<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Hello Richard,<br>
<br>
I confirm your calculations. You find most of them on my web site
about mass. However, the logical sequence is different for my model
than you present it here.<br>
<br>
The first logical step is to show that any extended object has
inertia. This (again) is the consequence of the fact that the
constituents of an extended object are bound to each other by forces
(attracting and repelling forces) which propagate at c. <br>
<br>
The next step is to assume an appropriate shape of that field. I
have combined both steps in the way that I have assumed from the
beginning a specific shape. If an appropriate field is chosen, then
the result of the calculation is Newton's law of motion. If some
other shape is chosen, there will be as well inertia, but it will
not fulfil Newton.<br>
<br>
I do NOT use the Bohr magneton to explain mass. On the contrary, my
model has a derivation of the Bohr magneton (classically, without
any QM). I only use the according measurements in order to calibrate
the force. (The result of the calibration is that the force is about
300 times stronger than the electric force.)<br>
<br>
The dynamical mass of the photon can be deduced from the assumption
that also the photon has an extension. The easiest assumption is
that it is built by 2 or 4 sub-particles. The sub-particles must
have positive and negative electric charges, balanced out. The
photon is neutral seen from the outside but reacts to electric
charges. That would be otherwise not possible.<br>
<br>
Any more questions to this?<br>
<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 10.02.2016 um 20:25 schrieb Richard
Gauthier:+<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:51DFAE65-03E1-439F-8E46-CBE8A2684F6D@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<div class="">Hello Albrecht,</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""> The reason your formula m=hbar/Rc works so well
to derive the electron’s mass m is that if you solve it for R
you get R= hbar/mc = 1/2pi h/mc . This radius R is the
radius of a circle whose circumference is one Compton wavelength
h/mc (the wavelength of a photon having the energy E=mc^2 of a
resting electron.) If the electron’s charge magnitude e moves
at light-speed in a single loop circle of this circumference
h/mc (corresponding to a photon momentum of mc), the magnetic
moment that is generated by this circulating light-speed
electric charge is EXACTLY the Bohr magneton ehbar/2m . Check
this using M = I A if you don’t believe me. So when you find
that 2 pi R = lambda in your Powerpoint slide , this is just
saying that lambda is the circumference of a circle which has R
as its radius. This calculation has no bearing on the size or
inertial mass of a photon. Plus, there is no experimental
evidence that a photon consists of either 2 or 4 particles, just
one (same as for the electron). Your derivation of the
electron's inertia seems to ignore that your two massless
light-speed particles move in an orbit of circumference one
Compton wavelength h/mc which generates the Bohr magneton
ehbar/2m . So it’s no surprise at all (and no genuine derivation
of the electron’s mass) to derive the electron’s mass m from the
Bohr magneton ehbar/2m in your electron model. You have no
photon model and no derivation of a photon’s inertial mass. And
your 2-particle electron model, though it has given you much
satisfaction over the years, and rightly so as it is your
original mental creation, is unfortunately a non-starter in
serious physics.</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class=""> Richard</div>
<br class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Feb 10, 2016, at 9:57 AM, Albrecht Giese <<a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a></a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type" class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class=""> <font
class="" color="#990000">Sorry! I have forgotten the
attachment. Now included.</font><br class="">
<br class="">
Hello Richard,<br class="">
<br class="">
good question!<br class="">
<br class="">
My model works originally for leptons and for quarks. The
photon is somewhat different visible through the different
spin. So, I am not sure that the photon can be described
by two sub-particles, maybe the description needs four
sub-particles. But this means only a limited correction
factor.<br class="">
<br class="">
For the determination of the mass, the model needs the
size of the particle. For the electron I have determined
the size from the magnetic moment. In case of the photon
the wavelength can be taken as a measure for the size. If
the wavelength is inserted into the equation for mass,
then the dynamical mass (equivalently the energy) is the
result. And that fits well.<br class="">
<br class="">
I have attached two pages of my power-point presentation
in San Diego. There you can see the calculation. The
calculation is done there the other way around. I start
with the energy, convert it to the mass and show that the
resulting size of the photon corresponds to its
wavelength. - In case of any questions, please ask.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Albrecht<br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 10.02.2016 um 17:41
schrieb Richard Gauthier:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:F6673E1F-3E91-4561-BB0F-3F4970273CB3@gmail.com"
type="cite" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252" class="">
<div class="">Hello Albrecht,</div>
<div class=""> If you have solved the problem of
inertia, then the inertial mass of a photon should
also be explainable by your two-particle electron
model. Is it?</div>
<div class=""> Richard</div>
<br class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Feb 10, 2016, at 5:13 AM, Albrecht
Giese <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type" class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class=""> Hi
Wolf,<br class="">
<br class="">
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 class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
class="">
<big class=""> </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 class="">
<br class="">
Albrecht<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 09.02.2016 um
20:35 schrieb Wolfgang Baer:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:56BA3F8C.7000106@nascentinc.com"
type="cite" class="">
<meta content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type" class="">
I can feel your frustration, Albrecht, <br
class="">
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 class="">
"standing on the shoulders of others", and
right or wrong they give us something tangible
to argue about<br class="">
and what quantum numbers have done for us to
organize chemistry is amazing.<br class="">
<br class="">
