<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Dear all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I am deeply disappointed.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">My careful explanation to those who are interested in the subject of non-locality has not worked.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">You, John D Chandra and Chip in particular should realize that I am not talking about my own pet theories (like many in this group), but really try to explain
where science stands. I was advocating Feynman, Wheeler, Tetrode, and all those experimentalists that work on entanglement.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I have little hope now anything good will come from this group.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Goodbye.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Martion<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Dr. Martin B. van der Mark</span><span lang="DE" style="color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Principal Scientist, Minimally Invasive Healthcare</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Philips Research Europe - Eindhoven</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">High Tech Campus, Building 34 (WB2.025)</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Prof. Holstlaan 4</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Tel: +31 40 2747548</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> General [mailto:general-bounces+martin.van.der.mark=philips.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>chandra<br>
<b>Sent:</b> donderdag 26 maart 2015 17:34<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Group discussion at San Diego<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Dear Friends: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">As an individual scientist like one of you, I concur with John D. and his followers. At this moment, I am abandoning my role as a moderator! [I will take the moderator role during our discussion at San Diego
in August!]<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> However, purely from the stand point of preserving the philosophical breadth in our discussion, I would restrain myself from the strong view of dropping the thread (emission
as a result of interaction by the absorber”) completely and immediately; unless, of course, all of you agree to. Because, it may give rise to, or evolve into, something productive; or it may become a dead-end also; like say, the string theory! I do not know.
I trust in the nature’s drive towards promoting diversity of thinking among humans. DIVERSITY IN EVERY SPHERE OF LIFE IS AT THE FOUNDATION OF EVOLUTIONARY SUSTAINABILITY. So, we need to accommodate diversity of thinking among humans, as long as everybody is
intellectually honest and remains, deep in her/his mind and connects to evolution congruency in some form or other.
</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> Now, scientifically speaking, let us visualize the physical processes in a gas laser behind the spontaneous
<b><i>emission and stimulated emission</i></b> under the constraints of the unique vectorial velocity matching necessary for lasing to happen, given the spectral Doppler broadening (Maxwellian velocity distribution of the gas atoms). The length of the laser
tube imposes physical and temporal separation between the spontaneous and stimulated emitting atoms. Successful modeling approach to temporal evolution of mode locked laser pulses clearly points to the complete independence between the spontaneous and the
stimulating atoms; they are not <b><i>entangled</i></b>!. This is, of course, very true for spontaneous photons that started its journey from a star, say, 10 billion light years past, and reaching my detector today on earth. That photon, obviously could not
have coordinated its emission characteristics, including its Cosmological Redshift, well before the invention of detection technology, or even the birth of the Sun!
<b><i>That is not a causal physics model. </i></b>If we start with a non-causal, but mathematically self-consistent theory to model measurable data; we should not keep on claiming that my theory is correct simply because it fits the measured data. A theory
determines what and how we measure some parameter. Something like this was said by none other than Alberto (our Einstein)!
