<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:199323332;
mso-list-template-ids:1438414490;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:2033724523;
mso-list-template-ids:-1986903016;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">John, well done!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Yes that division paper, the dust should be taken off.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Incidentally, talked to Dick Bouwmeester yesterday…<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Will book a flight this afternoon to come and see you<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Martin<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Dr. Martin B. van der Mark</span><span lang="DE" style="color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Principal Scientist, Minimally Invasive Healthcare</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Philips Research Europe - Eindhoven</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">High Tech Campus, Building 34 (WB2.025)</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Prof. Holstlaan 4</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Tel: +31 40 2747548</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> General [mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>John Williamson<br>
<b>Sent:</b> dinsdag 24 februari 2015 9:38<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion; Andrew Meulenberg<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [General] Space, time and gravitation<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">Good morning all,<br>
<br>
I have the sense that there is still at least one mis-conception within the group which has bearing on, not only this discussion but also on some of the the other threads we are following - and this is the proper nature of time and space themselves and our
understanding of them. Hence the change in title of the thread.<br>
<br>
Between us, we are beginning to cover some of the main issues. Perhaps we should, collectively write a (draft) paper with the title above. I do not think it will necessarily be considered any good within the cosmology crowd as I do not think any of us are within
that category - but it could be good to help our thinking get away from the very wooly.<br>
<br>
I like the three-form categorisation from Andrew. I find no fault in his explanations and agree with him even to the detail of the "I don't completely subscribe to this model" statement in the second category. I think the problem lies - not in the consistency
with experiment - light does what it does, but in the struggle to understand what it means in terms of the conventional (in my view very limited) human view of space, time and causality. What I will try to explain is very hard to think about conceptually -
precisely because the words one needs to use to decribe it in our monkey-view of 3-d space do not exist and must be invented. We think in terms of our experience, but one needs to realise that our experience is not of space and time directly but of interactions.
We then construct our view of reality to make sense of these interactions. We all possess, for example a table. It is, and looks 3-d and not 4-d. One can walk round it, climb up on it or jump off it in 3-d but not in 4-d. If we come back a bit later both we
and it have travelled forwards immense human distances in time (by breakfast the next morning you have both travelled 25900000000 kilometres). Luckily, most of this distance was round and round in circles within the particles (Andrew's category 3 photons)
of which we are composed and both we, and the table, look very similar the next day. However, these processes are all very slow compared to the natural clock frequencies of those particles - and it is this that colours our perceptions of the universe. This
kind of thinking is very very hard to get away from. Even in trained professional physicists (who should know better) - it keeps appearing - though when we are reminded we , bashfully, acknowledge there there is something in all this relativistic stuff and
we should take account of it.<br>
<br>
Logically, to complete the set for thinking purposes, I would propose a fourth form to add to Andrew's three:-<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ol start="1" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">Source-bound - this is the Maxwell's equations form<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">free - this is the 'classical' photon<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">self-bound - this is the source of all matter.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">observer-bound - this is also in the Maxwell equation form<o:p></o:p></span></li></ol>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">4. This is all that we see, all that we touch all that we taste and all that we feel. In the sense of Hume, this is all we have as
input to create the (second world of Popper) in which we live.<br>
<br>
The other thing that humans do is to try to make sense of nature. So far we have been trying to this and write it down traceably in the western tradition, for a few thousand years. A little longer for the Chinese and Indo-European traditions of course - and
these have merged to some extent- though not as much as they should have as I am sure Richard and Chandra will agree. It is worth noting that in none of the traditions are we there yet. This is partly because we try to over-simplify things to make sense of
them. That table, for example is much more complicated than merely 3-d. Our chief interaction is that the 3-d fields of the table impinge and interfere with our own 3-d fields. The the problem is that, really, there are not three of them but far more. If we
restrict ourselves to the electric and magnetic field componenents there are 6. In any given frame (the breakfast frame for example) these appear as two sets of three, the magnetic set and the electric set. Note that they are not sets of 4. This is, pretty
much, why the table looks 3d and not 4-d. For the purposes of jumping and climbing the two sets may be considered to be in the same place at the same time. However, neither of these two sets of three is responsible for the integrity of the table. One set (electric)
of the three tries to explode the elementary particles of which it is composed, the other (magnetic) may or may not be part of what is holding it together. It is another set of three that is primarily responsible for it not just collapsing. This is whatever
is responsible for the thing we call the Pauli exclusion principle. I do not think it is a principle, I think it is a force (as I argued at MENDEL 2012). That set of three is the triple of spin. Three more (axial) dimensions, again superimposed on the 3-d-seeming
table. Now we have nine. None of them are yet space or time themselves.<br>
<br>
Now we come to space and time. In the context of the Maxwell equations these are things appearing in the derivatives we use to make sense of much of nature. But what do they mean. John D has said for him that time is motion. For me this is not correct. Time
