[General] Axes plots

Tue Jun 23 21:27:34 PDT 2015

Chip,

David is right!  Don't quote me!

Regards, John W.
________________________________
From: General [general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] on behalf of David Mathes [davidmathes8 at yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2015 4:58 AM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
Cc: Nick Bailey; Anthony Booth; Manohar .; Kyran Williamson; Ariane Mandray
Subject: Re: [General] Axes plots

John

Unless there is a paper or book they have published,  I do not quote individuals. The rest is heresay and too risky to quote.

D

________________________________
From: John Williamson <John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk>
To: David Mathes <davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
Cc: Manohar . <manohar_berlin at hotmail.com>; Nick Bailey <nick at bailey-family.org.uk>; Anthony Booth <abooth at ieee.org>; Ariane Mandray <ariane.mandray at wanadoo.fr>; Kyran Williamson <kyran_williamson at hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: [General] Axes plots

Dear Chip and David,

Feel free to quote me on anything - with the proviso that you do not set me up as an authority on anything. I change at least one of my minds at least once a day. Even then am in two minds about nearly everything! Further, on qunatisation, I think Andrew had it right when he posed the question "is a bell quantised" earlier.

David - to make some progress towards the way-out how about moving passages. As in ..

Twisting passages of little maze

or substituting the general "little" for something more precise (within a magnitude or three)

Twisting passages of femto-maze

Now we metre-magnitude monkeys are getting closer to all our models of the electron!

Now lets all proceed (in an orderly fashion) onwards and upwards (and round and round in circles) to the way out of the quantum (a) maze ...

Cheers, -John W.
________________________________

From: General [general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] on behalf of David Mathes [davidmathes8 at yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 10:14 PM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
Subject: Re: [General] Axes plots

John, Chip and all,

I view quantization as low hanging fruit and something to keep the QM people busy calculating the odds instead of playing online poker.

In the London subway, there is a sign "Way out". Now normally way-out means something extra ordinary or even avant-garde.

However, "Way out" is used to indicate that the path is going to be long and not merely a quick EXIT to the surface.

I'm sure other phrases were considered. In the Tube, the path with stairs and escalators will be sort of a cross between the game Chutes and Ladders and Colossal Cave Adventure with variations on the theme phrase of "little maze of twisting passages." One needed to draw a map to reduce the amount of repetitive moves and get out of the cave system.

There were actually two types of caves - all alike and all different.
little maze of twisting passages, all alike
little maze of twisting passages, all different

Pay attention to detail since variants included:

  *   Little maze of twisting passages
  *   Little maze of twisty passages
  *   Little twisty maze of passages
  *   Maze of little twisting passages
  *   Maze of little twisty passages
  *   Maze of twisting little passages
  *   Maze of twisty little passages
  *   Twisting little maze of passages
  *   Twisting maze of little passages
  *   Twisty little maze of passages
  *   Twisty maze of little passages

Way out is sufficient for me even if at times it's a double entendre.

Best

David

________________________________
From: Chip Akins <chipakins at gmail.com>
To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion' <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: [General] Axes plots

Hi John

Very well said!!!

May I cite you regarding this statement?

There is a disease which I do not fully understand which seems to have infected nearly every physicist living and most for about the last hundred years. That is the desire to "quantise" everything from the beginning. It seems to me that, if you do that, you lose the possibility of finding out why things are quantised all. You are already lost. Ok it is kind of nice to put in something that you observe experimentally as an axiom, I suppose. Poor choice if you want to understand the origins of quantisation though.

Chip

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of John Williamson
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 1:33 PM
To: David Mathes; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
Cc: Nick Bailey; Anthony Booth; Manohar .; Ariane Mandray
Subject: Re: [General] Axes plots

Could not agree more.

There is far far more unknown than known for all of us collectively. Further, any of our competences is dwarfed by those of all of us.

I see it now. Seuss was right all along (as always) and we need to go onto that new alphabet!

Gonna use it in the new paper ... watch this space ...

Cheers,

John.
________________________________
From: David Mathes [davidmathes8 at yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 4:16 PM
To: John Williamson; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
Cc: Nick Bailey; Anthony Booth; Manohar .; Ariane Mandray
Subject: Re: [General] Axes plots
John,

"It's high time you were shown
That you really don't know
All there is to be known."

"In the places I go there are things that I see
That I never could spell if I stopped with the Z.
I'm telling you this 'cause you're one of my friends.
My alphabet starts where your alphabet ends!"

>From Seuss, T.G. "On Beyond Zebra" 1955

David

________________________________
From: John Williamson <John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk>>
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org<mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>>
Cc: Nick Bailey <nick at bailey-family.org.uk<mailto:nick at bailey-family.org.uk>>; Anthony Booth <abooth at ieee.org<mailto:abooth at ieee.org>>; Manohar . <manohar_berlin at hotmail.com<mailto:manohar_berlin at hotmail.com>>; Ariane Mandray <ariane.mandray at wanadoo.fr<mailto:ariane.mandray at wanadoo.fr>>; David Mathes <davidmathes8 at yahoo.com<mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 3:50 AM
Subject: RE: [General] Axes plots

Dear David and Andrew,

There is a disease which I do not fully understand which seems to have infected nearly every physicist living and most for about the last hundred years. That is the desire to "quantise" everything from the beginning. It seems to me that, if you do that, you lose the possibility of finding out why things are quantised all. You are already lost. Ok it is kind of nice to put in something that you observe experimentally as an axiom, I suppose. Poor choice if you want to understand the origins of quantisation though.

Andrew, then, raises an important point. Why not a continuum indeed? I think the proper answer lies in the relationship between things - not in the things themselves. Things inter-act. Charge is, at root, (at least an invitation to) an inter-action.

Imagine a bunch of such inter-actors in a (universe sized) box. They do what they do. They inter-act. Now imagine some of them are bigger, faster, better inter-actors. It turns out that the universal law that big is small and small is large makes these the little guys. Small, loud and shrill. They throw out their stuff to all and sundry - losing energy (and hence getting bigger) in the process. The stuff they throw out is more likely to find the (bigger) quiet ones - hence shrinking them. Meanwhile (being small) they do not get a lot of stuff back. In time, if you have enough inter-actors then all tend to the same size and potency. Apparent uniformity (quantisation) is then just a result of thermodynamic exchange.

Discuss!

Regards, John W.

P.S. Spin is different!

________________________________
From: General [general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] on behalf of Andrew Meulenberg [mules333 at gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 11:28 AM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
Cc: Nick Bailey; Anthony Booth; Manohar .; Ariane Mandray; David Mathes
Subject: Re: [General] Axes plots
Dear John W. and all,
If you start with a circularly-polarized photon, give it one full twist per wavelength (to 'unwind' it), and then close it at any point, could you not create the out-going E-field that we attribute to the electron or positron? However, since there is no reason to join the twisted photon only at integer wavelengths, then the electron would not have fixed properties. The only thing fixed would be the amount of twist per wavelength. What causes the photon twist in any of the models and, if the above model is correct, why don't we have particles with a continuum of charge (and spin?) values?
Andrew
__________________________________

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:19 AM, John Williamson <John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk>> wrote:
Here are some using a set of axes, as in the POS paper circulated earlier

Torfieldrock just shows three views of a positron.

Torfieldsinglemin0.4 is just a simple double loop. Not too busy.

Trockrevert is similar to the first, but with a glass torus.

Cheers, John.

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at mules333 at gmail.com<mailto:mules333 at gmail.com>
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at davidmathes8 at yahoo.com<mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at davidmathes8 at yahoo.com<mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.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/20150624/a4105ab0/attachment.htm>