<b><i>This is a clear example that we cannot anchor ourselves to the correctness of a theory simply because it is corroborated by a “working” theory.</i></b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> I am attaching one of my recent paper that further elaborates this issue.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Sincerely,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Chandra.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chandra=phys.uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+chandra=phys.uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>John Duffield<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, March 26, 2015 10:27 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Group discussion at San Diego<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">John/Martin:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">I concur with Chip. I would urge you to bury this “emission as a result of interaction by the absorber”. Emission and absorption might be separated by 13.8 billion years, or 46
billion light years. No way do they constitute the same spacetime event. Claiming that they do is the sort of thing that could attract a crackpot label. Malicious people might use it to discredit you along with everything else you say and do. And of course,
this group. Better to stick with hard scientific evidence of pair production, electron diffraction, Einstein-de Haas etc, and the self-confined-photon electron.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">I have little patience for spooky action at a distance. What is it really? It isn’t some ansible. Or any kind of time machine. You can’t even use it for instant messaging. I think
it’s a parlour trick, smoke and mirrors, quantum mysticism, or even a deliberate fraud. Please have a look at
<a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.0401" title="http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.0401">http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.0401</a> where Travis Norsen says this:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">“Many textbooks and commentators report that Bell's theorem refutes the possibility (suggested especially by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen in 1935) of supplementing ordinary
quantum theory with additional ("hidden") variables that might restore determinism and/or some notion of an observer-independent reality. On this view, Bell's theorem supports the orthodox Copenhagen interpretation. Bell's own view of his theorem, however,
was quite different”. </span></em><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Also see work by Joy Christian:
<a href="http://postbiota.org/pipermail/tt/2007-November/001833.html" title="http://postbiota.org/pipermail/tt/2007-November/001833.html">
Quantum entanglement: is spookiness under threat?</a> and <a href="http://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/au:+Christian_J/0/1/0/all/0/1">
http://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/au:+Christian_J/0/1/0/all/0/1</a>. All the mysticism is swept away by
<em><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">rotations do not commute</span></em>.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">John D<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">
<a href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" title="chipakins@gmail.com">Chip Akins</a> <o:p>
</o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">Sent:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"> Thursday, March 26, 2015 1:23 PM<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">To:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">
<a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" title="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">
'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">Subject:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"> Re: [General] Group discussion
at San Diego<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Hi Vivian<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Thank you. I have downloaded your paper and am reading it. Of course I immediately found the similarities between your electron model and mine. Please see attached.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">I completely concur that the Lorentz transformations are applied to confined photon particles and that the structure, the EM wave structure, of these particles is the cause for the Lorentz transformations, including
length contraction and time dilation. Simply due to the velocity limit of the constituent waves. So, in that scenario, time, as we know it, is created, and modified in various frames, for confined EM wave particles with velocity, by the EM wave motions and
interactions, and time is not an inherent property of space. Time is the rate at which confined EM wave particles can react and interact, and is created by the interaction of space and EM waves. Time is simply a measurement of the rate of particle interactions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">We observe photons, waves, with physical properties. They exhibit length, frequency, spin, etc. if we correctly apply Lorentz transformations to these linear, light speed, waves, we see redshift, or blue shift,
but we still see a wave which has length and travels at light speed. We do not see the length of the wave shrink to zero as we would for a confined wave particle. So we can see for this simple example that Lorentz transformations do not apply in the same sense
as for confined wave particles. The reason that time stops for a confined EM wave particle traveling at light speed, is simply that the waves are traveling at their maximum velocity in the direction of motion, so they cannot travel in their particle trajectory,
and they cannot interact with any adjacent particles moving along with them. This specific scenario however does not apply to the naturally linear moving photon.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">The view that a photon is exchanged in a single point in space time has some associated problems. Let’s consider the implications of that view.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">If a photon exists only at a single point in spacetime it would not be able to have any frequency or wavelength properties. If a photon is emitted and absorbed at the same point in spacetime, it cannot have, perhaps
billions, of cycles of its inherent frequency, in the space between emitter and absorber, because there is no space between emitter and absorber.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Another implication of the “single point in spacetime” approach is the predetermination of events. So let’s say a photon in a distant galaxy millions of light years away, strikes the retina of your eye on a starry
night some evening next week. The single point in spacetime approach makes that photon, in its reference frame, predetermine events, in your reference frame, millions of years in the future. Or it could mean that with every action we make, we change the past
for the rest of the universe. Neither of these options appear reasonable. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Those are a few of the reasons why I think there is something amiss in the single point in spacetime “solution” to photon exchange. I do feel there is a reasonable answer, I just don’t think we have it yet.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Chip<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Vivian Robinson<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, March 25, 2015 6:22 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Cc:</b> John Macken<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Group discussion at San Diego<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Dear Chandra, Chip, Martin and All,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Chandra I am please to see you moderating this discussion, keeping people focussed.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">My point of view is that all matter is composed of rotating photons that make two revolutions per wavelength. Some of the predictions from that model, as related to the electron are given in my paper, reference
link below.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><a href="http://www.la-press.com/a-proposal-for-the-structure-and-properties-of-the-electron-article-a2645">http://www.la-press.com/a-proposal-for-the-structure-and-properties-of-the-electron-article-a2645</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Chip you will see in that presentation I have suggested that it is this rotating photon structure of matter that is responsible for the half hbar spin of all individual sub atomic particles, for E = mc**2 and the
relativistic corrections of mass, length and time with velocity. As such the special relativity corrections are not something that is imposed upon matter by any nature of space-time. It is this structure that is responsible for those special relativity corrections.
