<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Hi Wolf,<br>
<br>
why do you think that I am frustrated? Why should I? Since I found
17 years ago the mechanism of inertia, which functions so straight
and logical with precise results, I am continuously happy. And the
appreciation by interested physicists is great. Since 14 years my
site about mass in internationally #1 in the internet. Only
sometimes the mass site of Nobel Prize winner Frank Wilzcek is one
step higher. But that is good companionship.<br>
<br>
True that it is a problem with Main Stream. They do not object but
just do not care. They love the Higgs model even though it is proven
not to work. - It just need patience. I still have it.<br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<big>
</big>Yes, quantum numbers work fine, but they are physically little
or not founded. It is similar to the known Pauli Principle. That
also works, but nobody knows why. And the bad thing is that nobody
from Main Stream concerned about this non-understanding. That is the
biggest weakness in today's physics in my view.<br>
<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 09.02.2016 um 20:35 schrieb Wolfgang
Baer:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:56BA3F8C.7000106@nascentinc.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
I can feel your frustration, Albrecht, <br>
The oldies are probably all wrong, but it's important to remember
that right or wrong they give us the platform from which to see
farther.<br>
"standing on the shoulders of others", and right or wrong they
give us something tangible to argue about<br>
and what quantum numbers have done for us to organize chemistry is
amazing.<br>
<br>
wolf<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/9/2016 10:18 AM, Albrecht Giese
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:56BA2D87.5090908@a-giese.de" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Hi Al,<br>
<br>
the choice of de Broglie is not suboptimal, it is clearly wrong.
Badly wrong. The wave he has introduced does not exist, and if
it would exist its behaviour would cause a physical behaviour
which is in conflict with measurements (if those are
comprehensively done).<br>
<br>
I agree with you that the main object now is to move forward.
But we will not move successfully forward if we carry millstones
with us. De Broglie's wave is a millstone. I just had a look
into a new textbook about QM, which was highly recommended by
our university. It makes full use of de Broglie's relation
between momentum and wavelength, so this is unfortunately not
just history. <br>
<br>
But looking into the history: Bohr, Sommerfeld and others have
used the result of de Broglie to explain quantum numbers.
Particularly the quantisation of the angular momentum on atomic
shells is explained by "standing waves" where the wavelength is
the one defined by dB. This obviously hides the true reason of
this quantisation, but as anyone believes that the Ansatz using
de Broglie is right, nobody is looking for the correct cause. -
This is one of the reasons for our sticking physics.<br>
<br>
Tschüss back<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 09.02.2016 um 14:57 schrieb <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a></a>:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:trinity-72537819-ce78-41a7-b82e-b4d7545f4651-1455026275771@3capp-webde-bs59"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: Verdana;font-size: 12.0px;">
<div>
<div>Hi Albrecht:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>As you fully know, the very same idea can be
expressed in various languages. This is true of physics
also. The very same structure can be attached to variuos
words and images. I do not defend deBroglie's choice of
words and images. I too find his choice suboptimal and
somewhat contrdictory. So what? He was playing his
hand at that time with the hand he was delt at that
time. Since then, other ideas have been found in the
deck, as it were. I find that, without changing any of
his math, one can tell a story that is vastly less
etherial and mysterious and, depending on the reader's
depth of analysis, less self-contradictory. I think my
story is the one DeBrogle would have told if he had been
inspired by some facits of SED. And, some people have a
greater affinty and interest in abstract structures, in
particular when their mathematical redintion seems to
work, that for the stories told for their explication.
This is particularly true of all things QM. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Anyway, the main object now (2016) is to move
forward, not critique historical personalitites. So,
I'm trying to contribute to this discussion by adding
what I know now, and what I have found to be useful. We
are "doing" physics, not history. Let's make new
errors, not just grind away on the old ones!</div>
<div> </div>
<div>BTW, to my info, both Dirac and Schrödinger would
agree that deBroglie proposed some not too cogent
arguments regarding the nature of QM-wave functions.
Still, the best there at that time. All the same, they
too went to their graves without having found a
satisfactory interpretation. SED throws some new
ingredients into the mix. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Tschuss, Al </div>
<div>
<div name="quote" style="margin:10px 5px 5px 10px;
padding: 10px 0 10px 10px; border-left:2px solid
#C3D9E5; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode:
space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
<div style="margin:0 0 10px 0;"><b>Gesendet:</b> Dienstag,
09. Februar 2016 um 13:41 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Albrecht Giese" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><genmail@a-giese.de></a></a><br>
<b>An:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>,
"Richard Gauthier" <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><richgauthier@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [General] De Broglie Wave</div>
<div name="quoted-content">
<div style="background-color: rgb(255,255,255);">Hi
Al,<br>
<br>
I have the impression that you have a solution for
particle scattering which is in some way related
to the idea of de Broglie. (I also have of course
a solution). But was this the goal of our
discussion and of my original contribution? It was
not! My objection was de Broglie's original idea
as stated in his thesis and as taken over by
Schrödinger and Dirac.<br>
<br>
You have a lot of elements in your argumentation
which I do not find in the thesis of de Broglie.
