<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:16px"><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1448327390092_2556">Richard</div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1448327390092_2553">Thanks</div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1448327390092_2554">You seem to be describing the model of a structure of photons to form an electron. I had envisioned the electron as a closed loop or 2 entwined closed loops. The problem is what determines charge?</div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1448327390092_3189"><br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1448327390092_3190">Hodge<br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1448327390092_2552"><span></span></div> <br><div class="qtdSeparateBR"><br><br></div><div style="display: block;" class="yahoo_quoted"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"> <div dir="ltr"><font size="2" face="Arial"> On Monday, November 23, 2015 1:43 PM, Richard Gauthier <richgauthier@gmail.com> wrote:<br></font></div> <br><br> <div class="y_msg_container"><div id="yiv9615620571"><div>Hello Albrecht,<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none"><div class="yiv9615620571"> I’m glad that you say that developing a 2-particle model of the electron was not your main interest. I think it will be useful to see what parts of your model may be saved, and what parts may have to go, to get a working model in progress for the electron which most of us here might agree on. First, since there is no generally accepted evidence of a nuclear strong force relation to electrons, let’s drop that proposal for holding your 2 circulating charged massless particles in orbit, at least for now. Second, since there’s no evidence for a two-particle structure of the electron from any scattering or other experiments, let’s also consider dropping that proposal for now. Your insistence that a 2-particle model is required for conservation of momentum at the sub-electron level does not seem sufficient to accept this part of your 2-particle model. We don’t even know experimentally that conservation of momentum exists at the sub-electron level, do we? Just an article of faith?</div><div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none"></div><div class="yiv9615620571"> So what is left of your model? You claim that your two particles are massless and travel at light speed. But you don’t say that they are also without energy, do you? If there are two massless particles, they will still each have to have 0.511/2 MeV of energy if the electron’s total resting energy 0.511 MeV is divided equally between them. One kind of particle that has no rest mass but has energy and travels at light speed is a photon. (Let’s forget about gluons here for now since there is no accepted evidence for a strong nuclear force on electrons). So each of your two particles (if there are still two for some other reason besides conservation of momentum, and a need for an attractive force between them to overcome their electric repulsion) could be a charged photon (circulating charge is necessary to get a magnetic moment for the model) with energy 0.511/2 MeV, which has energy but no rest mass. OK. But each of these two charged photons, each of energy 0.511/2 MeV = mc^2/2 will have a wavelength of 2 Compton wavelengths = 2 h/mc . If 1 wavelength of each photon is turned into a single closed loop, the each loop would have a radius 2hbar/mc, which is twice the radius hbar/mc of your proposed electron model. To make each of these photons move circularly in a way that each of their wavelengths gives a radius of hbar/mc as in your model, each photon would have to move in a double loop. So there will be two photons each of energy 0.511/2 moving in a double loop in this model. This is getting complicated. </div><div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none"></div><div class="yiv9615620571"> Let’s drop one of the two photons for simplicity (Occam’s razor put to good use) so that the other photon will have the full electron energy 0.511 MeV . This photon will now have a wavelength 1 Compton wavelength. If this 1 Compton wavelength charged photon moves in a single loop it will create an electron with magnetic moment 1 Bohr magneton and a spin of 1 hbar. That’s good for the experimental magnetic moment of the electron (slightly more than 1 Bohr magneton) but bad for its experimental spin (which you tried to reduce to 1/2 hbar in your model by a delayed force argument). If the photon moves in a double loop it will be good for the spin (which now is exactly 1/2 hbar) but bad for the magnetic moment (now 1/2 Bohr magneton). So there’s still a problem with the model’s magnetic moment. But this double-looping charged photon model now has gained the zitterbewegung frequency of the Dirac electron which is desirable for an electron model which hopes to model the Dirac electron. And it also has 720 degree symmetry which the Dirac electron has (while your original 2-particle model has a rotational symmetry of 180 degrees, since each particle would take the place of the other after a half-circle rotation).</div><div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none"></div><div class="yiv9615620571"> What do you think of this new model so far?</div><div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none"></div><div class="yiv9615620571"> Richard</div><div class="yiv9615620571yqt4346932208" id="yiv9615620571yqt91264"><div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none"><div><blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite"><div class="yiv9615620571">On Nov 22, 2015, at 9:43 AM, Albrecht Giese <<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a>> wrote:</div><br class="yiv9615620571Apple-interchange-newline" clear="none"><div class="yiv9615620571">
</div></blockquote></div></div></div></div></div><div class="yiv9615620571yqt4346932208" id="yiv9615620571yqt22418"><div><div class="yiv9615620571">
Hello Richard,<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
I never have persistently tried to develop a 2-particle model. What
I have persistently tried was to find a good explanation for
relativistic dilation. And there I found a solution which has
satisfied me. All the rest including the 2 particles in my model
where logical consequences where I did not see alternatives. If
there should be a model which is an alternative in one or the other
aspect, I will be happy to see it.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571moz-cite-prefix">Am 22.11.2015 um 00:13 schrieb Richard
Gauthier:<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
</blockquote></div></div><div>
Hello Albrecht,
<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571"> I admire your persistence in trying to save your
doomed (in my opinion) 2-particle electron model. </div>
</div>
Why 2 particles in the model? I say it again:<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
1) to maintain the conservation of momentum in the view of
oscillations<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
2) to have a mechanism for inertia (which has very precise results,
otherwise non-existent in present physics)<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
I will be happy to see alternatives for both points. Up to now I
have not seen any.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">Do you understand how unreasonable and irrational
it appears for you to write: "Then I had to determine the
field constant S which is normally provided by experiments.
But quantum mechanics is so unprecise regarding the numeric
value of the strong force that there is no number available in
the data tables. Here I found that I could use the Bohr
magneton to determine the constant. (Which turned out to be S
= hbar*c, merely a constant).” ? <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
I have once asked one of the leading theorists at DESY for a better
quantitative explanation or determination of the strong force. His
answer: Sorry, the strong force is not good enough understood so
that I cannot give you better information. <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">How could the number S that you could not find in
“unprecise” tables about the strong force possibly be the same
number that can be found precisely from the electron’s Bohr
magneton ehbar/2m and which you claim is S = hbar*c ? This is
an unbelievable, desperate stretch of imagination and
"grasping at straws", in my opinion. <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
When I have realized that my model deduces the Bohr magneton, I have
used the measurements available in that context to determine my
field constant. (I could also go the other way: I can use the Planck
/ Einstein relation E = h * f and the Einstein-relation E = m*c<sup class="yiv9615620571">2</sup>
to determine the constant S from the internal frequency in my model.
