<HTML dir=ltr><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<STYLE id=owaParaStyle type=text/css>P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr ocsi="0" fpstyle="1">
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>All:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What John said sounds about right to me. You start with a wave, a field
variation, and you wrap it around a closed path. Then you tighten it into a
double loop until the field variation looks like a standing field, and the wave
looks like a standing wave. You started with alternating displacement current,
you made two “charged particles” in pair production, and when you move one, you
call it conduction current. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I think the thing that’s interesting here is that the photon is more
fundamental than the field it is said to mediate. IMHO it’s important to note
that the electron IS a photon in a particular configuration, as is the positron.
When they move together they move like a cyclone and an anticyclone, and they’re
exchanging field but they aren’t exchanging photons. Ditto for the electron and
the proton. The hydrogen atom doesn’t exhibit much electromagnetic field.
Virtual photons aren’t photons, they’re abstract chunks of standing field.
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><IMG title=SpinorsSmall
style="BORDER-TOP: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; BACKGROUND-IMAGE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; DISPLAY: inline; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px"
border=0 alt=SpinorsSmall src="cid:3870CF1FEA1645B1891646CAB5A9DF85@HPlaptop"
width=638 height=233></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Andrew:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I hope your wormhole concept doesn’t come from something I’ve said in the
dim and distant past about the Falaco soliton. One could look at the depiction
above and think that the electron and positron are connected by some kind of
torsion string singularity. However the Falaco soliton is like half a smoke
ring. IMHO an electron is like a complete smoke ring, but it’s a stress flow
rather than a fluid flow, and it has a “steering wheel” rotation as well. The
positron has the opposite chirality. You made the two of them in pair production
because there’s nothing to brace upon and angular momentum is conserved, and
there’s no special connection between them. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><IMG title=FalacoSystem
style="BORDER-TOP: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; BACKGROUND-IMAGE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; DISPLAY: inline; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px"
border=0 alt=FalacoSystem src="cid:C93194E20C7B4EBF8E8AC8CD79AE2194@HPlaptop"
width=419 height=360> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards</DIV>
<DIV>John D </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000"></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV><FONT size=3 face=Calibri></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A
title=John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk
href="mailto:John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk">John Williamson</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Friday, March 06, 2015 8:26 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">Nature of Light and
Particles - General Discussion</A> ; <A title=mules333@gmail.com
href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com">Andrew Meulenberg</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Cc:</B> <A title=pgvaidya@gmail.com
href="mailto:pgvaidya@gmail.com">P.G. Vaidya</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [General] double-loop electron model
discussion</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma; COLOR: #000000; DIRECTION: ltr">Agreed
Andrew,<BR><BR>We need to realise that we are all "ignorant" in certain respects
- and indeed that "science" is also , presently, completely ignorant in certain
respects. We need to break this cycle of ignorance. We need the picture to make
sense in science as a whole. If we (I hope!) come up with a complete
picture, it must be right everywhere and only just right - explaining,
amongst other things- both the nature of and reason for quantisation and the
nature of charge.<BR><BR>In the paper I aim to present I hope to argue that one
can start from an underlying picture of continuous fields, show how and why
these must be quantised and then use that quantised (E=hf) object to show why
and how the (quantised) electron charge arises. In that sense I would say that I
then "know" what charge is - in terms of the deeper set of principles used to
describe it in terms of that theory. Others may say that, within QED
charge is that thing which emits and absorbs photons, the carriers of the
electromagnetic force and may claim, therefore to "understand" what charge is.
In my view, there is a big difference between putting charge in a-priori and
understanding what it is. Likewise, in the Maxwell equations the "charge" is
understood simply as the electric field divergence. This then begs the question
of the nature of the charge. The fact that it is defined here as a divergence
means that it must have a form related to a particular frame - just as Martin
says. Speed of light "charge" cannot happen, in this picture, precisely
because of this frame-bound (rest-massive) form. <BR><BR>In our 1997
paper, we put in (a subset of) the experimental properties of the (uncharged)
photon and got out an estimate of the charge. We demanded a set of non-crossing,
precisely lightspeed, paths. It was these starting points that led to the
properties we derived. The charge arose in this model because the oscillating
(a.c) photon field was re-configured to give a (d.c.) radial component. That
re-configuration (a knotting) required an equal and opposite re-configuration an
(antiknot) to give a detailed, smooth transition from cartesian (corkscrew -zero
divergence) to toroidal (positive and negative radial) co-ordinates. The half
integral spin to what John D calls the Dirac belt trick. The anomalous magnetic
moment calculation to a rigorous demand that all paths have the same phase
length, and be precisely lightspeed. That article is history though. Still good,
I think, in terms of its starting postulates, but we need to move on to a deeper
theory that gives BOTH electron AND photon solutions from an underlying
theory.<BR><BR>As we talk about this I see many holes and fallacies in what
others are saying, I'm expecting (and hoping!), to be challenged on my own areas
of ignorance. This is best done on proper, carefully argued papers, not loose
emails with half-understood starting points derived from other
authority.<BR><BR>It is through interaction and proper discussion that ignorance
can be resolved. <BR><BR>Regards, John.<BR><BR><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 16px; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman; COLOR: #000000">
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<DIV id=divRpF893494 style="DIRECTION: ltr"><FONT color=#000000 size=2
face=Tahoma><B>From:</B> General
[general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
on behalf of Andrew Meulenberg [mules333@gmail.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday,
March 06, 2015 7:19 AM<BR><B>To:</B> Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion; Andrew Meulenberg<BR><B>Cc:</B> P.G. Vaidya<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re:
[General] double-loop electron model discussion<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>Dear Richard,<BR><BR></DIV>While I agree with Martin, I think that we will
need to discuss the issue in person to iron out the pros & cons. I am
presenting a paper at the conference on the fields & potentials of an
optical standing wave. It will describe the differences between photonic
'charge' within the photon and point charges. I will probably be using your
paper as one of the several references that talk of charge within a
photon.<BR><BR></DIV>When we all have had time to read each others' papers
(hopefully before gathering at the conference), then we will be better able to
understand our respective positions and integrate the information into a
coherent, self-consistent, mutually acceptable, whole. I would like the actual
presentations from the multiple sources to present a complete picture, not the
repetitive fragments with the contradictions that presently
exist..<BR><BR></DIV>Andrew<BR></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_extra>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Richard Gauthier <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"
target=_blank>richgauthier@gmail.com</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<DIV style="WORD-WRAP: break-word">Hello Martin,
<DIV> Thank you for your thoughtful comments and questions.