I have also made some experimentally testable predictions based upon that model and hope that, at some time in the future some of those predictions will be tested. The simplest is the change the electron's radius with velocity.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">I also agree with Martin's comments about experiment being the arbiter of truth. It is no good having a theory which dispenses with any properly measured phenomena. In the space-time continuum, a photon traveling
at c is a point. In its own time frame, it is no sooner emitted than it is absorbed. I would like to be so bold as to suggest that does not mean that the absorber has to know that the emitter has emitted the photon and ready itself to receive it.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">A point in one frame of reference is not necessarily a point in another frame of reference. Electronic circuit diagrams are every bit as good a communications medium as are mathematics. Those of you familiar with
them will often see two components on a circuit diagram joined by or at a single point. When it comes to the reality of constructing the circuit, that point finishes up being a line or connecting wire that can extend from one end of the circuit to the other.
A point in space-time is not necessarily a point in space. As astronomers measure, photons leaving galaxies are red shifted when they are detected, a phenomenon that will not occur in a point.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">One of my reasons for this email is to introduce John Macken to this group. John is from California and has worked extensively with photons. I think we all agree that an understanding of the nature of the photon
is essential. John we would like to receive your viewpoints on the photon but please, as the implications of the topic are vast, restrict yourself to presentations of the structure of the photon and its implications for the structure of electrons, the main
topics of this discussion group.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Cheers,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Vivian Robinson<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">On 26/03/2015, at 7:38 AM, Richard Gauthier <<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Hello Chandra, <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> That sounds like a good approach. I will prepare a set of discussion points for my approach to the electron/photon and pass it to you and the others for consideration.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 9:18 AM, chandra <<a href="mailto:chandra@phys.uconn.edu" target="_blank">chandra@phys.uconn.edu</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Dear Friends:
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">I am delighted to see that our discussions are heading towards defining a fruitful platform. As Martin has done; each of us need to unambiguously
define our position pertaining to fundamental postulates (“accepted beliefs”); which are at the root of our individual theories for the discussion, “Electron</span><span style="color:black"> <--> Photon”. This will help us down select and define a very clear
set of discussion-points that would be possible to carry out within the 3-hour time we have on the Thursday morning.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Of course, we will be able to advance this discussion quite a bit over this web-saved-emails, if all of us quickly define your positions regarding the
fundamental postulates behind the theories that we believe in and we are using to advance your current models for electrons (photons). Then our volunteer editors can collect and group them. Then we can collectively iterate a few times and then we finalize
the discussion-focal points. If we do this soon, we will have time to even re-assess whether we have succeeded in down selecting the best set of discussion issues while email-based discussion keeps on advancing.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Remember, even though ours is “Special Conference” granted by SPIE; we still need to conform to its basic rules behind the publication of SPIE proceedings.
Proceeding papers should be between 6 to 15 pages long, and never to exceed 20-pages.
<b><i>All papers in the proceeding must have assigned conference numbers</i></b>. Obviously, our “discussion papers” do not have numbers; as we have not submitted abstracts for these papers yet.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Here is a possible solution. My discussion with SPIE indicates that SPIE will be happy to assign paper numbers like post deadline! Papers; if we edit and
group the output of our discussions into well-selected set of papers (between 6 to 20 pages) and authored by appropriate set of discussion participants. If all of you “sign up to this approach”; then we need to pro-actively organize the discussions-points
and create <b><i>TENTATIVE</i></b> discussion groups who will author specific discussion-papers. “Tentative” implies that we should be able to re-organize our collective authorships, if necessary, as we finalize the separation of discussion outcomes into a
well-defined set of papers. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Are all of you willing to organize our discussions issues with this mode of publication by several sub-groups, yet to be defined?