Same result. But I like the other way better. BTW: Do you know any
other model which deduces these relations rather than using them as
given?)<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">Here is the meaning of “grasping at straws” from <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/grasp+at+straws"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-freetext" target="_blank" href="http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/grasp+at+straws">http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/grasp+at+straws</a> :</div>
<h2 class="yiv9615620571" style="display:inline-block;margin:0px 6px 0px;color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">grasp at straws</h2>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">Also,</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><b class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">clutch</span> at <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">straws</span></b><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">.</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">Make</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">a</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">desperate</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">attempt</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">at</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">saving</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">oneself.</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">For</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">example,</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><i class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">He <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">had </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">lost</span> <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">the</span> <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">argument,</span> <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">but</span> he <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">kept</span> <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">grasping</span> at <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">straws,</span> <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">naming</span> <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">numerous</span> <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">previous</span> <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">cases</span> <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">that </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">had</span> <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">little</span> to do <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">with</span> <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">this</span> <span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="">one</span></i><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">.</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">This</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">metaphoric</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">expression</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">alludes</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">to</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">a</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">drowning</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">person </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">trying</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">to</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">save</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">himself</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">by</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">grabbing</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">at</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">flimsy</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">reeds.</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">First</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">recorded</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">in</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">1534,</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">the</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">term</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">was </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">used</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">figuratively</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">by</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">the</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">late</span><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;"> </span><span class="yiv9615620571hvr" style="color:rgb(64, 64, 64);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px;">1600s.</span> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">I am not at all opposed to using desperate
measures to find or save a hypothesis that is very important
to you. Max Planck described his efforts to fit the black body
radiation equation using quantized energies of hypothetical
oscillators as an "act of desperation”. So you are of course
free to keep desperately trying to save your 2-particle
electron hypothesis. I personally think that your many talents
in physics could be better spent in other ways, for example in
revising your electron model to make it more consistent with
experimental facts.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Do you know any other electron model which is so much consistent
with experimental facts (e.g. size and mass) as this one (without
needing the usual mystifications of quantum mechanics)?<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> By the way, van der Waals forces do not "bind
atoms to form a molecule". They are attractive or repulsive
forces between molecules or between parts of a molecule.
According to Wikipedia:</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">" <span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255);">the </span><b class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;">van der Waals
forces</b><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255);"> (or </span><b class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;">van der Waals'
interaction</b><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255);">), named
after </span><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands" title="Netherlands" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(11, 0, 128);background-image:none;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;">Dutch</a><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255);"> </span><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientist" title="Scientist" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(11, 0, 128);background-image:none;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;">scientist</a><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255);"> </span><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Diderik_van_der_Waals" title="Johannes Diderik van der Waals" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(11, 0, 128);background-image:none;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;">Johannes Diderik van der
Waals</a><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255);">, is the sum
of the attractive or repulsive forces between </span><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule" title="Molecule" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(11, 0, 128);background-image:none;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;">molecules</a><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255);"> (or between parts of the same
molecule) other than those due to </span><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covalent_bond" title="Covalent bond" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(11, 0, 128);background-image:none;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;">covalent
bonds</a><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255);">, or the </span><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571mw-redirect" target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrostatic_interaction" title="Electrostatic interaction" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(11, 0, 128);background-image:none;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;">electrostatic interaction</a><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255);"> of </span><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion" title="Ion" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(11, 0, 128);background-image:none;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;">ions</a><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255);"> with one another, with
neutral molecules, or with charged molecules.</span><sup class="yiv9615620571reference" id="yiv9615620571cite_ref-1" style="line-height:1;font-size:11px;color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;"><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_der_Waals_force#cite_note-1" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(11, 0, 128);background-image:none;white-space:nowrap;">[1]</a></sup><span class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:22px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255);"> The resulting van der Waals
forces can be attractive or repulsive.</span><sup class="yiv9615620571reference" id="yiv9615620571cite_ref-Van_OssAbsolom1980_2-0" style="line-height:1;font-size:11px;color:rgb(37, 37, 37);font-family:sans-serif;"><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_der_Waals_force#cite_note-Van_OssAbsolom1980-2" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(11, 0, 128);background-image:none;white-space:nowrap;">[2]</a></sup></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Yes, my arrangement of charges of the strong force causes as well a
combination of attractive and repulsive forces and is doing the same
like in the van der Waals case. That was my reason to refer to them.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Best regards<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Albrecht<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">with best regards,</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> Richard</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571">On Nov 21, 2015, at 8:32 AM, Albrecht
Giese <<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="yiv9615620571Apple-interchange-newline" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
</div></blockquote></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><div><div class="yiv9615620571"> Hello
Richard,<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
I am a bit confused how badly my attempted
explanations have reached you.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
I have NOT used the Bohr magneton to determine the
radius R of an electron. I deduced the radius
directly from the measured magnetic moment using the
classical equation for the magnetic moment.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
For the binding force of the sub-particles I needed
a multipole field which has a potential minimum at a
distance R<sub class="yiv9615620571">0</sub>. The simplest shape
of such a field which I could find was for the force
F:<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
F = S * (R<sub class="yiv9615620571">0</sub> - R) /R<sup class="yiv9615620571">3</sup>.
Here R<sub class="yiv9615620571">0</sub> is of course the
equilibrium distance and S the field constant. I
wanted to refer to an existing field of a proper
strength, and that could only be the strong force.
