<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Thank you, Chandra, for the link.<br>
<br>
The author of that paper, Manor, assumes that the effect of
relativistically increased mass means in reality a change in
gravity. But what about situations where gravity is not essential?<br>
<br>
At the DESY accelerator in Hamburg electrons have been accelerated
so that e.g. its relativistic mass reaches 900 MeV, so about the
rest mass of the proton. If now the electron collides with a proton,
the mechanical reaction is so as if two objects of similar mass
collide. This is generally taken as an indication that the mass of
the electron is in fact increased. - This situation is not
measurably influenced by gravity.<br>
<br>
Regarding Special Relativity: You mean that the time dilation is an
"at hoc" assumption? The dilation is <br>
- easily visible; one can move a clock forth and back and compare
it later to another clock which was at rest all the time. The clock
in motion is then retarded. This fact is used (and so also proven)
at the operation of GPS satellites.<br>
- there are a lot of indications that in elementary particles there
is a permanent motion at c (speed of light), "zitterbewegung". This
is a simple physical reason for dilation. It does not even need a
relativity principle.<br>
<br>
Sincerely<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 24.09.2015 um 18:24 schrieb
Roychoudhuri, Chandra:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BY2PR05MB189611547862F2F41861E2CC93430@BY2PR05MB1896.namprd05.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<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:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@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;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
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;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle22
{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:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:33699605;
mso-list-template-ids:-877752442;}
@list l0: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 l0: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 l0: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 l0: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 l0: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 l0: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 l0: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 l0: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 l0: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:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=59224&utm_campaign=papersubmission&utm_source=e_cp&utm_medium=nl_physics_20150911_huangytb"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=59224&utm_campaign=papersubmission&utm_source=e_cp&utm_medium=nl_physics_20150911_huangytb">http://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=59224&utm_campaign=papersubmission&utm_source=e_cp&utm_medium=nl_physics_20150911_huangytb</a></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Hello
Everybody: Here is an interesting paper, “Gravity, Not Mass
Increases with Velocity”, worth reading and re-interpreting
in the context of my proposal, space as a stationary Complex
Tension Field (CTF). Perpetually propagating EM waves are
linear excitations. Inertial particles are non-linear
excitations of the same CTF that are localized self-looped
oscillations. [Thus, M-M experiments cannot refute the
existence of the CTF concept.] These self-looped
oscillations experience velocity-dependent inertial
resistance even in the absence of any other force fields.
Fluid mechanics supports this concept. We do not need
gravity on any other force to increase for higher velocity
particles. The inertial resistance of the particles
(self-looped oscillation) increases as it tries to move with
higher and higher velocity through the CTF. This is a much
better
<b><i>physical model</i></b> than the ad hoc Special
Relativistic mass increase, time dilation and space
contraction.<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">I am
enjoying Spain (Barcelona and Valencia) giving workshop
lectures on the Non-Interaction of Waves while celebrating
“2015- International Year of Light”.<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>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
name="_MailEndCompose"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></a></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<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 class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]<b>On
Behalf Of </b>Richard Gauthier<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, September 23, 2015 1:03 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de">phys@a-giese.de</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] research papers<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hello Albrecht,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Yes, all of our electron models here
have a radius related to the Compton wavelength. Dirac’s
zitterbewegung amplitude is 1/2 of the reduced Compton
wavelength, or hbar/2mc , which is the radius of the generic
circulating charged photon’s trajectory in my circulating
spin 1/2 charged photon model for a resting electron. That
radius decreases by a factor of gamma^2 in a moving
electron. Does yours? Incorporating a more detailed spin 1/2
charged photon model with the generic model could bring the
model's radius up to the reduced Compton wavelength hbar/mc.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> all the best,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Richard<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Sep 22, 2015, at 11:13 AM, Dr.
Albrecht Giese <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Dear
Richard,<br>
<br>
thank you for this reference to the article of Frank
Wilczek. <br>
<br>
He has a quantum mechanical argument to determine a
size for the electron. It is the application of the
uncertainty relation to the magnetic moment of the
electron. The result is as you write: 2.4 x 10^-12 m,
which is the Compton wavelength of the electron.<br>
This is a bit similar to the way as Erwin Schrödinger
has determined the size of the electron using the
Dirac function in 1930. There Schrödinger determined
the "amplitude of the zitterbewegung" also applying
the uncertainty relation to the rest energy of the
electron. It was "roughly" 10^-13 m, which also meant
in his words the Compton wavelength of the electron.
<br>
<br>
In my electron model its radius is 3.86 x 10^-13 m,
which is exactly the "reduced" Compton wavelength. But
here it is not an expectation value as in the cases of
Wilczek and Schrödinger but the exact radius of the
orbits of the basic particles.<br>
<br>
Thank you again and best wishes<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Am 21.09.2015 um 05:01 schrieb
Richard Gauthier:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">This 2013 Nature comment “The
enigmatic electron” by Frank Wilczek at <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.nature.com/articles/498031a.epdf?referrer_access_token=ben9To-3oo1NBniBt2zIw9RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Mr0WZkh3ZGwaOU__QIZA8EEsfyjmdvPM68ya-MFh194zghek6jh7WqtGYeYWmES35o2U71x2DQVk0PFLoHQk5V5M-cak670GmcqKy2iZm7PPrWZKcv_J3SBA-hRXn4VJI1r9NxMvgmKog-topZaM03&tracking_referrer=www.nature.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.nature.com/articles/498031a.epdf?referrer_access_token=ben9To-3oo1NBniBt2zIw9RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Mr0WZkh3ZGwaOU__QIZA8EEsfyjmdvPM68ya-MFh194zghek6jh7WqtGYeYWmES35o2U71x2DQVk0PFLoHQk5V5M-cak670GmcqKy2iZm7PPrWZKcv_J3SBA-hRXn4VJI1r9NxMvgmKog-topZaM03&tracking_referrer=www.nature.com">http://www.nature.com/articles/498031a.epdf?referrer_access_token=ben9To-3oo1NBniBt2zIw9RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Mr0WZkh3ZGwaOU__QIZA8EEsfyjmdvPM68ya-MFh194zghek6jh7WqtGYeYWmES35o2U71x2DQVk0PFLoHQk5V5M-cak670GmcqKy2iZm7PPrWZKcv_J3SBA-hRXn4VJI1r9NxMvgmKog-topZaM03&tracking_referrer=www.nature.com</a></a> is
worth a look. He states that due to QM effects,
the size of the electron is about 2.4 x 10^-12 m,
which is roughly in the range of some of our
electron models.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Richard<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:59
PM, Wolfgang Baer <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:wolf@nascentinc.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wolf@nascentinc.com">wolf@nascentinc.com</a></a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";background:white">I
should add you sent me Main-2014.pdf and
that may be the one not available on the web
sight.</span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><br>
<span style="background:white">I was looking
for a similar one that included the other
topics as well.</span><br>
<span style="background:white">If you do not
have it, its OK, I just like reading from
paper.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background:white">best wishes,</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background:white">Wolf</span><br>
<br style="orphans:
auto;text-align:start;widows:
auto;-webkit-text-stroke-width:
0px;word-spacing:0px">
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<pre style="background:white">Dr. Wolfgang Baer<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white">Research Director<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white">Nascent Systems Inc.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white">tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white">E-mail <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com"><span style="color:purple">wolf@NascentInc.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">On
9/14/2015 12:45 PM, Dr. Albrecht Giese
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt;orphans:
auto;text-align:start;widows:
auto;-webkit-text-stroke-width:
0px;word-spacing:0px">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt;background:white"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">John,<br>
<br>
You wrote a long text, so I will enter my
answers within your text.</span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">Am
14.09.2015 um 02:54 schrieb John Macken:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Hello
David and Albrecht,</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">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.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><b><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">David</span></b><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">, you
asked about the words<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>quantum,
quantifying and quantizing. 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<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><i>Energetic
Spacetime: The New Aether</i><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>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
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://onlyspacetime.com/"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://onlyspacetime.com/">http://onlyspacetime.com/</a></a></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><b><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Albrecht</span></b><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">: 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><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><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.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><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.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><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><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">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
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">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>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">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
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>ħ<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>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<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><i>e</i>,
it is necessary to manually install the
fine structure constant. <span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">How
do you get the value<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">½<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>ħ</span><span
class="apple-converted-space"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> </span></span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">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).
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">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).</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">In
my last post I have given an answer
about the factor of 10<sup>120</sup><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>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<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><b>you</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>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<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><i>c,</i><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><i>G</i>,<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><i>ħ</i><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>and<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><i>ε<sub>o</sub></i><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>testify
that spacetime is not an empty void. <span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">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 class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><i><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">ε<sub>o</sub></span></i><span
class="apple-converted-space"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> </span></span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">is
the field constant of the electric force
with a similar background.<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">If
spacetime was an empty void, why should
particles have a speed limit of<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><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<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><i>c</i><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>relative
to the earth. The earth bound observer
sees them separating at 1.5<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><i>c</i><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>but
the rules of relativistic addition of
velocity has a spaceship observer seeing
the other spaceship moving away at only
0.96<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><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
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">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><span
class="apple-converted-space"><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> </span></span><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><br>
<br>
</span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">John
M.</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">Perhaps
I should read your book. But that chould
take a lot of time, I am afraid.<br>
<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid
#E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span
class="apple-converted-space"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Dr.
Albrecht Giese [<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><span
style="color:purple"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">mailto:genmail@a-giese.de</a></span></a>]<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<b>Sent:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Sunday,
September 13, 2015 1:43 PM<br>
<b>To:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>John
Macken<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:john@macken.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:john@macken.com"><john@macken.com></a></a>;
'Nature of Light and Particles -
General Discussion'<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
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><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Re:
[General] research papers<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt;background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">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.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><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.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><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>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Am
11.09.2015 um 23:51 schrieb John
Macken:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Hello
Albrecht and All,</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">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
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><b><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Albrecht:</span></b><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> <span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>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
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">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
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><b><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Albrecht</span></b><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">, 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><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">John
M.</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid
#E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span
class="apple-converted-space"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">General
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><span
style="color:purple">mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a>]<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><b>On
Behalf Of<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></b>Dr.
Albrecht Giese<br>
<b>Sent:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Friday,
September 11, 2015 9:52 AM<br>
<b>To:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Re:
[General] research papers<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">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:<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:3.0pt;text-align:justify;background:white">
<span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""
lang="EN-GB">>Steven D. Brass, The
cosmological constant puzzle, Journal of
Physics G, Nuclear and Particle Physics
38, 4(2011) 43201< ,</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt;background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-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.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><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"><span
style="color:purple">www.ag-physics.org/rmass</span></a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ag-physics.org/electron"><span
style="color:purple">www.ag-physics.org/electron</span></a><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>.<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>
<br>
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Am
04.09.2015 um 18:40 schrieb John
Macken:</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Martin,</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">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><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">John
M.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid
#E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in
0in">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span
class="apple-converted-space"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">General
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><span
style="color:purple">mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a>]<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><b>On
Behalf Of<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></b>Mark,
Martin van der<br>
<b>Sent:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Friday,
September 04, 2015 6:34 AM<br>
<b>To:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Nature
of Light and Particles - General
Discussion<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
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><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>[General]
research papers<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:10.0pt;background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Dear
all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:10.0pt;background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">My
recent (and old) work can be found on
Researchgate:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:10.0pt;background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Van_der_Mark/publications"><span
style="color:purple"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Van_der_Mark/publications">https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Van_der_Mark/publications</a></span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:10.0pt;background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">In
particular you will find the most
recent work:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:#1F497D;margin-bottom:10.0pt;mso-list:l0
level1 lfo1;background:white">
<span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">On
the nature of “stuff” and the
hierarchy of forces<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:#1F497D;margin-bottom:10.0pt;mso-list:l0
level1 lfo1;background:white">
<span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Quantum
mechanical probability current as
electromagnetic 4-current from
topological EM fields<o:p></o:p></span></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:10.0pt;background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Very
best regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:10.0pt;background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Martin<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy"
lang="DE">Dr. Martin B. van der Mark</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><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""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:navy"> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><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""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><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""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><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""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><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""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><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""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:center;background:white"
align="center">
<span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
<hr size="3" width="100%"
align="center">
</span></div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><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="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<pre style="background:white">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white">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"><span style="color:purple">phys@a-giese.de</span></a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><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"><span style="color:purple">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</span></a>><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white">Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white"></a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt;background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:center;background:white"
align="center">
<span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
<hr style="color:#909090"
noshade="noshade" size="1" width="99%"
align="center">
</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">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"><span
style="color:purple;border:solid
windowtext
1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><Mail
Attachment.jpeg></span></a></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</td>
<td style="padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt
.75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#3D4D5A">Diese
E-Mail wurde von Avast
Antivirus-Software auf Viren
geprüft.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"><span
style="color:purple">www.avast.com</span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt;background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><br>
<br>
<br>
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:center;background:white"
align="center">
<span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
<hr style="color:#909090"
noshade="noshade" size="1" width="99%"
align="center">
</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">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"><span
style="color:purple;border:solid
windowtext
1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><Mail
Attachment.jpeg></span></a></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</td>
<td style="padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt
.75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#3D4D5A">Diese
E-Mail wurde von Avast
Antivirus-Software auf Viren
geprüft.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"><span
style="color:purple">www.avast.com</span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt;background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:center;background:white"
align="center">
<span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">
<hr style="width:960.05pt"
noshade="noshade" size="1" width="1600"
align="center">
</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"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"><span
style="color:purple;text-decoration:none"><img moz-do-not-send="true"
id="_x0000_i1029"
src="http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png"
alt="Avast logo" border="0"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td style="padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt
.75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#3D4D5A">Diese
E-Mail wurde von Avast
Antivirus-Software auf Viren
geprüft.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"><span
style="color:purple">www.avast.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<pre style="background:white">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white">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:Wolf@nascentinc.com"><span style="color:purple">Wolf@nascentinc.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><a href=<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><span style="color:purple">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</span></a>><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white">Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white"></a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><br>
<span style="background:white">_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span style="background:white">If you no
longer wish to receive communication from
the Nature of Light and Particles General
Discussion List at<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a></a><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><br>
<span style="background:white"><a href="</span></span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a></a><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";background:white">"></span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><br>
<span style="background:white">Click here to
unsubscribe</span><br>
<span style="background:white"></a></span></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center">
<hr style="color:#909090" noshade="noshade" size="1"
width="99%" align="center">
</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"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"><span
style="text-decoration:none"><img
moz-do-not-send="true" id="_x0000_i1031"
src="http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png" alt="Avast
logo" border="0"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td style="padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><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"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></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;'>
<tr>
<td style='border:none;padding:0px 15px 0px 8px'>
<a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus">
<img border=0 src="http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png" alt="Avast logo" />
</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 href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus">www.avast.com</a>
</p>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<br />
</body>
</html>