<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Albrecht:<br>
<br>
I've been studying your web site and would like a hard copy so I can
get to an easier chair<br>
<br>
The requested URL /pdf/main.pdf was not found on this server.<br>
<br>
It looks like a great site and summarizes everything you've been
talking about<br>
<br>
best<br>
wolf<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/14/2015 12:45 PM, Dr. Albrecht
Giese wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:55F723F0.3080200@a-giese.de" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<font size="-1">John,<br>
<br>
You wrote a long text, so I will enter my answers within your
text.<br>
</font><br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 14.09.2015 um 02:54 schrieb John
Macken:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:007301d0ee87$df0903d0$9d1b0b70$@macken.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (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:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman \,serif";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:black;}
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:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:#20188C;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:#20188C;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
span.EmailStyle25
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:#20188C;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:582760371;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:413293532 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:757141588;
mso-list-template-ids:721092480;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">Hello David and Albrecht,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">It was through the
contact with this group that I was finally able to
understand the disconnect that existed between my idea of
vacuum energy and the picture that others were obtaining
from my use of the term “energy”. Many of the mysteries
of quantum mechanics and general relativity can be traced
to the fact that fields exist and yet we do not have a
clear idea of what they are. My answer is that we live
within a sea of vacuum activity which is the physical
basis of the mysterious fields. I combine all fields into
a single “spacetime field” which is the basis of all
particles, fields and forces. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">David</span></b><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">, you asked about the
words</span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"> quantum, quantifying and quantizing</span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">. I did a word search and
I did not use the word “quantizing” in either the email or
the attachment to my last post. However, the paper <i>Energetic
Spacetime: The New Aether</i> submitted to SPIE as part
of the conference presentation, used and defines the word
“quantization”. This paper was attached to previous posts,
and is available at my website: </span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://onlyspacetime.com/">http://onlyspacetime.com/</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">Albrecht</span></b><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">: I can combine my
answer to you with the clarification for David of the word
“quantify” and its derivatives. I claim that my model of
the universe “quantifies” particles and fields. I will
start my explanation of this concept by giving examples of
models which do not “quantify” particles and fields.
There have been numerous particle models from this group
and others which show an electron model as two balls
orbiting around a center of mass. Most of the group
identifies these balls as photons but Albrecht names the
two balls “charges of the strong force”. Both photons and
charges of strong force are just words. To be
quantifiable, it is necessary to describe the model of the
universe which gives the strong force or the
electromagnetic force. What exactly are these? How much
energy and energy density does one charge of strong force
have? Can a photon occupy a volume smaller than a reduced
Compton wavelength in radius? Does a muon have the same
basic strong force charge but just rotate faster? Are the
charges of strong force or photons made of any other more
basic component?</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<span
style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Times
New Roman",serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New
Roman";mso-ansi-language:DE;mso-fareast-language:
DE;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA"><br>
Regarding charge: This is a basic entity in my model. At some
point a physical theory has to start. My model starts with the
assumption that a charge is an "atomic" entity, so possibly
point-like, which emits exchange particles (in this point I
follow the general understanding of QM). There are two types of
charges: the electric ones which we are very familiar with,
having two signs, and the strong ones, which are not so obvious
in everyday physics; they also have two signs. In the physical
nature we find the charges of the strong force only in
configurations made of those different signs, never isolated.
