<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Dear John,<br>
<br>
great, I almost agree. But replace "light going around" by
"zitterbewegung". Because zitterbewegung is the cause of special
relativity, it acts like the parallel-mirror light clock.<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
PS: Will come back to your previous mail soon.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 12.10.2015 um 22:28 schrieb John
Duffield:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:001901d1052c$97e76800$c7b63800$@btconnect.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:SimSun;
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@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:Verdana;
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;}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@SimSun";
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Cambria",serif;
mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;}
p.msochpdefault, li.msochpdefault, div.msochpdefault
{mso-style-name:msochpdefault;
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;}
span.htmlpreformattedchar0
{mso-style-name:htmlpreformattedchar;
font-family:Consolas;}
span.emailstyle18
{mso-style-name:emailstyle18;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.emailstyle21
{mso-style-name:emailstyle21;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">When
it comes to the muon, I think it’s simplest to think of it
as <i>light going round and round and round</i>. And then
to say it does so for circa one zillion revolutions before
the muon decays. Only if it’s moving fast it isn’t going
round and round and round in a circle, it’s helical instead.
Hence the one zillion revolutions take longer. So the muon
lifetime is extended.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><img
id="Picture_x0020_2"
src="cid:part1.09060804.01020108@a-giese.de" height="153"
width="211"></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Then
once the muon has decayed and a more-or-less massless
chargeless neutrino has departed at the speed of light, all
you’re left with is light going round and round. We then
call it an electron. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">As
regards symmetrical time dilation, I agree it’s akin to
perspective. When we are separated by distance, I say you
look smaller than me, and you say I look smaller than you.
But we don’t then say <i>whoa paradox!</i> Nor should we
say that when we are separated by relative motion. Our time
is just the number of reflections on our <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation#Simple_inference_of_time_dilation_due_to_relative_velocity">parallel-mirror
light clock</a>. And the light in that clock either looks
like this | or it looks like this /\/\/\/\/\. It’s like the
circle and the helix viewed from the side. Special
relativity works because of the wave nature of matter, as
per the attached <i>The Other Meaning of Special Relativity</i>
by Robert Close. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">John
D<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US"> General
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:general-bounces+johnduffield=btconnect.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+johnduffield=btconnect.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>John Williamson<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 12 October 2015 19:11<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Nick Bailey
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:nick@bailey-family.org.uk"><nick@bailey-family.org.uk></a>; Ariane Mandray
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ariane.mandray@wanadoo.fr"><ariane.mandray@wanadoo.fr></a>; Anthony Booth
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:abooth@ieee.org"><abooth@ieee.org></a>; ARNOLD BENN
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:arniebenn@mac.com"><arniebenn@mac.com></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] nature of light particles
& theories<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">Gentlemen,<br>
<br>
I detect a tendency to act as though physics is a kind of
chocolate box from which one can discard the flavours one
does not like. Not so. It all has to fit together and all
has to agree with experiment.<br>
<br>
Everything - however you mess up your view of it - has to
stay consistent with experiment. A safe way of doing this
is keeping with some fundamental principles, never known
to violated, such as the absolute conservation of energy.<br>
<br>
Sorry Chandra, you just cannot "discard Special
Relativity" and keep GR, since SR is in GR as an element
of it (in the diagonal of the metric tensor). Agree with
the standing on shoulders of giants bit though (and with
most of the rest of what you say).<br>
<br>
Al, Albrecht is right. There is no contradiction - just
something you need to understand about the symmetry. You
seem to see a contradiction where there is none present.
You make some statements as though they are fact which are
not fact. <br>
For example you say >>><br>
<br>
</span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">"Two entities cannot at once be both be
dialted in the other's view and not their own." <br>
<br>
<br>
Yes they can. Yes they must, it has to be symmetric!
