[General] CLASSICAL,QUANTUM MECHANICS

Sun May 6 06:27:36 PDT 2018

Dear  André,

Thank you for the additional reference.

It will help in my publication of a paper that, 5 years ago, the American
Journal of Physics rejected in 8 minutes. I showed, with simple algebra,
that the increase in relativistic-EM mass during electron/positron
annihilation exactly matched the loss of mass (relative to the rest mass)
from the proximity of the two leptons. Thus, the transition from charged
bodies to photons was a continuous (not quantum) process that conserved
energy. I don't think that the rejecting editor ever got past the cover
letter and read the abstract, but I attributed that to the fact that I was
blacklisted because I had published papers on Cold Fusion.

Best regards,

Andrew
_ _ _ _

On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 8:08 AM, André Michaud <srp2 at srpinc.org> wrote:

> 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
>> <http://www.millsian.com/>.
>>
>> “ 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
>> <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 USAWolf at NascentInc.com <Support 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
>> <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/srp2%40srpinc.org?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20180506/7ed5052e/attachment.html>