(There is e.g. nothing at dB about SED ore
background.)<br>
<br>
The essential point of our discussion is the
meaning of his wave - and his wavelength. I think
it is very obvious from his thesis (which you
clearly know) that his "fictitious wave"
accompanies a particle like the electron<i> all of
the time</i>. There is no interaction mentioned
except that there is an observer at rest who
measures the frequency of the particle. But
without influencing the particle.<br>
<br>
Now it is normal knowledge that a frequency and as
well a wavelength appears changed for an observer
who is in motion. This is caused by the Doppler
effect. But the Doppler effect will never cause
that a finite wavelength changes to Infinite if an
observer moves at some speed unequal to c. But
just that happens to the wave invented by de
Broglie. It follows the equation<br>
<br>
lambda = h/(m*v) where v is the speed
difference between the particle and the observer
(to say it this time this way). And this is in
conflict to any physics we know.<br>
<br>
Best, Albrecht<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 08.02.2016 um
17:20 schrieb <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>:</div>
<blockquote>
<div style="font-family: Verdana;font-size:
12.0px;">
<div>
<div>Hi Albrecht:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>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.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>You have got to get your head around
the idea that deB waves are independant of
particles whatever their frame.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>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
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.nonloco-physics.0catch.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.nonloco-physics.0catch.com">www.nonloco-physics.0catch.com</a></a>,
are unique in formulating S's eq. in terms
of deB concepts. Try it, maybe you'll
like it. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>There are other SED-type stories too,
but as they are based on diffusion
(parabolic, not hyperbolic) precesses, I
find them self contradictory.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>ciao, Al</div>
<div>
<div 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 style="margin: 0 0 10.0px 0;"><b>Gesendet:</b> Montag,
08. Februar 2016 um 141 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Albrecht Giese" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><genmail@a-giese.de></a></a><br>
<b>An:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="af.kracklauer@web.de"
target="_parent">af.kracklauer@web.de</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_parent">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>,
"Richard Gauthier" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><richgauthier@gmail.com></a></a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [General] De
Broglie Wave</div>
<div>
<div style="background-color:
rgb(255,255,255);">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>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am
08.02.2016 um 03:30 schrieb <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a></a>:</div>
<blockquote>
<div style="font-family:
Verdana;font-size: 12.0px;">
<div>
<div>Hi Albrecht:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>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''.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>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.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Best, Al</div>
<div>
<div 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 style="margin: 0 0
10.0px 0;"><b>Gesendet:</b> Sonntag,
07. Februar 2016 um
22:10 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Albrecht
Giese" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><genmail@a-giese.de></a></a><br>
<b>An:</b> <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a></a>,
"Richard Gauthier" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><richgauthier@gmail.com></a></a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re:
[General] De Broglie
Wave</div>
<div>
<div
style="background-color:
rgb(255,255,255);">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>
<div
class="moz-cite-prefix">Am
07.02.2016 um 19:03
schrieb <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a></a>:</div>
<blockquote>
<div
style="font-family:
Verdana;font-size:
12.0px;">
<div>
<div>Hi
Albrecht:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>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. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>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.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>M.f.G. Al</div>
<div>
<div
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
style="margin:
0 0 10.0px 0;"><b>Gesendet:</b> Sonntag,
07. Februar
2016 um 14:39
Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Albrecht
Giese" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><genmail@a-giese.de></a></a><br>
<b>An:</b> <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a></a>,
"Richard
Gauthier" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><richgauthier@gmail.com></a></a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re:
[General] De
Broglie Wave</div>
<div>
<div
style="background-color:
rgb(255,255,255);">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>
<div
class="moz-cite-prefix">Am
06.02.2016 um
03:15 schrieb
<a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a></a>:</div>
<blockquote>
<div
style="font-family:
Verdana;font-size:
12.0px;">
<div>
<div>Hi
Albrecht:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>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
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.Nonloco-Physics.0catch.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.Nonloco-Physics.0catch.com">www.Nonloco-Physics.0catch.com</a></a>.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>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. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Best,
Al </div>
<div>
<div
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
style="margin:
0 0 10.0px 0;"><b>Gesendet:</b> Freitag,
05. Februar
2016 um 21:43
Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Albrecht
Giese" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><genmail@a-giese.de></a></a><br>
<b>An:</b> <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a></a>,
<a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> "Richard
Gauthier" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><richgauthier@gmail.com></a></a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re:
[General] De
Broglie Wave</div>
<div>
<div
style="background-color:
rgb(255,255,255);">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>
<div
class="moz-cite-prefix">Am
05.02.2016 um
19:20 schrieb
<a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a></a>:</div>
<blockquote>
<div
style="font-family:
Verdana;font-size:
12.0px;">
<div>
<div>Hi:
Albrecht:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>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.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>ciao, L</div>
<div>
<div
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
style="margin:
0 0 10.0px 0;"><b>Gesendet:</b> Freitag,
05. Februar
2016 um 12:28
Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "Albrecht
Giese" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><genmail@a-giese.de></a></a><br>
<b>An:</b> "Richard
Gauthier" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><richgauthier@gmail.com></a></a>,
<a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a></a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re:
[General] De
Broglie Wave</div>
<div>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
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.academia.edu/21564534/The_Conflict_with_the_De_Broglie_Wavelength"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.academia.edu/21564534/The_Conflict_with_the_De_Broglie_Wavelength">https://www.academia.edu/21564534/The_Conflict_with_the_De_Broglie_Wavelength</a></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
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus">https://www.avast.com/antivirus</a></a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no
longer wish to
receive
communication
from the
Nature of
Light and
Particles
General
Discussion
List at <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a></a><br>
<a href=<a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a></a>><br>
Click here to
unsubscribe<br>
</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<table
style="border-top:
1.0px solid
rgb(170,171,182);">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td
style="width:
470.0px;padding-top:
20.0px;color:
rgb(65,66,78);font-size:
13.0px;font-family:
Arial ,
Helvetica ,
sans-serif;line-height:
18.0px;">Diese
E-Mail wurde
von einem
virenfreien
Computer
gesendet, der
von Avast
geschützt
wird.<br>
<a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.avast.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.avast.com">www.avast.com</a></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<table
style="border-top:
1.0px solid
rgb(170,171,182);">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td
style="width:
470.0px;padding-top:
20.0px;color:
rgb(65,66,78);font-size:
13.0px;font-family:
Arial ,
Helvetica ,
sans-serif;line-height:
18.0px;">Diese
E-Mail wurde
von einem
virenfreien
Computer
gesendet, der
von Avast
geschützt
wird.<br>
<a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.avast.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.avast.com">www.avast.com</a></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<table
style="border-top:
1.0px solid
rgb(170,171,182);">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td
style="width:
470.0px;padding-top:
20.0px;color:
rgb(65,66,78);font-size:
13.0px;font-family:
Arial ,
Helvetica ,
sans-serif;line-height:
18.0px;">Diese
E-Mail wurde
von einem
virenfreien
Computer
gesendet, der
von Avast
geschützt
wird.<br>
<a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.avast.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.avast.com">www.avast.com</a></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<table style="border-top: 1.0px
solid rgb(170,171,182);">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width:
470.0px;padding-top:
20.0px;color:
rgb(65,66,78);font-size:
13.0px;font-family: Arial ,
Helvetica ,
sans-serif;line-height:
18.0px;">Diese E-Mail wurde
von einem virenfreien
Computer gesendet, der von
Avast geschützt wird.<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email"
style="color:
rgb(68,83,234);"
target="_blank">www.avast.com</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<table style="border-top: 1.0px solid
rgb(170,171,182);">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width: 470.0px;padding-top:
20.0px;color: rgb(65,66,78);font-size:
13.0px;font-family: Arial , Helvetica ,
sans-serif;line-height: 18.0px;">Diese
E-Mail wurde von einem virenfreien
Computer gesendet, der von Avast geschützt
wird.<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email"
style="color: rgb(68,83,234);"
target="_blank">www.avast.com</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<table style="border-top: 1px solid #aaabb6;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 20px; color:
#41424e; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif; line-height: 18px;">Diese E-Mail wurde von
einem virenfreien Computer gesendet, der von Avast
geschützt wird. <br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email" target="_blank"
style="color: #4453ea;">www.avast.com</a> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a>
<a href=<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br />
<table style="border-top: 1px solid #aaabb6;">
<tr>
<td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 20px; color: #41424e; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 18px;">Diese E-Mail wurde von einem virenfreien Computer gesendet, der von Avast geschützt wird. <br /><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email" target="_blank" style="color: #4453ea;">www.avast.com</a> </td>
</tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>