Saying something does not make it true, however sensible
it may seem to the sayer. There is no actual dilation. The
existence of another entity somewhere has no bearing on
the local properties elsewhere. All is as viewed, all is
perspective (good word). If this is what you are on about
then we agree.<br>
<br>
</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">It seems to me though that is not all those
textbook writers that are missing something but you. Both
observers DO see each other clocks running slow. The Muon
in the muon decay sees the earth as approaching it at near
lightspeed -in its primary stillness and pure stationary
state. The Earth it observes is still round - but as round
as a pancake. The muon decays in 2.2 microseconds, in its
frame, as usual. This layers multiple kilometres into the
earth in the earth frame though. This is because the muon
thinks the earth is as flat as a pancake. No
contradiction - no problem. If it were two earths
colliding, with muons in them, each muon in each earth
would see the other earth as flat. Perfectly
symmetrically. Both sets of observers (as their last act
in this case) would observe muons to live longer when
moving fast in their frame.<br>
<br>
This is all symmetric. The base reason (for space and time
contraction) is explained in the first of my two papers to
SPIE (where gamma is derived from photon energy
transformations E=H nu) , and arises, simply, from the
linearity and conservation of energy. It is just
derivative of the Doppler shift of photons. Dead simple.
Do the maths! You can discard SR if you like, but you must
also lose energy conservation and the relation E=h nu if
you do. SR is that relation which maintains energy
linearity and conservation of energy for light. Chandra
is right: there are some things that are simply more
fundamental than other things. Energy (and hence
frequency) is, apparently, more fundamental than space and
time scales. You need to get this! Read my paper!<br>
<br>
Regards, John (W).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:center"
align="center"><span style="font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center"></span></div>
<div id="divRpF575473">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> General
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
on behalf of Roychoudhuri, Chandra
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu">chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, October 12, 2015 5:30 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion; <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de">phys@a-giese.de</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] nature of light
particles & theories</span><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US">Hello
Everybody: </span><span style="color:black"
lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US">Not
being a theoretician, I stay away from theoretical
arguments. But, my outright opinion is that we
should discard Special Relativity; in contrast to
ride on the shoulders of GR and QM to develop much
better theories for future; which again should be
discarded and advanced by the next generations; and
so on. GR and QM have captured some kernels of
ontological reality. But, they should be advanced to
deeper levels of ontological realities by
constructing newer theories by re-building the very
foundational postulates behind the current theories.
It must be continued for a long time to come. It is
about time to openly learn to get rid of our mental
Messiah Complex and move forward to keep on evolving
as thinking species.</span><span style="color:black"
lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US">In many
of my papers [</span><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US">Down
load paper: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.natureoflight.org/CP/"
target="_blank"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#0070C0">http://www.natureoflight.org/CP/</span></a>;
summarized in the book, “Causal Physics”, CRC,
2014], I have repeatedly underscored that we must be
alert about the parameters we use while building an
equation regarding their existence as a physical
variable involved in the phenomenon we are modeling.
The parameters can be primary (leads the interaction
process and measurable); it can be secondary
(measurable, but exists only in association with the
primary parameter); it can be indistinguishable
whether it is primary or secondary because of our
limited understanding; it can be a tertiary
parameter (human logics needs it as a variable based
on the current limited knowledge, etc.), etc. A
simple example is ν = c/λ and the associated
velocity relation c=√(1/εμ). Here I claim that, from
the standpoint of functional “INTERACTION PROCESS”,
“ν” is the primary parameter (intrinsic oscillation
of the source dictates the frequency). But “c” is
also a primary parameter given by intrinsic set of
properties of nature; we cannot do anything more
than complain about that! Whereas, “λ” is a
secondary parameter defined by the first two
parameter already mentioned.</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US">
However, to measure </span><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US">“c”, we
need to introduce another highly functional and
CONCEPTUAL parameter, the “time interval”, δt from
our daily experience of v= δx/ δt. </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US"> Let
us not forget that we can never directly measure the
time interval δt, or its CONCEPTUAL big brother, THE
“RUNNING TIME”, “t”. Smart humans figured out how to
measure both “δt” and “t” using the real physical
parameter, “f”, the frequency of diverse kinds of
natural oscillators, be it a pendulum or an atomic
clock. We smartly set “δt” =(1/f); “f” being a real
physical parameter; we are still “grounded” to
gather “evidence based” results!! We measure “f”,
invert it to get a time interval “δt” and a longer
time interval “Δt”~N.“δt”, where N is big number
representing so many complete oscillations of the
“Pendulum” we use. Operationally speaking, “Δt” is
the closet we can get to the concept of “running
time”.</span><span style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US">
The running time “t’, not being a real physical
parameter of any physical object within our control;
we must not dictate nature as to how she ought
behave based upon human invented “running time”. The
“running time” cannot be “dilated” or “contracted”.
