<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Hello Everybody: I am in complete agreement with Al. Only our written expressions are very different – language and culture, I presume!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Al: My energy behind facilitating this conference series and this web discussion are based on this simple belief:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> Any and all organized bodies of knowledge constructed by humans (whether meant for social engineering or nature engineering) are necessarily incomplete as they have been based upon postulates
that are insufficient to capture all ontic rules behind our cosmic system. (In your language, only God knows the ontic truth!)
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">This is also the reason why I have repeatedly been saying that it is high time for us to collect all the foundational postulates behind all the “working” theories and then restructure them to bring
better harmony in them and move towards a more “unified” theory. But, that will not be the final theory. We will have to keep on iterating our “working “ theories forever until we attain Nirvana (a complete understanding about the meaning and the purpose behind
this universe). <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> How do we keep the iteration in the right direction over centuries and millennia? Interaction processes that give rise to the manifest and evolving universe (and also data in our instruments)
are much closer to the ontic reality than our data and math that models them. This is the reason why have articulated that we should add Interaction Process Mapping Epistemology (IPM-E) over and above our prevailing Measurable Data Modeling Epistemology (MDM-E).
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> To further assist in harmonizing all fields of human endeavors, I have proposed, “Urgency of evolution process congruent thinking”. This is nothing but reverse system engineering thinking;
rather than abstract mathematical thinking alone. This will help honest intellectuals to culturally shame and eliminate forces like “Climate change deniers”, “Believers of perpetually growing capitalism as the best economic solution even it means destroying
the biosphere”, etc., etc. By the way, “Capital” politically controls the means of production. Real wealth creation is done by entrepreneurs, managers and workers working in harmony.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Sincerely,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Chandra.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></a></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> General [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>af.kracklauer@web.de<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, February 08, 2016 9:01 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] De Broglie Wave<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Hi Chandra et al.:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">From the view point I espouse there are two utterly distinct entities in play here. One is the phenomena before any scientist ever thought of analyizing it, i.e., its ontological
essence; and Two: the mathematical plus story told by human explicators of such phenomena. The former is what some would say "God made." The latter is what humans made/make. For the latter, various notions might be found convenient that "God" never exploited
in the first place. Such a notion is, for example, that of "field." It is a hypothetical, imaginay aid to thinking (mostly calculating) about the relevant phenomena, but fields do not necessarily exist as ontological stuff. God (or whoever, whtever set
it all up) did not consult Huygens first, it's the other way around. Huygens consulted God (i.e., went to the lab an examined "what God hath whrot") and then cooked up a story with math to assit in talking about what he experienced in the lab. Huygens' succesful,
that is: useful, story cannot in and of itself elevate whatever intermediary notions he used to the level of ontology. It could be that, the players in the intermediat steps of his story are all imaginay, even while his explantion "works" for predicting what
the consequences of the phenomena of interset can, or must, be.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">My only dog in this fight is that, by unconscioulsly considering what are imaginary concepts without recognizing them as such is most likely going to lead to mythology and
not understaning. The world has enough "multiverses, entanglement, wave collapse," etc., etc. (not to mention their political, psychological, sociological, parallel universes!).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">ciao, Al<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid #C3D9E5 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 8.0pt;margin-left:7.5pt;margin-top:7.5pt;margin-right:3.75pt;margin-bottom:3.75pt;word-wrap: break-word;-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;-webkit-line-break: after-white-space" name="quote">
<div style="margin-bottom:7.5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Gesendet:</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> Montag, 08. Februar 2016 um 23:01 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Roychoudhuri, Chandra" <<a href="mailto:chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu">chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu</a>><br>
<b>An:</b> "Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion" <<a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>>, "Eric Reiter" <<a href="mailto:unquant@yahoo.com">unquant@yahoo.com</a>><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [General] De Broglie Wave<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div name="quoted-content">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt">To Wolf B., Al K. and the rest of our community: </span>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt">Wolf: A wide range of “optical antennas” are being worked upon by many:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><a href="http://www.optics.rochester.edu/workgroups/novotny/papers/novotny09b.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.optics.rochester.edu/workgroups/novotny/papers/novotny09b.pdf</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt">Al: <b><i>Huygens postulated that every point in space functions as a source for a new secondary wavelet</i></b>. This has been used by Fresnel to formulate the Huygens-Fresnel Diffraction Integral. Optical science and engineering