You are right that any complete model of the electron would include the origin
of electric charge. No one currently understands the nature and origin of
electric charge—that’s why there are various models of the electron. To say
that electric charge originates with electric fields that have a non-zero
divergence is to imply that we understand the origin of electromagnetic
fields, which are supposed to be generated by accelerated electric charges! A
full circle of deep ignorance as the the nature of either. It seems clear to
me that both electric charge and electromagnetic fields originate from
something more primary and more fundamental than either. I call this more
fundamental entity an energy quantum. It generates both electric charge and
electromagnetic fields, as well as other physical properties of quantized
particles. Its chief characteristic is its energy which is proportional to its
frequency: E=hf. It takes on other properties such as the speed of light,
wavelength, momentum, spin, magnetic moment, flavor, color charge etc
depending on what physical particle such as the photon, electron, gluon, quark
etc that it expresses itself as. The energy quantum expresses non-locally
through the various particles that it manifests as such as the photon or the
electron.</DIV>
<DIV> So I don’t think that the electric charge has to be
point-like. I do think that the energy quantum, which is not inherently
charged, is likely to be point-like. It generates the electron which has all
the electron's enigmatic properties. I think that if the energy quantum was
better understood as a hypothetical fundamental entity, the quantum properties
of the so-called fundamental particles would become less enigmatic. So the
electron may be a charged photon, but a photon is an energy quantum expressing
as an uncharged photon or as a charged photon (electron). In your and John's
model of the electron, electric charge must travel at less than the speed of
light, but in my model of the electron as a charged photon, electric charge
can travel at light speed and perhaps faster. Neither of our models is proved
to the extent that either of them can claim factually that electric charge can
or cannot travel at the speed of light or even faster than light. That’s for
experiment to decide. But we can ask how our models can lead to a deeper
understanding of matter and energy.</DIV>
<DIV> with best regards,</DIV>
<DIV>
Richard</DIV>
<DIV> <BR>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>On Mar 4, 2015, at 8:01 AM, Mark, Martin van der <<A
href="mailto:martin.van.der.mark@philips.com"
target=_blank>martin.van.der.mark@philips.com</A>> wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="WHITE-SPACE: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; FONT: 12px helvetica; LETTER-SPACING: normal; TEXT-INDENT: 0px">
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Oh
Richard, maybe the main thing is:<U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Why
put charge in your model to begin with? Wouldn’t it be nice to have it as a
consequence? The charge itself is the whole problem to begin
with…<U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">The
motivation just puzzles me….<U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Cheers,
Martin<U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
lang=DE
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Dr.
Martin B. van der Mark</SPAN><SPAN lang=DE
style="COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Principal
Scientist, Minimally Invasive Healthcare</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Philips
Research Europe - Eindhoven</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">High
Tech Campus, Building 34 (WB2.025)</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Prof.
Holstlaan 4</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">5656
AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Tel: +31
40 2747548</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: rgb(181,196,223) 1pt solid; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; PADDING-LEFT: 0cm; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm">
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif"><SPAN> </SPAN>General
[<A
href="mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target=_blank>mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</A>]<SPAN> </SPAN><B>On
Behalf Of<SPAN> </SPAN></B>Mark, Martin van
der<BR><B>Sent:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>woensdag 4 maart 2015
16:56<BR><B>To:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Nature of Light and Particles -
General Discussion<BR><B>Subject:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Re: [General]
double-loop electron model discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Hi
Richard, thank you,<U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Firstly,
There are 3 intimately related problems. With the self-energy problem comes
the 4/3 problem and that of the Poincare stresses. See chapter 28 VOL II of
the Feynman Lectures. Neither has to do with the electron being a point. (go
back and make sure you read that previous sentence well) When the
electron is taken to be smaller than half the classical radius, it is
already the end of physics, because there is more energy in the
electric field outside than there is mass to begin
with.<SPAN> </SPAN><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Secondly,
a charged object whatever you call it and whatever its size cannot go at
light velocity. It may approach it, but not reach it. Charge means a special
configuration of field, of the sort that has a non-zero divergence, field
sticks out in all directions. These things, really inescapably, MUST have a
so-called “rest” mass, if only from the point of view of what radiation is
about: the transverse part, and what virtual photons, longitudinal
polarization or near-field optics are about: mass given by their decay
length.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">I
hope this is clear enough. “Charged photon” is a crippled name, it suggest a
contradiction that I believe (I can be quite wrong, but now you know where
it comes from) is also part of the whole concept described and in my opinion
cannot be married with physics as it stands or with physics as it (perhaps)
will appear to be.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Very
best, Martin<U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
lang=DE
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Dr.
Martin B. van der Mark</SPAN><SPAN lang=DE
style="COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Principal
Scientist, Minimally Invasive Healthcare</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Philips
Research Europe - Eindhoven</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">High
Tech Campus, Building 34 (WB2.025)</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Prof.
Holstlaan 4</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">5656
AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Tel: +31
40 2747548</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: rgb(181,196,223) 1pt solid; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; PADDING-LEFT: 0cm; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm">
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif"><SPAN> </SPAN>General
[<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target=_blank>mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</A>]<SPAN> </SPAN><B>On
Behalf Of<SPAN> </SPAN></B>Richard
Gauthier<BR><B>Sent:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>woensdag 4 maart 2015
16:19<BR><B>To:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Nature of Light and Particles -
General Discussion<BR><B>Subject:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Re: [General]
double-loop electron model discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Martin,<U></U><U></U></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">
I agree. The electron’s quantum existence has a unity that must be preserved
in any electron model, although I would like to hear why this must be in
your opinion.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">
The charged photon model of the electron does not require that the charge of
the charged photon (i.e. the electron) is a point charge. What we know about
the electron is that when it is detected it displays point-like behavior, so
at that time the charge as well as the location of the detected electron is
point-like (or at least confined within the particular region of detection
of the electron.) The same goes for a photon. We cannot say that the photon
is point-like when it is traveling undetected through a double slit
apparatus, which an electron can do also. As the electron/charged photon
goes through the double slits, its charge goes through the double slits
also, as does its spin and magnetic moment (or at least the electron's
potential for re-expressing all of these properties when it is later
detected after passing wavelike through both slits.) The photon is only
point-like when it is detected. So the electron and the photon are very
similar in this respect, both showing wave-particle duality. I’m claiming
that this wave-particle duality property (or Feynman's sum-over-histories
property if you don’t like wave-particle duality) of a photon and an
electron is essentially the same because the electron is a charged photon
and has the properties of a photon like wave-particle duality, interference,
diffraction, and entanglement. But I also claim that the term “matter-waves”
is less meaningful for an electron if an electron is a charged photon and is
not really “matter” at all, unless an uncharged photon is also “matter”. In
this view, the term “matter” and “material” are not really relevant to the
physicist except as various expressions of energy, if matter is really light
or other luminous objects like gluons of various frequencies, conformations,
and levels of confinement.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">
The charged photon model only requires that the charged photon have the
quantum and wave properties of the photon given by E=hf , p=h/lambda and
c=lambda f , which by the way are present in your photon with toroidal
topology as I understand it. The charged photon carries the charge -e for an
electron and +e for the charged photon which is a positron. The light-speed
of the electron (which I call a charged photon) is currently unobserved (as
Dirac remarked) but this doesn’t mean that this light speed is not part of
the electron/charged photon model, since the charged photon model of the
electron generates the de Broglie wavelength which IS observed and is
based on a) a helically circulating light-speed charged photon, b) the
increasing frequency of the light-speed charged photon with increasing
electron total energy, and c) the corresponding decrease of wavelength of
the light-speed charged photon with increasing electron total energy. Since
your toroidal electron model has these photon properties, it will also
generate the de Broglie wavelength as does the charged photon model when
your electron model has a velocity in the direction perpendicular to the
plane of its helical axis. So your electron model will generate the de
Broglie wavelength in 2 ways — the way you describe in your and John’s
article and in this way as well.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">
So I am not attached to the electron as charged photon model as having a
point-like electric charge just as I am not attached to an uncharged photon
model being point-like. The supposed point-like charge of an electron as
leading to unwanted infinities has been a headache to physicists for a long
time. Perhaps a new approach is needed.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">
<U></U><U></U></DIV>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt; MARGIN-TOP: 5pt">
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">On
Mar 3, 2015, at 3:24 PM, Mark, Martin van der <<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:martin.van.der.mark@philips.com"
target=_blank>martin.van.der.mark@philips.com</A>>