wolf<br class="">
<br class="">
<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 class="">
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:56BA2D87.5090908@a-giese.de"
type="cite" class="">
<meta content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type" class="">
Hi Al,<br class="">
<br class="">
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 class="">
<br class="">
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 class="">
<br class="">
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 class="">
<br class="">
Tschüss back<br class="">
Albrecht<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<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
class="">
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:trinity-72537819-ce78-41a7-b82e-b4d7545f4651-1455026275771@3capp-webde-bs59"
type="cite" class="">
<div style="font-family:
Verdana;font-size: 12.0px;" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">Hi Albrecht:</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">Tschuss, Al </div>
<div class="">
<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;" class="">
<div style="margin:0 0 10px 0;"
class=""><b class="">Gesendet:</b> Dienstag,
09. Februar 2016 um 13:41 Uhr<br
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">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 class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">Betreff:</b> Re:
[General] De Broglie Wave</div>
<div name="quoted-content"
class="">
<div style="background-color:
rgb(255,255,255);" class="">Hi
Al,<br class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
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 class="">
<br class="">
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
class=""> 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
class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
Best, Albrecht<br class="">
<br class="">
<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="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a>:</div>
<blockquote class="">
<div style="font-family:
Verdana;font-size:
12.0px;" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">Hi
Albrecht:</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">You have
got to get your head
around the idea that
deB waves are
independant of
particles whatever
their frame.</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">ciao, Al</div>
<div class="">
<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);"
class="">
<div style="margin:
0 0 10.0px 0;"
class=""><b
class="">Gesendet:</b> Montag,
08. Februar 2016
um 141 Uhr<br
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">Betreff:</b> Re:
[General] De
Broglie Wave</div>
<div class="">
<div
style="background-color:
rgb(255,255,255);" class="">Hi Al,<br class="">
<br class="">
if you follow de
Broglie, you
should have an
explanation for
the following
experiment (here
again):<br
class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
Ciao Albrecht<br
class="">
<br class="">
<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
class="">
<div
style="font-family:
Verdana;font-size:
12.0px;"
class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">Hi
Albrecht:</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">Best,
Al</div>
<div class="">
<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);"
class="">
<div
style="margin:
0 0 10.0px 0;"
class=""><b
class="">Gesendet:</b> Sonntag,
07. Februar
2016 um 22:10
Uhr<br
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">Betreff:</b> Re:
[General] De
Broglie Wave</div>
<div class="">
<div
style="background-color:
rgb(255,255,255);" class="">Hi Al,<br class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
Grüße<br
class="">
Albrecht<br
class="">
<br class="">
PS: Your
article refers
to "Stochastic
Electrodynamics".
That is in my
knowledge not
standard
physics and so
a new
assumption.<br
class="">
<br class="">
<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
class="">
<div
style="font-family:
Verdana;font-size:
12.0px;"
class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">Hi
Albrecht:</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">M.f.G.
Al</div>
<div class="">
<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);"
class="">
<div
style="margin:
0 0 10.0px 0;"
class=""><b
class="">Gesendet:</b> Sonntag,
07. Februar
2016 um 14:39
Uhr<br
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">Betreff:</b> Re:
[General] De
Broglie Wave</div>
<div class="">
<div
style="background-color:
rgb(255,255,255);" class="">Hi Al,<br class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
Best, Albrecht<br
class="">
<br class="">
<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
class="">
<div
style="font-family:
Verdana;font-size:
12.0px;"
class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">Hi
Albrecht:</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">Best,
Al </div>
<div class="">
<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);"
class="">
<div
style="margin:
0 0 10.0px 0;"
class=""><b
class="">Gesendet:</b> Freitag,
05. Februar
2016 um 21:43
Uhr<br
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">Betreff:</b> Re:
[General] De
Broglie Wave</div>
<div class="">
<div
style="background-color:
rgb(255,255,255);" class="">Hi Al,<br class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
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
class="">
<br class="">
If I should
have
misunderstood
you, please
show the
mathematical
calculations
which you
mean.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Ciao, Albrecht<br
class="">
<br class="">
<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
class="">
<div
style="font-family:
Verdana;font-size:
12.0px;"
class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">Hi:
Albrecht:</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">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 class=""> </div>
<div class="">ciao,
L</div>
<div class="">
<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);"
class="">
<div
style="margin:
0 0 10.0px 0;"
class=""><b
class="">Gesendet:</b> Freitag,
05. Februar
2016 um 12:28
Uhr<br
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">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
class="">
<b class="">Betreff:</b> Re:
[General] De
Broglie Wave</div>
<div class="">Hi
Richard and
Al, hi All,<br
class="">
<br class="">
recently we
had a
discussion
here about two
topics:<br
class="">
<br class="">
1. The
functionality
of the de
Broglie wave,
particularly
its wavelength<br
class="">
if seen from a
different
inertial
system. Such
cases lead to
illogical<br
class="">
situations.<br
class="">
2. The problem
of the
apparent
asymmetry at
relativistic
dilation.<br
class="">
<br class="">
I have
investigated
these cases
and found that
they are in
some way<br
class="">
connected.