will simply collapse if you succeed in wiping out the knowledge of HF-integral out of all books and minds! It is because of this sustained success of Huygens postulate, I have added the new postulate (on that of Huygens) that space is a physical Complex Tension
Field (CTF; modified ether). CTF is capable of generating the oscillatory electric and magnetic potential gradients (your “source”) under proper external excitation. This oscillation is then perpetually pushed away as EM waves through CTF so it can locally
come back to its state of quiescence before the excitation. This is also the root of energy conservation. CTF is unable to assimilate EM wave energy, to the first degree. EM wave is some form of perturbation energy inserted in it by some physical dipole, already
existing in it as a localized structure. These dipoles also function as a sink for EM waves. This “merry-go-round” universe is being played in the CTF!</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt">Back to “Optical Antenna”. I refer to this phenomenon as detecting dipoles behaving as “quantum cups” in my book; based upon some of the resonance fluorescence experiment we have done. Atomic dipoles, in a low pressure tube, can
absorb energy out of 10 to 100-Lambda cubed volume from ALL the existing resonant waves within that volume. The parent tension field holding the energy as its oscillation is eager to donate the tension-perturbed energy to the dipole “sink”. I call the process
as simultaneous “push” by the tension field and “pull” by the resonant (sink) dipole. Light as “indivisible quanta” was a rebellious attempt by young Einstein to over-ride Herr Planck’s to get some serious attention; which he did get at the cost of thrusting
physics backward for a century. Planck’s life-long assertion that light consists of non-interacting and diffractively spreading waves; albeit being emitted and absorbed in discrete quantities in amounts “h-nu”. Single and get some attention; Even non-diffracting
Gamma keeps on delivering energy in a series of encounters with nucleon after nucleons.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt">Sincerely,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt">Chandra.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Wolfgang Baer<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, February 08, 2016 3:15 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>; Eric Reiter<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] De Broglie Wave</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
Al:<br>
Glad to hear you say "wave function collpase in any version is a bag of crap!"<br>
<br>
However to prove it we would need to build or design a simultaneous monte-carlo simulation analog probability computer that can simultaneously hold multiple scenarios as reversible branches which explore various possibilities and then physically pull back from
all but the chosen outcome.<br>
I think my brain and perhaps a quantum computer could work that way.<br>
<br>
Its a project I've been intending to follow-up on but perhaps it has already been done. References welcome.<br>
<br>
thanks<br>
wolf<br>
<br>
Also if atoms could be shown to act like resonance absorbing antennas then arrays of them would respond to wide area EM waves but only one would succeed in pulling in a quantum of energy. Its a version of Loading theory ( see Eric Reiters paper in te SPIE vol)
that could provide a physical mechanism for an EM wave collapse.<br>
<br>
wb<br>
<br>
Dr. Wolfgang Baer Research Director Nascent Systems Inc. tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432 E-mail
<a href="wolf@NascentInc.com" target="_parent">wolf@NascentInc.com</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
On 2/8/2016 11:48 AM, <a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Hi Hodge et al.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Well that's one way (and much more efficient one) of looking at it. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">However, I think your redition of wave function collapse is not the fully orthodox version which supposes that the collapse occures by agency of a sentient being. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">And, from Albrecht's point of view, the calculation of the band pattern done aforehand in accord with what he wants to call the conventional understanding should come out different than the actual
result. For him, the issue is inconsistence of the theory rather than mysterious lab results. I gather, he would agree that the pattern does not change for the moving observer and conclude that, that fact is symptomatic of inconsistency in the conventional
understanding of deB waves.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">FYI: I hold that wave function collpase in any version is a bag of crap! My arguments are fully given on
<a href="http://www.nonloco-physics.0catch.com" target="_blank">www.nonloco-physics.0catch.com</a>.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Best, Al</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid #C3D9E5 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 8.0pt;margin-left:7.5pt;margin-top:7.5pt;margin-right:3.75pt;margin-bottom:3.75pt">
<div style="margin-bottom:7.5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Gesendet:</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> Montag, 08. Februar 2016 um 19:03 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Hodge John" <a href="jchodge@frontier.com" target="_parent"><jchodge@frontier.com></a><br>
<b>An:</b> "Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion" <a href="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_parent">
<general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org></a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [General] De Broglie Wave</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">The screen is the "observer" that causes the collapse of the wavefunctin. A moving human will see bands. Will the bands be in a different position if the human is moving?