wrote:<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV><PRE style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; WORD-SPACING: 0px; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">Hi Chip, clearly what John and I have written is too compact to give a full explanation and it should not have been a surprise to me that the subtleties do not always immediately sink in with the reader. <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">Perhaps there will be time in at the conference to sit together and discuss the physics, like why, on firm experimental grounds, it absolutely imposible that the electron consists of two parts. It is a very puzzling one, and why the narrowest possible escape may be just, and only just, sufficient: that it is a single quantum of electromagnetic field with a non trivial topplogy. And why any extra property put in from the beginning will destroy the whole concept. Emerging properties should be: charge, spin, magnetic moment, de broglie wavelength, Pauli principle, etc. <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">Really the only thing i do not have too much of a clue about is the mass scale...our model is at least not by itself capable of explaing it. This is one of the things a real theory should provide!<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">Cheers, Martin<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif"> </SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif"> </SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Op 3 mrt. 2015 om 18:30 heeft "Chip Akins" <<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A>> het volgende geschreven:<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Hi Martin<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> I have read your 1997 paper many times and continue to refer to it during research.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Rereading the Feynman Lectures II chapter 28 now.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> I am fairly certain that my model, derived in part from yours, handles these issues similarly, but adds some specifics for the electron you may be interested in. If you have not read it please give it a look.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Chip<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> From: General [<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A>] On Behalf Of Mark, Martin van der<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 11:23 AM<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Subject: Re: [General] double-loop electron model discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Hi Chip,<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> John and I have dealt with it in our model. However, we can only be sure if we can also develop a complete theory: a model is just and only a toy. A very important toy to guide our thinking and to help us taking all aspects on board.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> In our 1997 paper, we dealt with just about everything, except for:<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> · The Pauli principle (interference at same Compton frequency)<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> · The weak interaction (linked field lines)<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> · The strong interaction (knotted flow)<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Although after all these years I still feel that our model is very adequate, perhaps the most important of our 1997 paper is that it explains the problems related to certain properties of the electron.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> So read the paper and you will know a lot more about the physics involved. And do read Chapter 28 VOL II of Feynman.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Good luck,<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Martin<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Dr. Martin B. van der Mark<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Principal Scientist, Minimally Invasive Healthcare<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Philips Research Europe - Eindhoven<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> High Tech Campus, Building 34 (WB2.025)<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Prof. Holstlaan 4<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> 5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Tel: +31 40 2747548<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> From: General [<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A>] On Behalf Of Chip Akins<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Sent: dinsdag 3 maart 2015 18:05<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Subject: Re: [General] double-loop electron model discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Hi Martin<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Thank you for the comments.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> In your opinion does the model you and John W. created for the electron (1997) satisfy this self-energy problem you mention?<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> I have read the Feynman lectures, but it has been a while, so time for a review.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Infinities are quite distasteful, and an electron has spin and a magnetic moment, so it can be argued that the electron cannot actually be a point, even if it does react at a single point.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Thoughts?<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Chip<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> From: General [<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A>] On Behalf Of Mark, Martin van der<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:40 AM<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Subject: Re: [General] double-loop electron model discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Hi Chip, Richard and Andrew,<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> 1) Ever read chapter 28 of Vol. II of the Feynman Lectures?<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> It is about the energy in the field of a charged object, like a football that has been rubbed against a cat (as physicists do).<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> That energy goes to infinity at smaller and smaller radius. This leads to the self-energy problem for a small particle. (The invention of charged photons doesn’t seem to do this any good)<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> 2) The interaction of an electron is point-like, it means that it consists of a single thing, not two massive parts bound by a force (because that would vibrate at some energy)<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Any electron model must be able to make plausible why this is.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Some thinking to do for you perhaps…<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Best, Martin<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Dr. Martin B. van der Mark<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Principal Scientist, Minimally Invasive Healthcare<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Philips Research Europe - Eindhoven<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> High Tech Campus, Building 34 (WB2.025)<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Prof. Holstlaan 4<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> 5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Tel: +31 40 2747548<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> From: General [<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A>] On Behalf Of Chip Akins<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Sent: dinsdag 3 maart 2015 17:10<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Subject: Re: [General] double-loop electron model discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Hi Richard and Andrew<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Andrew, I have been looking at the annihilation reaction of the electron and positron and considering that the result yields two photons of the energy 0.511MeV. Then assuming the electron and positron are each made of one photon.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> So far, possibly due to my assumptions regarding the nature of a photon, I have not been able to logically justify splitting the positive and negative “portions’ of a single photon to create these two oppositely charged particles. To me the positive and negative portions of the photon are really made of the same thing, in that they are simply one field vector pointing toward the positive. The positive and negative ends being part of the same spacetime distortion.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> I have attached an updated draft of the electron as a confined photon.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Chip<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> From: General [<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A>] On Behalf Of Richard Gauthier<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 AM<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Subject: Re: [General] double-loop electron model discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Hi Andrew,<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> That’s a very interesting view that a wormhole connection between a created electron-positron pair could resolve the EPR paradox. I think that you would need to show that the same wormhole explanation would resolve the EPR paradox with other particles that are quantum mechanically entangled. You would also need to show that the appropriate quantum communication between two particles could pass between their connecting wormhole to keep them entangled.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> There are other sub-quantum hypotheses I suppose about how a photon interacting with another photon or an atomic nucleus can create an electron pair. Have you studied them and eliminated them as possible contenders?<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> On Mar 2, 2015, at 7:59 AM, Andrew Meulenberg <<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mules333@gmail.com</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:mules333@gmail.com</SPAN></A>>> wrote:<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Dear Richard, Chip, et al.,<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> I thought for a long time about the electron as a self-bound photon, before I realized that I could only make progress when I considered the electron/positron pair as that photon. So, instead of a free photon (a soliton) we must consider 2 self-bound solitons, that can be separated. It was the paraphrased statement(s) from a molecular biologist (who read more physics than I did) that started me on the right path. "Mass and charge are only produced when (& as) the soliton pair are separated." This became the basis of a paper that AJP rejected in 9 minutes from its electronic receipt. However, with that identity of mass and charge in mind and with the recognition of total internal reflection (TIR) as a means of binding light in a "whispering-Gallery" mode, it became clear that the transverse electric field of a bound photon could be 'rectified' by the Goos–Hänchen or Imbert–Fedorov effect<<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imbert%E2%80%93Fedorov_effect" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imbert%E2%80%93Fedorov_effect</SPAN></A>> of a photon and give the net charge of an electron. This happens at a unique frequency and orbit size where the negative phase shift exactly equals the phase advance of the photon and the electric field can always point out. If the phase is not correct, then the distortion of space (which affects the refractive index of the path and thus the curvature of the photon) is not resonant. However, this difference in curvature, balanced against the phase shift gives a stable configuration.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> That was the easy part. Nevertheless, I have not yet actually done the full calculations. Someone of the group, with more mathematical ability than I, could do so and coauthor my paper.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> My present conjecture: What happens to the field confined inside the bound-photon 'orbit'? It is so greatly concentrated by the path curvature that it becomes 'singular' at the center. Nature 'abhors a singularity' even more than it abhors a vacuum! The extreme energy density distorts space and forms a 'connection' between the forming electron and positron. I believe that the distortion is a wormhole and the connection is thru time. Just as the external field lines of a bar magnet are 'closed' thru the bar, I believe that the electric field lines of an electron/positron (the lepton) pair in space, also form and are closed thru time via the wormhole. The lepton pair remains connected (entangled) by this internal structure until the wormhole 'distributes' among all of the neighboring charges. [I don't believe that the wormhole collapses until a pair annihilates.] Since time does not exist within a wormhole, this resolves the EPR paradox.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> In response to Richard's intent "I would like to start a thread that focuses on comparing and contrasting the various double-loop electron models ... to find any common areas of agreement, and any points of difference."<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> My original double-loop model assumed that every wavelength is divided in 1/2 and then recombined (nearly superposed). It required a different type of phase shift than normally assumed and was nicely represented by the mobius strip with a 1/2 twist per 1/2 cycle (a full rotation for every wavelength).<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> My present concept, using the Goos–Hänchen or Imbert–Fedorov effect, does not require a relationship between a 'twist' and the photon wavelength, since the path curvature provides the necessary phase shift to keep the fields constant. These options must still be confirmed.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Thus, I have two models with different mobius twist factors. One with a 1/2 twist per 1/2 cycle, and one with no twist at all. I believe that both models would allow the electron to be the lowest level and this structure could have higher levels such as the muon. (However, I don't think that they can be considered excited states.)<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Andrew<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> _____________________________<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Chip Akins <<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A>>> wrote:<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Hi Richard<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> One of the items which intrigued me while studying electron models, was the notion that charge was topologically generated by the spin of the electron. We only find charge in spin 1/2 particles. Looking at U(1) and SU(2) and the Yang-Mills "phase force" idea, led me to be even more convinced.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> As it turns out, it seems the photon is capable of generating charge topologically, when confined. Of course the simplest method to express that confinement is a monochromatic circular plane wave, certain toroidal models may also work, as long as the negative end of the E field is exposed to the outside.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Another attraction in starting with the plane circular model, is the relative ease of analyzing wave interference. It happens that wave interference is very important, because the result is that the effective electrical and magnetic radius is then slightly larger than the transport radius, providing the exact values for the magnetic moment (with anomaly), and the exact electric charge. Wave interference occurs near the center of the model, making the E field less efficient near the center, and thereby shifting the effective E field radius, and therefore the effective magnetic radius, outwards, while not affecting the transport radius.