This is in contrast to the electric charges. <br>
<br>
The basic particles are composed of a collection of charges of
the strong force so that both basic particles are bound to each
other in a way that they keep a certain distance. This distance
characterizes an elementary particle. In several (or most) cases
there is additionally an electric charge in the basic particle.<br>
<br>
The two parameters I have to set - or to find - are the shape of
the strong field in the elementary particle. Here I have defined
an equation describing a minimum multi-pole field to make the
elementary particle stable. The other setting is the strength of
this field. This strength can be found e.g. using the electron
because the electron is well known and precisely measured. This
field is then applicable for all leptons as well as for all
quarks. It is also applicable for the photon with the
restriction that there may be a correction factor caused by the
fact that the photon is not fundamental in the sense of this
model but composed of (maybe) two other particles. <br>
<br>
The size of the photon is (at least roughly) described by its
wavelength. This follows from the mass formula resulting from my
model, as with this assumption the (dynamic) mass of the photon
is the correct result.<br>
<br>
As I wrote, the results of this model are very precise, the
prove is in practice only limited by limitations of the
measurement processes.</span>
<blockquote cite="mid:007301d0ee87$df0903d0$9d1b0b70$@macken.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">I could go on with more
questions until it is possible to calculate the properties
of an electron from the answers. So far both models lack
any quantifiable details except perhaps a connection to
the particle’s Compton frequency. I am not demanding
anything more than I have already done. For example, I
cannot calculate the electron’s Compton frequency or the
fine structure constant. However, once I install these
into the model that I create, and combine this with the
properties of the spacetime field, then I get an
electron. Installing a muon’s Compton frequency generates
a muon with the correct electric field, electrostatic
force, curvature of spacetime, gravitational force and de
Broglie waves. I am able to quantify the distortion of
spacetime produced by a charged particle, an electric
field and a photon. I am able to test these models and
show that they generate both the correct energy density
and generate a black hole when we reach the distortion
limits of the spacetime field. </span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
In my model the Compton frequency of the electron (and of the
other leptons) follows directly from the size of the particle and
the fact that the basic particle move with c. The fine structure
constant tells us the relation of the electric force to the strong
force. This explanation follows very directly from this model,
however was also found by other theorists using algebra of
particle physics.<br>
<br>
Another result of the model is that Planck's constant - multiplied
by c - is the field constant of the strong force. Also this is the
result of other models (however not of mainstream physics).<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:007301d0ee87$df0903d0$9d1b0b70$@macken.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">My model starts with a
quantifiable description of the properties of spacetime.
The spacetime model has a specific impedance which
describes the properties of waves that can exist in
spacetime. Then the amplitude and frequency of the waves
in spacetime is quantified. This combination allows the
energy density of spacetime to be calculated and this
agrees with the energy density of zero point energy. The
particle models are then defined as ½ </span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Cambria
Math",serif;color:#20188C">ħ</span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"> units of quantized
angular momentum existing in the spacetime field. This
model is quantifiable as to size, structure, energy, etc.
Also the fact that the rate of time and proper volume is
being modulated, it is possible to calculate the effect
that such a structure would have on the surrounding volume
of spacetime. It is possible to calculate the effect if
the spacetime-based particle model would have if the
coupling constant was equal to 1 (Planck charge), To get
charge <i>e</i>, it is necessary to manually install the
fine structure constant. </span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
How do you get the value <span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">½ </span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Cambria
Math",serif;color:#20188C">ħ</span> for the angular
momentum? What is the calculation behind it? - I understand that
in your model the electric charge is a parameter deduced from
other facts. Which ones? From alpha? How do you then get alpha?<br>
<br>
I personally have in so far a problem with all considerations
using spacetime as I have quite thoroughly investigated how
Einstein came to the idea of this 4-dimentional construct. His
main motivation was that he wanted in any case to avoid an ether.
And in his discussions with Ernst Mach he had to realize that he
was running into a lot of problems with this assumption. He could
solve these problems in general by his "curved spacetime". But
this concept still causes logical conflicts which are eagerly
neglected by the followers of Einstein's relativity (and which do
not exist in the Lorentzian way of relativity).
<blockquote cite="mid:007301d0ee87$df0903d0$9d1b0b70$@macken.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">The quantifiable
properties of spacetime imply that there should be
boundary conditions which imply that the waves in
spacetime should be nonlinear. When the nonlinear
component is calculated and treated as separate waves, the
characteristics of the particle’s gravitational field are
obtained (correct: curvature, effect on the rate of time,
force and energy density).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">In my last post I have
given an answer about the factor of 10<sup>120</sup>
difference between the observable energy density of the
universe and the non-observable energy of the universe.
This non-observable energy density is absolutely necessary
for QED calculations, zero point energy, the uncertainty
principle, Lamb shift, spontaneous emission and quantum
mechanics in general. This non-observable energy density
is responsible for the tremendously large impedance of
spacetime c<sup>3</sup>/G. Since I can also show how this
non-observable energy density is obtainable from
gravitational wave equations, it is necessary for <b>you</b>
to show how all these effects can be achieved without
spacetime being a single field with this non-observable
energy density. In fact, the name non-observable only
applied to direct observation. The indirect evidence is
everywhere. It forms the basis of the universe and
therefore is the “background noise” of the universe. For
this reason it is not directly observable because we can
only detect differences in energy. The constants <i>c,</i>
<i>G</i>, </span><i><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Cambria
Math",serif;color:#20188C">ħ</span></i><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"> and <i>ε<sub>o</sub></i>
testify that spacetime is not an empty void. </span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Up to now I did not find any necessity for zero-point energy. And
I find it a dangerous way to assume physical facts which cannot be
observed. The greatest argument in favour of this energy is its
use in Feynman diagrams. But is there really no other way? I have
a lecture of Feynman here where he states that his formalism has
good results. But that he has no physical understanding why it is
successful. In my understanding of the development of physics this
is a weak point.<br>
<br>
The discrepancy of 10^120 between assumed and observed energy is
taken as a great and unresolved problem by present main stream
physics. Those representatives would have all reason to find a
solution to keep present QM clean. But they are not able to. This
causes me some concern.<br>
<br>
The constants you have listed: c is the speed of light what ever
the reason for it is. (I have a model, but it is a bit
speculative.) But it has nothing to do with energy. G is the
gravitational constant which is as little understood as gravity
itself. Planck's constant I have explained, it is (with c) the
field constant of the strong force (any force has to be described
by a field constant); and <span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"><i>ε<sub>o</sub></i></span> is
the field constant of the electric force with a similar
background.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:007301d0ee87$df0903d0$9d1b0b70$@macken.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">If spacetime was an empty
void, why should particles have a speed limit of <i>c</i>?