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1454954441262_2403">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<br>
<span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">On Monday, February 8, 2016 11:20 AM,
<a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">"af.kracklauer@web.de"</a> <a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">
<af.kracklauer@web.de></a> wrote:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div id="yiv9159182760">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Hi Albrecht:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Your challenge is easy! In fact my last responce covered it. The RELEVANT velocity is the relative velocity between the particle and the slit; not that between the observer-particle or observer-slit.
An observer will see all kinds of distortions of the events, starting with simple persepctive due to being at some distance from the slit and its registration screen. In additon this observer will see those deB waves affecting the particle (NOT from the
particle, nor from the slit, but from the universal background there before either the particle or slit came into being) as perspectively-relativistically distorted (twin-clock type distortion). BUT, the observer will still see the same over-all background
because the totality of background signals (not just those to which this particle is tuned), i.e., its spectral energy density, is itself Lorentz invariant. That is, the observer's motion does not enable it to empirically distinguish between the background
in the various frames, nor does the background engender friction forces.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">You have got to get your head around the idea that deB waves are independant of particles whatever their frame.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Schrördinger did toy with some aspects that deBroglie used, but never did succeed in rationalizing his eq. in those or any other terms. For him, when died, wave functions were ontologically completely
mysterious. From SED proponents, I'm told, my thoughts in #7 on <a href="http://www.nonloco-physics.0catch.com" target="_blank">
www.nonloco-physics.0catch.com</a>, are unique in formulating S's eq. in terms of deB concepts. Try it, maybe you'll like it. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">There are other SED-type stories too, but as they are based on diffusion (parabolic, not hyperbolic) precesses, I find them self contradictory.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">ciao, Al</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid #C3D9E5 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 8.0pt;margin-left:7.5pt;margin-top:7.5pt;margin-right:3.75pt;margin-bottom:3.75pt">
<div style="margin-bottom:7.5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Gesendet:</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> Montag, 08. Februar 2016 um 141 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Albrecht Giese" <a href="genmail@a-giese.de" target="_parent"><genmail@a-giese.de></a><br>
<b>An:</b> <a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_parent">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>, "Richard Gauthier"
<a href="richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_parent"><richgauthier@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [General] De Broglie Wave</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div id="yiv9159182760yqt88158">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Hi Al,<br>
<br>
if you follow de Broglie, you should have an explanation for the following experiment (here again):<br>
<br>
Electrons move at 0.1 c towards the double slit. Behind the double slit there is an interference pattern generated, which in the frame of the slit follows the rule of de Broglie. But now there is an observer also moving at 0.1 c parallel to the beam of electrons.
