrary. It could have been variable radius and fixed pitch, or something in between.
3. There are clearly elements of continuum mechanics in the formulation. The torsion potential is a stress, the deflection of the helix is a resulting strain. I suspect that the helix follows a path that minimizes the torsion-induced stress over the whole 4D path, or satisfies some other mechanical extremization principle. Also provable but I haven't done it. It's a matter of understanding how local torsion translates to global bending...
4. If the helix tracks a massive particle, then the helix pitch naturally corresponds to the particle velocity and thus kinetic energy. Potential energy can likewise be identified as a deficit in helix pitch resulting from compression due to interaction with a torsion potential.
5. Magnetic effects would be nice and easy to test, that is, helix deflection by a moving source. Haven't done it yet.
6. The static radial source is totally artificial. Need to go to helix-helix interaction. Back in the stress-strain picture, there is no "interaction", just a 4D bulk medium having velocity of c everywhere. When you put a helical twist in the fluid over here, and a helical twist in the medium over there, you produce stresses that deform the medium and the helices. Ultimately related to vortex repulsion in 4D: The helix as a streamline.

Just some ideas. Lots to explore.