Then I had to determine the field constant S which
is normally provided by experiments. But quantum
mechanics is so unprecise regarding the numeric
value of the strong force that there is no number
available in the data tables. Here I found that I
could use the Bohr magneton to determine the
constant. (Which turned out to be S = hbar*c, merely
a constant).<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
From the equation for F given above the inertial
mass of the particle follows from a deduction which
is given on my website: <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" target="_blank" href="http://www.ag-physics.org/rmass">www.ag-physics.org/rmass</a>
. Too long to present it here, but straight and
inevitable. Here the result again: m = S / (R * c<sup class="yiv9615620571">2</sup>) .<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
If you are unsatisfied by my deduction of this
field, what is about the van der Waals forces which
bind atoms to build a molecule? Did van der Waals
have had a better way of deduction in that case? I
think that the fact that the von der Waals forces
act so as observed, is enough for the physical
community to accept them. <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
And you ask for an independent calculation of S
which I should present in your opinion. Now, Is
there anyone in physics or in astronomy who can
present an independent calculation of the
gravitational constant G? No, nobody can calculate
G from basic assumptions. Why asking for more in my
case? I think that this demand is not realistic and
not common understanding in physics.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
And again: where is circular reasoning?<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Best regards<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Albrecht<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571moz-cite-prefix">Am 20.11.2015 um 23:02
schrieb Richard Gauthier:<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
</blockquote></div></div><div><div class="yiv9615620571">Hello Albrecht,</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> Thanks for your detailed
response. I think the key problem is in your
determination of your “field constant” S which
you say describes the "binding field" for your
two particles. This definition of S is too
general and empty of specific content as I
understand that it applies to any "binding
field” at any nuclear or atomic or molecular
level. With your 2-particle electron model you
then calculate the radius R=hbar/mc from the
Bohr Magneton e*hbar/2m, assuming the values of
m, e, h and c. . Then you calculate S from the
Bohr magneton and find it to be S=c*hbar. You
then calculate m from the equation m=S/(R*c^2).
How can a binding field S be described by such
a universal term hbar * c ? That’s why I think
that your derivation is circular. You use the
Bohr magneton e*hbar/2m to calculate R and S,
(using the Bohr magneton) and then you use R and
S to calculate m. You have no independent
calculation of S except from the Bohr magneton.
That’s the problem resulting in circularity. </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> with best regards,</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> Richard</div>
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571">On Nov 20, 2015, at 1:09 PM,
Albrecht Giese <<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="yiv9615620571Apple-interchange-newline" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
</div></blockquote></div></div><div><div class="yiv9615620571"> Hallo Richard,<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
I find it great that we have made similar
calculations and came at some points to
similar conclusions. That is not a matter
of course, as you find in all textbooks
that it is impossible to get these results
in a classical way, but that in the
contrary it needs QM to come to these
results. <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Here now again the logical way which I
have gone: I assume the circular motion of
the elementary electric charge (2* 1/2 * e<sub class="yiv9615620571">0</sub>) with speed c. Then
with the formula (which you give here
again) M = i*A one can conclude A from the
measured magnetic moment. And so we know
the radius to be R = 3.86 x 10<sup class="yiv9615620571">-13</sup> m for the electron.
No constants and no further theory are
necessary for this result. I have then
calculated the inertial mass of a particle
which turns out to be m = S / (R * c<sup class="yiv9615620571">2</sup>) where the parameter S
describes the binding field. I did
initially have no knowledge about the
quantity of this field. But from the mass
formula there follows for the magnetic
moment: M= (1/2)*(S/c)*(e /m). To this
point I have not used any knowledge except
the known relation for the magnetic
moment. Now I look to the Bohr magneton in
order to find the quantity of my field
constant S: M= (1/2)*hbar*(e /m).
Because the Planck constant has to be
measured in some way. For doing it myself
I would need a big machine. But why? Basic
constants never follow from a theory but
have to be measured. I can use such a
measurement, and that tells me for my
field constant S = c*hbar (from Bohr
magneton). So, where do you see circular
reasoning? <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Now I have no theory, why specific
elementary particles exist. Maybe later I
find a way, not now. But now I can use the
(measurable) magnetic moment for any
particle to determine the radius, and then
I know the mass from my formula. This
works for all charged leptons and for all
quarks. Not good enough?<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
And yes, the Landé factor. Not too
difficult. In my deduction of the mass I
have used only the (initially unknown)
constant S for the field. Which I assume
to be the strong field as with the
electric field the result is too small (by
a factor of several hundred). The only
stronger alternative to the electrical
force is the strong force, already known.
Is this a far-fetched idea? But I have in
this initial deduction ignored that the
two basic particles have an electrical
charge of e/2 each, which cause a
repelling force which increases the radius
R a bit. With this increase I correct the
result for e.g. the magnetic moment, and
the correction is quite precisely the
Landé factor (with a deviation of ca. 10<sup class="yiv9615620571">-6</sup>).<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
So, what did I invent specially for my
model, and which parameters do I use from
others? I have assumed the shape of the
binding field as this field has to cause
the bind at a distance. And I have used
the measurement of the Planck constant h
which other colleagues have performed.
Nothing else. I do not have do derive the
quantity e as this is not the task of a
particle model. If e could be derived
(what nobody today is able to do), then
this would follow from a much deeper
insight into our physical basics as anyone
can have today. <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
The fact of two constituents is a
necessary precondition to obey the
conservation of momentum and to support
the mechanism of inertia. I do not know
any other mechanism which works.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Where do I practice circular reasoning?<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Best regards<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Albrecht<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571moz-cite-prefix">Am 18.11.2015
um 15:42 schrieb Richard Gauthier:<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
</blockquote></div></div><div><div class="yiv9615620571">Hello Albrecht,</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> Let’s look at your
listed assumptions of your electron
model in relation to the electron’s
magnetic moment. It is known that the
magnitude of the electron’s
experimental magnetic moment is
slightly more than the Bohr magneton
which is Mb = ehbar/2m = 9.274 J/T in
SI units. Your 2-particle model aims
to generate a magnetic moment to match
this Bohr magneton value (which was
predicted for the electron by the
Dirac equation) rather than the
experimental value of the electron’s
magnetic moment which is slightly
larger. The standard equation for
calculating the magnetic moment M of a
plane current loop is M = IA for loop
area A and current I. If the area A is
a circle and the current is a circular
current loop I around this area, whose
value I is calculated from a total
electric charge e moving circularly at
light speed c (as in your 2-particle
electron model) with a radius R, a
short calculation will show that if
the radius of this circle is R =
hbar/mc = 3.86 x 10-13 m (the reduced
Compton wavelength corresponding to a
circle of circumference one Compton
wavelength h/mc), then this radius R
for the current loop gives a magnetic
moment M = IA = Bohr magneton ehbar/2m
. I have done this calculation many
times in my electron modeling work and
know that this is the case. The values
of h and also e and m of the electron
have to be known accurately to
calculate the Bohr magneton ehbar/2m .