However, the physical frequency of any and all
“pendulums” can be “dilated” or “contracted” with
appropriate changes in the environment of the
“pendulum”. </span><span style="color:black"
lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US"> There
is SPACE, defined as “ether”, by most of the
physicists who constructed the foundation of
classical physics over centuries. Based upon, modern
understanding, I have improved upon the “ether”
concept to CTF (Complex Tension Field) that
accommodates Non-Interaction of Waves (NIW) all
across the cosmic space. The NIW removes
wave-particle duality and most of the non-causal
postulates thrown into QM to make it “nobody
understand…”. QM is understandable and it has many
realities built into it and hence it can now lead to
scientific platform to re-build QM as a higher level
theory. </span><span style="color:black"
lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US"> The
definition <b><i>mass</i></b> “m” is another
parameter that must be eliminated from physics, not
because it is unreal like the running time, but
because we have known for quite some time that “m”
(=E/c<sup>2</sup>) represent energy, not some
“substance”. We measure its value out of its <b><i>inertial
behavior</i></b> when it is forced to move in
the presence of some potential gradients. We do not
measure the content of the “substance” it holds;
rather the <b><i>kinetic behavior</i></b> of the
enfolded energy as resonant oscillations of the CTF.
Kinetic motion (associated with another harmonic
oscillation; a de Broglie oscillation rather than de
Broglie “Pilot Wave”) adds further additional energy
on to its structural (oscillating) energy. I would
not call it “Relativistic Energy” as this energy
increase happens for all velocities.</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US"> In
my personal view point, it is time for us to leave
behind the romanticism of hanging on to the
successes of the twentieth physics, (albeit being
absolutely correct); but, a la Newton, let us boldly
ride on the shoulders of the formulators of these
theories to move on and allow our knowledge-horizon
to expand and allow evolution-given perpetual
enquiring minds to keep on evolving. Our job is to
build that cultural platform for our next
generations to come, instead of focusing on the
transient Nobel Prizes; which did not even exist
before 1900. But science was steadily maturing
staying focused on understanding the interaction
processes that give rise to the measurable data for
“evidence based science”! Unfortunately, we now
know that “evidences” always bring limited
information; they do not provide complete
information about anything in nature. Thus, all
theories must be iterated on and on! </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><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:"Times
New Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US">Sincerely,</span></a><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black" lang="EN-US">Chandra</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> General [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
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><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, October 12, 2015 10:44 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de">phys@a-giese.de</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] nature of light
particles & theories</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"
lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span style="color:black"
lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid #C3D9E5
1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm
8.0pt;margin-left:7.5pt;margin-top:7.5pt;margin-right:3.75pt;margin-bottom:3.75pt;word-wrap:break-word"
name="quote">
<div style="margin-bottom:7.5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">Gesendet:</span></b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> Montag, 12. Oktober 2015 um
15:13 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Dr. Albrecht Giese" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a></a>><br>
<b>An:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"
target="_blank">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>,
"phys >> Dr. Albrecht Giese" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de">phys@a-giese.de</a></a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [General] nature of
light particles & theories</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div name="quoted-content">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">Hi Al,</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">Hi Albrecht: </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">AK: From your comments I
can't be sure if we disagree (as it
seems your are saying) or not. Some
responses below may get this issue.<br>
<br>