In his frame the electrons have momentum=0 and so wavelength=infinite. That means: No interference pattern. But there is in fact a pattern which does not disappear just because there is another observer. And the moving observer will see the pattern. - This
is a falsification of de Broglie's rule. What else?<br>
<br>
The understanding that the de Broglie wave is a property of the particle (even though depending on their speed, but not on an interaction) was not my idea but the one of Schrödinger and Dirac and many others. Also by de Broglie himself.<br>
<br>
Ciao Albrecht<br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Am 08.02.2016 um 03:30 schrieb
<a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Hi Albrecht:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">BUT, the laws of Physics for "being" in a frame are not the laws for interacting between frames! The deB. wave is not a feature of a particle in its own frame, but a feature of the interaction
of such a particle with at least one other particle in another frame. When the two frames are moving with respect to each other, then the features of the interaction cannot be Lorentz invariants. When one particle is interacting with another particle (or
ensemble---slit say) the relevant physics is determined by the deB wave in that sitation, whatever it looks like to an observer in a third frame with yet different relative velocities. It is a perspective effect: a tree is the same ontological size in fact
no matter how small it appears to distant observers. Observed diminished size(s) cannot be "invriant." Appearances =/= ,,so sein''.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">You have gotten your head stuck on the idea that deB. waves are characteristics intrinsic to particles in an of themselves. Recalibrate! DeB waves are charactteristics of the mutual interaction
of particles.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Best, Al</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid #C3D9E5 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 8.0pt;margin-left:7.5pt;margin-top:7.5pt;margin-right:3.75pt;margin-bottom:3.75pt">
<div style="margin-bottom:7.5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Gesendet:</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> Sonntag, 07. Februar 2016 um 22:10 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Albrecht Giese" <a href="genmail@a-giese.de" target="_parent"><genmail@a-giese.de></a><br>
<b>An:</b> <a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_parent">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>, "Richard Gauthier"
<a href="richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_parent"><richgauthier@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [General] De Broglie Wave</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Hi Al,<br>
<br>
at one of your points I really disagree. The physical laws have to be fulfilled in every frame. That means that all physical processes have to obey the same laws in all frames. So also the process at the double slit. But the rule given by de Broglie looks correct
in only one frame, that is the frame where the double slit is at rest. For an observer in motion the diffraction pattern looks very similar as for the observer at rest, but for the observer in motion the results according to de Broglie are completely different,
because the momentum of the particle is different in a wide range in the frame of a moving observer and so is the wavelength assigned to the particle.<br>
<br>
The specific case: At electron scattering, the observer co-moving with the electron will see a similar pattern as the observer at rest, but de Broglie says that for this observer there does not exist any pattern. That is strongly incorrect.<br>
<br>
The Schrödinger equation and also the Dirac function should have correct results in different frames, at least at non-relativistic speeds. This requirement is clearly violated through their use of de Broglie's rule.<br>
<br>
Grüße<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
PS: Your article refers to "Stochastic Electrodynamics". That is in my knowledge not standard physics and so a new assumption.<br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Am 07.02.2016 um 19:03 schrieb
<a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Hi Albrecht:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">In my view the story in my paper has no new assunptions, rather new words for old assumptions. As I, along with most others, see it, there is no conflict with experiment, but a less than fully
transparent explantion for experimental observations (particle beam diffrction) otherwise unexplained. At the time of writing, and nowadays too (although I'd to think that my paper rationalizes DeB's story) it was the most widely accepted story for this phenomna.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">The only entities that logically need to be Lorentz invariant are the particle. I the deB wave is not a 'Bestandteil' of the particle, but of its relations with its envionment, then invariance
is not defined nor useful.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">M.f.G. Al</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid #C3D9E5 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 8.0pt;margin-left:7.5pt;margin-top:7.5pt;margin-right:3.75pt;margin-bottom:3.75pt">
<div style="margin-bottom:7.5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Gesendet:</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> Sonntag, 07. Februar 2016 um 14:39 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Albrecht Giese" <a href="genmail@a-giese.de" target="_parent"><genmail@a-giese.de></a><br>
<b>An:</b> <a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_parent">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>, "Richard Gauthier"
<a href="richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_parent"><richgauthier@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [General] De Broglie Wave</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Hi Al,<br>
<br>
thank you for your reference. Your paper has a lot of intelligent thoughts but also a lot of additional assumptions. With reference to the de Broglie wave, I think, is the situation much simpler on the level of conservative knowledge. De Broglie has misunderstood
relativity (particularly dilation) and so seen a conflict which does in fact not exist. He has solved the conflict by inventing an additional "fictitious" wave which has no other foundation in physics, and also his "theorem of harmonic phases" which as well
is an invention without need. And his result is in conflict with the experiment if we ask for Lorentz invariance or even for Galilean invariance. - If we follow the basic idea of de Broglie by, however, avoiding his logical error about relativity, we come
easily to a description of matter waves without logical conflicts. This does not need new philosophy or other effort at this level.<br>
<br>
Best, Albrecht<br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Am 06.02.2016 um 03:15 schrieb
<a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Hi Albrecht:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">DeBroglie's verbage is indeed quite rococo! Nonetheless, his machinations, although verbalized, in the true tradtion of quantum mechanics, mysteriously, can be reinterpreted (i.e., alternate
verbage found without changing any of the math) so as to tell a fully, if (somewhat) hetrodoxical, story. See #11 on
<a href="http://www.Nonloco-Physics.0catch.com" target="_blank">www.Nonloco-Physics.0catch.com</a>.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">cc: Waves are never a characteristic of a single, point-like entity, but colletive motion of a medium. IF they exist at all. My view is that E&M waves are a fiction wrought by Fourier analysis.
