<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
There seems to be a lot of discussion about redefining particles and
phenomena in terms of something circulating<br>
Photons, Albrecht's charges , etc.<br>
Does this reflect a trend, perhaps something more fundamental ? <br>
<br>
Can any of these efforts be related to String Theory Loops, or
Cycles of action?<br>
<br>
Wolf<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/1/2016 1:27 AM, John Duffield
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:000f01d1a383$46ed38d0$d4c7aa70$@btconnect.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]-->
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.im
{mso-style-name:im;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1971089654;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-2103700790 134807567 134807577 134807579 134807567 134807577 134807579 134807567 134807577 134807579;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">1.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">displacement
current. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"
lang="EN-US"> General
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:general-bounces+johnduffield=btconnect.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+johnduffield=btconnect.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Albrecht Giese<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 30 April 2016 17:48<br>
<b>To:</b> Richard Gauthier
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><richgauthier@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org></a>;
Mark, Martin van der
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:martin.van.der.mark@philips.com"><martin.van.der.mark@philips.com></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] inertia<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p>Hallo Richard,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>you are making good calculations. However, some questions are
still open:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>1. What does the photon make to move on a circuit? A charge
can only be the cause if there is another charge attracting
this one. Or a corresponding permanent field. I do not see it
in your model. - If the reason is that the photon is curling
up, which mechanism makes it to curl up?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>2. You say that inertia and momentum is essentially the
same. I agree. But if you refer the inertial mass of the
electron to the momentum of the circling photon, this is by
itself not an explanation. There has to be a mechanism which
causes your charged photon to have a momentum. For this
question I could also not find an answer in your
academia.paper. What did I overlook?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Albrecht<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Am 23.04.2016 um 06:44 schrieb Richard
Gauthier:<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">Hello Albrecht, <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Thank you for your further
comments and questions about inertial mass and my
electron model.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> It is becoming clear to me that
the cause or origin of inertia is momentum. Newton’s
“law of inertia” (his first law of motion) is just an
expression of conservation of momentum in the absence of
an outside force that changes momentum. But “inertia”
has been a vague word because it has not been understood
how an object with a rest mass m gets this inertial mass
or resistance to acceleration given by m=F/a . But when
it is understood that a resting electron may be composed
of a circulating photon carrying momentum mc=Eo/c when
the electron’s rest energy is Eo=0.511 MeV/c^2, then it
becomes clear why an electron has inertial mass m — it
is quantitatively due to this circulating internal
momentum mc=Eo/c .<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> But you raise very important
issues: "I am still wondering which mechanism causes a
photon to move on a circuit. And how the problem of the
conservation of momentum is solved in this picture.” I
think the ability of a photon to move in a circle or
helix is closely related to its ability (for a proposed
spin-1/2 photon that forms an electron) to carry an
electric charge. My proposed model of a spin-1/2 photon
(which I briefly described perhaps a year ago in this
“Nature of Light and Particles” discussion list, is
proposed to exist in a curled-up double-loop
configuration (as an electron) or in a non-curled-up
state (where it would be an uncharged spin-1/2 photon)
or with any degree of curling in between. The more
curled-up the spin-1/2 photon is, the greater its
electric charge, up to a maximum of -e for an electron.
And once the spin-1/2 charged photon is curled up and
separated from the second spin-1/2 charged photon formed
with it that became a positron in e-p production, the
curled-up spin-1/2 charged photon is unable to uncurl
itself because this would violate conservation of
electric charge. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> My model of a spin-1/2 charged
photon is closely related to the model of a spin-1
uncharged photon described in my article <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.academia.edu/4429810/Transluminal_Energy_Quantum_Models_of_the_Photon_and_the_Electron"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.academia.edu/4429810/Transluminal_Energy_Quantum_Models_of_the_Photon_and_the_Electron">https://www.academia.edu/4429810/Transluminal_Energy_Quantum_Models_of_the_Photon_and_the_Electron</a></a> .
In the spin-1/2 photon model, the proposed transluminal
energy quantum (TEQ) forming the spin-1/2 photon makes 2
helical loops instead of one for each wavelength of the
spin-1/2 photon, but the spin-1/2 photon model still has
a forward internal angle of 45 degrees like the spin-1
photon model. (These two helical loops per wavelength of
the spin-1/2 charged photon generate the zitterbewegung
frequency of the curled-up double-looped photon model.)