is no more motion than space is motion. To get motion we divide space by time. Conventionally a little bit of space by a little bit of time, dx/dt. Now this is not as simple a thing as it appears to most people, as we are dividing one thing (a bit of space)
by another (a bit of time) when we should know (as professional physicists) that space and time are related. As Stephen put in his thesis for example "One man's space is another man's time". Understanding this is so important that Martin and I devoted several
years of our lives to try to understand exctly how this worked in a properly relativistic algebra this. We wrote a paper on it called "Division and the algebra of reality". We have tried to submit it a few times but it remains unpublished. The last referee
claiming it was completely useless as there was no conceivable practical application (we submitted it to a maths-physics journal so, even if it was true (which it isn't) it should have been no impediment. Ho hum. This is pretty complicated, so I am not going
to have time to go into it today. Actually it is a Martin-John paper and , if peoole are interested, it could (possibly) go in in August. Martin and I initially thought not, because it is not directly related to light per-se. What do you think Martin?<br>
<br>
Unfortunately- though the story is far from complete I am going to have to stop now as I have a lecture (actually three in a row) coming up, followed by exams in the afternoon as well a Masters thesis to read and mark and documention to produce for accreditation
in Civil engineering. Still need to write a few exams before Martin comes for a visit in a couple of weeks.They keep me busy.<br>
<br>
I really ought to stop talking to you guys altogether. At this rate you may all have to wait for next week's exciting episode....<br>
<br>
Including inversion of space and time, Penrose twistors and time for photons...<br>
<br>
Gotta go .....<br>
<br>
Cheers, John.<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="color:black">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</span></div>
<div id="divRpF716751">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"> General [general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
on behalf of Andrew Meulenberg [mules333@gmail.com]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, February 24, 2015 2:37 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion; Andrew Meulenberg<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] gravitation</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black">Dear Martin, John W., John D., Chip, and all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black">My initial introduction to parts of this discussion was over multiple beers. It probably needs it. However, the concepts from those seeds have grown over the years.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">I think that we need to go where the Nature of Light series may not have yet tread. Consider EM radiation in 3 forms (in my present view):<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ol start="1" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2">
Source-bound - this is the Maxwell's equations form<o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2">
free - this is the 'classical' photon<o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2">
self-bound - this is the source of all matter.<o:p></o:p></li></ol>
<p><span style="color:black">1. the EM field from an oscillating dipole does not 'radiate' (become unbound) except under special conditions. It remains 'attached' to the source as a standing (evanescent) wave. It also constitutes the relativistic-added mass
(and causes relativistic electrons to 'shrink' in size, just as a light wave (photon) can shrink in length with the addition of more frequencies from the Fourier analysis?)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:black">2. the photon does not 'see' time in its own frame. In this version, it can travel either direction in time. It can travel across the universe and its energy can be absorbed with the reemission of the induced photon that, 180 degrees
out of phase, travels back along the identical path in time and space 'erasing' itself. I don't completely subscribe to this model. However, it does appear to be self-consistent and creation of a coherent laser beam is not a bad model for the obverse of this
action).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:black">My preference is for the photon to be a self-propagating (solitonic), resonant, wave that can move w/o loss thru space at a fixed velocity for the medium encountered.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:black">3. the self-bound photon is what we have been discussing as the basis of matter (from my viewpoint becoming the electron positron pair). My ideas are continuing to evolve with these discussions. The wormhole connecting the charge
pair, during creation, can eventually 'close' (leaving the charged monopoles), just as the bound EM wave can eventually radiate (producing the photon). The timing and conditions for both are energy and statistics dependent.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:black">I do not see how we can discuss light w/o discussing all of its nature, including its self-interaction. Likewise, we cannot discuss matter w/o discussing its origins and characteristics in light. Too many models have been proposed
w/o sufficient information. We still may not have all we need to get the full picture. Nevertheless, we are much further along than we were a century ago and should take advantage of that additional knowledge to 'update' our models.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:black">Andrew<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 4:31 AM, Mark, Martin van der <<a href="mailto:martin.van.der.mark@philips.com" target="_blank">martin.van.der.mark@philips.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Hi Chip, yes the Coulomb field seems to have infinite speed. Seems. Have to come back to that, there
is something in the Feynman Lectures about it, there is something with Lienhard Wiechert potentials…. Must reeducate myself. Thanks for the paper.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Later!</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Martin</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="DE" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Dr. Martin B. van der Mark</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Principal Scientist, Minimally Invasive Healthcare</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Philips Research Europe - Eindhoven</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">High Tech Campus, Building 34 (WB2.025)</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Prof. Holstlaan 4</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Tel: +31 40 2747548</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"> General
