[General] (no subject)
Chip Akins
chipakins at gmail.com
Mon Jan 25 14:44:19 PST 2016
Hi All
I am looking for any thoughts or insight regarding the masses of the
particles. Specifically the electron, muon, proton neutron, and tau.
Recently I have been searching for a physical explanation of why the
following 4th order polynomial predicts these masses (Energies).
E = 2.16215091940284E-11n4 - 2.57974739967757E-10n3 + 1.06568810515144E-09n2
- 1.69871730871029E-09n + 8.69464305369825E-10
Chip
From: General
[mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.
org] On Behalf Of Roychoudhuri, Chandra
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 3:09 PM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
<general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
Subject: Re: [General] (no subject)
Friends:
I am of the opinion that all waves are excited states of their respective
mother tension field. They do not even carry energy. The externally
perturbing energy; which disturbed the quiescent state of the tension field
holding all the energy; gets perpetually pushed away by the mother tension
field to regain its original state of equilibrium (quiescence). This is at
the foundation of perpetual wave propagation; the velocity is being
determined by the intrinsic tension properties of the tension field. This is
built into our LINEAR wave equation! Linear superposition only means that
within the linear domain (sum of all amplitudes) in the local tension field;
all waves can co-propagate and cross-propagate away as per their original
Poynting vectors without picking up any memory of their temporary
co-local-propagation.
SP, the Superposition Principle is a very smart starting-step
mathematical-logic invention by humans to structure the energy exchange
process with a resonant detector - as the square modulus of the sum-total
complex amplitudes. Then what we measure is Superposition Effect SE. This
non-linear square modulus physical OPERATION can be carried out only by some
resonant detector; not by the field themselves. That is why superposed
fields do not re-organize their intrinsic energy; they still are propagating
as various excited AMPLITUDE states of the tension field. Within the tension
field, which still holds all the tension energies, they still remain
dedicated to individual waves. That is why finite size waves, when emerge
out of each other, do not have any memory of their earlier encounter. This
what I have been describing as Non-Interaction of Waves (NIW).
SE is an observable phenomenon of nature; SP is not. That is why nobody is
going to make quantum computers using mathematical logic based upon SP only.
If we want to build something physical; we better build that logic based
upon measurable SE. God is not going to change its operating rules just
because we have already invested hundreds of millions of dollars to make
quantum computers based upon non-observable logics of SP (single photon
interference) over the past several decades. Neither can photon have mass;
just like we do not assign mass to undulation surface tension field (water
waves). Yes, water itself does have inertia to motion (“mass”).
Chandra.
From: General
[mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightan
dparticles.org] On Behalf Of Wolfgang Baer
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 2:44 PM
To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
<mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
Subject: Re: [General] (no subject)
Does this not all start with the E=mc^2 energy mass equivalence postulate?
A moving photon has energy therefore mass , if the wave is confined to a
circular path the mass could be considered stationary
The equations can all be manipulated to come up with various quantities and
interpretations.
What to me is problematic is the centrifugal forces. What balances the
tremendous outward pull?
An electron only has charge that repels, and now centrifugal forces, what
holds it all together?
Wolf
Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com <mailto:wolf at NascentInc.com>
On 1/25/2016 8:33 AM, Albrecht Giese wrote:
Dear Richard,
you know that I object to your derivation of inertial mass. You deduce it
from momentum. That is mathematically possible by using the known relations.
But it is not logical in so far as momentum depends on inertia. In a world
without inertia there would be no momentum.
So we have to explain first the mechanism of inertia itself, then we can
derive the momentum and the inertial mass.
Best
Albrecht
Am 24.01.2016 um 20:42 schrieb Richard Gauthier:
Hello Vladimir and Chandra and all,
Yes, I definitely support the idea of the ether as material space, and
that all physical particles are derived from this ether. This ether can also
be called a plenum or Cosmic Tension Field.
I don’t however think that it is necessary to explain the inertial mass
of particles in relation to a "coefficient of inertia” or "the amount of
momentum the ether resists." I have shown
(https://www.academia.edu/19652036/The_Origin_of_the_Electrons_Inertia ) by
a very simple derivation that the inertial mass m of an electron may be
derived from the momentum of the circling photon in a circulating-photon
model of the electron, whose circling photon has momentum mc where m =
Eo/c^2 = hf/c^2 , where Eo is the rest energy 0.511 MeV of the electron and
f is the frequency of the circulating photon in the resting electron.
Secondly, in a similar way I derived a linearly moving photon's inertial
mass to be M-inertial = hf/c^2 , where f is the photon’s frequency, even
though a photon has zero rest mass. Thirdly, I derived the inertial mass of
a relativistic electron, whose momentum is p=gamma mv, to be M-inertial =
gamma m , even though the moving electron's rest mass is m.
I present these derivations below, taken from the academia.edu
<http://academia.edu> session on my electron inertia article at
https://www.academia.edu/s/a26afd55e0?source=link :
"One reason people don’t think that a photon has any inertial mass (because
it has no rest mass) is that how do you get a photon to change its momentum
(i.e. accelerate) in order to measure its inertial mass. It can’t go faster
or slower than c in a vacuum, so it can’t accelerate in a linear direction,
and in normal physics a photon doesn’t follow a curved path (except with
gravity), which would make it possible to measure its centripetal
acceleration c^2/R . But as I showed in my short electron inertia article at
https://www.academia.edu/19652036/The_Origin_of_the_Electrons_Inertia
<https://www.academia.edu/19652036/The_Origin_of_%20%20th%0A%20e_Elect%0A%0A
rons_Inertia> , the electron model in a resting electron has the photon
going in a circle, with momentum mc and speed c, and the electron's inertial
mass is then calculated to be M-inertial =(dp/dt)/Acentrifugal =wmc/(c^2/r)=
m which is the inertial mass of the electron. But this calculation of the
circling charged photon's inertial mass is independent of the radius of the
charged photon’s circular orbit. Let that circular radius go towards
infinity and you get a photon traveling in essentially a straight line,
still having its inertial mass M =hf/c^2 (where the photon frequency f
decreases as the radius of the circle increases) . So according to this
logic, a linearly moving photon DOES have inertial mass M-inertial =hf/c^2
even though a photon has zero rest mass. And when a relativistic electron
with momentum p=gamma mv travels in a circle with speed v, the inertial mass
calcul ation ab ove gives M -in ertial = gamma m for a circling relativistic
electron, and not just m the electron’s rest mass . Extending the radius
here towards infinity also gives a linearly moving electron an inertial mass
M = gamma m and not just the electron's rest mass m."
As far as I know these are all original derivations of the inertial
mass of a resting electron, a photon and a relativistic electron based on a
circulating photon model of an electron. I would be pleased to be shown
otherwise.
Richard
On Jan 24, 2016, at 6:42 AM, Roychoudhuri, Chandra
<chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu <mailto:chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu> >
wrote:
Yes, Vlad, that is also my viewpoint.
I do not remember whether I have attached this paper while communicating
with you earlier. I call the “plenum” Cosmic Tension Field (CTF), to be
descriptive in its essential properties.
Chandra.
From: General
[mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightan
dparticles.org] On Behalf Of Vladimir Tamari
Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2016 7:00 PM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
Subject: Re: [General] (no subject)
Hi Richard
I barge into your discussion without knowing your views on a "plenum field"
but if it is an ether I definitely think there is one. A "coefficent of
inertia" might be defined as the amount of momentum the ether resists. In a
charged or gravitational field this coefficent would increase...I think of
this in terms of my Beautiful Universe ether of dielectric nodes, except
this may give the wrong idea it is something matter wades in.. not so.
Matter and ether are made if the selfsame nodes of energy!
Cheers
Vladimir
_____________________
<http://vladimirtamari.com/> vladimirtamari.com
On Jan 21, 2016, at 7:41 AM, Richard Gauthier <richgauthier at gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Hodge,
I don’t remember asking that. But if I did, I’m glad the question was
helpful.
I’m thinking about inertia these days. Do you or others have any insights
about its nature?
Richard
On Jan 20, 2016, at 1:43 PM, Hodge John <jchodge at frontier.com
<mailto:jchodge at frontier.com> > wrote:
Richard Gauthier:
You asked if the galaxy redshift, Pioneer anomaly, Pound--Rebka experiment
model had a velocity term. I looked at redshift data for 1 galaxy and found
no indication of a velocity term.
I had not noticed this in the equations. Your suggestion that the plenum
field can look like the Higgs field seems valid. That is, the acceleration
of the plenum field looks like it adds energy (mass) is a Higgs Field
characteristic. Thus, the plenum is closer to the idea of a quantum field
and Higgs field (weak force).
Thanks for the insight.
Hodge
_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at richgauthier at gmail.com
<mailto:richgauthier at gmail.com>
<a href="
<http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureofligh
tandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflight
andparticles.org/richgauthier%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 <mailto:vladimirtamari at hotmail.com>
vladimirtamari at hotmail.com
<a href="
<http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureofligh
tandparticles.org/vladimirtamari%40hotmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflight
andparticles.org/vladimirtamari%40hotmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
<2012.2_JMP_Space as real
field.pdf>_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at richgauthier at gmail.com
<mailto:richgauthier at gmail.com>
<a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureo
flightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1
<http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureofligh
tandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=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 phys at a-giese.de
<mailto:phys at a-giese.de>
<a href=
<http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureofligh
tandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureofligh
tandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai
gn=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
Diese E-Mail wurde von einem virenfreien Computer gesendet, der von Avast
geschützt wird.
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai
gn=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> www.avast.com
_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at Wolf at nascentinc.com
<mailto:Wolf at nascentinc.com>
<a href=
<http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureofligh
tandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureofligh
tandparticles.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/20160125/f5b03bef/attachment.htm>
More information about the General
mailing list