For a thought experiment, suppose that two spaceships
leave earth going opposite directions and accelerate until
they reach a speed of 0.75 <i>c</i> relative to the
earth. The earth bound observer sees them separating at
1.5 <i>c</i> but the rules of relativistic addition of
velocity has a spaceship observer seeing the other
spaceship moving away at only 0.96 <i>c</i>. How is this
possible if spacetime is an empty void. My model of the
universe answers this because all particles, fields and
forces are also made of the spacetime field and they
combine to achieve Lorentz transformations which affects
ruler length and clocks. None of this can happen unless
spacetime is filled with dipole waves in spacetime and
everything is made of the single component. The universe
is only spacetime. </span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
If two spaceships move at 0.75 c in opposite direction, the
observer at rest may add these speeds and may get 1.5 c as a
result. Why not? If an observer in one of the spaceships measures
the relative speed of the other spaceship, the result will be less
then c (as you write it). The reason is the well known fact that
the measurement tools accessible for the observer in the ship are
changed and run differently at this high speed. The reason for
these changes is for time dilation the internal speed c in
elementary particles. For contraction it is the contraction of
fields at motion which is a fact independent of relativity (and
which was already known before Einstein). In addition when the
speed of another object is to be measured several clocks are to be
used positioned along the measurement section. These clocks are
de-synchronized in relation to the clocks of the observer at rest.
These phenomena together cause the measurement result < c. You
find these considerations in papers and books about the Lorentzian
interpretation of relativity. So, following Lorentz, there is no
reason to assume Einstein's spacetime.<span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"><o:p> <br>
</o:p></span>
<blockquote cite="mid:007301d0ee87$df0903d0$9d1b0b70$@macken.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C">John M.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Perhaps I should read your book. But that chould take a lot of
time, I am afraid.<br>
<br>
Albrecht<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:007301d0ee87$df0903d0$9d1b0b70$@macken.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="color:windowtext"> Dr. Albrecht Giese [<a
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">mailto:genmail@a-giese.de</a></a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, September 13, 2015 1:43 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> John Macken <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:john@macken.com"><john@macken.com></a>;
'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion' <a
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org></a></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] research papers<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Hello John,<br>
<br>
great that you have looked so deeply into the model which I
have presented. Thank you.<br>
<br>
There are some questions which I can answer quite easily. I
think that this model in fact explains several points just
in contrast to main stream physics. In standard physics the
electron (just as an example) is a point-like object without
any internal structure. So, how can a magnetic moment be
explained? How can the spin be explained? How can the mass
be explained? The position of main stream physics is: That
cannot be explained but is subject to quantum mechanics. And
the fact that it cannot be explained shows how necessary QM
is.<br>
<br>
In contrast, if the electron is assumed to have a structure
like in the model presented, these parameters can be
explained in a classical way, and this explanation is not
merely a qualitative one but has precise quantitative
results.<br>
<br>
To your questions in detail:<br>
The fact of two basic particles is necessary to explain the
fact of an oscillation and to fulfil the conservation of
momentum. A single object (as point-like) cannot oscillate.
The basic particles are composed of charges of the strong
force. In this model the strong force is assumed to be the
universal force in our world effective on all particles. A
charge is a fundamental object in the scope of this model.
There are two kinds of charges according to the two kinds of
forces in our world, the strong one and the electric one.
The weak force is in fact the strong force but has a smaller
coupling constant caused by geometric circumstances. And
gravity is not a force at all but a refraction process,
which is so a side effect of the other forces. And, by the
way, gravity is not curved spacetime. This is not necessary,
and besides of this, Einstein's spacetime leads to logical
conflicts.<br>
<br>
The forces (i.e. strong force) inside an elementary particle
are configured in a way that at a certain distance there is
a potential minimum and in this way the distance between the
basic particles is enforced. So, this field has attracting
and repulsive components. Outside the elementary particle
the attracting forces dominate to make the particle a stable
one. And those field parts outside have an opposite sign.
Now, as the basic particles are orbiting each other, the
outside field is an alternating field (of the strong forth).
If this field propagates, it is builds a wave. This wave is
described by the Schrödinger equation and fulfils the
assumptions of de Broglie. <br>
<br>
With the assumption of two basic particles orbiting at c and
subject to strong force, the parameters mass, magnetic
moment, spin result from it numerically correctly without
further assumptions.<br>
<br>
This model does not need any vacuum energy or virtual
particles. Those are simply not necessary and they are
anyway very speculative because not directly observable. And
in the case of the vacuum energy of the universe we are
confronted with the discrepancy of 10^120 which you also
mention in your paper attached to your mail.<br>
<br>
The Coulomb law can be easily explained by the assumption
(standard at quantum mechanics) that a force is realized by
exchange particles. The density of exchange particles and so
the strength of the field diminishes by 1/r^2, which is
simple geometry. <br>
<br>
So John, this is my position. Now I am curious about your
objections of further questions.<br>
<br>
Best regards<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Am 11.09.2015 um 23:51 schrieb John
Macken:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Hello
Albrecht and All,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I have
attached a one page addition that I will make to my
book. It is a preliminary explanation of my model of the
spacetime field. It has been very helpful to me to
interact with this group because I now understand better
the key stumbling block for some scientists to accept my
thesis. Therefore I have written the attached
introduction to ease the reader of my book into my
model. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Albrecht:</span></b><span
style="font-size:12.0pt"> I appreciate your email. We
agree on several points which include the size of the
electron and there is a similarity in the explanation of
gravity. The key points of disagreement are the same as
I have with the rest of the group. Your explanation of
a fundamental particle is not really an explanation.
You substitute a fundamental particle such as an
electron with two “basic particles”. Have we made any
progress or did we just double the problem? What is
your basic particles made of? What is the physics
behind the force of attraction between the particles?
What is the physics behind an electric field? How does
your model create de Broglie waves? How does your model
create a gravitational field (curved spacetime)? Can
you derive the Coulomb law and Newtonian gravitational
equation from your model? </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">These
might seem like unfair questions, but my model does all
of these things. All it requires is the reader accept
the fact that the vacuum possesses activity which can be
characterized as a type of energy density that is not
observable (no rest mass or momentum). This is no
different that accepting that QED calculations should be
believed when they assume vacuum energy or that zero
point energy really exists. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Albrecht</span></b><span
style="font-size:12.0pt">, perhaps I have come on too
strong, but I have decided to take a firmer stand. You
just happen to be the first person that I contrast to my
model. I am actually happy to discuss the scientific
details in a less confrontational way. I just wanted to
make an initial point.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">John M.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="color:windowtext"> General [<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a></a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Dr. Albrecht Giese<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, September 11, 2015 9:52 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] research papers</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dear John Macken,<br>
<br>
I would like to answer a specific topic in your mail
below. You write "... would have particular relevance to
the concept that the Higgs field is needed to give inertia
to fermions".<br>
<br>
We should not overlook that even mainstream physicists
working on elementary particles admit that the Higgs
theory is not able to explain inertia. I give you as a
reference: <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:3.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:3.0pt;margin-left:0in;text-align:justify"><span
lang="EN-GB">>Steven D. Brass, The cosmological
constant puzzle, Journal of Physics G, Nuclear and
Particle Physics 38, 4(2011) 43201< ,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman ,serif",serif">which has the result that the
Higgs field, which causes inertia according to the
theory, is by at least 56 orders of magnitude too small
to explain the mass of the elementary particles.