[mailto:<a href="mailto:general-bounces%2Bmartin.van.der.mark" target="_blank">general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark</a>=<a href="mailto:philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank">philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Chip Akins<br>
<b>Sent:</b> maandag 23 februari 2015 20:46</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><br>
<b>To:</b> 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] gravitation<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Hi Martin<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Thank you for the comments and insight. So many times, since the late 1970’s I have revisited the original EPR paradox concept. Physics has in many ways
matured since then. Still there seem to be components of the range of possible solutions, which have not been fully explored. Take for example the experiment in the attached paper “<u>Measuring Propagation Speed of Coulomb Fields</u>”.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">While the speed of light (propagation of EM waves) is apparently not affected by a superluminal Coulomb field, if such properties exist for Coulomb fields,
if the implications are fully explored, it might explain many of the experimental observations.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">My question regarding photon exchange for very large distances is difficult for me to comprehend. Do you have any insight in that area?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">The way it seems to me, requiring photon exchange, by requiring the absorber be identified prior to emission, also requires that the full current state
of the universe was known billions of years ago??? And likewise, the future is predetermined for billions of years because photons are continuously being emitted with destinations across this vast universe.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Is this implication invalid? If it is invalid, can you explain why?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Chip<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> General
[<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Mark, Martin van der<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, February 23, 2015 12:21 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] gravitation</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Dear Chip,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">I do understand your position, things are confusing and nit arsily explained by a simple e-mail. What you can do best is first study the EPR parodox, understand
that this implies problems with locality or causality, and then reconsider. Space-time is not just a simple stage on which the actors play, actors snd stage sometimes (experimentally proven) be intertwined! It is not hoe people like to think, or even i like
to think, but it is a fact you simply have to take on board.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Good luck!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Best, Martin<br>
<br>
Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><br>
Op 23 feb. 2015 om 15:09 heeft "Chip Akins" <<a href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target="_blank">chipakins@gmail.com</a>> het volgende geschreven:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Hi Stephen<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Thank you for the critique. I really appreciate the belief aspect which can cause us to stray from science. I think that most of us are looking at the
current understanding and asking if it is valid, probably for a variety of reasons. Searching for answers and probing a wider range of possibilities, rather than just accepting whatever the current general set of beliefs are, is this also not science?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Actually, I am quite satisfied to accept the full answers wherever they lead us.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">The requirement to conserve energy is not violated by my proposal, Photons are absorbed whenever they are incident upon an acceptable absorber. Maybe
it depends on the definition of “absorber”. In my opinion it is entirely acceptable to space to be the destination for a photon. And yes, I feel the “edge” of space is “curved” which preserves the conservation of energy.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">When a theory does not seem to adequately explain the observable universe, it seems to be appropriate to question that theory.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">For several reasons, some of which are touched on below, I feel there may well be another solution which provides for the observations of experiment.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">One thing that seems to bother me, is when we find infinities in our theories. It does not seem to be an infinity paranoia, but rather a tendency to question
the validity of the argument which brought us to adopt the infinite solution, if another solution exists.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">OK, perhaps “infinity paranoia” is an appropriate description.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">If matter is made from light, most of the basic principles of relativity would be the natural result. Our observations would hold that the physical laws
do not change across different reference frames, that the speed of light will be measured as a constant, and that matter cannot travel at the speed of light.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">The following thoughts are based upon the concept that matter is made from light, particles are made from photons.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Our measurement of time would then be based on the frequencies of particles and their resultant interactions in our inertial frame. In that sense the photon
would be the physical generator of time, or the underlying mechanism which creates time.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Time, as we are able to measure or define it, for a single photon then becomes a difficult issue to try to determine, from the “inertial” frame of the
photon. The photon has no “inertial frame” since it has no mass and no therefore no inertia. Yes it has energy and momentum but that is not the same thing.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Trying to stretch relativity, which is designed to relate how matter reacts with light, spacetime, and other matter, and try to apply the same rules of
relativity which work for matter, to the photon, which is the cause of creation for the principle of relativity, and the foundation and cause of creation for the property of time, may be an error.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">As an analogy, a photon has no mass, but creates mass when confined into a particle. So it is not prudent to try to calculate the mass term for the free
