From chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu Wed Apr 1 08:33:15 2020 From: chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu (Roychoudhuri, Chandra) Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 15:33:15 +0000 Subject: [General] New paper: Something is Rotten in the State of QED In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello everybody! I hope all of you are safe and well. Please, take all possible precautions to stay away from COVID-19. It is a ruthless virus, especially, if the body is compromised due to some other ailments. Fortunately, the real death rate is a tiny tiny fraction of one percent when you consider the global population to be over 7 Billion. Even the recovery rate is hovering around 96%, or better, for those who have been hospitalized with COVID-19. So relax, rest, exercise (especially, breathing exercises) and enjoy good food. Intellectual exercise is also an important component of maintaining good health. Thank you Viv, Oliver and everybody else for keeping up the discussions on the fact that the foundational physics-thinking has to be re-visited and re-structured from the very beginning. Sincerely, Chandra. Sent from my iPhone On Mar 11, 2020, at 12:44 AM, Viv Robinson wrote: ? *Message sent from a system outside of UConn.* Dear Oliver, Thank you for your report. I share your sentiments and express my displeasure in the following way. "QED seems very good in obtaining an expression for the anomalous magnetic moment of an electron, that differs from the actual by about 1%, yet in another field it requires the universe to have an energy density of ? 10^120 higher than is measured". I guess that is one of "The problem of infinities?. I am of the opinion that it is better to have a theory that explains the 10^-10 J/m^3 density of the universe and differs by about 1% for the observed value of the electron?s magnetic moment, than to have something that differs by 10^120 but accurately explains an error of ? 1% Cheers, Vivian Robinson On 11 March 2020 at 7:12:36 AM, oliver consa (oliver.consa at gmail.com) wrote: Dear fellow scientist, I send you this mail because you have been skeptical about Foundations of Physics. I think that this new paper will be of your interest. Feel free to share it with your colleagues or publish it on the web. I consider it important that this paper serves to open a public debate on this subject. Something is Rotten in the State of QED https://vixra.org/pdf/2002.0011v1.pdf Abstract "Quantum electrodynamics (QED) is considered the most accurate theory in the history of science. However, this precision is based on a single experimental value: the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron (g-factor). An examination of QED history reveals that this value was obtained using illegitimate mathematical traps, manipulations and tricks. These traps included the fraud of Kroll & Karplus, who acknowledged that they lied in their presentation of the most relevant calculation in QED history. As we will demonstrate in this paper, the Kroll & Karplus scandal was not a unique event. Instead, the scandal represented the fraudulent manner in which physics has been conducted from the creation of QED through today." (12 pag.) Best Regards, Oliver Consa oliver.consa at gmail.com _______________________________________________ If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at viv at universephysics.com Click here to unsubscribe _______________________________________________ If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu Click here to unsubscribe -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mules333 at gmail.com Sun Apr 5 10:49:00 2020 From: mules333 at gmail.com (Andrew Meulenberg) Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2020 12:49:00 -0500 Subject: [General] Williamson's "A new linear theory of light and matter" Message-ID: John, I finally had the time to read your paper. Congratulations! It is very well done (despite a few typos) and an important contribution. I have added this comment to the researchgate access to it. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333976356_A_new_linear_theory_of_light_and_matter/comments "I consider this to be the clearest, most-coherent, description of the math needed to describe both matter and EM radiation. While I do not completely agree with all of the conclusions, this is a major step in understanding fundamental physics at the elementary-particle level." The paper even provides a basis for a number of things that I have long felt (and sometimes expressed) but, for which, I have not been able give the necessary math. I hope to find time (from my young family and cold-fusion work) to discuss some of your concepts and conclusions. Best to all, ANDREW -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2018 Christmas family photo (cropped).jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 490895 bytes Desc: not available URL: From support at nascentinc.com Sun Apr 5 15:15:40 2020 From: support at nascentinc.com (Wolfgang Baer) Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2020 15:15:40 -0700 Subject: [General] New paper: Something is Rotten in the State of QED In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1a5706a5-81a1-1c92-667a-b3d93389ff98@NascentInc.com> Chandra: I'm sitting in California rain and loving the quarantine You have probably by now all heard of my "Conscious Action Book" published by Routledge press that I selfishly believe is the most advanced text on the 'Physics of Consciousness', a topic I consider the grandest challenge to science in general and physics in particular. By studying the physics that would be required to include a physical basis of consciousness I have found it necessary to return to the last time in history when physics was understandable and in conformity with personal experience and intuition. Oliver Consa's comments are in my opinion exactly what I found - almost a century of work around development guided by engineering necessities and lacking a coherent picture of any reality one can imagine. My position and Conscious Action Theory in the history of western thought is described below My approach is to incorporate the 1st-person perspective as first priority. If I cannot find myself, my existence, my own conscious living being in a theory then that theory for me is simply an engineering tool but such theories have no right or legitimacy in claiming to answer the larger questions and claims to be finding God particles, origin