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Chandra.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><a name="14c51ba2edf82b59__MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></a><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"> General
[mailto:<a href="mailto:general-bounces%2Bchandra" target="_blank">general-bounces+chandra</a>=<a href="mailto:phys.uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank">phys.uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Mark, Martin van der<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, March 25, 2015 9:38 AM</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Group discussion at San Diego<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Dear Chip,
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">let me start by answering your questions (not because John cannot do it, but he is doing a lot of
answering already)</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">First of all you are right in saying that it is not the whole story, something else is going on as
well.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">But first we have to get a few things very straight.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">What I know as being correct knowledge, as a professional physicist, is what I will describe below.
Correct knowledge is that knowledge that science has approved of to be the closest to the truth as we presently know. Not more, and also not any less.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">(Special) relativity is essentially correct, it describes experiment, including time dilation, twin
paradox, etc.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The foundation of the theory is that the speed of light is the same for all observers. The consequence
is that clocks flying at high speed seem to be slow (the clock thinks the same of stationary you). Clocks will stop ticking in the limit where they would move at light speed. At the same time space is contracted, the clocks look short. No size (in the direction
of motion) will remain when at light speed.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Conclusion: something that goes at the speed of light does not see any time or space, it is there
but contracted to nothing at all. Something that happens, but without space or time interval. This is what we call an event. It is a point in space-time.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">If you cannot agree with the above, you cannot agree with physics as it stands. It may not be the
whole story, but the bit I described is the consistent truth to our very best knowledge. One cannot dismiss it out of hand, or even with a lot of experiments, because a zillion experiments have confirmed this already. There may be an additional subtlety that
has been overlooked, but then one has to point out that subtlety very precisely.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Now there are at least two extra things to the story you want to talk about, some subtleties you
may call them, but before I go into those, I want to point out something else that we know to our very best knowledge. It is the single most puzzling thing, I believe, in physics today.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">It is the experimental result of the EPR-experiments, the quantum teleportation, quantum eraser,
and other quantum entanglement experiments, see Bell inequalities and GHZ entanglement. The result of these experiments is the proof that space is non-local for entangled quantum states. That may be a part of a very limited set of states describing normal
life, but it shows that space is not simply what normal reason of local causality makes of it.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Again I have so far not done any speculation, this is what the situation in physics is.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">From here it is still nothing new really, it is only just taking the full consequences of the above,
but it is not an embedded piece of knowledge in the whole body of physics.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">So now it comes; These results can be understood completely if we look at them from the point of
view of emission as a result of interaction by the absorber!!!!!! In all their weirdness, this is how it actually seems to be workings.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Interaction of the emitter and absorber to exchange a photon is saying that the photon is part of
an event (or that two entangled photons [emitted from a singlet state] are part of a single event with one emitter and two absorbers). The emitter and absorber(s) are one at that event.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">This notion unifies the idea of non-locality and emission of light, AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE LIGHTSPEED
BEING CONSTANT FOR ALL ABSORBERS.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Now you can choose to dismiss it or not.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">There here are the mentioned two subtleties:
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">1)</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D">
</span><span style="color:#1F497D">light is quantized, we are talking about photons. That is not a required part of relativity, but it is not clear to me how it would upset it. Or is it perhaps..?</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">2)</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D">
</span><span style="color:#1F497D">Light does not really go at the speed of light or rather it is, but I mean photons are not really going at the speed of light. The near-field part of the excitation or the limited distance between emission and absorption
(it is not infinite) puts boundaries on it and pulls the total emission slightly off the energy-momentum shell, hence it is ever, ever,ever so slightly slow…. (only the radiative part is light speed and rigorously on-shell)</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Well John, or anybody else, may add what is missing! I have to go…</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Best regards, Martin</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="DE" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Dr. Martin B. van der Mark</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Principal Scientist, Minimally Invasive Healthcare</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Philips Research Europe - Eindhoven</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">High Tech Campus, Building 34 (WB2.025)</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Prof. Holstlaan 4</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Tel:
<a href="tel:%2B31%2040%202747548" target="_blank">+31 40 2747548</a></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"> General
[<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>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Chip Akins<br>
<b>Sent:</b> woensdag 25 maart 2015 13:35<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Group discussion at San Diego</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Hi John W<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Still working on coming to grips with emission and absorption interactions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Lots of opinion follows…<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">I feel that photon exchange, and virtual particle exchange, is a mechanism we can demonstrate and is a required part of our understanding, at least for
many short range interactions. However I do not feel the “single point in spacetime” approach provides the answer. I believe that photons are very simple linear, principally transverse, quantized wave structures. And that mater is made of wave structures
as well. And as such photons are responsible for creating relativity. Photons are then the fundamental upon which relativity is built, and are not subject to the spacetime velocity transformations, but rather are the cause for these transformations being
required for mater.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Imagine an asteroid or planet orbiting a star a billion light years away. Now envision the past light cone for an absorber on that asteroid or planet.
If photons zig, zagged in their paths to their destination, the popular concept could work for absorption and emission. But of course they travel in “straight” lines in spacetime. Even if an absorber can see all of its past light cone at one point in space
time, it still does not correctly explain photon exchange. There is something else going on here, something is missing, and something that is not really there has been “added” to try to explain things. I feel we have reached for an explanation which is convenient,
but an error, and that we do not yet have the real answer to this issue.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Still eager to understand.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Chip<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> General
[<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>John Williamson<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, March 24, 2015 10:28 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Anthony Booth; Hans De Raedt<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Group discussion at San Diego</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">Dear Chip and everyone,<br>
<br>
I am trying to start to get my act together in preparation for August, and just came across the keynote talk from Carver Mead from nature of light and particles 5. It is available here :<br>
<br>
<a href="http://natureoflight.org/" target="_blank">http://natureoflight.org/</a><br>
<br>
It addresses the very issue of interaction with the absorber we discussed earlier. In my opinion it is spot on - even though the answer to the last question (similar to your worry Chip) was rather weak - that a lot of people have trouble with resonances over
million year plus-time scales. Indeed.<br>
<br>
I think the proper way to view this is, as I said, from the point of view of the observer being in touch with all points on the lightcone at previous times, not that the emitter sees all "future" times all over the universe. This is a "pull" not a "push" for
the direction of causality. The observer says "hit me!". The past is happy to oblige - zillions of hits per second painting the universe of your perceptions.<br>
<br>
Now I enjoyed Carver Mead's book thoroughly a few years ago when I first came across it (thanks Nick) and he is one person I would very much like to meet if I'm coming to California. That man can really think - and think freely. Is he coming to this one, and,
if not, can anyone introduce me? He would be a most excellent person to have on the group. Another excellent chap - and I have just finished reading some spectacularly interesting work of his- is Tony Booth (copied above). Tony is a real engineer (I am in
an engineering department but I can tell the difference). Please add him to the general discussion group!<br>
<br>
Further to this whole developing endeavour. I am perfectly delighted to try and give classes on any aspect of the new theory - or to help bring people up to speed on some of the other relevant theories and areas in my areas of expertise - in quantum mechanics
(relativistic or ordinary), experimental solid state physics, elementary particle physics (including QED, the standard model and various field theories), and relativity (special or general). Another favourite theme of mine is current problems and mysteries
in Science as a whole. Another possibility is a question and answer session on "how stuff works". I'm particularly interested in questions I cannot answer. We should make a list!<br>
<br>
I expect lots of you to contribute and educate me in areas where I am weak such as optics, photonics, atomic physics to name but a very few (my ignorance is, almost, boundless). Martin and I are quite used to this as we both belong to an international study
club (I was a founder member - but it is still going strong after a quarter of a century) which does this sort of thing regularly. It is BIG fun! I'm sure there will be a lot of input from others in the group in developing aspects of the above theories where,
I am sure, many of you go beyond me.<br>
<br>
I already have tens of hours of lecture material prepared and am perfectly happy to go on for multiple hours at a time (if people can stand it). I just gave four hours of lectures on-the-trot yesterday (then had lunch and gave another one). I am quite used
to it - and it would be much more fun than the first year vector and complex number maths given in two of the lectures today. If a room can be made available either before or after the conference with a projector and board all would be welcome. I know Martin
would be prepared to talk on his areas of expertise as well, and I'm sure others of the more senior group would be delighted to help educate the younger ones as well.