photon in the same manner we use for particles or matter, like E=mc<sup>2</sup>. The photon is the reason the term E=mc<sup>2</sup> would work for matter. The photon however, being the source, which is to say, the cause for the mass term for matter, lies
outside that definition of mass. In this sense it is part of the definition of the property of mass, and in a similar way, it is part of the definition of the property of time.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">So, in that sense, the fields and forces which comprise the photon, cannot be relativistic in the normal sense of the term. The EM fields are quite naturally
propagating at the speed of light, but they create the property of relativity due to their specific interactions with space and their natural reactions within particles.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Returning to the view that EM fields, with their inherent properties, make up photons and all particles, create inertial mass, create the circumstances
for “time” as we know it, and create the principle of relativity, we must then conclude that relativistic treatment of these waves is entirely unnecessary, and in fact, an error. Just as it would be an error to flatly state that the mass of a free photon is
m=E/ c<sup>2</sup>.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">It is my view that spacetime only supports, at the most basic level, one form of energy. That energy is always in the form of EM waves. Likewise I feel
the photon is the simplest, most elemental form of that EM energy. So then, the photon is simply the fields of the EM waves, with the inherent forces and energy density allowed by the energy in the photon and spacetime. It follows then that these circumstances
engender the properties of the photon, like speed of propagation, spin angular momentum, polarization, etc.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">I think we were faced with problematic behaviors while studying the photon, and reached for, and misapplied, an apparent “solution”, to “explain” those
behaviors. Relativistic treatment of the photon allowed us to find one “solution” which implies that emitters and absorbers are identified prior to emission. The vast implications of that “solution” just simply do not seem to describe our universe. So yes,
I will continue to search for other possible solutions which can explain experiment. And yes, this search is motivated in part by belief. But I suspect that is one of the motivations behind almost all research. The issue becomes, can we change our beliefs,
once we discover a solution which does in fact fit all criteria of the observable.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> General
[<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Stephen Leary<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, February 23, 2015 4:16 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] gravitation</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Hi Chip, <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">There is experimental evidence to suggest that the emission of a photon is dependent on there being a pre-defined absorber. This is pretty much a requirement
to conserve energy as photons would "miss" otherwise and eventually all energy would be photons and there would be no matter. You seem to be falling into the trap of only looking at the evidence that supports your beliefs. That is not science.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Stephen<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Chip Akins <<a href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target="_blank">chipakins@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Hi Stephen<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Thank you for the insight.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">What I am saying however, is that emission of a photon, may not be dependent on there being a pre-identified absorber. But rather, that if the local field
conditions of the emitter allow emission in a specific direction, then a photon could be emitted. The local field herein would be defined as the area around the emitter wherein the fields from absorbers are still strong enough to be even slightly sensed by
the emitter.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Since we do not yet know if there is an “edge” to the universe (meaning an “edge” of space-time), nor do we know the nature of such an “edge” should it
exist. It may not add clarity to our perceptions to try to contemplate the possible actions of photons in that location. But my feeling is that, if we envision an edge exists, the void beyond would present no fields to an adjacent particle sufficiently close
to that edge, and therefore no condition for emission would be presented.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">What I am having some trouble digesting is the concept that, regardless of distance or time, an emitter and absorber are pre-identified prior to photon
“exchange”. I understand the concept, but the implications do not seem to be a description of our universe.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">For, if every photon in flight, at this instant, had identified its specific absorber prior to or at emission, then the exact location of all absorbers,
the future position of every particle or atom, meaning our exact fate, was known and established billions of years ago.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Is there another way to look at long distance photon “exchange” which does not present this problem?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Chip<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> General
[mailto:</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:general-bounces%2Bchipakins" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">general-bounces+chipakins</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">=</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Stephen Leary<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, February 22, 2015 2:30 AM</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"><br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] gravitation<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Hi Chip, <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">I request you add the following question to your thinking and see how it fits in. Consider matter at the "edge" of the universe (by that i mean that there
is no matter beyond and make that explicit assumption). Is that matter allowed/able to emit photons in any direction regardless of whether they are ever absorbed?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">IMHO they cannot do this. Similarly for long distance photons I don't see the issue. It just reduces the likelyhood of interaction. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Stephen<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 6:29 PM, Chip Akins <<a href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target="_blank">chipakins@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="color:black">Hi All</span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Following John Duffield’s comments regarding photon’s relation to “time” and reading “The Other Meaning of Special Relativity”, still leaves a few questions