When the radius of the circular loop
is R=hbar/mc, the frequency f of the
charge e circling the loop is easily
found to be f=c/(2pi R)= mc^2/h ,
which is the frequency of light having
the Compton wavelength h/mc. </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">So the current loop radius
R=hbar/mc that is required in your
2-particle model to derive the Bohr
magneton ehbar/2m using M=IA obviously
cannot also be used to derive either
of the values h or m since these
values were used to calculate the Bohr
magneton ehbar/2m in the first place.
So your model cannot be used to derive
any of the values of e, h or m, and
seems to be an exercise in circular
reasoning. Please let me know how I
may be mistaken in this conclusion.</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">with best regards,</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> Richard</div>
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571">On Nov 18, 2015, at
2:03 AM, Dr. Albrecht Giese <<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="yiv9615620571Apple-interchange-newline" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
</div></blockquote></div></div><div><div class="yiv9615620571"> <small class="yiv9615620571">Hi Al,<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<font class="yiv9615620571" color="#006600"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
I completely disagree with
your conclusions about the
motivation towards my model
because my intention was not
to develop a particle model.
My intention was to develop
a better understanding of
time in relativity. My
present model was an
unexpected consequence of
this work. I show you my
arguments again and ask you
to indicate the point where
you do not follow.</font><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</small>
<div class="yiv9615620571moz-cite-prefix"><small class="yiv9615620571">Am 17.11.2015 um
19:18 schrieb <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>:</small><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">Hi Albrect:</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">Comments² <strong class="yiv9615620571">IN BOLD</strong></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:10px 5px 5px 10px;padding:10px 0 10px 10px;border-left:2px solid #C3D9E5;word-wrap:break-word;">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:0 0 10px 0;"><b class="yiv9615620571">Gesendet:</b> Dienstag,
17. November 2015 um
18:41 Uhr<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">Von:</b> "Dr.
Albrecht Giese" <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><genmail@a-giese.de></a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">An:</b> <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">Cc:</b> <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">Betreff:</b> Re:
[General] Reply of
comments from what a
model…</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);"><small class="yiv9615620571">Hi Al,<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
again some
responses.</small><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571moz-cite-prefix"><small class="yiv9615620571">Am
14.11.2015 um
18:24 schrieb
<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>:</small></div>
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">Hi
Albrecht:</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">Answers
to your
questions:</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">1)
The SED
background
explains the
Planck BB
distribution
without
quantization.
It explans why
an atom
doesn't
collapse: in
equilibrium
with
background, In
fact, just
about every
effect
described by
2nd
quantization
has an SED
parallel
explantion
without
additional
considerations.
With the
additional
input of the
SED origin of
deBroglie
waves, it
provides a
direct
derivation of
the
Schröedinger
eq. thereby
explainiong
all of 1st
Quantization.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571">Maybe
you achieve
something when
using SED
background. I
do not really
understand
this
background,
but I do not
see a
stringent
necessity for
it. But SED as
an origin to
the de Broglie
waves is of
interest for
me. I am
presently
working on de
Broglie waves
to find a
solution,
which does not
have the
logical
conflicts
which we have
discussed
here.</small></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">See
No. 11 (or 1)
@ <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" target="_blank" href="http://www.nonloco-physics.0catch.com/"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" target="_blank" href="http://www.nonloco-physics.0catch.com/">www.nonloco-physics.0catch.com</a>
for
suggetions and
some previous
work along
this line.</strong></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<font class="yiv9615620571" color="#006600"><small class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">Thank
you, will have a look.</strong></small></font>
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:10px 5px 5px 10px;padding:10px 0 10px 10px;border-left:2px solid #C3D9E5;word-wrap:break-word;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">2)
Olber's logic
is in conflict
with Mach's
Principle, so
is obviously
just valid for
visible light.
Given a
little
intergalacitc
plasma (1
H/m³), not to
mention
atmossphere
and
interplanatary
plama, visible
light
disappears to
Earthbound
observers at
visitble freqs
to reappear at
other, perhaps
at 2.7° even,
or at any
other long or
hyper short
wave length.
'The universe
matters'---which
is even
politically
correct
nowadays!</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571">Olber's
logic is
simple in so
far, as it
shows that the
universe
cannot be
infinite. I
have assumed
the same for
all background
effects. Or
are they
infinite?</small></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">The
fly in the
ointment is
absorbtion.
An inf.
universe with
absorbtion in
the visible
part of the
spectrum will
still have a
largely dark
sky. </strong><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</small></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<font class="yiv9615620571" color="#006600"><small class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">And
the other way around: Even
if there is no absorption,
the sky will be dark. And
the general opinion is
that, even if there is a
lot of radiation absorbed,
this absorbing material
will heat up by the time
and radiate as well. So an
absorption should not
change too much.</strong></small></font><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:10px 5px 5px 10px;padding:10px 0 10px 10px;border-left:2px solid #C3D9E5;word-wrap:break-word;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);">
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571"> <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
What is the
conflict with
Mach's
principle?</small></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">Mach
says: the
gravitational
"background
radiation" is
the cause of
inertia. This
effect is
parallel to
the SED
bacground
causing QM
effects.
Conflict: if
Olber is
right, then
Mach is
probably wrong
(too weak).</strong></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<font class="yiv9615620571" color="#006600"><small class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">In
my understanding, what
Mach means is completely
different. Mach's
intention was to find a
reference system which is
absolute with respect to
acceleration. He assumed
that this is caused by the
stars in our vicinity. He
did not have a certain
idea how this happens, he
only needed the fact.
(Einstein replaced this
necessity by his
equivalence of gravity and
acceleration - which
however is clearly
falsified as mentioned
several times.)</strong></small></font>
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:10px 5px 5px 10px;padding:10px 0 10px 10px;border-left:2px solid #C3D9E5;word-wrap:break-word;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);">
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">3)
The (wide
spread)
criticism of 2
particles is
that there is
neither an <em class="yiv9615620571">a-priori</em>
intuative
reason, nor
empirical
evidence that
they exist.
Maybe they do
anyway. But
then, maybe
Zeus does too,
and he is just
arranging
appearances so
that we amuse
ourselves.
