[General] 21st century linear, first order theories. Are there any others?

Wolfgang Baer wolf at nascentinc.com
Thu Dec 10 15:55:51 PST 2015


John:
"From zero to infinity" Peter Rowlands build on the Dirac equation to 
formulate a nillpotent equation
I do not have a paper, Hie book is a bit expensive but I get it from the 
Library every once in a while
Wolf

Please Note: I will be ot of the office from Nov. 14 to Dec. 10
Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com

On 11/26/2015 8:01 PM, John Williamson wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
>
> I’m just writing a paper on the new linear set of differential 
> equations I proposed last year and want to compare it to similar work 
> in the 21^st century, or fairly recently at least. I usually like to 
> read a couple of papers before breakfast (thanks for keeping me 
> supplied guys – especially David John D and Al) – but I’m just drawing 
> a blank here. What should I be looking at?
>
> To be specific: is anyone aware of any other equations which have been 
> proposed this century or in the second half of last century which can 
> be written in the linear first-order form d (something) = 0?
>
>
> For reference, what comes to mind in the early twentieth are the Dirac 
> equation and the Weyl equation. There were other guys playing with 
> things around then, but my mind has gone blank (Eddington?). 
> Shroedinger’s, of course, has second order derivatives (though, as 
> Dieks has argued it has first order features imported though the 
> adoption of the de Broglie relation – and I am going to refer to 
> that). I’m also not talking about further work on Dirac or Maxwell 
> such as that by Hestenes or using the Bateman method on the Maxwell 
> equations (of which the most advanced work, in my view, is that of 
> Martin which he and I will review over the Christmas “vacation”). I’m 
> talking about proper, basic, first order equations of light, matter or 
> anything else.
>
>
> David – you were proposing I write a review of comparable work (and I 
> am delighted that you are going to review the various electron 
> models!) – but I’m talking here about linear theories expressed in 
> (vector) differential form, not about any specific model within them. 
> Tony … your stuff is brilliant but second order – anything else you 
> are aware of?Nick … Pask’s stuff was brilliant too – did he express 
> anything new in linear equations? Also, of course, not referring to 
> work on such perturbative theories as QED and non-perturbative stuff 
> such as QCD, most of the “standard model” and the various string 
> theories. Chip, Albrecht, Richard ... you have been looking at lots of 
> electron and photon models - anything there? Joakim, Adam, Mayank ... 
> anything caught your attention? Chandra, Al, Martin … anything on 
> light beyond Maxwell or in “quantum entanglement”? Michael M, David, 
> Viv … anything out there in space?
>
>
> Maybe I’m being stupid at this time in the morning and more things 
> will come to me after another cup of coffee, but I’m drawing a blank 
> here.Any further suggestions would be helpful!
>
>
> Regards, John.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at Wolf at nascentinc.com
> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
> Click here to unsubscribe
> </a>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20151210/2b565e48/attachment.htm>


More information about the General mailing list