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> With these values (magnetic moment and charge) defined so accurately in the model, it is still a little puzzling that my models wave interference predicts a value for the fine structure, internal to the electron, of 0.007285993718303 when the actual value (CODATA) is 0.0072973525698. The difference is 0.1557% but I still feel it is significant, and want to know why the difference is there. Maybe I am calculating the interference incorrectly or incompletely. Or maybe there is another contribution to the fine structure which I have missed. While writing this I may have discovered where my error is. I kept telling myself that the fields actually extend far beyond the effective RMS radius but falling off in intensity, and I accounted for that in part of the wave interference calculations, but not all of the interference was calculated, because I failed to see its tiny contribution before now.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Another aspect of my model which is unique and not incorporated in any other model we have seen is the relative phase of the electrical and magnetic components of the wave. This aspect becomes important when understanding how the photon is confined.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> The electron exhibits many clues to its nature. From this model we can calculate the exact known value for the Quantum Hall effect, by simply running some standard electrical engineering formula using the "voltage", "current", and frequency. This indicates also that an electrical engineering analysis may provide other valuable information. Using a similar approach we can understand that the electron will display a particular phase relationship between E and M components. In a simple EM resonant system the E and M components are shifted 90 degrees at resonance. If we start with a 90 degree phase shift and look at the double loop configuration of the wave we see an apparent 180 degree phase shift in the confined E and M components, placing them on opposite sides of the electron radius at any given instant. Then it is much easier to see that with the E and M fields on opposite sides, and the attraction between these fields, the issue of photon confinement is simplified somewhat.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> We still have a ways to go, getting answers to many of the remaining questions. But so far it seems like the group has uncovered some important new understanding which may lead us to a clearer, causal, view of physics, and provide a new basis which can describe experiment more fully and accurately.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Chip<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> -----Original Message-----<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> From: General [mailto:<A href="mailto:general-bounces%2Bchipakins" target=_blank>general-bounces+chipakins</A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:general-bounces%2Bchipakins" target=_blank>mailto:general-bounces%2Bchipakins</A>>=<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A>>] On Behalf Of Richard Gauthier<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 11:47 PM<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Subject: Re: [General] double-loop electron model discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Hi Chip,<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Thank you for your thoughtful as well as personal history comments about your interest in modeling the electron. My own interest in the structure and composition of the electron dates back to the late 1980’s. My spiritual guru gave some new ideas in 1986 about how matter might be formed by a kind of life principle transmitted through subtle vibrating life-energy entities that have both a mental and a physical portion. That idea intrigued me and soon I tried to apply the idea to make a model of a photon as being composed of millions of these oscillating life-particles. I had mainly my intuition to guide me. My photon model soon contained a single circulating energy entity (a superluminal energy quantum) traveling helically at a 45 degree angle with the speed c sqrt(2) and a total momentum along a helical trajectory of (h/lambda) sqrt(2). The energy quantum's helical radius is the photon’s wavelength lambda divided by 2 pi. This result came out of the requirement that the photon model should have its experimental value of spin hbar (or minus hbar) generated by the transverse component of the superluminal energy quantum's total momentum along its helical trajectory, while having the transluminal energy quantum’s longitudinal component of momentum be the photon's linear momentum p=h/lambda.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> I then modeled the electron as a closed charged photon-like object. I knew very little about the Dirac equation except its prediction of antimatter and that the electron has a 4pi rotational symmetry. I also found that a single closed-loop of one wavelength of a photon (the Compton wavelength h/mc) with the electron’s rest energy mc^2 yields a spin of 1 hbar — twice the value of the electron’s spin. It hit me that making a double-loop of a single wavelength photon produces an electron model with a spin of 1/2 hbar.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> While making my electron model I realized that it should also have the electron’s magnetic moment M — approximately the magnitude of the Bohr magneton (e hbar)/2m. I set the electron model to have the Bohr magneton for its magnetic moment by adjusting the radius of the closed helical path of the helically moving charged superluminal energy quantum so that its helically circulating charge generates the Dirac equation electron's Bohr magneton for the electron model. (Choosing a slightly larger helical radius generates the electron’s exact experimental value of magnetic moment which is a little larger than the Bohr magneton’s magnitude.)<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Later I started analyzing other people’s cyclical models of the electron more closely. I found that Dirac had claimed that electrons actually move at the speed of light, but that only a sub-luminal speed can be observed. I found two analyses of the Dirac equation that suggested that the path of a moving electron’s charge can be described as light-speed along an open helix. This gave me the idea to fit my model of the circulating charged photon for a resting electron to this light-speed helical approach. I realized that the circulating photon in the electron model would have an increased frequency f corresponding to its increased total energy gamma mc^2 when the electron moves forward, and that the corresponding wavelength of this circulating charged photon would decrease with this increasing frequency, in order to keep the speed of light of the circulating charged photon constant. The radius of the charged photon’s helix was found to decrease with increasing electron velocity by the factor gamma^2 in order for the photon’s wavelength to decrease as described as the frequency of the charged photon increases with increasing electron speed and total energy. All the math worked out nicely, including the generation of the electron’s spin 1/2 hbar for a slow moving electron from the tangential component mc of the charged photon’s total momentum gamma mc along its helical axis, multiplied by the radius hbar/2mc of the charged photon’s helical axis for a slow moving electron. And I realized that any speed-of-light double-looping photon model for an electron should also follow a corresponding helical path whose radius decreases in the same way with the electron’s increase speed. This is because the result only depends on the relations E=hf, p=h/lambda , and c= lambda f , the basic quantum energy and momentum equations for a photon and the equation for wave motion with speed c.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Although I knew that any acceptable electron model would have to generate the relativistic de Broglie wavelength Ldb = h/(gamma mv) , I was quite surprised that this result falls out so easily from the circulating charged photon model of a moving electron, where the longitudinal component of the circulating charged photon’s wave vector k yields the wave number that corresponds to the relativistic de Broglie wavelength. Furthermore, this simple result for the origin of the electron’s de Broglie wavelength suggests that the quantum wave functions for a moving electron, which depend heavily on the electron's de Broglie wavelength, are produced mathematically from the waves generated by the circulating charged photon that models the electron.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Richard<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> On Feb 28, 2015, at 6:47 AM, Chip Akins <<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A>>> wrote:<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Hi Richard and ALL<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> You asked for a comparison of electron models.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Since 1986, while having lunch with a mathematician, Eric Peterson, I have felt that the electron was made up of EM waves, or a photon.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Several of us have come to the same conclusion.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> When I saw your model from 2005 many things started to make sense. That is why I was so excited and interested to fully pursue the math to try to deeply understand your TEQ model. It was quite informative and inspiring to see your work.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Since that time, principally due to an Occam's razor argument, I have returned to the view that TEQ's are not required to model the electron. While I still feel that it may be possible that TEQ's exist, I do not find, in my view, that it is required for the modeling of the photon and electron.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> When I later saw John W and Martin's work from 1997 I was again very interested, principally because they were saying the same thing I was thinking, in general.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> While running the math and testing the model from John W and Martin, it occurred to me that we had to have some sort of photon model to build the electron from. So I produced the simplest model I could imagine which would fulfill what I felt then was the basic criteria. My view of the basic criteria has since changed due to this collaboration, so I am working now to update my electron model. However it seems most of the electron model remains intact.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> The fundamental differences between my model and John W. and Martin's model are as follows:<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> I found that wave interference may be precisely the cause for the exact value of the magnetic moment anomaly, and the cause for the exact value for the elementary charge.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> That wave interference, incidentally, produces a new view of the fine structure constant in the electron.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> My motivation, in part, to do this work, was because we have to provide an electron model which is simple in comparison, and competes with current theory and models in accuracy, before such a model will be considered a viable alternative.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> My model currently falls short of some of the goals that I feel we will need, in order for our work to be considered noteworthy and to be eventually accepted.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> My model also demonstrates the cause for inertial mass, but I think John W. and Martin's model may illustrate the same property. And in fact, all confined photon models may show the same attribute of inertial mass.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> There are implications of the work we are doing which we also need to discuss. If Matter is made from light, when you think about its implications on relativity, leads to the existence of a preferred reference rest frame in space, leading us toward Chandra's view and CTF.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Working with all of you is both enlightening and inspiring.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Chip<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> -----Original Message-----<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> From: General<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> [mailto:<A href="mailto:general-bounces%2Bchipakins" target=_blank>general-bounces+chipakins</A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:general-bounces%2Bchipakins" target=_blank>mailto:general-bounces%2Bchipakins</A>>=<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandpart" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandpart</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandpart" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandpart</SPAN></A>><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="http://icles.org/" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">icles.org</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="http://icles.org/" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">http://icles.org/</SPAN></A>>] On Behalf Of Richard Gauthier<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 11:10 PM<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Subject: [General] double-loop electron model discussion<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> I would like to start a thread that focuses on comparing and contrasting the various double-loop electron models, mainly John and Martin’s (J/M's), Chip’s, Vivian's and mine, and any others that people may know of, to find any common areas of agreement, and any points of difference. I think we are all agreed that the resting electron in our various models has spin 1/2 hbar. Chip’s model is based on J/M's model. I’d like to ask Chip, if I might, what commonalities and differences exist between J/M’s electron model and Chip's electron model. We can go on from there, if that’s agreeable.