(Try to prove
that wrong!) </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571">I
have explained
how I came to
the conclusion
of 2
sub-particles.
Again:<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
1) There is
motion with c
in an
elementary
particle to
explain
dilation<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
2) With only
on particle
such process
is
mechanically
not possible,
and it
violates the
conservation
of momentum<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
3) In this way
it is the only
working model
theses days to
explain
inertia. And
this model
explains
inertia with
high
precision.
What more is
needed?</small></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">These
assumtions are
"teleological,"
i.e., tuned
to give the
desired
results. As
logic,
although often
done, this
manuver is not
legit in the
formal
presentation
of a theory.
For a physics
theory,
ideally, all
the input
assuptios have
empirical
justification
or motivation.
Your 2nd
partical
(modulo
virtual
images) has no
such
motivatin, in
fact, just the
opposite. </strong><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</small></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<font class="yiv9615620571" color="#006600"><small class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">My
logical way is just the
other way around. I had
the plan to work on
relativity (the aspects of
time), not on particle
physics. The particle
model was an unplanned
spin-off. I shall try to
explain the logical path
again: <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<u class="yiv9615620571">1st step:</u>
I have calculated the
4-dimensional speed of an
object using the temporal
part of the Lorentz
transformation. The
surprising fact was that
this 4-dim. speed is
always the speed of light.
I have then assumed that
this constant shows a
permanent motion with c in
a particle. I have
accepted this as a
probable solution, but I
have never assumed this,
before I had this result.
It was in no way a desired
result. My idea was to
describe time by a vector
of 3 of 4 dimensions. - I
have then </strong></small></font><font class="yiv9615620571" color="#006600"><small class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">no
further </strong></small></font><font class="yiv9615620571" color="#006600"><small class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">followed
this idea.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<u class="yiv9615620571">2nd step:</u>
If there is some motion in
the particle, it cannot be
caused by one constituent.
This is logically not
possible as it violates
the conservation of
momentum. Also this was
not a desired result but
logically inevitable. <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<u class="yiv9615620571">3rd step:</u>
If the constituents move
with c, then they cannot
have any mass. Also this
was not a result which I
wished to achieve, but
here I followed my
understanding of
relativity.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</strong></small></font><strong class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571"><font class="yiv9615620571" color="#006600"><u class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">4th </strong></u><u class="yiv9615620571">step:</u> The
size must be such that the
resulting frequency in the
view of c yields the
magnetic moment which is
known by measurements. <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<u class="yiv9615620571">5th step:</u>
I had to find a reason for
the mass of the electron
in spite of the fact that
the constituents do not
have any mass. After some
thinking I found out the
fact that any extended
object has necessarily
inertia. I have applied
this insight to this
particle model, and the
result was the actual mass
of the electron, if I
assumed that the force is
the strong force. It could
not be the electric force
(as it was assumed by
others at earlier times)
because the result is too
weak.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
None of the results from
step 1 thru step 5 was
desired. Every step was
inevitable, because our
standard physical
understanding (which I did
not change at any point)
does not allow for any
alternative. - <u class="yiv9615620571">Or at which
step could I hav</u><u class="yiv9615620571">e had an
alternative in your
opinion?<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</u>And btw: which is the
stringent argument for
only one constituent? As I
mentioned before, the
experiment is not an
argument. I have discussed
my model with the former
research director of DESY
who was responsible for
this type of electron
experiments, and he
admitted that there is no
conflict with the
assumption of 2
constituents.</font><u class="yiv9615620571"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</u></small></strong>
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:10px 5px 5px 10px;padding:10px 0 10px 10px;border-left:2px solid #C3D9E5;word-wrap:break-word;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);">
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571"> <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
I know from
several
discussions
with particle
physicists
that there is
a lot of
resistance
against this
assumption of
2
constituents.
The reason is
that everyone
learn at
university
like with
mother's milk
that the
electron is
point-like,
extremely
small and does
not have any
internal
structure.
This has the
effect like a
religion.
(Same with the
relativity of
Hendrik
Lorentz.
Everyone
learns with
the same
fundamental
attitude that
Lorentz was
nothing better
than a senile
old man how
was not able
to understand
modern
physics.) -
Not a really
good way, all
this.</small></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">Mystical
thinking is
indeed a major
problem even
in Physics!
But, some of
the objectiors
to a 2nd
particle are
not basing
their
objection of
devine
revelation or
political
correctness. </strong></small></div>
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">4)
It is
ascientific to
consider that
the desired
result is
justification
for a
hypothetical
input. OK,
one can say
about such
reasoning, it
is validated <em class="yiv9615620571">a
posteriori</em>,
that at least
makes it sound
substantial.
So much has
been granted
to your
"story" but
has not
granted your
story status
as a "physics
theory." It
has some
appeal, which
in my mind
would be
enhansed had a
rationalization
for the 2nd
particle been
provided.
That's all
I'm trying to
do. When you
or whoever
comes up with
a better one,
I'll drop
pushing the
virtual
particle
engendered by
the
background.
Maybe, it
fixes too many
other things.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571">My
history was
following
another way
and another
motivation. I
intended to
explain
relativity on
the basis of
physical
facts. This
was my only
intention for
this model.
All further
properties of
the model were
logical
consequences
where I did
not see
alternatives.
I did not want
to explain
inertia. It
just was a
result by
itself.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
So, what is
the problem? I
have a model
which explains
several
properties of
elementary
particles very
precisely. It
is in no
conflict with
any
experimental
experience.
And as a new
observation
there is even
some
experimental
evidence. -
What else can
physics expect
from a theory?
- The argument
that the
second
particle is
not visible is
funny. Who has
ever seen a
quark? Who has
ever seen the
internal
structure of
the sun? I
think you have
a demand here
which was
never
fulfilled in
science.</small></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">The
problem,
obviously, is
that the
existence of
the 2nd
particle, as
you have
presented it,
is not a fact,
but a
Wunschansatz.
[BTW: "See"
in this
context is not
meant
occularly, but
figuratively
for
experimental
verification
through any
length of
inferance
chain.] So,
my question
is: what
problem do you
have with a
virtual mate
for the
particle? In
fact, it will
be there
whether you
use it or not.</strong><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
And see again
Frank Wilczek.
