[General] Reply of comments from what a model…

Fri Nov 13 04:25:19 PST 2015

Hello Richard,

those uncertainties which are typical for the Copenhagen version of QM 
occur as single events for a short time. (In my personal understanding 
they are uncertainties of measurement and not uncertainties of reality.) 
So, if the conservation of momentum would be permanently violated in a 
particle with a specific tendency, this seems not covered by any 
assumption of QM.

And, if you assume a violation of spatial symmetry in the electron, 
which position in space would permanently deviate from the rest of space 
if looking into the electron? The electron would then have to 
permanently alter space at a specific place inside. Do you have an idea 
about a mechanism which can cause that?

To have evidence for my particle model in a high energy experiment is a 
problem because the sub-particles are mass-less. So the particle cannot 
be decomposed by elastic scattering, that is a problem, true. But as I 
have mentioned in my last comment to Al Kracklauer, Frank Wilczek has 
mentioned an experiment where in a situation of superconductivity and 
high pressure half-electrons were observed. Again the article:

http://www.nature.com/articles/498031a.epdf?referrer_access_token=ben9To-3oo1NBniBt2zIw9RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Mr0WZkh3ZGwaOU__QIZA8EEsfyjmdvPM68ya-MFh194zghek6jh7WqtGYeYWmES35o2U71x2DQVk0PFLoHQk5V5M-cak670GmcqKy2iZm7PPrWZKcv_J3SBA-hRXn4VJI1r9NxMvgmKog-topZaM03&tracking_referrer=www.nature.com: 

Another topic which we have discussed earlier: In San Diego you asked me 
for this apparent problem that at motion the internal frequency of a 
particle has to be dilated on the one hand, but on the other hand must 
be increased to reflect the increased energy. How is this treated in my 
model? I am sorry that I have given you an incorrect answer (Doppler). 
In this context I misunderstood relativistic dilation. There is in fact 
no such conflict. - I am going to explain this in a separate paper as it 
needs some more words and mathematics.

Albrecht

Am 12.11.2015 um 16:04 schrieb Richard Gauthier:
> Hello Albrecht,
>
>    There is a very well-known paper by Bohr, Kramers and Slater (the 
> BKS paper) in 1924 that challenged conservation of energy and momentum 
> in individual electron-photon reactions except on a statistical level. 
> That hypothesis was disproved experimentally by more detailed 
> Compton-type experiments. Bohr admitted that experiments had proved 
> their hypothesis wrong. Obviously I am not proposing going against 
> accepted experimental evidence. But no one has done such experiments 
> at the sub-particle level for an electron that  am aware of, since 
> electrons are not even supposed in standard model physics to have a 
> sub-particle structure (except for a cloud of e-p pairs surround a 
> bare charge). But high energy experiments DO show no evidence for a 
> 2-particle structure of the electron as in your model.
>
> In the double-loop photon model the value of delta x delta p (i.e. 
> Xrms x Prms) for the circulating photon moving in a radius hbar/2mc 
> with circulating momentum mc falls (as I recall) below the Heisenberg 
> uncertainty principle cutoff value of hbar/2 . Perhaps this means that 
> such a possible “violation” of conservation of momentum by a single 
> quantum particle at this level is permitted since such a violation 
> cannot (at least theoretically according to Heisenberg) be detected. 
> And yes, perhaps this spatial symmetry rule doesn’t apply at this level.
>
> Richard
>
>
>> On Nov 12, 2015, at 6:20 AM, Dr. Albrecht Giese <genmail at a-giese.de 
>> <mailto:genmail at a-giese.de>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Richard,
>>
>> of course you are right, physicists have to be prepared to question 
>> anything which is currently believed in physics. However:
>>
>> Before we give up a physical law which is very fundamental, we should 
>> be aware of the price we have to pay. If we give up the conservation 
>> of momentum, then we give up the symmetry of space (and also Newton's 
>> 3rd law) which are the causes of this conservation. And if we give up 
>> those fundamentals, then more than 99% of what our present view of 
>> the physical world is, will be void. Is this a price you are willing 
>> to pay?
>>
>> So again, you are clearly right from the fundamental view, but I 
>> think that the requirement for a single-particle model is not strong 
>> enough to give up something like spacial symmetry.  - Acceptable?
>>
>> Albrecht
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 11.11.2015 um 23:09 schrieb Richard Gauthier:
>>> Hello Albrecht,
>>>     If conservation of momentum was "never ever" questioned in 
>>> physics, then physicists haven’t been doing their job, which (among 
>>> other things) is to continually question everything about physical 
>>> laws. Physical laws (including quantum mechanics) are just a summary 
>>> of what is physically believed to be the case in the physical world, 
>>> based on current and past evidence. No physical law is a sacred cow 
>>> and unquestionable, because it could be disproved or modified 
>>> tomorrow, or later today, by new evidence to the contrary.
>>>        Richard
>>>
>>>> On Nov 11, 2015, at 1:39 PM, Dr. Albrecht Giese <genmail at a-giese.de 
>>>> <mailto:genmail at a-giese.de>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello Richard,
>>>>
>>>> I think that the conservation of momentum is one of the most 
>>>> fundamental laws in physics. It is even more fundamental than the 
>>>> conservation of energy. If now an object is made to move on a 
>>>> circuit there must be a force or something else which causes the 
>>>> acceleration. A second object solves this problem. - So there is in 
>>>> my understanding no need for an experiment as the conservation of 
>>>> momentum was never ever questioned in physics (to my knowledge).
>>>>
>>>> You mention a /double /loop. Does this mean any difference?
>>>>
>>>> Albrecht
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 11.11.2015 um 17:44 schrieb Richard Gauthier:
>>>>> Hello Albrecht,
>>>>>    Also, who has ever experimentally tested the conservation of 
>>>>> momentum law for a single photon circulating in a double-loop at 
>>>>> light speed in a circle of radius hbar/2mc? I think nobody.
>>>>>        Richard
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 11, 2015, at 8:27 AM, af.kracklauer at web.de wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 11. November 2015 um 11:54 Uhr
>>>>>> *Von:* "Dr. Albrecht Giese" <genmail at a-giese.de>
>>>>>> *An:* general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
>>>>>> *Betreff:* Re: [General] Reply of comments from what a model…
>>>>>> Hi  Albrecht:
>>>>>> You said:  A model with only one particle is in my view also not 
>>>>>> possible as it violates the conservation of momentum. A single 
>>>>>> object can never oscillate.
>>>>>> I ask:   Why can't a single particle oscillate against, or in 
>>>>>> consort with, its own virtual image. (Presuming there is charge 
>>>>>> complex around---mirror in 2d, negative sphere (I think) in 3d)?
>>>>>> ciao,  Al
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Avast logo <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> 	
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.
>>>>>> www.avast.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________ If you no longer 
>>>>>> wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and 
>>>>>> Particles General Discussion List at af.kracklauer at web.de Click 
>>>>>> here to unsubscribe 
>>>>>> <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of 
>>>>>> Light and Particles General Discussion List at richgauthier at gmail.com
>>>>>> <a 
>>>>>> href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
>>>>>> Click here to unsubscribe
>>>>>> </a>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Avast logo <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> 	
>>>>
>>>> Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.
>>>> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Avast logo <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> 	
>>
>> Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.
>> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>
>>
>

---
Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20151113/c83033f7/attachment.htm>