[General] CLASSICAL,QUANTUM MECHANICS

Sun May 6 05:08:28 PDT 2018

Dear Andrew,

Thanks for the appreciation.

De Broglie was very aware also of the physical existence of the relativistic mass increment that Marmet confirmed in 2003 was directly related to the energy of the magnetic field, and even calculated it in a paper that I forgot to mention in my recent paper, but that he could not relate to the magnetic field since Marmet discovery was still in the future.

If you need this reference as more historical precedent, you can find his calculation on top of page 8 of his paper ref: "The Reinterpretation of Wave Mechanics", Foundations of Physics, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1970.

Best Regards

André
---

André Michaud
GSJournal admin
http://www.gsjournal.net/
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2740-5684
http://www.srpinc.org/

On Sun, 6 May 2018 04:52:21 -0400, Andrew Meulenberg  wrote:

Dear Andre,

Thank you for providing the link to your paper. I'm only 1/10 the way thru it and have already found 1/2 dozen points (with references) that are important bases to my views of physics. It is nice to know that some of them have historical precedent. I have 2 papers, which I need to publish, that can use yours as a reference.

Andrew M.
_ _ _

On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 11:53 PM, André Michaud <srp2 at srpinc.org> wrote:

Hi Wolfgang,

To your first question, 

>From equation (5-22) and afferent text, page 132 in reference "Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules, Solids, Nuclei, and Particles - Second edition", by R. Eisberg and R.Resnick, Schrödinger's equation had an imaginary part from the get go.

Initially, Schrödinger meant the wave function to represent a resonance volume within which the localized electron remained captive when in bound state:

http://file.scirp.org/Html/17-7503469_84158.htm

Best Regards

André

---
André Michaud
GSJournal admin
http://www.gsjournal.net/
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2740-5684
http://www.srpinc.org/

On Sat, 5 May 2018 19:25:17 -0700, Wolfgang Baer wrote:

Two questions:

1) Nina Sotina's paper in The Vigier 10 proceedings points out something that has puzzled me for a long time. Schroedinger's 1926 paper introducing the Wave function was a real classic function not an imaginary. In october 1926 Von Madelung derived a classic hydrodynamic formulation of quantum theory but did so from the Schroedinger equation with an imaginary wave function. Both Schroedinger's and Madelung's derivation suggests they thought QM waves were real, an interpretation, which I tend to favor.

Were and who introduced the imaginary?

2) Along those lines I just ran into

THE GRAND UNIFIED THEORY OF CLASSICAL QUANTUM MECHANICS by Dr. Randell Mills

The guy knows a lot of physics and claims he can explain the results of quantum theory from purely classical physics.

His claim that the electron is a charge shell rather than a probability is similar to my CAT theory, only my rational is to

analyze quantum theory as a mental projection of the observer i.e. as the physics of the observer.

Is this guy a bullshitter? Anyone heard of him?

http://brilliantlightpower.com/theory-overview/

Theory Overview:

The claim that classic physics “ only the simple laws of Newton’s Mechanics, Maxwell’s equations of electricity, magnetism, and electrodynamics, and the fundamental constants of nature” are adequate to explain “All observables from quarks to cosmos … in closed-form analytical expressions containing fundamental constants only.”

“According to Mills GUT-CP, nature is classical. Electrons, when bound in an atom, are considered to be discrete two-dimensional spherical membranes of charge and current that completely surround the nucleus as a bubble.”

“Mills GUT-CP is a confirmable theory, … Data sets include the electron spin, g-factor, ionization energies of 1-20 electron atoms and ions (400 states); the state lifetimes and line intensities of hydrogen; the excited states of helium; the excited states of H2, the relationships between the masses of fundamental particles; the bond distances, energies, angles, and dipole moments of over 800 molecules; and the parameters of a variety of extended solids. From the molecular theory, Brilliant Light Power has launched a molecular modeling subsidiary, Millsian Inc.

“ The essence of GUTCP is that every solution is for the true or real source of the observable wherein any solution of an observable as the inherent information for all observables that can be related to that observable.”

Here is a a site to down load his book

http://brilliantlightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/theory/GUT-CP-2016-Ed-Book-Web-121517.pdf

-- 
Wolfgang Baer
Nascent Systems Inc. 
380W. Carmel Valley Rd.
Carmel Valley, CA 93924 USA
Wolf at NascentInc.com

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at srp2 at srpinc.org

Click here to unsubscribe

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at 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>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20180506/73931f96/attachment.html>