</small><small class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">He writes: "By co</span></span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">mb</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">ining fragmen</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">tatio</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">n with su</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">per</span><span class="yiv9615620571ws0 yiv9615620571ls0 yiv9615620571current-selection">-</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">con</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">ductivity</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">, w</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">e
can get
half-electro</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">ns tha</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">t
</span></small><small class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">ar</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">e
their o</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">wn an</span><span class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">tiparticles."
</span></span></small></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection"><strong class="yiv9615620571">A "straw in the wind" but
sure seems far
fetched!
Superconductivity
is already a
manybody
phenomenon,
It's theory
probably
involves some
"virtual"
notions to
capture the
essence of the
average effect
even if the
virtual actors
do not really
exist. </strong></span></span></small></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<small class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571"><font class="yiv9615620571" color="#006600">This
was a nice confirmation in
my understanding. So as
the whole article of
Wilczek. The electron is
in fact enigmatic if one
follows main stream. It
looses a lot of this
property if my model is
used. - But even without
this experimental hint I
do not see any alternative
to my model without
severely violating known
physics.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Ciao<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Albrecht</font><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</strong></small>
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571" type="cite">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:10px 5px 5px 10px;padding:10px 0 10px 10px;border-left:2px solid #C3D9E5;word-wrap:break-word;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);">
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection"><strong class="yiv9615620571"> </strong></span></span></small><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<small class="yiv9615620571">Guten
Abend<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Albrecht</small></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><small class="yiv9615620571"><strong class="yiv9615620571">Gleichfalls,
Al</strong></small></div>
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">Have
a good one!
Al</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:10.0px 5.0px 5.0px 10.0px;padding:10.0px 0 10.0px 10.0px;border-left:2.0px solid rgb(195,217,229);">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:0 0 10.0px 0;"><b class="yiv9615620571">Gesendet:</b> Samstag,
14. November
2015 um 14:51
Uhr<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">Von:</b> "Dr.
Albrecht
Giese" <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><genmail@a-giese.de></a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">An:</b> <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">Cc:</b> <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">Betreff:</b> Re:
[General]
Reply of
comments from
what a model…</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);">Hi Al,<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Why do we need
a background?
If I assume
only local
forces (strong
and electric)
for my model,
the
calculation
conforms to
the
measurement
(e.g. between
mass and
magnetic
moment) with a
precision of 2
: 1'000'000.
This is no
incident. Not
possible, if a
poorly defined
and stable
background has
a measurable
influence. -
And if there
should be such
background and
it has such
little effect,
which mistake
do we make if
we ignore
that?<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
For the
competition of
the 1/r<sup class="yiv9615620571">2</sup>
law for range
of charges and
the r<sup class="yiv9615620571">2</sup>
law for the
quantity of
charges we
have a popular
example when
we look at the
sky at night.
The sky is
dark and that
shows that the
r<sup class="yiv9615620571">2</sup>
case (number
of shining
stars) does in
no way
compensates
for the 1/r<sup class="yiv9615620571">2</sup>
case (light
flow density
from the
stars).<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Why is a 2
particle model
necessary?<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
1.) for the
conservation
of momentum<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
2.) for a
cause of the
inertial mass<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
3.) for the
radiation at
acceleration
which occurs
most time, but
does not occur
in specific
situations.
Not explained
elsewhere.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Ciao, Albrecht<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571moz-cite-prefix">Am
13.11.2015 um
20:31 schrieb
<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>:</div>
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">Hi
Albrecht:</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">Your
proposed
experiment is
hampered by
reality! If
you do the
measurement
with a gaget
bought in a
store that has
knobes and a
display, then
the
measurement is
for certain
for signals
under a couple
hundred GHz
and based on
some phenomena
for which the
sensitivity of
man-made
devices is
limited. And,
if limited to
the electric
field, then
there is a
good chance it
is missing
altogether
oscillating
signals by
virtue of its
limited
reaction time
of reset time,
etc. etc. The
vast majority
of the
background
will be much
higher, the
phenomena most
attuned to
detecting
might be in
fact the
quantum
effects
otherwise
explained with
mystical
hokus-pokus!
Also to be
noted is that,
the processes
invovled in
your model, if
they pertain
to elementray
entities, will
have to be at
very small
size and if at
the velocity
(c) will be
very high
energy, etc.
so that once
again, it is
quite
reasonable to
suppose that
the universe
is anything
but
irrelavant! </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">Of
course, there
is then the
issue of the
divergence of
the this SED
background.
Ameliorated
to some extent
with the
realization
that there is
no energy at a
point in empty
space until a
charged entity
is put there,
whereupon the
energy of
interaction
with the rest
of the
universe (not
just by itself
being there
and ignoring
the
universe---as
QM theorists,
and yourself,
are wont to
do) is given
by the sum of
interactions
over all
particles not
by the
integral over
all space,
including
empty space.
Looks at
first blush to
be finite. </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">Why
fight it?
Where the
hell else will
you find a
credible 2nd
particle? </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">ciao,
Al</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:10.0px 5.0px 5.0px 10.0px;padding:10.0px 0 10.0px 10.0px;border-left:2.0px solid rgb(195,217,229);">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:0 0 10.0px 0;"><b class="yiv9615620571">Gesendet:</b> Freitag,
13. November
2015 um 12:11
Uhr<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">Von:</b> "Dr.
Albrecht
Giese" <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><genmail@a-giese.de></a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">An:</b> <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">Cc:</b> <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">Betreff:</b> Re:
[General]
Reply of
comments from
what a model…</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);">Hi Al,<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
if we look to
charges you
mention the
law 1/r<sup class="yiv9615620571">2</sup>.
Now we can
perform a
simple
physical
experiment
having an
electrically
charged object
and using it
to measure the
electric field
around us. I
say: it is
very weak. Now
look to the
distance of
the two
half-charges
within the
particle
having a
distance of
4*10<sup class="yiv9615620571">-13</sup>
m. This means
an increase of
force of about
25 orders of
magnitude
compared to
what we do in
a lab. And the
difference is
much greater
if we refer to
charges acting
from the
universe. So I
think we do
not make a big
mistake
assuming that
there is
nothing
outside the
particle.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Regarding my
model, the
logic of
deduction was
very simple
for me:<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
1.) We have
dilation, so
there must be
a permanent
motion with c<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
2.) There must
be 2
sub-particles
otherwise the
momentum law
is violated; 3
are not
possible as in
conflict with
experiments.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
3.) The
sub-particles
must be
mass-less,
otherwise c is
not possible<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
4.) The whole
particle has
mass even
though the
sub-particles
are mass-less.
