[General] Fwd: A composite electron?

Sat Sep 23 23:44:35 PDT 2017

Hello Martin, 
You must have been accidentally left off of the reply list.  So I am forwarding Wolf’s latest reply which is directed partly to you. You can send any reply back to general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> . You are also welcome to join the discussion group if you like.
     with warm regards,
          Richard

> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Wolfgang Baer <wolf at nascentinc.com>
> Subject: Re: [General] A composite electron?
> Date: September 23, 2017 at 11:14:31 PM PDT
> To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
> Reply-To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
> 
> I  looked at Martin's
> 
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299636714_Kinematical_Theory_of_Elementary_Spinning_Particles_Lecture_Notes <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299636714_Kinematical_Theory_of_Elementary_Spinning_Particles_Lecture_Notes>
> and was
> Quite interested in several problems he discussed. First the question of how to address charge separation from mass when charge  cancels to a neutral. I’ve had the same thoughts that somehow one must treat the centers of positive and negative charge separately and then put them together. I do not know if he is listening but one idea I have been mulling through is that the sign of charge is somehow associated with the observers time , so that plus and minus charge is associated with before and after the observers now. Just a wiff of something going through my head.
> 
>  
> The other however is the force relationship between the Lorenz force on one side and the Newtonian force on the mass
> 
> He then equates the two but that leaves a separate pull on a charge and one on a mass. So I’ve postulated a force holding the two together and approximated the force between charge and mass as Fcm and its opposite Fmc as two additional forces that must happen inside material and have been trying to connect them to the weak and strong force, but without success. Mainly because I do not know that much about elementary particles.
> 
>  But it is clear to me that we have two parallel systems of force categories when looking at material from the outside. One is Electromagnetic governed by Maxwell and the Lorenz force on charges the other is Gravito-inertial forces governed by Einstein
> 
> We just assume charge and mass must be held together or these two force types would operate completely independently and we would have nothing of the kind of material we actually experience.
> 
>  I’ve modeled such internal force simply by a spring with a spring constant that is infinity when we assume charge and mass are co located, but then as the spring constant become finite all kinds of interesting effects can happen. One I’ve asked Albrecht to look at is to see if we consider the Bohr atom and assume that the central force between proton and electron pulls the mass and charges apart slightly. The coulomb force would be a bit greater since the inertial balancing force would pull the mass outward. 
>             Would such a system account for the fine structure? And would we get Sommerfelds fine structure constant out of it. I do not have the background to do such a calculation but wish I could find someone who could do it or have a reference to someone who has done it.If you get any leads on thios kind of thing let me know
> 
> Perhaps Martin if you are listening could shed light on this problem with his Kinem,atic Theory of elementary particles?
> best for now
> 
> 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 9/22/2017 9:36 PM, Andrew Meulenberg wrote:
>> Dear Wolf,
>> 
>> This whole concept is new to me (only weeks old), so i can't recommend anything yet. I'm just trying to find the time to scan/read what looks promising. However, it may be something to draw a number of models together (given a little 'wiggle-room'). . 
>> 
>> One of the questions to be addressed is certainly on what holds the centers together. So, your thoughts could be very important. My first instinct is to look at the whirlpool effect as exemplified by the Falaco effect (see various papers like  Falaco solitons, cosmic strings in a swimming pool <https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0101098>  RM Kiehn - arXiv preprint gr-qc/0101098, 2001 - arxiv.org <http://arxiv.org/>). I am slow with the mathematics; nevertheless, I find the concept to be useful and now I can apply it to the polarizability of, and forces between, two centers. My preference at the moment is to assume relativity and 3-space + time.
>> 
>> Richard has shown that his charged photon concept has wiggle room and therefore it is probably compatible with my present concepts (which also have wiggle room). Both of our models may be compatible with a 2-center model. 
>> 
>> I fear that Albrecht's twin particle model may not be given the wiggle room to incorporate the two-center model. If so, that is too bad, because both models might benefit from the comparison.
>> 
>> Since my twins were born, I have not had time to keep up with most of the discussions of this forum. (This lack of time is the result of a different 2-center model. Just this evening, I had two pair of glasses, which I had left on my laptop, nearly destroyed.) So pointing out important threads might be necessary to bring me up-to-speed on some of the things presented as they pertain to the present discussion.
>> 
>> Andrew M.
>> _________________
>> 
>> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Wolfgang Baer <wolf at nascentinc.com <mailto:wolf at nascentinc.com>> wrote:
>> Andrew:
>> 
>> I've been working on the concept of charge and mass center differences and forces thaT MAY HOLD THEM TOGETHER 
>> You mention quite a few papers which one or which set would you recommend  to find out more about what has been proposed?
>> 
>> And yes I have suggested this to Albrecht but he has not felt it was what he has in mind, his idea is that the two rotating chrges are purely a elecromagnetic strong or weak force, I cannot remember which
>> 
>> 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 9/20/2017 2:45 PM, Andrew Meulenberg wrote:
>>> Dear Richard and Albrecht,
>>> 
>>> Richard has expressed doubts about Albrecht's 2-body electron and Albrecht probably has reservations about Richard's charged photons.
>>> 
>>> I just read a paper ("The dynamical equation of the spinning electron," J. Phys. A, 36, 4703, (2003), and also LANL ArXiv:physis/0112005, along.with some background papers) that Richard has referenced in his: The Dirac Equation and the Superluminal Electron Model (https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research#papers <https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research#papers>). I found a concept with which I was previously unfamiliar: the centers of mass and charge being different. If this interesting concept is valid; then it might be possible that the two centers are the 'objects' that Albrecht has proposed for his composite electron. It might also apply to the charged photon.
>>> 
>>> Has anyone any comments on this concept (or n the author of the paper: Martin Rivas)?
>>> 
>>> Andrew M
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.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 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 <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 Wolf at nascentinc.com <mailto:Wolf at nascentinc.com>
>> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.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 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>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170923/e5f35b99/attachment.htm>