<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div>Dear Albrecht and Chip,<br><b><br></b></div><b>Regarding </b><span style="color:black"><b>Fs = Fe α: </b><br><br></span></div><span style="color:black">No one would expect or claim that the resonance of a block of wood would have the same restoring force relations as an electron about its nuclei. So why should the Planck constant control both atomic-electron (EM) and nuclear forces (resonances) of an atom.<br><br></span></div><span style="color:black">The anomalous solution to the relativistic-Schrodinger and Dirac equations has angular momentum quantum numbers that are about hbar/100 apart. If QM is based on h alone (which it shouldn't be, since it is wave mechanics regardless of the source of waves), then it is no surprise that QM has problems at the nuclear level. The physics associated with the atomic-electron levels is different from that associated with highly relativistic electrons at the nuclear level.<br><br></span></div><span style="color:black">QM states that the atomic-electron ground state is the energy minimum. <b>It is not</b>. It, like all stable levels, is one of many minima. It <b>is</b>, however, a minimum for photonic energy transfer, since a photon requires angular momentum of hbar to exist and deeper electron levels do not have sufficient angular momentum with which to form a photon. The </span><span style="color:black"><span style="color:black">selection rule for </span>zero-to-zero ang mom transitions is that they are highly forbidden. However, if there are wave forms based on a different constant (say </span><span style="color:black">'α hbar', then a new set of levels can exist within the limit of <i>l</i> = 0. It is standard physics to combine spin and orbital ang mom. Approximations are made for spin-dominated and orbit-dominated regimes. Why stop there? The symmetry-breaking of relativity introduces a non-linearity that both produces the discrete deep levels (separated with small ang mom) and increases the effective Coulomb potential to the magnitude of nuclear strong -force potential levels. It might even give the quark story a basis.<br><br></span></div><span style="color:black">We will be publishing the 1st part of this story in the near future. If anyone is interested in the deep-electron orbitals (binding energy in the 1/2 MeV range), as predicted by the relativistic QM equations, I will post a draft of the paper, when it is complete.<br><br></span></div><div><span style="color:black">This difference between resonance constants actually has an impact on the understanding of photons and perhaps on electrons.<br></span></div><div><span style="color:black"><br></span></div><span style="color:black">Andrew<br></span></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 11:03 PM, Albrecht Giese <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de" target="_blank">genmail@a-giese.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Hi Chip,<br>
<br>
I fully agree to your considerations and conclusions. It follows
(also) from my model that the fine structure constant alpha shows
the relation between the electric force and the strong force. And
the consequence is as well that the strong force plays a much bigger
role in the physical world than it is assumed up to now.<br>
<br>
But are you aware that this is in strict conflict with main stream
physics? In traditional textbooks as well as at Wikipedia it is said
that alpha means the coupling between electric charges. Also the
original use of the constant, introduced by Arnold Sommerfeld, was
to explain fine structures in atomic spectra. (The origin of the
name.) But recently I have also found a textbook with your
explanations (which is also mine.) <br>
<br>
How or where did you find this? I am wondering how long it will take
that main stream will accept this.<br>
<br>
Greetings<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<br>
<div>Am 13.02.2016 um 16:39 schrieb Chip
Akins:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Hi All<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">An issue has
become interesting regarding the fine structure constant.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">We observe
the fine structure constant in many different ways. It is a
prevailing constant which is uniquely and widely manifest.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">It is
understood that the fine structure constant is simply the
difference in strength between the EM force (Fe) and the
Strong force (Fs). <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Fs = Fe α.
And Fe = Fs/α. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">It seems we
may have overlooked the possibility that what we call the
nuclear strong force is present in many more circumstances
than we previously assumed.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">So it seems
that for every instance where we observe the fine structure
α, <b>both</b> of these forces must be at play, or there
must be a force equal to the strength of the strong nuclear
force, which we have not previously recognized.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Thoughts?