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Richard<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> _______________________________________________<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Light and Particles General Discussion List at <A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A>> <a<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> href="<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-n" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-n</SPAN></A><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="http://atureoflightandparticles.org/chipakins%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfir" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">atureoflightandparticles.org/chipakins%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfir</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="http://atureoflightandparticles.org/chipakins%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfir" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">http://atureoflightandparticles.org/chipakins%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfir</SPAN></A>><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> m=1"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Click here to unsubscribe<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> </a><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> _______________________________________________<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Light and Particles General Discussion List at <A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">richgauthier@gmail.com</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com</SPAN></A>><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <a<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> href="<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-n" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-n</SPAN></A><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> <A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="http://atureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubcon" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">atureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubcon</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="http://atureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubcon" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">http://atureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubcon</SPAN></A>><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> firm=1"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> Click here to unsubscribe<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">>> </a><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> _______________________________________________<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A>> <a href="<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/chipakins%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/chipakins%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</SPAN></A>"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Click here to unsubscribe<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> </a><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> _______________________________________________<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mules333@gmail.com</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:mules333@gmail.com</SPAN></A>><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <a href="<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</SPAN></A>"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Click here to unsubscribe<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> </a><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> _______________________________________________<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">richgauthier@gmail.com</SPAN></A><<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com</SPAN></A>><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <a href="<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</SPAN></A>"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Click here to unsubscribe<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> </a><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> ________________________________<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> 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.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <The Electron as a Confined Photon CA.pdf><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> _______________________________________________<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="mailto:martin.van.der.mark@philips.com" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">martin.van.der.mark@philips.com</SPAN></A><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> <a href="<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/martin.van.der.mark%40philips.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/martin.van.der.mark%40philips.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</SPAN></A>"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> Click here to unsubscribe<U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">> </a><U></U><U></U></SPAN></PRE>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Hi
Martin<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">I
have read your 1997 paper many times and continue to refer to it during
research.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Rereading
the Feynman Lectures II chapter 28 now.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">I
am fairly certain that my model, derived in part from yours, handles these
issues similarly, but adds some specifics for the electron you may be
interested in. If you have not read it please give it a
look.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Chip<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: rgb(225,225,225) 1pt solid; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; PADDING-LEFT: 0cm; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm">
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif"> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif">General [<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target=_blank>mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</A>]<SPAN> </SPAN><B>On
Behalf Of<SPAN> </SPAN></B>Mark, Martin van
der<BR><B>Sent:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Tuesday, March 03, 2015 11:23
AM<BR><B>To:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion<BR><B>Subject:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Re: [General] double-loop
electron model discussion</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Hi
Chip,</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">John
and I have dealt with it in our model. However, we can only be sure if we
can also develop a complete theory: a model is just and only a toy. A very
important toy to guide our thinking and to help us taking all aspects on
board.</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">In
our 1997 paper, we dealt with just about everything, except
for:</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt">
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: symbol; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">·</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">
<SPAN> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">The
Pauli principle (interference at same Compton
frequency)</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt">
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: symbol; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">·</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">
<SPAN> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">The
weak interaction (linked field lines)</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt">
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: symbol; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">·</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">
<SPAN> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">The
strong interaction (knotted flow)</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Although
after all these years I still feel that our model is very adequate,
perhaps the most important of our 1997 paper is that it explains the
problems related to certain properties of the
electron.</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">So
read the paper and you will know a lot more about the physics involved.
And do read Chapter 28 VOL II of Feynman.</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Good
luck,</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Martin</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"></SPAN><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
lang=DE
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Dr.
Martin B. van der Mark</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Principal
Scientist, Minimally Invasive Healthcare</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"></SPAN><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Philips
Research Europe - Eindhoven</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">High
Tech Campus, Building 34 (WB2.025)</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Prof.
Holstlaan 4</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">5656
AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Tel:
+31 40 2747548</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"></SPAN><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: rgb(181,196,223) 1pt solid; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; PADDING-LEFT: 0cm; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm">
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif"> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">General [<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A>]<SPAN> </SPAN><B>On
Behalf Of<SPAN> </SPAN></B>Chip
Akins<BR><B>Sent:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>dinsdag 3 maart 2015
18:05<BR><B>To:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>'Nature of Light and Particles -
General Discussion'<BR><B>Subject:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Re: [General]
double-loop electron model
discussion</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Hi
Martin<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Thank
you for the comments.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">In
your opinion does the model you and John W. created for the electron
(1997) satisfy this self-energy problem you
mention?<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">I
have read the Feynman lectures, but it has been a while, so time for a
review.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Infinities
are quite distasteful, and an electron has spin and a magnetic moment, so
it can be argued that the electron cannot actually be a point, even if it
does react at a single point.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Thoughts?<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Chip<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: rgb(225,225,225) 1pt solid; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; PADDING-LEFT: 0cm; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm">
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif"> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif">General [<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A>]<SPAN> </SPAN><B>On
Behalf Of<SPAN> </SPAN></B>Mark, Martin van
der<BR><B>Sent:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:40
AM<BR><B>To:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion<BR><B>Subject:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Re: [General] double-loop
electron model discussion</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Hi
Chip, Richard and Andrew,</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt">
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">1)</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">
<SPAN> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Ever
read chapter 28 of Vol. II of the Feynman
Lectures?</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-INDENT: 36pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">It
is about the energy in the field of a charged object, like a football that
has been rubbed against a cat (as physicists
do).</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; TEXT-INDENT: 36pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">That
energy goes to infinity at smaller and smaller radius. This leads to the
self-energy problem for a small particle. (The invention of charged
photons doesn’t seem to do this any good)</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt">
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">2)</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">
<SPAN> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">The
interaction of an electron is point-like, it means that it consists of a
single thing, not two massive parts bound by a force (because that would
vibrate at some energy)</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Any
electron model must be able to make plausible why this
is.</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Some
thinking to do for you perhaps…</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">Best,
Martin</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"></SPAN><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"></SPAN><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
lang=DE
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Dr.