So there must
be a mechanism
to cause
inertia. It
was
immediately
clear for me
that inertia
is a
consequence of
extension.
Another reason
to assume a
particle which
is composed of
parts. (There
is no other
working
mechanism of
inertia known
until today.)<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
5.) I had to
find the
binding field
for the
sub-particles.
I have taken
the simplest
one which I
could find
which has a
potential
minimum at
some distance.
And my first
attempt
worked.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
That is all,
and I do not
see any
possibility to
change one of
the points 1.)
thru 5.)
without
getting in
conflict with
fundamental
physical
rules. And I
do not invent
new facts or
rules beyond
those already
known in
physics.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
So, where do
you see any
kind of
arbitrariness
or missing
justification?<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Tschüß!<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Albrecht<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571moz-cite-prefix">Am
12.11.2015 um
17:51 schrieb
<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>:</div>
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">Hi
Albrect:</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">We
are making
some progress.
</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">To
your remark
that Swinger
& Feynman
introduced
virtual
charges, I
note that they
used the same
term: "virtual
charge/particle,"
in spite of
the much older
meaning in
accord with
the charge and
mirror
example. In
the finest of
quantum
traditions,
they too
ignored the
rest of the
universe and
instead tried
to vest its
effect in the
"vacuum."
This idea was
suitably
mystical to
allow them to
introduce the
associated
plaver into
the folk lore
of QM, given
the sociology
of the day.
Even in spite
of this BS,
the idea still
has merit.
Your objection
on the basis
of the 1/r²
fall-off is
true but not
conclusive.
This fall-off
is matched by
a r² increase
in muber of
charges, so
the integrated
total
interaction
can be
expected to
have at least
some effect,
no matter
what. Think
of the
universe to
1st order as a
neutral,
low-density
plasma. <span class="yiv9615620571">I
(and some
others) hold
that this
interaction is
responcible
for all
quantum
effects. In
any case, no
particle is a
universe unto
itself, the
rest have the
poulation and
time to take a
toll! </span></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571">BTW,
this is
history
repeating
itself. Once
upon a time
there was
theory of
Brownian
motion that
posited an
internal cause
known as "elan
vital" to dust
specks
observed
hopping about
like Mexican
jumping beans.
Ultimately
this nonsense
was displaced
by the
observation
that the dust
spots were not
alone in their
immediate
universe but
imbededded in
a slurry of
other
particles,
also in
motion, to
which they
were reacting.
Nowadays
atoms are
analysed in QM
text books as
if they were
the only
object in the
universe---all
others being
too far away
(so it is
argued,
anyway). </span></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571">Your
model, as it
stands, can be
free of
contradiction
and still
unstatisfying
because the
inputs seem to
be just what
is needed to
make the
conclusions
you aim to
make. Fine,
but what most
critics will
expect is that
these inputs
have to have
some kind of
justification
or motivation.
This is what
the second
particle
lacks. Where
is it when one
really looks
for it? It
has no
empirical
motivation.
Thus, this
theory then
has about the
same ultimate
structure, and
pursuasiveness,
as saying:
'don't worry
about it, God
did it; go
home, open a
beer, pop your
feet up, and
forget about
it---a theory
which explains
absolutely
everything!</span></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571">Tschuß,
Al</span></div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:10.0px 5.0px 5.0px 10.0px;padding:10.0px 0 10.0px 10.0px;border-left:2.0px solid rgb(195,217,229);">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="margin:0 0 10.0px 0;"><b class="yiv9615620571">Gesendet:</b> Donnerstag,
12. November
2015 um 16:18
Uhr<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">Von:</b> "Dr.
Albrecht
Giese" <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" ymailto="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><genmail@a-giese.de></a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">An:</b> <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">Cc:</b> <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<b class="yiv9615620571">Betreff:</b> Re:
[General]
Reply of
comments from
what a model…</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);"><font class="yiv9615620571" size="-1">Hi Al,<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
I have gotten
a different
understanding
of what a
virtual
particle or a
virtual charge
is. This
phenomenon was
invented by
Julian
Schwinger and
Richard
Feynman. They
thought to
need it in
order to
explain
certain
reactions in
particle
physics. In
the case of
Schwinger it
was the Landé
factor, where
I have shown
that this
assumption is
not necessary.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
If there is a
charge then of
course this
charge is
subject to
interactions
with all other
charges in the
universe. That
is correct.
But because of
the normal
distribution
of these other
charges in the
universe,
which cause a
good
compensation
of the
effects, and
because of the
distance law
we can think
about models
without
reference to
those. And
also there is
the problem
with virtual
particles and
vacuum
polarization
(which is
equivalent),
in that we
have this huge
problem that
the integrated
energy of it
over the
universe is by
a factor of
10^120 higher
than the
energy
measured. I
think this is
a really big
argument
against
virtual
effects.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Your example
of the virtual
image of a
charge in a
conducting
surface is a
different
case. It is,
as you write,
the
rearrangement
of charges in
the conducting
surface. So
the partner of
the charge is
physically the
mirror, not
the picture
behind it. But
which mirror
can cause the
second
particle in a
model if the
second
particle is
not assumed to
be real?<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
And what in
general is the
problem with a
two particle
model? It
fulfils the
momentum law.
And it does
not cause
further
conflicts. It
also explains
why an
accelerated
electron
sometimes
radiates,
sometimes not.