of life, who and what we really are, etc,etc.. Answers to these should not be claimed by such theories. In order to make progress I have specialized in establishing the foundations of physics back to the time of Plank> The physics then was understandable and most important in conformity with experience and intuition. From that start point my physics is based upon Goldstien's "Classical Mechanics" and Jackson's electrodynamics? texts , which are still used today. The fundamental basis of these books is to assume the existence and properties of mass, charge, space, time. These I understand intuitively. I see space around me, feel time flow through me, feel the weight of mass in the pull on my arm, and the effect of charge when I rub a rubber rod in cats fur. These four items foundationally anchor my physics in my experience and it is from this base that the beliefs of a conscious being, "I"? who wishes to know the world must be based. The development of quantum theory and Einsteins relativity are both incomplete because they try to develop theories without taking the human creator of the theories into account and therefore represent complicated work arounds precisely because they refuse to accept their own role in creating the reality they hope to discover. I also follow Whitehead =>de Broglie => Bohm(see diagram above) and go a step farther. The wave function in my theory described thought in physical terms as motion of material in which thought appears. Think of a computer unplugged - its a system in equilibrium that just sits there - you plug it in - electric disturbances propagate through the formerly static equilibrium state - modifying and changing the content of its memory. These disturbances are engineered by classic EM laws, but more fundamentally the movement in the memory can fundamentally be reduced to linear disturbances which appear in any field of equilibrium material. And these disturbances are characterized by Schroedinger's equation, SEE Appendix A5-1 in my book or Chapter 10 in Goldstien There you have quantum theory in a nut shell. Any stable system in equilibrium will host Schroedinger waves as long as the disturbances are small enough so as not to destroy the memory structure (Space) in which the disturbances propagate. .Furthermore when those disturbances form self regenerating disturbance loops we have the physical basis of conscious experiences. ? appendix A5-2 defines the wave function as The integral is a happening carried out by Nature, when carried out by quantum physicists it hides the activity in the form e^2??? i when added and multiplexed this form gives the Fourier transforms of quantum Theory. We should replace fundamental particles with fundamental events to straighten out physics and put it back on its proper course of development. When Applied to Relativity: There is obviously a background space. Every piece of material is actually a self contains existence activity and there is something it feels like to be that material. Einstein failed to understand that his own thought experiments were always carried out in his imagination which provides the ether or plenum as Bohm called it. When applied to externalized physical experiments what theory explains the construction, dismantling, and data analysis of a cyclotron, for example? What theory describes our body behavior while doing our experiment? This was my PhD thesis question in 1975. It was rejected then as not being physics. I had a long talk with Charles Townes *who was on my committee) and his wife before he died - his answer was Christianity and God determines our behavior- they were both quite happy with this answer. I was not, but kept quiet out of politeness. Times have changed - the Physics of Consciousness has now become a legitimate topic of scientific inquiry. And when applied to YOU:? We are events and should think of ourselves as interacting lifetimes. Linear disturbances in those lifetime equilibrium structures are your thoughts. These propagate in the material of your Brain as long as they are not so large that they destroy the apparatus in which they propagate. When they do get large they involve learning, growth and destruction, death, CAT chapter 8 addresses these phenomena and chapter 5 shows how Quantum theory is derived from CAT when the displacements remain in the linear realm. Glad the group is still alive and still thinking Wolf PS: the "Brain" referred? to above is the real mechanism "You", which generates the 1st-person experience not the observable brain which you see in others and feel in the experience behind your nose that is part of the experience generated i.e. the screen content not the computer. On 4/1/2020 8:33 AM, Roychoudhuri, Chandra wrote: > > Hello everybody! > > I hope all of you are safe and well. > > Please, take all possible precautions to stay away from COVID-19. It > is a ruthless virus, especially, if the body is compromised due to > some other ailments. > > Fortunately, the real death rate is a tiny tiny fraction of one > percent when you consider the global population to be over 7 Billion. > Even the recovery rate is hovering around 96%, or better, for those > who have been hospitalized with COVID-19. > > So relax, rest, exercise (especially, breathing exercises) and enjoy > good food. Intellectual exercise is also an important component of > maintaining good health. > > Thank you Viv, Oliver and everybody else for keeping up the > discussions on the fact that the foundational physics-thinking has to > be re-visited and re-structured from the very beginning. > > Sincerely, > > Chandra. > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > On Mar 11, 2020, at 12:44 AM, Viv Robinson > wrote: > > ? > > *Message sent from a system outside of UConn.* > > Dear Oliver, > > Thank you for your report. I share your sentiments and express my > displeasure in the following way. "/QED seems very good in > obtaining an expression for the anomalous magnetic moment of an > electron, that differs from the actual by about 1%, yet in another > field it requires the universe to have an energy density of ? > 10^120 higher than is measured/". I guess that is one of "*The > problem of infinities*?. I am of the opinion that it is better to > have a theory that explains the 10^-10 J/m^3 density of the > universe and differs by about 1% for the observed?value of the > electron?s magnetic moment, than to have something that differs by > 10^120 but accurately explains an error of ? 