Martin B. van der Mark</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Principal
Scientist, Minimally Invasive Healthcare</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: navy"></SPAN><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Philips
Research Europe - Eindhoven</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">High
Tech Campus, Building 34 (WB2.025)</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Prof.
Holstlaan 4</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">5656
AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,sans-serif; COLOR: navy">Tel:
+31 40 2747548</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"></SPAN><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: rgb(181,196,223) 1pt solid; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; PADDING-LEFT: 0cm; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm">
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif"> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">General [<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A>]<SPAN> </SPAN><B>On
Behalf Of<SPAN> </SPAN></B>Chip
Akins<BR><B>Sent:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>dinsdag 3 maart 2015
17:10<BR><B>To:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>'Nature of Light and Particles -
General Discussion'<BR><B>Subject:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Re: [General]
double-loop electron model
discussion</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Hi
Richard and Andrew<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Andrew,
I have been looking at the annihilation reaction of the electron and
positron and considering that the result yields two photons of the energy
0.511MeV. Then assuming the electron and positron are each made of one
photon.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">So
far, possibly due to my assumptions regarding the nature of a photon, I
have not been able to logically justify splitting the positive and
negative “portions’ of a single photon to create these two oppositely
charged particles. To me the positive and negative portions of the photon
are really made of the same thing, in that they are simply one field
vector pointing toward the positive. The positive and negative ends being
part of the same spacetime distortion.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">I
have attached an updated draft of<SPAN> </SPAN><U>the electron as a
confined photon</U>.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Chip<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: rgb(225,225,225) 1pt solid; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; PADDING-LEFT: 0cm; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm">
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif"> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: calibri,sans-serif">General [<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A>]<SPAN> </SPAN><B>On
Behalf Of<SPAN> </SPAN></B>Richard
Gauthier<BR><B>Sent:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08
AM<BR><B>To:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion<BR><B>Subject:</B><SPAN> </SPAN>Re: [General] double-loop
electron model discussion</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">Hi
Andrew,<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">
That’s a very interesting view that a wormhole connection between a
created electron-positron pair could resolve the EPR paradox. I think that
you would need to show that the same wormhole explanation would resolve
the EPR paradox with other particles that are quantum mechanically
entangled. You would also need to show that the appropriate quantum
communication between two particles could pass between their connecting
wormhole to keep them entangled.<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">
There are other sub-quantum hypotheses I suppose about how a photon
interacting with another photon or an atomic nucleus can create an
electron pair. Have you studied them and eliminated them as possible
contenders?<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt; MARGIN-TOP: 5pt">
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt">On
Mar 2, 2015, at 7:59 AM, Andrew Meulenberg <<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">mules333@gmail.com</SPAN></A>>
wrote:<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 12pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">Dear Richard,
Chip, et al.,</SPAN><U></U><U></U></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 12pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">I thought for
a long time about the electron as a self-bound photon, before I realized
that I could only make progress when I considered the electron/positron
pair as that photon. So, instead of a free photon (a soliton) we must
consider 2 self-bound solitons, that can be separated. It was the
paraphrased statement(s) from a molecular biologist (who read more
physics than I did) that started me on the right path. "Mass and charge
are only produced when (& as) the soliton pair are separated." This
became the basis of a paper that AJP rejected in 9 minutes from its
electronic receipt. However, with that identity of mass and charge in
mind and with the recognition of total internal reflection (TIR) as a
means of binding light in a "whispering-Gallery" mode, it became clear
that the transverse electric field of a bound photon could be
'rectified' by the Goos–Hänchen or<SPAN> </SPAN><A
title="Imbert–Fedorov effect"
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imbert%E2%80%93Fedorov_effect"
target=_blank><SPAN style="COLOR: purple">Imbert–Fedorov
effect</SPAN></A><SPAN> </SPAN>of a photon and give the net charge
of an electron. This happens at a unique frequency and orbit size where
the negative phase shift exactly equals the phase advance of the photon
and the electric field can always point out. If the phase is not
correct, then the distortion of space (which affects the refractive
index of the path and thus the curvature of the photon) is not resonant.
However, this difference in curvature, balanced against the phase shift
gives a stable configuration.<BR><BR>That was the easy part.
Nevertheless, I have not yet actually done the full calculations.
Someone of the group, with more mathematical ability than I, could do so
and coauthor my paper.</SPAN><U></U><U></U></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 12pt"><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">My present
conjecture</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">: What
happens to the field confined inside the bound-photon 'orbit'? It is so
greatly concentrated by the path curvature that it becomes 'singular' at
the center. Nature 'abhors a singularity' even more than it abhors a
vacuum! The extreme energy density distorts space and forms a
'connection' between the forming electron and positron. I believe that
the distortion is a wormhole and the connection is thru time. Just as
the external field lines of a bar magnet are 'closed' thru the bar, I
believe that the electric field lines of an electron/positron (the
lepton) pair in space, also form and are closed thru time via the
wormhole. The lepton pair remains connected (entangled) by this internal
structure until the wormhole 'distributes' among all of the neighboring
charges. [I don't believe that the wormhole collapses until a pair
annihilates.] Since time does not exist within a wormhole, this resolves
the EPR paradox.</SPAN><U></U><U></U></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">In response to
Richard's intent<SPAN> </SPAN><I>"I would like to start a thread
that focuses on comparing and contrasting the various double-loop
electron models ... to find any common areas of agreement, and any
points of difference."</I></SPAN></B><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 12pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">My original
double-loop model assumed that every wavelength is divided in 1/2 and
then recombined (nearly superposed). It required a different type of
phase shift than normally assumed and was nicely represented by the
mobius strip with a 1/2 twist per 1/2 cycle (a full rotation for every
wavelength).</SPAN><U></U><U></U></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 12pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">My present
concept, using the Goos–Hänchen or Imbert–Fedorov effect, does not
require a relationship between a 'twist' and the photon wavelength,
since the path curvature provides the necessary phase shift to keep the
fields constant. These options must still be
confirmed.</SPAN><U></U><U></U></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 12pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">Thus, I have
two models with different mobius twist factors. One with a 1/2 twist per
1/2 cycle, and one with no twist at all. I believe that both models
would allow the electron to be the lowest level and this structure could
have higher levels such as the muon. (However, I don't think that they
can be considered excited states.)</SPAN><U></U><U></U></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">Andrew<BR>_____________________________</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif"></SPAN><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">On Sun, Mar 1,
2015 at 8:41 PM, Chip Akins<SPAN> </SPAN><<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A>><SPAN> </SPAN>wrote:</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; PADDING-TOP: 0cm; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; PADDING-LEFT: 6pt; MARGIN: 5pt 0cm 5pt 4.8pt; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1pt solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm">
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">Hi
Richard<BR><BR>One of the items which intrigued me while studying
electron models, was the notion that charge was topologically
generated by the spin of the electron. We only find charge in
spin 1/2 particles. Looking at U(1) and SU(2) and the Yang-Mills
"phase force" idea, led me to be even more convinced.<BR><BR>As it