For an
experimental
evidence I
refer again to
the article of
Frank Wilczek
in "Nature"
which was
mentioned here
earlier:<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-freetext" target="_blank" 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><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-freetext" target="_blank" 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>:
</font><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571ws2 yiv9615620571y37 yiv9615620571m88 yiv9615620571h2 yiv9615620571ls3 yiv9615620571fc0 yiv9615620571x28 yiv9615620571t yiv9615620571sc0 yiv9615620571fs1 yiv9615620571ff1"><small class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">He writes: "By co</span></span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">mb</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">ining fragmen</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">tatio</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">n with su</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">per</span><span class="yiv9615620571ls0 yiv9615620571ws0 yiv9615620571current-selection">-</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">con</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">ductivity</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">,
w</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">e can get half-electro</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">ns
tha</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">t </span></small><small class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">ar</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">e their o</span><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">wn
an</span><span class="yiv9615620571"><span class="yiv9615620571current-selection">tiparticles." </span><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</span></small></div>
<font class="yiv9615620571" size="-1">For
Wilczek this
is a
mysterious
result, in
view of my
model it is
not, on the
contrary it is
kind of a
proof.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Grüße<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Albrecht</font><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<div class="yiv9615620571moz-cite-prefix"><font class="yiv9615620571" size="-1">Am
12.11.2015 um
03:06 schrieb
<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>:</font></div>
<blockquote class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571" style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:12.0px;">
<div class="yiv9615620571">
<div class="yiv9615620571">Hi
Albrecht:</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">Virtual
particles are
proxys for an
ensemble of
real
particles.
There is
nothing
folly-lolly
about them!
They simply
summarize the
total effect
of particles
that cannot be
ignored. To
ignore the
remainder of
the universe
becasue it is
inconvenient
for theory
formulation is
for certain
leading to
error. "No
man is an
island," and
no single
particle is a
universe!
Thus, it can
be argued
that, to
reject the
concept of
virtual
particles is
to reject a
facit of
reality that
must be
essential for
an explantion
of the
material
world.</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">For
example, if a
positive
charge is
placed near a
conducting
surface, the
charges in
that surface
will respond
to the
positive
charge by
rearranging
themselves so
as to give a
total field on
the surface of
zero strength
as if there
were a
negative
charge
(virtual)
behind the
mirror.
Without the
real charges
on the mirror
surface, the
concept of
"virtual"
negative
charge would
not be
necessary or
even useful. </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">The
concept of
virtual charge
as the second
particle in
your model
seems to me to
be not just a
wild
supposition,
but an
absolute
necessity.
Every charge
is, without
choice, in
constant
interaction
with every
other charge
in the
universe, has
been so since
the big bang
(if such were)
and will
remain so till
the big crunch
(if such is to
be)! The
universe
cannot be
ignored. If
you reject
including the
universe by
means of
virtual
charges, them
you have a lot
more work to
do to make
your theory
reasonable
some how else.
In particular
in view of the
fact that the
second
particles in
your model
have never
ever been seen
or even
suspected in
the various
experiments
resulting in
the
disasssmbly of
whatever
targert was
used. </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
<div class="yiv9615620571">MfG,
Al</div>
<div class="yiv9615620571"> </div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<hr class="yiv9615620571" style="border:none;color:rgb(144,144,144);background-color:rgb(176,176,176);height:1.0px;width:99.0%;">
<table class="yiv9615620571" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;"><tbody class="yiv9615620571"><tr class="yiv9615620571"><td colspan="1" rowspan="1" class="yiv9615620571" style="border:none;padding:0.0px 15.0px 0.0px 8.0px;"><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"><img class="yiv9615620571" alt="Avast logo" border="0"> </a></td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1" class="yiv9615620571"><div class="yiv9615620571" style="color:rgb(61,77,90);font-family:Calibri , Verdana , Arial , Helvetica;font-size:12.0pt;">Diese
E-Mail wurde
von Avast
Antivirus-Software
auf Viren
geprüft.<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" target="_blank" href="http://www.avast.com/"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" target="_blank" href="http://www.avast.com/">www.avast.com</a></div>
</td></tr></tbody></table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<hr class="yiv9615620571" style="border:none;color:#909090;background-color:#B0B0B0;height:1px;width:99%;">
<table class="yiv9615620571" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;"><tbody class="yiv9615620571"><tr class="yiv9615620571"><td colspan="1" rowspan="1" class="yiv9615620571" style="border:none;padding:0px 15px 0px 8px;">
<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"> <img class="yiv9615620571" alt="Avast logo" border="0"> </a> </td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1" class="yiv9615620571"><div class="yiv9615620571" style="color:#3d4d5a;"> Diese E-Mail
wurde von Avast
Antivirus-Software auf
Viren geprüft. <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" target="_blank" href="http://www.avast.com/">www.avast.com</a> </div>
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
If you no longer wish to receive
communication from the Nature of
Light and Particles General
Discussion List at <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" ymailto="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<a href="<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"></a><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571moz-txt-link-freetext" target="_blank" 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>"><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
Click here to unsubscribe<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
</a><br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<hr class="yiv9615620571" style="border:none;color:#909090;background-color:#B0B0B0;height:1px;width:99%;">
<table class="yiv9615620571" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;"><tbody class="yiv9615620571"><tr class="yiv9615620571"><td colspan="1" rowspan="1" class="yiv9615620571" style="border:none;padding:0px 15px 0px 8px;"> <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"> <img class="yiv9615620571" alt="Avast logo" border="0"> </a> </td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1" class="yiv9615620571"><div class="yiv9615620571" style="color:#3d4d5a;"> Diese
E-Mail wurde von Avast
Antivirus-Software auf Viren
geprüft. <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus">www.avast.com</a> </div>
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<hr class="yiv9615620571" style="border:none;color:#909090;background-color:#B0B0B0;height:1px;width:99%;">
<table class="yiv9615620571" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;"><tbody class="yiv9615620571"><tr class="yiv9615620571"><td colspan="1" rowspan="1" class="yiv9615620571" style="border:none;padding:0px 15px 0px 8px;"> <a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"> <img class="yiv9615620571" alt="Avast logo" border="0"> </a>
</td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1" class="yiv9615620571"><div class="yiv9615620571" style="color:#3d4d5a;"> Diese E-Mail
wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf
Viren geprüft. <br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" class="yiv9615620571" target="_blank" href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus">www.avast.com</a> </div>
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none">
<br class="yiv9615620571" clear="none"></div></div></div><br><div class="yqt4346932208" id="yqt78790">_______________________________________________<br clear="none">If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:jchodge@frontier.com" href="mailto:jchodge@frontier.com">jchodge@frontier.com</a><br clear="none"><a href="<a shape="rect" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/jchodge%40frontier.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/jchodge%40frontier.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br clear="none">Click here to unsubscribe<br clear="none"></a><br clear="none"></div><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div></div></body></html>