<br>
<br>
We could, further, invite anyone from industry who was interested in new, linear, paradigms for developing and thinking about new kinds of materials, devices and systems for a further session, perhaps after the conference proper. This may have the added advantage
of snowballing into some other meetings and prospects for the future. <br>
<br>
What does everyone think?<br>
<br>
Regards, John.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="color:black">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</span></div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"> General [general-bounces+john.williamson=<a href="mailto:glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank">glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
on behalf of chandra [<a href="mailto:chandra@phys.uconn.edu" target="_blank">chandra@phys.uconn.edu</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, March 09, 2015 7:02 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Hans De Raedt<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [General] Group discussion at San Diego</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Dear Out-of-Box “Electron Modelers”:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">We are arranging for a special 3-hour (8 to 11AM) discussion session, especially, for this group, on Thursday, August, 13, 2015. The title
has been deliberately chosen as a somewhat open ended question: </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;color:black">“Are electrons oscillating photons or oscillations of the vacuum itself?”</span></i></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">If needed, the 3-huor duration would be flexible; and we can add an extra hour. During the main conference schedule, all of you have been
given the standard 20-minute slots. This compensating discussion period provides all of you a better forum to debate and further develop your concepts.
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">I will take the role of the Moderator. I would need a couple of volunteer editors from your “Electron Modeling” group. Feel free to suggest
their names. Obviously, I am looking for “volunteers” who are very respectful to logically self-consistent views of others in spite of those views being counter to their personal views. All of you will be given the opportunity to present the summary of your
views, as well-articulated issues/point-of-views to promote discussions. Duration of this first presentation will be short (5 minutes??).</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">The ideas presented above are suggestions, and obviously, they are not set in stone; since we want to maximize the scientific outcome
of this discussion. So, please, feel free to send me your suggestions through this “General Forum” to develop a better approach towards our ultimate ambitious goal: The correct ontological model of the electron!</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">I am soliciting also suggestions and editorial support regarding how to incorporate the summary of this discussion in the SPIE proceeding.
The turn-around time has to be less than a month. Normally, SPIE publishes many of the proceedings pre-conference publication available during the conference. We have been holding out for post-conference. We must finalize everything by the end of September.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Please, develop concepts and ideas on how to summarize the discussion/debate and also relate them to your individual papers. Remember
that SPIE proceeding rule is 10-page limit for individual articles.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Also remember, while preparing your papers and presentations that our dominant SPIE audience consists of engineering. Engineers think
in terms emulating nature allowed processes in different permutations and combinations to create new working tools and technologies, in spite of their incomplete understanding of the deeper complete theory. So, try to add relevant experiments to illustrate
the deeper ontological processes that may be going on in nature; even though you are speculating them with your mathematical models.
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Sincerely,</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Chandra.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="color:black">
<hr size="3" width="100%" align="center">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:gray">The information contained in this message may be confidential and legally protected under applicable law.
The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a><br>
<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>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
<a href="mailto:viv@etpsemra.com.au">viv@etpsemra.com.au</a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/viv%40etpsemra.com.au?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/viv%40etpsemra.com.au?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
<hr size="3" width="100%" align="center">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
<a href="mailto:johnduffield@btconnect.com">johnduffield@btconnect.com</a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/johnduffield%40btconnect.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/johnduffield%40btconnect.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>