(Another weakness is the fact that the Higgs theory does
not tell us the mass of any elementary particle even if
all other parameters are known.)<br>
<br>
As you may remember, in our meeting I have presented a
model explaining inertia which does not only work as a
general idea but provides very precise results for the
mass of leptons. The mass is classically deduced from
the size of a particle. It also explains the mass of
quarks, but here the verification is more difficult, due
to the lack of measurements. In addition I have shown
that the model also explains the (dynamic) mass of
photons, if the size of a photon is related to its
wavelength. <br>
<br>
You may find details in the proceedings of our San Diego
meeting, but also on the following web sites:<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ag-physics.org/rmass">www.ag-physics.org/rmass</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ag-physics.org/electron">www.ag-physics.org/electron</a>
.<br>
<br>
You may also find the sites by Google search entering
the string "origin of mass". You will find it on
position 1 or 2 of the list, where it has constantly
been during the past 12 years.<br>
<br>
If you have any questions about it, please ask me. I
will be happy about any discussion.<br>
<br>
With best regards<br>
Albrecht Giese<br>
<br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman ,serif",serif">Am 04.09.2015 um 18:40
schrieb John Macken:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Martin,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I
wanted to remind you that I think that you should
update your article “Light Is Heavy” to include the
mathematical proof that confined light has exactly the
same inertia as particles with equal energy.
Accelerating a reflecting box causes different photon
pressure which results in a net inertial force. I
already reference your Light Is Heavy article in my
book, but expanding the article would be even better.
An expanded article would have particular relevance to
the concept that the Higgs field is needed to give
inertia to fermions. The Higgs field is not needed to
give inertia to confined light. Furthermore, confined
light exerts exactly the correct inertia and kinetic
energy, even at relativistic conditions. I have not
seen a proof that the Higgs field gives exactly the
correct amount of inertia or kinetic energy to
fermions. Any particle model that includes either a
confined photon or confined waves in spacetime
propagating at the speed of light gets inertia and
kinetic energy from the same principles as confined
light in a reflecting box.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">John
M. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> General [<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a></a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Mark, Martin van der<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, September 04, 2015 6:34 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [General] research papers<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:10.0pt"><span
style="color:#1F497D">Dear all,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:10.0pt"><span
style="color:#1F497D">My recent (and old) work can be
found on Researchgate:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:10.0pt"><span
style="color:#1F497D"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Van_der_Mark/publications">https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Van_der_Mark/publications</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:10.0pt"><span
style="color:#1F497D">In particular you will find the
most recent work:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:#1F497D;margin-bottom:10.0pt;mso-list:l0
level1 lfo3">On the nature of “stuff” and the
hierarchy of forces<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:#1F497D;margin-bottom:10.0pt;mso-list:l0
level1 lfo3">Quantum mechanical probability current as
electromagnetic 4-current from topological EM fields<o:p></o:p></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:10.0pt"><span
style="color:#1F497D">Very best regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:10.0pt"><span
style="color:#1F497D">Martin</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:navy"
lang="DE">Dr. Martin B. van der Mark</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:navy">Principal
Scientist, Minimally Invasive Healthcare</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:navy"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:navy">Philips
Research Europe - Eindhoven</span><o:p></o:p></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><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:navy">Prof.
Holstlaan 4</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:navy">5656
AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:navy">Tel:
+31 40 2747548</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif">
<hr align="center" size="3" width="100%"></span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><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><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman ,serif",serif"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de">phys@a-giese.de</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href=<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre></a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman ,serif",serif"><br>
<br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman ,serif",serif">
<hr style="color:#909090" align="center"
noshade="noshade" size="1" width="99%"></span></div>
<table class="MsoNormalTable"
style="border-collapse:collapse" border="0"
cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="padding:0in 11.25pt 0in 6.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times
New Roman ,serif",serif"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"><span
style="border:solid windowtext
1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><img
id="_x0000_i1027"
src="cid:part14.06060508.00040503@nascentinc.com"
alt="Image removed by sender. Avast logo"
border="0" height="100" width="100"></span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td style="padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#3D4D5A">Diese
E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf
Viren geprüft. <br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus">www.avast.com</a>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman ,serif",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif">
<hr style="color:#909090" align="center" noshade="noshade"
size="1" width="99%"></span></div>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse:collapse"
border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="padding:0in 11.25pt 0in 6.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times
New Roman",serif"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"><span
style="border:solid windowtext
1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><img
id="_x0000_i1029"
src="cid:part14.06060508.00040503@nascentinc.com"
alt="Image removed by sender. Avast logo"
border="0" height="100" width="100"></span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
<td style="padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#3D4D5A">Diese
E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf
Viren geprüft. <br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus">www.avast.com</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<hr style="border:none; color:#909090; background-color:#B0B0B0;
height: 1px; width: 99%;">
<table style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="border:none;padding:0px 15px 0px 8px"> <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"> <img
moz-do-not-send="true"
src="http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png"
alt="Avast logo" border="0"> </a> </td>
<td>
<p style="color:#3d4d5a;
font-family:"Calibri","Verdana","Arial","Helvetica";
font-size:12pt;"> Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast
Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft. <br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus">www.avast.com</a>
</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>