(for my feeble mental processes), relating to correlating theory to experiment.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">My approach has been precisely as described by Robert Close, regarding the photon constituted mass carrying particles, clearly displaying relativistic
properties naturally, due to their wave (photon) structure.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">There appears to be a significant amount of evidence supporting such an approach.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Underlying that approach, and as an implication of the results, is the suggestion that there is (even if we cannot detect it) a reference rest frame in
space. Close therefore remarks, <i>“What has not been generally recognized is that special relativity is a consequence of the wave nature of matter and is entirely consistent with classical notions of absolute space and time.”</i><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><i><span style="color:black"> </span></i><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">So, like John D., I am still looking for, and willing to exhaustively pursue, any possible explanations for experiment, which are built on such an approach,
before abandoning such a robust, simple, and elegant, causal approach. But I cannot ignore the compelling arguments from John Williamson, Martin van der Mark, Stephen Leary. So at this time certain issues remain (for me) unresolved.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">While our discussions of the photon and possible various relativistic interpretations, to describe experiment, are quite stimulating and thought provoking.
In my current view, the idea that a photon can feel its entire future, at one point in spacetime, raises more problems than it solves. While the “one point in spacetime” approach, may in fact turn out to be the actual nature of physics, I feel it is required
to look for other explanations, and there are many possibilities we can explore, before accepting any answer to best describe experiment.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="color:black">Hi Stephen</span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Thank you for the analogy.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Of course to test any idea, we need to look at the full range of applications of the idea.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black">I can understand the photon exchange, hinted by your analogy, for a distance which is easily within the field of the emitters and absorbers, or a distance where the mutual field strength is sufficiently above the “background” noise
floor. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black">However for me it does not seem to hold for large distances. In other words, I feel that for close range photon exchange, the fields are sufficiently strong to have an influence on such photon exchange. Tony Fleming has created a
model for the hydrogen atom using a variation of such an approach, which is very accurate at predicting the properties of this atom. “<u>Electromagnetic Self-Field Theory and Its Application to the Hydrogen Atom</u>” Anthony Fleming 2005.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black">However for very large distances, it seems to me that photon “exchange” is not a pre-required condition, and that photon emission is quite acceptable even if the eventual absorber is not already known at emission. I do not yet feel,
that a photon can only exist, if the absorber is already “known” by the photon.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<b><span style="color:black">Hi John D. </span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black">Thank you for the references to photon models. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black">Having toyed with certain photon models, the one described by Drozdov and Stahlhofen has been very close to my preferred model. But it leaves questions raised by some experimental observation unanswered. However I have not looked
closely at the full set of implications regarding the possibility that a viable photon model may also exist, encompassing multiples of its wavelength. To explore, we might be able to model the emission duration for certain events, and compare that estimated
duration to the emitted photon wavelength. Meanwhile, I will run some math to explore further.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<b><span style="color:black">Hi Chandra</span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black">I agree with your approach and comments regarding our quest.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black">And referring directly to…<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">“If we do not explicitly frame our questions to access reality of nature; we will never find it!”</span></i></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">The group has begun addressing specific issues, from different viewpoints, which enhance our individual, and therefore collective, ability
to look more clearly at the problems, and the implications of different views, and therefore review the possibilities in a more complete manner.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Thank you for your tremendous assistance and contribution to this process.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">All</span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black">It appears we have a consensus for material substance (mass carrying particles) from light.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none">
<span style="color:black">If we do have a consensus for building matter from light (photons), then it seems we must better understand the photon, for the photon then becomes the foundation for everything. So that misconceptions in the understanding of the photon,
would propagate to the entire concept.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Chip<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> General
[mailto:</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:general-bounces%2Bchipakins" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">general-bounces+chipakins</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">=</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>John Duffield<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, February 21, 2015 9:46 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] gravitation</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Andrew:</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">It’s a mystery to me why people don’t know about this kind of stuff. Einstein said
</span><span style="color:black"><a href="http://www.rain.org/~karpeles/einsteindis.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">a field is a state of space</span></a></span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">.
Susskind said the same in his video lecture. And there aren’t two states of space where an electron is.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">As for the strong force, it’s supposed to be fundamental. So ask yourself this:
<em><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">where does the strong force go in low-energy proton-antiproton annihilation to gamma photons?
</span></em>And ask yourself this: <em><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">what is it that makes the electromagnetic wave propagate at c?</span></em> Alternatively, imagine you can hold this electron in your hands like a bagel.
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><image001.png></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Imagine it’s elastic, like the bag model. Try to pull it apart. You will find that you cannot. You can’t pull this kiddie
apart either:</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><image002.png></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">It’s made of three parts, three partons. See
</span><span style="color:black"><a href="http://www.ipmu.jp/webfm_send/1053" target="_blank" title="http://www.ipmu.jp/webfm_send/1053"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">http://www.ipmu.jp/webfm_send/1053</span></a></span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
and note page 11 where Witten mentions knot crossings? Trace round it clockwise starting at the bottom left calling out the crossing-over directions:
<em><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">up up down</span></em>. When you do eventually break this thing, you don’t see three things flying free.
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Regards</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">John D
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:whitesmoke">
<b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target="_blank" title="mules333@gmail.com"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">Andrew Meulenberg</span></a></span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:whitesmoke">
<b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">Sent:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"> Saturday, February 21, 2015 6:41 AM</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:whitesmoke">
<b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">To:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank" title="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">Nature of Light and Particles
- General Discussion</span></a></span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:whitesmoke">
<b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">Subject:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"> [General] gravitation</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Dear John D,</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">I wonder why this concept has not been developed?</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="margin-left:30.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">"The clockwise and anticlockwise twists don’t quite cancel. The rubber sheet is subject to a tension that diminishes with
distance. That represents the hydrogen atom’s gravitational field."</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">I came to this conclusion several years ago that gravitation was the long-range, non-torsional, 'residue' of the strong EM
fields composing the net-neutral charge fields of matter. This came from thinking (non-mathematically) about the differences between the E & M forces as distortions of space & how relativity affects them.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">I hope to write-up a paper on strong-gravity (after the conference in August), that describes the nuclear strong force as
resulting from the interacting short-range (multipole) fields of the relativistic electron-positron 'clusters' (triplets?) called quarks.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Andrew</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:johnduffield@btconnect.com" target="_blank"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">johnduffield@btconnect.com</span></a></span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><br>
<a href="</span><span style="color:black"><a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/johnduffield%40btconnect.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/johnduffield%40btconnect.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</span></a></span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
<a href="mailto:sleary@vavi.co.uk" target="_blank">sleary@vavi.co.uk</a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/sleary%40vavi.co.uk?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/sleary%40vavi.co.uk?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"><br>
<br clear="all">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">--
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Stephen Leary<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
<a href="mailto:sleary@vavi.co.uk" target="_blank">sleary@vavi.co.uk</a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/sleary%40vavi.co.uk?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/sleary%40vavi.co.uk?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"><br>
<br clear="all">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">--
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Stephen Leary<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
<a href="mailto:martin.van.der.mark@philips.com" target="_blank">martin.van.der.mark@philips.com</a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/martin.van.der.mark%40philips.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/martin.van.der.mark%40philips.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="color:black">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:gray">The information contained in this message may be confidential and legally protected under applicable law.
The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
<a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target="_blank">mules333@gmail.com</a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>