Comments?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Chip<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><b>From:</b>
General
[<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>John Macken<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, February 12, 2016 5:11 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles
<a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank"><general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [General] Gravitational Waves and de
Broglie Waves<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Hello Everyone, <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>It has been some time since
I have contributed to the discussion but I now have
something new to say because of the historic gravitational
wave announcement yesterday. It may seem as if gravitational
waves are far removed from particles, forces and de Broglie
waves, but in my world there is a strong connection. There
has been a lot of discussion in the group about the
properties of spacetime. However, the discussion has
largely ignored all the work done on gravitational waves.
These waves propagate in the medium of spacetime and they
reveal a lot of concrete information about the properties of
spacetime. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Until yesterday there has
been a lot of doubt about whether the theoretically
predicted properties of gravitational waves were correct.
Serious efforts to detect gravitational waves have been
unsuccessful for over more than 25. We now know that the
problem was that the detectors were not sensitive enough
rather than a mistake in the concept or equations. A few
weeks after the sensitivity of LIGO was increased by a
factor of 3, they detected the first gravitational wave.
The first signal detected came from two black holes merging
about 1.3 billion years ago. The detected pattern exactly
matches the theoretical wave pattern predicted for the
merging of two black holes. The signal was a strain wave in
spacetime which had a frequency chirp from about 30 Hz to
about 250 Hz. The following link is the first official
technical paper on the subject (note the hundreds of
authors) : <a href="https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102" target="_blank">https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>The details about the
emitted and detected waves gives support to the model of the
universe that I have been proposing. I want to make several
points.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#444444"><span>1)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><span style="color:#444444">There is now no doubt that the
impedance of spacetime is Z<sub>s</sub> =<i> c</i><sup>3</sup>/<i>G</i>
= 4 x 10<sup>35</sup> kg/s. This comes from gravitational
wave equations. This impedance has been known to the
community of scientists working on gravitational waves for a
long time (references available). However, now all
physicists must admit that spacetime has this important
property. I claim that all the quantum mechanical wave
properties can be analyzed using the impedance of
spacetime. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#444444"><span>2)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><span style="color:#444444">This large impedance implies that
spacetime is not an empty void. This impedance is a
measurable property of spacetime that is about 28 orders of
magnitude larger than the impedance of steel. An empty void
would have no impedance. Also impedance implies an elastic
medium which has the ability to absorb energy and return
energy to a propagating wave. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#444444"><span>3)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><span style="color:#444444">The model of the vacuum that I have
proposed fits perfectly with this impedance. Quantum
mechanics implies that there is a Planck length uncertainty
in the distance between points and a Planck time uncertainty
in the time dimension. If this is modeled as waves in
spacetime which are continuously modulating distance by
Planck length and modulating the rate of time by Planck
time, then suddenly everything fits. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#444444"><span>4)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><span style="color:#444444">Using gravitational wave equations and
the impedance of spacetime, it is possible to test the
hypothesis that spacetime is really filled with these small
amplitude waves. I have shown that zero point energy
exactly fits this model.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#444444"><span>5)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><span style="color:#444444">All the forces are explained not by
mysterious virtual photons and mysterious gravitons but by
waves and distortions of this “spacetime field”. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#444444"><span>6)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><span style="color:#444444">Using quantifiable properties of
spacetime and Planck length/time waves, it is possible to
move from hand waving models of particles, fields and de
Broglie waves to models which can be mathematically analyzed
and tested. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span style="color:#444444"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Previously I was not clear
enough about whether these waves filling spacetime fit the
definition of being true “energy density”. Suppose that we
assume that the definition of “observable” energy is: <i>E</i><sup>2</sup>
= (<i>mc</i><sup>2</sup>)<sup>2</sup> + (<i>pc</i>)<sup>2</sup>.
All the fermions and bosons meet this definition of being
observable energy. I claim that the difference between
observable energy density (fermions and bosons) and the
unobservable energy density of the waves in spacetime is
that observable energy possess quantized angular momentum
(spin) while unobservable energy does not possess spin.
These Planck length/time waves have energy-like properties
such as a frequency, wave amplitude and encounter the
impedance of spacetime, but without quantized angular
momentum they do not interact with fermions and bosons in a
detectable way. These Planck length/time waves are the most
perfect superfluid possible. Their presence is felt because
they are responsible for giving spacetime constants such as:
<i>c</i>, <i>G</i>, </span><span>ħ</span><span>, ε<sub>o</sub> and <i>Z</i><sub>s</sub>.