turns out, it seems the photon is capable of generating charge
topologically, when confined. Of course the simplest method to express
that confinement is a monochromatic circular plane wave, certain
toroidal models may also work, as long as the negative end of the E
field is exposed to the outside.<BR><BR>Another attraction in starting
with the plane circular model, is the relative ease of analyzing wave
interference. It happens that wave interference is very
important, because the result is that the effective electrical and
magnetic radius is then slightly larger than the transport radius,
providing the exact values for the magnetic moment (with anomaly), and
the exact electric charge. Wave interference occurs near the
center of the model, making the E field less efficient near the
center, and thereby shifting the effective E field radius, and
therefore the effective magnetic radius, outwards, while not affecting
the transport radius.<BR><BR>With these values (magnetic moment and
charge) defined so accurately in the model, it is still a little
puzzling that my models wave interference predicts a value for the
fine structure, internal to the electron, of 0.007285993718303 when
the actual value (CODATA) is 0.0072973525698. The difference is
0.1557% but I still feel it is significant, and want to know why the
difference is there. Maybe I am calculating the interference
incorrectly or incompletely. Or maybe there is another contribution to
the fine structure which I have missed. While writing this I may have
discovered where my error is. I kept telling myself that the
fields actually extend far beyond the effective RMS radius but falling
off in intensity, and I accounted for that in part of the wave
interference calculations, but not all of the interference was
calculated, because I failed to see its tiny contribution before
now.<BR><BR>Another aspect of my model which is unique and not
incorporated in any other model we have seen is the relative phase of
the electrical and magnetic components of the wave. This aspect
becomes important when understanding how the photon is
confined.<BR>The electron exhibits many clues to its nature. >From this
model we can calculate the exact known value for the Quantum Hall
effect, by simply running some standard electrical engineering formula
using the "voltage", "current", and frequency. This indicates also
that an electrical engineering analysis may provide other valuable
information. Using a similar approach we can understand that the
electron will display a particular phase relationship between E and M
components. In a simple EM resonant system the E and M
components are shifted 90 degrees at resonance. If we start with
a 90 degree phase shift and look at the double loop
configuration of the wave we see an apparent 180 degree phase shift in
the confined E and M components, placing them on opposite sides of the
electron radius at any given instant. Then it is much easier to see
that with the E and M fields on opposite sides, and the attraction
between these fields, the issue of photon confinement is simplified
somewhat.<BR><BR>We still have a ways to go, getting answers to many
of the remaining questions. But so far it seems like the group
has uncovered some important new understanding which may lead us to a
clearer, causal, view of physics, and provide a new basis which can
describe experiment more fully and
accurately.<BR><BR><SPAN>Chip</SPAN><BR><BR><SPAN>-----Original
Message-----</SPAN><BR><SPAN>From: General [mailto:<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:general-bounces%2Bchipakins" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">general-bounces+chipakins</SPAN></A>=<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A>]
On Behalf Of Richard Gauthier</SPAN><BR><SPAN>Sent: Saturday, February
28, 2015 11:47 PM</SPAN><BR><SPAN>To: Nature of Light and Particles -
General Discussion</SPAN></SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">Subject: Re:
[General] double-loop electron model discussion<BR><BR>Hi
Chip,<BR><BR> Thank you for your thoughtful as well as
personal history comments about your interest in modeling the
electron. My own interest in the structure and composition of the
electron dates back to the late 1980’s. My spiritual guru gave some
new ideas in 1986 about how matter might be formed by a kind of life
principle transmitted through subtle vibrating life-energy entities
that have both a mental and a physical portion. That idea intrigued me
and soon I tried to apply the idea to make a model of a photon as
being composed of millions of these oscillating life-particles. I had
mainly my intuition to guide me. My photon model soon contained a
single circulating energy entity (a superluminal energy quantum)
traveling helically at a 45 degree angle with the speed c sqrt(2) and
a total momentum along a helical trajectory of (h/lambda) sqrt(2). The
energy quantum's helical radius is the photon’s wavelength lambda
divided by 2 pi. This result came out of the requirement that the
photon model should have its experimental value of spin hbar (or minus
hbar) generated by the transverse component of the superluminal energy
quantum's total momentum along its helical trajectory, while having
the transluminal energy quantum’s longitudinal component of momentum
be the photon's linear momentum p=h/lambda.<BR><BR>
I then modeled the electron as a closed charged photon-like object. I
knew very little about the Dirac equation except its prediction of
antimatter and that the electron has a 4pi rotational symmetry. I also
found that a single closed-loop of one wavelength of a photon (the
Compton wavelength h/mc) with the electron’s rest energy mc^2 yields a
spin of 1 hbar — twice the value of the electron’s spin. It hit me
that making a double-loop of a single wavelength photon produces an
electron model with a spin of 1/2 hbar.<BR><BR>
While making my electron model I realized that it should also have the
electron’s magnetic moment M — approximately the magnitude of the Bohr
magneton (e hbar)/2m. I set the electron model to have the Bohr
magneton for its magnetic moment by adjusting the radius of the closed
helical path of the helically moving charged superluminal energy
quantum so that its helically circulating charge generates the Dirac
equation electron's Bohr magneton for the electron model. (Choosing a
slightly larger helical radius generates the electron’s exact
experimental value of magnetic moment which is a little larger than
the Bohr magneton’s magnitude.)<BR><BR> Later I
started analyzing other people’s cyclical models of the electron more
closely. I found that Dirac had claimed that electrons actually move
at the speed of light, but that only a sub-luminal speed can be
observed. I found two analyses of the Dirac equation that suggested
that the path of a moving electron’s charge can be described as
light-speed along an open helix. This gave me the idea to fit my model
of the circulating charged photon for a resting electron to this
light-speed helical approach. I realized that the circulating photon
in the electron model would have an increased frequency f
corresponding to its increased total energy gamma mc^2 when the
electron moves forward, and that the corresponding wavelength of this
circulating charged photon would decrease with this increasing
frequency, in order to keep the speed of light of the circulating
charged photon constant. The radius of the charged photon’s helix was
found to decrease with increasing electron velocity by the factor
gamma^2 in order for the photon’s wavelength to decrease as described
as the frequency of the charged photon increases with increasing
electron speed and total energy. All the math worked out nicely,
including the generation of the electron’s spin 1/2 hbar for a slow
moving electron from the tangential component mc of the charged
photon’s total momentum gamma mc along its helical axis, multiplied by
the radius hbar/2mc of the charged photon’s helical axis for a slow
moving electron. And I realized that any speed-of-light double-looping
photon model for an electron should also follow a corresponding
helical path whose radius decreases in the same way with the
electron’s increase speed. This is because the result only depends on
the relations E=hf, p=h/lambda , and c= lambda f , the basic
quantum energy and momentum equations for a photon and the equation
for wave motion with speed c.<BR><BR> Although
I knew that any acceptable electron model would have to generate the
relativistic de Broglie wavelength Ldb = h/(gamma mv) , I was quite
surprised that this result falls out so easily from the circulating
charged photon model of a moving electron, where the longitudinal
component of the circulating charged photon’s wave vector k yields the
wave number that corresponds to the relativistic de Broglie
wavelength. Furthermore, this simple result for the origin of the
electron’s de Broglie wavelength suggests that the quantum wave
functions for a moving electron, which depend heavily on the
electron's de Broglie wavelength, are produced mathematically from the
waves generated by the circulating charged photon that models the
electron.<BR><BR>
Richard<BR><BR>> On Feb 28, 2015, at 6:47 AM, Chip Akins <<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A>>
wrote:<BR>><BR>> Hi Richard and ALL<BR>><BR>> You asked
for a comparison of electron models.<BR>><BR>> Since 1986, while
having lunch with a mathematician, Eric Peterson, I have felt that the
electron was made up of EM waves, or a photon.<BR>><BR>> Several
of us have come to the same conclusion.<BR>><BR>> When I saw
your model from 2005 many things started to make sense. That is
why I was so excited and interested to fully pursue the math to try to
deeply understand your TEQ model. It was quite informative and
inspiring to see your work.<BR>><BR>> Since that time,
principally due to an Occam's razor argument, I have returned to the
view that TEQ's are not required to model the electron. While I
still feel that it may be possible that TEQ's exist, I do not find, in