1% > > Cheers, > > Vivian Robinson > > On 11 March 2020 at 7:12:36 AM, oliver consa > (oliver.consa at gmail.com ) wrote: > > Dear fellow scientist, > > I send you this mail because you have been skeptical about > Foundations of Physics. I think that this new paper will be of > your interest. Feel free to share it with your colleagues or > publish it on the web. I consider it important that this paper > serves to open a public debate on this subject. > > > *Something is Rotten in the State of QED* > https://vixra.org/pdf/2002.0011v1.pdf > > > Abstract > /"Quantum electrodynamics (QED) is considered the most > accurate theory in the history of science. However, this > precision is based on a single experimental value: the > anomalous magnetic moment of the electron (g-factor). An > examination of QED history reveals that this value was > obtained using illegitimate mathematical traps, manipulations > and tricks. These traps included the fraud of Kroll & Karplus, > who acknowledged that they lied in their presentation of the > most relevant calculation in QED history. As we will > demonstrate in this paper, the Kroll & Karplus scandal was not > a unique event. Instead, the scandal represented the > fraudulent manner in which physics has been conducted from the > creation of QED through today." ?(12 pag.)/ > > > Best Regards, > Oliver Consa > oliver.consa at gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature > of Light and Particles General Discussion List at > viv at universephysics.com > href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/viv%40universephysics.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"> > Click here to unsubscribe > > > _______________________________________________ > If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of > Light and Particles General Discussion List at > chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu > href="https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.natureoflightandparticles.org%2Foptions.cgi%2Fgeneral-natureoflightandparticles.org%2Fchandra.roychoudhuri%2540uconn.edu%3Funsub%3D1%26unsubconfirm%3D1&data=02%7C01%7Cchandra.roychoudhuri%40uconn.edu%7Cdb01eb5ef52b4a1b4d3c08d7c576e8d1%7C17f1a87e2a254eaab9df9d439034b080%7C0%7C0%7C637194986815756290&sdata=06dpAu0Zoukum194UXH7fpnBQW6eujWF0TtEx0LhyRM%3D&reserved=0"> > Click here to unsubscribe > > > > > _______________________________________________ > If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at Wolf at nascentinc.com > > Click here to unsubscribe > -- Dr. Wolfgang Baer Nascent Systems Inc. Wolf at NascentInc.com Tel 831-659-3120 Fax 831-659-0432 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: kkefjkjloebpfaem.png Type: image/png Size: 218062 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: amlomdeahejdcglo.png Type: image/png Size: 7063 bytes Desc: not available URL: From unquant at yahoo.com Thu Apr 9 18:10:08 2020 From: unquant at yahoo.com (Eric Reiter) Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 01:10:08 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [General] Corrected DrBroglie wavelength References: <1951909223.3629810.1586481008886.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1951909223.3629810.1586481008886@mail.yahoo.com> Hello Chandra and fellow physicics friends. Albrecht Giese published this paper on the deBroglie wavelength where he says it is really about the length of the beat.? ? ?The Conflict with the De Broglie Wavelength The Conflict with the De Broglie Wavelength The postulation of matter waves by Louis de Broglie was an essential starting point for the development of quant... I derived this realization far earlier and showed it in the San Diego meeting.? It is viewable in SPIE, but it is easier to access this earlier version in Progress in Physics Page 82.? My writings describe group wavelength as well as beat length.?? It has been very upsetting that this group and others have ignored my findings, especially since it is both experimental and theoretical.? Also, please see my website http://www.thresholdmodel.com Thank you? Eric S Reiter From richgauthier at gmail.com Tue Apr 14 23:26:44 2020 From: richgauthier at gmail.com (Richard Gauthier) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 23:26:44 -0700 Subject: [General] Williamson's "A new linear theory of light and matter" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello all, The coming APS Annual April Meeting will be free and online (the physical meeting had to be cancelled). The meeting is FREE to all, but registration is required. The link is below. all the best, Richard https://april.aps.org/ Registration is Now Open for the APS Virtual April Meeting Registration is now open for the APS Virtual April Meeting, which will be held online April 18?21, 2020. Attendance is free of charge and open to both APS members and non-members, but registration is required to attend. If you previously registered for the 2020 April Meeting you will need to register again. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From quicycle at gmail.com Wed Apr 15 00:37:17 2020 From: quicycle at gmail.com (Quicycle) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 09:37:17 +0200 Subject: [General] Williamson's "A new linear theory of light and matter" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Andrew. On Sun, 5 Apr 2020 at 19:48, Andrew Meulenberg wrote: > John, > > I finally had the time to read your paper. Congratulations! It is very > well done (despite a few typos) and an important contribution. I have added > this comment to the researchgate access to it. > > https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333976356_A_new_linear_theory_of_light_and_matter/comments > "I consider this to be the clearest, most-coherent, description of the > math needed to describe both matter and EM radiation. While I do not > completely agree with all of the conclusions, this is a major step in > understanding fundamental physics at the elementary-particle level." > > The paper even provides a basis for a number of things that I have long > felt (and sometimes expressed) but, for which, I have not been able give > the necessary math. I hope to find time (from my young family and > cold-fusion work) to discuss some of your concepts and conclusions. > > Best to all, > > ANDREW > _______________________________________________ > If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light > and Particles General Discussion List at quicycle at gmail.com > > Click here to unsubscribe > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: