[General] separate the inertial and gravitational aspects of mass

[Vivian Robinson]

Hodge,

I see nothing in those references that suggest any difference. If you wish it to be accepted, please state your case clearly from experimental observation, as distinct from inferring it from a theoretical interpretation.

Cheers,

Vivian Robinson. 

> From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of Hodge John
> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 11:42 AM
> To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
> Subject: [General] separate the inertial and gravitational aspects of mass
>  
> Vivian Robinson:
> I suggest the following experiment does separate the inertial and gravitational aspects of mass.
>  
> Diffraction experiment and its STOE photon simulation program rejects wave models of light http://intellectualarchive.com/?link=item&id=1603
>  
> STOE assumptions that model particle diffraction and that replaces QM
> http://intellectualarchive.com/?link=item&id=1719
>  
> The proposed photon model predicted this experiment. Some of the required postulates to make the model match experimental observations are to separate the inertial and gravitational mass. No other model of the photon or of diffraction fits the observation.
>  
> The diffraction model also explains the “walking drop” observation of Fig. 5c in Bush,~J.W.M., 2015,The new wave of pilot-wave theory, Physics Today, 68(8), 47
> http://newfos.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/Pilot_Waves_Phys_Today_Aug_2015.pdf
> wherein the inertia of the medium allows the wave to reflect and influence the drop that caused the wave. Compare Fig. 5c of Bush with Fig. 1 of “Diffraction experiment …”
>  
> Hodge
>  
>  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20160605/d133b5da/attachment.htm>