Relativistic
dilation is
not as simple
as it is
normally<br
class="">
taken. It
looks
asymmetric if
it is
incorrectly
treated. An
asymmetry<br
class="">
would falsify
Special
Relativity.
But it is in
fact
symmetrical if<br
class="">
properly
handled and
understood.<br
class="">
<br class="">
It is funny
that both
problems are
connected to
each other
through the<br
class="">
fact that de
Broglie
himself has
misinterpreted
dilation. From
this<br
class="">
incorrect
understanding
he did not
find another
way out than
to invent<br
class="">
his "theorem
of phase
harmony"; with
all logical
conflicts
resulting<br
class="">
from this
approach.<br
class="">
<br class="">
If relativity
is properly
understood,
the problem
seen by de
Broglie<br
class="">
does not
exist.
Equations
regarding
matter waves
can be derived
which<br
class="">
work properly,
i.e. conform
to the
experiments
but avoid the
logical<br
class="">
conflicts.<br
class="">
<br class="">
As announced,
I have
composed a
paper about
this. It can
be found at:<br
class="">
<br class="">
<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
class="">
.<br class="">
<br class="">
I thank
Richard
Gauthier for
the discussion
which we had
about this<br
class="">
topic. It
caused me to
investigate
the problem
and to find a
solution.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Albrecht<br
class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
---<br
class="">
Diese E-Mail
wurde von
Avast
Antivirus-Software
auf Viren
geprüft.<br
class="">
<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
class="">
<br class="">
_______________________________________________<br class="">
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 class="">
<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
class="">
Click here to
unsubscribe<br
class="">
</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<table
style="border-top:
1.0px solid
rgb(170,171,182);"
class="">
<tbody
class="">
<tr class="">
<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;"
class="">Diese
E-Mail wurde
von einem
virenfreien
Computer
gesendet, der
von Avast
geschützt
wird.<br
class="">
<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);"
class="">
<tbody
class="">
<tr class="">
<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;"
class="">Diese
E-Mail wurde
von einem
virenfreien
Computer
gesendet, der
von Avast
geschützt
wird.<br
class="">
<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);"
class="">
<tbody
class="">
<tr class="">
<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;"
class="">Diese
E-Mail wurde
von einem
virenfreien
Computer
gesendet, der
von Avast
geschützt
wird.<br
class="">
<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);"
class="">
<tbody
class="">
<tr class="">
<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;"
class="">Diese
E-Mail wurde
von einem
virenfreien
Computer
gesendet, der
von Avast
geschützt
wird.<br
class="">
<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);" class="">
<tbody class="">
<tr class="">
<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;" class="">Diese
E-Mail wurde von einem
virenfreien Computer
gesendet, der von
Avast geschützt wird.<br
class="">
<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>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<table style="border-top: 1px solid
#aaabb6;" class="">
<tbody class="">
<tr class="">
<td style="width: 470px; padding-top:
20px; color: #41424e; font-size:
13px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif; line-height: 18px;"
class="">Diese E-Mail wurde von
einem virenfreien Computer gesendet,
der von Avast geschützt wird. <br
class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email"
target="_blank" style="color:
#4453ea;" class="">www.avast.com</a>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br class="">
<pre class="" 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 class="">
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br class="">
<pre class="" 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:phys@a-giese.de">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a moz-do-not-send="true" 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 class="">
<br class="">
<table style="border-top: 1px solid #aaabb6;"
class="">
<tbody class="">
<tr class="">
<td style="width: 470px; padding-top:
20px; color: #41424e; font-size: 13px;
font-family: Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif; line-height: 18px;" class="">Diese
E-Mail wurde von einem virenfreien
Computer gesendet, der von Avast
geschützt wird. <br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email"
target="_blank" style="color:
#4453ea;" class="">www.avast.com</a> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br
class="">
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:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a><br
class="">
<a href="<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
class="">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br
class="">
Click here to unsubscribe<br class="">
</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<table style="border-top: 1px solid #aaabb6;" class="">
<tbody class="">
<tr class="">
<td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 20px; color:
#41424e; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,
Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 18px;"
class="">Diese E-Mail wurde von einem virenfreien
Computer gesendet, der von Avast geschützt wird. <br
class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email"
target="_blank" style="color: #4453ea;" class="">www.avast.com</a>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<span
id="cid:D9074734-A5E7-4DBA-BE8D-7B1BED835F7E@hsd1.ca.comcast.net."><Photon_mass.pptx></span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</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>