Also these small amplitude waves are responsible for
uncertainty and probabilistic characteristics of quantum
mechanics.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>If you treat these waves as
if they had quantized angular momentum (spin), then the
maximum energy density of spacetime would be about 10<sup>113</sup>
J/m<sup>3</sup>. However, without angular momentum to make
them quantized, the vacuum appears to be an empty void which
possesses mysterious physical properties. The moment that
new angular momentum is introduced into spacetime, then some
of the incomplete energy density of the Planck length/time
waves in spacetime becomes complete and observable. For
example, two spiraling black holes introduce the missing
angular momentum to some of the waves in spacetime and they
become observable gravitational waves. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>I want to use information
from the above referenced gravitational wave paper to
support the contention that spacetime is filled with small
amplitude waves. According to this cited paper, the peak
power emitted by these black holes as they were merging was
3.6 x 10<sup>49</sup> watts. This is a tremendous power
which approaches Planck power. It is possible to drill
deeper and analyze the forces involved in the emission of
this power. Energy is force times distance. Power (P) is
force (F) divided by speed (v). We know the power emitted
(3.6 x 10<sup>49</sup> watts) and the paper gives the
maximum speed as about ½ the speed of light. Therefore the
implied force retarding these two merging black holes is
about: <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>F = P/v = 3.6 x 10<sup>49</sup>
w/1.5 x 10<sup>8</sup> m/s = 2.4 x 10<sup>40</sup> N. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Another calculation can be
made of the energy density of gravitational waves leaving
the surface of the black holes at the speed of light. This
calculation gives the emitted energy density propagating
through the spacetime near the Schwarzschild radius as
roughly 2 x 10<sup>29</sup> J/m<sup>3</sup>. This is more
than 10<sup>8</sup> times greater than the <i>E</i> = <i>mc</i><sup>2</sup>
energy density of osmium. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>An interpretation of
Einstein’s field equation is that there is a maximum
possible force which is: (1/8π)c<sup>4</sup>/G = 4.8 x 10<sup>42</sup>
N. Therefore the retarding force on the merging black holes
is about 2 orders of magnitude less than the maximum
possible force. The conservation of momentum says that
every force requires an equal and opposite reaction. What
is the opposite reaction in this case? It is easy to say
that momentum is being transferred to the emitted
gravitational waves, but then the question becomes: What is
physically happening in spacetime that allows space to carry
away this large a force and power? If spacetime is
visualized as an empty void, then the only explanation is
that the force is being transferred to gravitons. The more
widely accepted explanation of gravity is that gravity is a
geometrical effect and not a true force. However this
explanation is inadequate because geometry cannot extract a
power of 10<sup>49</sup> watts and a force of 10<sup>48</sup>
N. Even claiming that gravitons exist and carry away the
power is a problem. The paper is also able to place a limit
on the Compton wavelength of gravitons (if they exist). The
finding is that a graviton must have a Compton wavelength
greater than 10<sup>16</sup> m which is a wavelength greater
than 1 light year. This obviously seems incompatible with
the emission time and frequency of the gravitational waves.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>If spacetime is filled with
Planck length/time waves which have an incomplete energy
density of about 10<sup>113</sup> J/m<sup>3</sup>, then it
is easy to see where the power and offsetting force comes
from. The gravitational waves are distorting the tremendous
incomplete energy density of the spacetime field and making
it complete by adding angular momentum. This addition then
completes the requirements for the vacuum fluctuations to
become observable energy density which can transfer momentum
and remove energy. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>What does all of this have
to do with particles, forces and de Broglie waves? Actually
I claim that all wave activity in quantum mechanics
ultimately is connected to the impedance of spacetime and
the Planck length/time waves that fill spacetime. I will be
writing a technical paper which explains this in more detail
and uses gravitational waves as numerical examples.
However, it is possible to find the answers if you combine
what has been said in this post with the information in two
attached papers. I suggest reading the “foundation” paper
first if you are interested. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>John M.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div></div></div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" target="_blank">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">"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">
<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 href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email" style="color:#4453ea" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com">mules333@gmail.com</a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>