my view, that it is required for the modeling of the photon and
electron.<BR>><BR>> When I later saw John W and Martin's work
from 1997 I was again very interested, principally because they were
saying the same thing I was thinking, in general.<BR>><BR>>
While running the math and testing the model from John W and Martin,
it occurred to me that we had to have some sort of photon model to
build the electron from. So I produced the simplest model I could
imagine which would fulfill what I felt then was the basic
criteria. My view of the basic criteria has since changed due to
this collaboration, so I am working now to update my electron
model. However it seems most of the electron model remains
intact.<BR>><BR>> The fundamental differences between my model
and John W. and Martin's model are as
follows:<BR>><BR>> I found
that wave interference may be precisely the cause for the exact value
of the magnetic moment anomaly, and the cause for
the exact value for the elementary
charge.<BR>><BR>> That wave
interference, incidentally, produces a new view of the fine
structure constant in
the electron.<BR>><BR>> My motivation, in part, to do this work,
was because we have to provide an electron model which is simple in
comparison, and competes with current theory and models in accuracy,
before such a model will be considered a viable
alternative.<BR>><BR>> My model currently falls short of some of
the goals that I feel we will need, in order for our work to be
considered noteworthy and to be eventually accepted.<BR>><BR>>
My model also demonstrates the cause for inertial mass, but I think
John W. and Martin's model may illustrate the same property. And in
fact, all confined photon models may show the same attribute of
inertial mass.<BR>><BR>> There are implications of the work we
are doing which we also need to discuss. If Matter is made from
light, when you think about its implications on relativity, leads to
the existence of a preferred reference rest frame in space, leading us
toward Chandra's view and CTF.<BR>><BR>> Working with all of you
is both enlightening and inspiring.<BR>><BR>>
Chip<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> -----Original
Message-----<BR>> From: General<BR>> [mailto:<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:general-bounces%2Bchipakins" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">general-bounces+chipakins</SPAN></A>=<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandpart" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandpart</SPAN></A><BR>><SPAN> </SPAN><A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="http://icles.org/" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">icles.org</SPAN></A>] On Behalf Of Richard
Gauthier<BR>> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 11:10 PM<BR>> To:
Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<BR>> Subject:
[General] double-loop electron model discussion<BR>><BR>> I
would like to start a thread that focuses on comparing and
contrasting the various double-loop electron models, mainly John and
Martin’s (J/M's), Chip’s, Vivian's and mine, and any others that
people may know of, to find any common areas of agreement, and any
points of difference. I think we are all agreed that the resting
electron in our various models has spin 1/2 hbar. Chip’s model is
based on J/M's model. I’d like to ask Chip, if I might, what
commonalities and differences exist between J/M’s electron model and
Chip's electron model. We can go on from there, if that’s
agreeable.<BR>> Richard<BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> If you no
longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of<BR>> Light
and Particles General Discussion List at<SPAN> </SPAN><A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A><SPAN> </SPAN><a<BR>>
href="<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-n"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-n</SPAN></A><BR>><SPAN> </SPAN><A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="http://atureoflightandparticles.org/chipakins%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfir"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">atureoflightandparticles.org/chipakins%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfir</SPAN></A><BR>>
m=1"><BR>> Click here to unsubscribe<BR>>
</a><BR>><BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> If you no
longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of<BR>> Light
and Particles General Discussion List at<SPAN> </SPAN><A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">richgauthier@gmail.com</SPAN></A><BR>>
<a<BR>> href="<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-n"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-n</SPAN></A><BR>><SPAN> </SPAN><A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="http://atureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubcon"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">atureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubcon</SPAN></A><BR>>
firm=1"><BR>> Click here to unsubscribe<BR>>
</a><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>If
you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light
and Particles General Discussion List at<SPAN> </SPAN><A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">chipakins@gmail.com</SPAN></A><SPAN> </SPAN><a
href="<A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/chipakins%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/chipakins%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</SPAN></A>"><BR>Click
here to
unsubscribe<BR></a><BR><BR>_______________________________________________</SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">If you no
longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at<SPAN> </SPAN><A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">mules333@gmail.com</SPAN></A><BR><a href="<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</SPAN></A>"><BR>Click
here to
unsubscribe<BR></a></SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif"></SPAN><U></U><U></U> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">_______________________________________________<BR>If
you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at<SPAN> </SPAN></SPAN><A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target=_blank><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif; COLOR: purple">richgauthier@gmail.com</SPAN></A><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif"><BR><a
href="</SPAN><A style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
target=_blank><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif; COLOR: purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</SPAN></A><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">"><BR>Click
here to
unsubscribe<BR></a></SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"
align=center>
<HR align=center SIZE=2 width="100%">
</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><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><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica,sans-serif">_______________________________________________<BR>If
you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at<SPAN> </SPAN><A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"
target=_blank>richgauthier@gmail.com</A><BR><a href="<A
style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline; COLOR: purple"
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
target=_blank>http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</A>"><BR>Click
here to
unsubscribe<BR></a></SPAN><U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman',serif; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><U></U><U></U> </DIV></DIV></DIV><SPAN
style="WHITE-SPACE: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; FLOAT: none; FONT: 12px helvetica; DISPLAY: inline !important; LETTER-SPACING: normal; TEXT-INDENT: 0px">_______________________________________________</SPAN><BR
style="WHITE-SPACE: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; FONT: 12px helvetica; LETTER-SPACING: normal; TEXT-INDENT: 0px"><SPAN
style="WHITE-SPACE: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; FLOAT: none; FONT: 12px helvetica; DISPLAY: inline !important; LETTER-SPACING: normal; TEXT-INDENT: 0px">If
you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at <A href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"
target=_blank>richgauthier@gmail.com</A></SPAN><BR
style="WHITE-SPACE: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; FONT: 12px helvetica; LETTER-SPACING: normal; TEXT-INDENT: 0px"><SPAN
style="WHITE-SPACE: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; FLOAT: none; FONT: 12px helvetica; DISPLAY: inline !important; LETTER-SPACING: normal; TEXT-INDENT: 0px"><a
href="<A
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
target=_blank>http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</A>"></SPAN><BR
style="WHITE-SPACE: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; FONT: 12px helvetica; LETTER-SPACING: normal; TEXT-INDENT: 0px"><SPAN
style="WHITE-SPACE: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; FLOAT: none; FONT: 12px helvetica; DISPLAY: inline !important; LETTER-SPACING: normal; TEXT-INDENT: 0px">Click
here to unsubscribe</SPAN><BR
style="WHITE-SPACE: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; FONT: 12px helvetica; LETTER-SPACING: normal; TEXT-INDENT: 0px"><SPAN
style="WHITE-SPACE: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; FLOAT: none; FONT: 12px helvetica; DISPLAY: inline !important; LETTER-SPACING: normal; TEXT-INDENT: 0px"></a></SPAN></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV><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><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>If you no longer wish to
receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion
List at johnduffield@btconnect.com<BR><a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/johnduffield%40btconnect.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><BR>Click
here to unsubscribe<BR></a><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>