The only real physical part is an "interaction", which mnight as well be thought of an absract string between charges. Also, neutrons have electric multipole moments; i.e., they are totally neutral but not charge-free. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Best, Al </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid #C3D9E5 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 8.0pt;margin-left:7.5pt;margin-top:7.5pt;margin-right:3.75pt;margin-bottom:3.75pt">
<div style="margin-bottom:7.5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Gesendet:</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> Freitag, 05. Februar 2016 um 21:43 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Albrecht Giese" <a href="genmail@a-giese.de" target="_parent"><genmail@a-giese.de></a><br>
<b>An:</b> <a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>,
<a href="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_parent">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> "Richard Gauthier" <a href="richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_parent"><richgauthier@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [General] De Broglie Wave</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Hi Al,<br>
<br>
true, in the frame of the particle the dB wavelength is infinite. Because in its own frame the momentum of the particle is 0. The particle oscillates with the frequency of the particle's Zitterbewegung (which background fields do you have in mind? De Brogie
does not mention them). This oscillation is in no contradiction with this wavelength as the phase speed is also infinite. For the imagination, the latter means that all points of that wave oscillate with the same phase at any point.<br>
<br>
Which background waves do you have in mind? What is the CNONOICAL momentum? And what about E&M interactions? De Broglie has not related his wave to a specific field. An E&M field would anyway have no effect in the case of neutron scattering for which the same
de Broglie formalism is used. And into which frame do you see the wave Lorentz-transformed?<br>
<br>
So, an electron in his frame has an infinite wavelength and in his frame has the double slit moving towards the particle. How can an interference at the slits occur? No interference can happen under these conditions. But, as I have explained in the paper, the
normal wave which accompanies the electron by normal rules (i.e. phase speed = c) will have an interference with its own reflection, which has then a wavelength which fits to the expectation of de Broglie. But that is a very local event (in a range of approx.