I do not see any conflict if the
situation with synchronized clocks is
obeyed as I explained it in my last
mail (see below). Those clock
assemblies show dilation, but do not
present any logical conflict.</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">AK: An interval for one
party cannot BE (appearances are a
different matter!) origianl length
(per his clock) and forshortened (per
partner's clock) at the same location
and termination with one end at the
same instant. Obvious! Even text
books point out that the interval is
the same in both frames (per +/-
Relativity Principle) and show a
hyperbolic isocline intersecting the
travelr's world line. Thus, each for
himself agrees on the length, and each
for the other agrees on a dilated
interval. Where else does this sort
of thing happen? PERSPECTIVE. </span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">Your argument makes sense
only if it is taken that the virtual
image (or its equivalent in
space-time; where it can't be static
as in Classical Optics) is
dilated/contracted. If that's what
you mean, we agree. Otherwise, what
the texts say is pure contradiction or
science fiction mystery.</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"><br>
When looking at a real situation one
has to identify the observed object on
the one hand with a clock in the
example, and on the other hand the
observer with another clock or a
sequence of other clocks. If we
observe a moving particle (like a
muon) in a laboratory, than the muon
is represented by one clock in the
moving system. In this case the
observer is represented by a line of
clocks positioned along the path of
the muon. Because, if we think in an
idealized way, we have first to note
the time when the muon starts by
looking at the clock which is close to
the muon at start time. When the muon
decays we have for the decay time to
look to the clock which is close to
the muon at that moment.</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">AK: In experiments, NO
lifetime measurement is made at all!
The data consists entirely of
counting the quanttity of muons at a
given location. Neither experiment
provides any empirical information
whatsoever about the muon generation
instant or location---in any frame.
These latter features are surmized or
calculated given assumed theory.
Thus, an alternate explanation must
only account for the presense of a
muon quantity at the measureing
location compatible with those
ESTIMATED using SR or whatever. </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"><br>
This may look ridiculous as for the
observer in the lab all clocks have
the same indication. But from the
"view" of the muon the clock at rest
at the start looks advanced and the
clock at the end looks retarded. So
the muon has the impression that the
time in the lab was slowed down.</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">AK: If things only "look"
to be dilated/contracted, then you are
talking about the virtual image; in
which case we have agreed from the
start. BUT, with this explantion the
muon data cannot be explained. To
begin, the muons don't look or
interact with any exterior observers.
Even the exterior observers look only
at the number of muons in a location
where they do not expect many. This
muon story does not involve two
parties for whcih the appearance can
be accounted for in terms of
projective geometry in either 3-space
(classical optics) or 4-space-time (SR
hyperoptics, if you will).<br>
<br>
As a reminder: The equation for time
transformation is: t' = gamma* (t -
vx / c<sup>2</sup>) (i.e. the Lorentz
transformation). Here is x the
position of that clock which is close
to the moving object at the time of
observation. And that position is x =
v*t if the observer it at rest. So,
for this observer there is t' =
t/gamma. For a co-moving observer
there is v = 0, so the result is t' =
t*gamma. Both results are covered by
this equation, and there is no logical
conflict.</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">AK: Here again you may be
confusing/mixing ontology with
perception. Typically clock readings
are at different locations, so they
have to be broadcast along light cones
to the other party---this usually
takes TIME! (This fact alsos leads to
confusion, as there are two times
involved, that of the event at the
event and that of the news arival not
at the event.) But a muon does not
wait for a signal from anybody, it
uses its clock, basta. It's interval
is dilated only as seen from the
(passive) observer's frame; about
which the muon knows (i.e. waits for
light rays from or sends to) nothing
nor needs anything. Likewise, the
observer on Earth doesn't know
(measure) where or when the muon
originated. </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">AK: Anyway, we know
cosmic rays reach the surface of the
Earth. So how many muons have those
that almost get that far generated?
SR texts don't address this. </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">AK: We haven't even got
to Eherenfest yet!!!</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">AK: ciao, Al<br>
<br>
Best wishes<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<br>
</span><span style="color:black"
lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">Hi Albrecht &
Curious:</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">Overlooked in my
previous responce:</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">If, as is done in
virtually all text books on SR
(I just checked Rindler, for
example) time dilation is
discussed in terms of the
dialtion happening to a concrete
objects (as it must if the Muon
story is to make sense) then
there is an obvious inconsitency
and sever conflict with the
relativity principle. Two
entities cannot at once be both
be dialted in the other's view
and not their own. The real
trick here is explaing how this
is not obvious to authors of
text books! Maybe, to
paraphrase Weinburg: That
stupid people say dumb things is
natural, to get smart people to
say dumb things, it takes
physics!</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">Your explantion (or
my prefered version: perspctive)
renders the objection both mute
and sterile wrt muons, however. </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div
style="border:none;border-left:solid
#C3D9E5 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm
8.0pt;margin-left:7.5pt;margin-top:7.5pt;margin-right:3.75pt;margin-bottom:3.75pt">
<div style="margin-bottom:7.5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">Gesendet:</span></b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> Sonntag, 11.
Oktober 2015 um 22:55 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Dr. Albrecht
Giese" <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="UrlBlockedError.aspx"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><genmail@a-giese.de></a></a><br>
<b>An:</b> <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="UrlBlockedError.aspx"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a></a>,
"A. F. Kracklauer" <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="UrlBlockedError.aspx"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"><af.kracklauer@web.de></a></a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re:
[General] nature of light
particles & theories</span><span
style="color:black"
lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">Hi Al,<br>
<br>
about time dilation.<br>
<br>
The problem is that time
dilation looks
inconsistent at the first
glance. But it is not. I
shall try to explain. It
has to do with clock
synchronization. (I try to
do it without graphics,
which would be easier, but
a problem in an email.)<br>
<br>
Assume that there are two
inertial systems, I call
them A and B. Both move in
relation to each other at
some speed v. Now assume
that there are clocks
distributed equally over
both systems. And of
course in both systems the
clocks are synchronized.
Now there comes a
relativistic effect. If
the observer in A looks to
the clocks in B, he finds
them desynchronized. The
clocks which are in front
with respect to the
direction of motion are
retarded, the ones in the
rear advanced. Similar in
the other system. If an
observer in B looks to the
clocks in A, he finds them
also desynchronized in the
way that the clocks in the
front are retarded and the
clocks in the rear
advanced. Shall I explain
why this happens? If you
want, I can do it. But
next time to keep it short
here.<br>
<br>
Now, what is dilation in
this case?<br>
<br>
If the observer in A takes
one of the clocks in B and
compares it to those
clocks in his own system,
which is just opposite in
sequence, then the clock
in B looks slowed down.
But if he takes one clock
in his own system, A, and
compares it to the clocks
in B which are opposite in
sequence, the clocks in B
look accelerated.<br>
<br>
Now it looks in a similar
way for the observer in B.
If the observer in B does
the equivalent to the
observer in A just
described, he will make
just the same experience.
No contradiction!<br>
<br>
In the case of the muons:
The muon which will decay
is in the position of a
clock in the muon-system,
and this clock is slowed
down as seen from the
observer at rest as
described above, and this
is no violation of
symmetry between the
systems. If an observer,
who moves with the muon,
looks to the clocks of the
system at rest, he will
find those clocks
accelerated. No
contradiction. Correct?<br>
<br>
Albrecht <br>
</span><span
style="color:black"
lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<pre style="background:white"><span style="color:black" lang="EN-US"></a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;background:white"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="color:black"
lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:center;background:white"
align="center"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US">
<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:0cm 11.25pt 0cm
6.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"
target="_blank"><span
style="text-decoration:none"><img
moz-do-not-send="true"
id="_x0000_i1027"
src="http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png"
alt="Avast logo"
border="0"></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"
target="_blank">www.avast.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif;color:black"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<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:phys@a-giese.de">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" 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>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</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>