10^-12 m for the electron) and it is not at all a property of the electron as de Broglie has thought.<br>
<br>
To say it again: The de Broglie wavelength cannot be a steady property of the particle. But Schrödinger and Dirac have incorporated it into their QM equations with this understanding.<br>
<br>
If I should have misunderstood you, please show the mathematical calculations which you mean.<br>
<br>
Ciao, Albrecht<br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Am 05.02.2016 um 19:20 schrieb
<a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Hi: Albrecht:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Your arguments don't resonate with me. The deB' wave length is infinite in the particles frame: it is the standing wave formed by the inpinging background waves having a freq. = the particle's
Zitterbewegung. If these TWO waves are each Lorentz x-formed to another frame and added there, they exhibit exactly the DeB' modulation wavelength proportional to the particle's momentum. The only mysterious feature then is that the proportionality is to
the CNONICAL momentum, i.e., including the vector potential of whatever exterior E&M interactions are in-coming. Nevertheless, everything works our without contradiction. A particle oscillates in place at its Zitter freq. while the Zitter signals are modulated
by the DeB' wavelength as they move through slits, say.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">ciao, L</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid #C3D9E5 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 8.0pt;margin-left:7.5pt;margin-top:7.5pt;margin-right:3.75pt;margin-bottom:3.75pt">
<div style="margin-bottom:7.5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Gesendet:</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> Freitag, 05. Februar 2016 um 12:28 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Albrecht Giese" <a href="genmail@a-giese.de" target="_parent"><genmail@a-giese.de></a><br>
<b>An:</b> "Richard Gauthier" <a href="richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_parent"><richgauthier@gmail.com></a>,
<a href="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_parent">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [General] De Broglie Wave</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Hi Richard and Al, hi All,<br>
<br>
recently we had a discussion here about two topics:<br>
<br>
1. The functionality of the de Broglie wave, particularly its wavelength<br>
if seen from a different inertial system. Such cases lead to illogical<br>
situations.<br>
2. The problem of the apparent asymmetry at relativistic dilation.<br>
<br>
I have investigated these cases and found that they are in some way<br>
connected. Relativistic dilation is not as simple as it is normally<br>
taken. It looks asymmetric if it is incorrectly treated. An asymmetry<br>
would falsify Special Relativity. But it is in fact symmetrical if<br>
properly handled and understood.<br>
<br>
It is funny that both problems are connected to each other through the<br>
fact that de Broglie himself has misinterpreted dilation. From this<br>
incorrect understanding he did not find another way out than to invent<br>
his "theorem of phase harmony"; with all logical conflicts resulting<br>
from this approach.<br>
<br>
If relativity is properly understood, the problem seen by de Broglie<br>
does not exist. Equations regarding matter waves can be derived which<br>
work properly, i.e. conform to the experiments but avoid the logical<br>
conflicts.<br>
<br>
As announced, I have composed a paper about this. It can be found at:<br>
<br>
<a href="https://www.academia.edu/21564534/The_Conflict_with_the_De_Broglie_Wavelength" target="_blank">https://www.academia.edu/21564534/The_Conflict_with_the_De_Broglie_Wavelength</a><br>
.<br>
<br>
I thank Richard Gauthier for the discussion which we had about this<br>
topic. It caused me to investigate the problem and to find a solution.<br>
<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
---<br>
Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.<br>
<a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" target="_blank">https://www.avast.com/antivirus</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
<a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a><br>
<a href=<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="1" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0" style="border:none;border-top:solid #AAABB6 1.0pt">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="588" style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:15.0pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;line-height:13.5pt">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#41424E">Diese E-Mail wurde von einem virenfreien Computer gesendet, der von Avast geschützt wird.<br>
<a href="http://www.avast.com" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="1" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0" style="border:none;border-top:solid #AAABB6 1.0pt">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="588" style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:15.0pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;line-height:13.5pt">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#41424E">Diese E-Mail wurde von einem virenfreien Computer gesendet, der von Avast geschützt wird.<br>
<a href="http://www.avast.com" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="1" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0" style="border:none;border-top:solid #AAABB6 1.0pt">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="588" style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:15.0pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;line-height:13.5pt">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#41424E">Diese E-Mail wurde von einem virenfreien Computer gesendet, der von Avast geschützt wird.<br>
<a href="http://www.avast.com" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="1" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0" style="border:none;border-top:solid #AAABB6 1.0pt">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="588" style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:15.0pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;line-height:13.5pt">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#41424E">Diese E-Mail wurde von einem virenfreien Computer gesendet, der von Avast geschützt wird.<br>
<a href="http://www.avast.com" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div id="yqt32576">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
<a href="jchodge@frontier.com" target="_parent">jchodge@frontier.com</a><br>
<a href="<a 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>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<br>
<span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">_______________________________________________ If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
<a href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">
Click here to unsubscribe </a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre style="background:white">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white">If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="Wolf@nascentinc.com" target="_parent">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white"><a href=<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white">Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="background:white"></a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:white">
<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">_______________________________________________ If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion
List at <a href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">
Click here to unsubscribe </a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>