The radius R of the spin-1/2 photon model is
R=lambda/4pi instead of R=lambda/2pi for the spin-1
photon model. In both the spin-1 photon model and the
uncurled spin-1/2 photon model, the photon moves forward
at the speed c but the transluminal energy quantum
forming the photon moves helically at c sqrt(2).<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> What about the problem of
conservation of momentum in the one-particle circulating
spin-1/2 charged photon model of the electron? It has
been calculated that a centripetal force of 0.414 N
keeps the spin-1/2 charged photon moving in a
double-looped circle with a radius of hbar/2mc. This
centripetal force of 0.414 N is continuously changing
the direction of the circulating charged photon’s
momentum mc.The source of this external force on the
circulating charged photon is not known in the spin-1/2
charged photon model, but conservation of momentum is
not required for the circulating spin-1/2 charged photon
if there is an external force acting it to change its
momentum into a circular trajectory to form the
electron.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> I hope these explanations about
the possible origin of inertial mass in the electron are
helpful.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Richard<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Apr 22, 2016, at 7:53 AM,
Albrecht Giese <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Hello
Richard,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">your
calculations look good. However there has a
mechanism to be understood which is the cause of
inertia. This is also seen this way by main
stream physics since a long time (answered there
by the Higgs theory). But if the Higgs mechanism
does not work, another one is needed. I am still
convinced that the forces between the
constituents of an extended object in connection
with the finiteness of the speed of light build
such a mechanism. Mathematically it works quite
perfect as I have shown repeatedly.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I
am still wondering which mechanism causes a
photon to move on a circuit. And how the problem
of the conservation of momentum is solved in
this picture.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The
fact that circling charges in our models do not
radiate is not surprising. A charge does not
"know" what an acceleration is. An object with
inertia knows it, but that is a different
phenomenon. Why does e.g. an electron radiate at
acceleration? I have explained it in my mail to
Andrew the other day. Here again:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">"The
EM field emitted by the electron in case of an
acceleration is caused by the following process.
If an electron is accelerated then its shape is
relativistically distorted. As a consequence,
one sub-charge is subject to a changing
electrical field of the other sub-charge. This
causes an EM radiation. - This, by the way, is
the only cause of radiation in physics, the
situation that one charge is subject to a
changing field. There is no other cause of
radiation in physics. Or do you know one?"<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">We
should not be confused by the fact that Maxwell
in his formalism states that an accelerated
charge radiates. Maxwell's equation are a
mathematical formalism which is very beautiful
and very well usable by electrical engineers.
But it does not touch the <i>physical </i>causes
of electrical and magnetic phenomena.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Albrecht<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Am 20.04.2016 um 20:44
schrieb Richard Gauthier:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hello Albrecht,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Thank you for your
comments. I think that if it is recognized
that a photon has an inertial mass M=
hv/c^2, then it is a short step that in
double-looping or single-looping resting
electron models composed of a circulating
photon of energy Eo = hv =0.511 MeV=mc^2 and
having a circulating momentum p=0.511 MeV/c
= mc (where m is the electron’s invariant
mass Eo/c^2), the circulating photon will
also have a inertial mass M=hv/c^2 = p/c =
0.511MeV/c^2 = m, the invariant mass of the
electron. For a double-looping photon model
of a resting electron, I show a separate
short derivation of the resting electron’s
inertial mass M=m at <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.academia.edu/23184598/Origin_of_the_Electrons_Inertia_and_Relativistic_Energy_Momentum_Equation_in_the_Spin-_Charged_Photon_Electron_Model"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.academia.edu/23184598/Origin_of_the_Electrons_Inertia_and_Relativistic_Energy_Momentum_Equation_in_the_Spin-_Charged_Photon_Electron_Model">https://www.academia.edu/23184598/Origin_of_the_Electrons_Inertia_and_Relativistic_Energy_Momentum_Equation_in_the_Spin-_Charged_Photon_Electron_Model</a></a> .
The resting electron’s inertial mass M=m
originates from the internally circulating
photon’s momentum p=mc=Eo/c=0.511MeV/c. And
even if it is not recognized that a
linearly-moving photon has inertial mass
hv/c^2, the derivation of M=m in the
above-linked article still stands for
circulating-photon models of a resting
electron, since this derivation for the
electron’s inertial mass in a
circulating-photon model does not assume
that the circulating photon composing the
electron itself has inertial mass M=m. This
inertial mass of the circulating photon (and
therefore the inertial mass of the electron
modeled by the circulating photon) is what
is derived in the calculation of M=m for the
circulating-photon electron model.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> As for your comment
about the principle of equivalence in
relation to photons, I will leave that to
experts on general relativity theory. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> You say that the
calculations of the inertial mass M=hv/c^2
of a photon, though good, don’t explain the
origin of inertia in physics. But it is a
big step that these calculations of a
photon’s inertial mass during reflection
help explain the origin of the electron’s
inertial mass, as I mentioned above with
circulating photon models. I hope that John
W, Martin, Chip, Vivian, John M and any
others with circulating photon models of the
electron will agree. Of course, circulating
photon models in their several varieties are
still only hypotheses. There are (at least)
two unexplained issues with a
circulating-photon hypothesis for modeling a
resting electron: 1) the source of the large
apparent force 0.414 N required to curve a
photon with momentum mc into a
double-looping circle of radius Ro=hbar/2mc
(and a slightly smaller force required for
such a photon moving in a single-looping
circle of radius R1=hbar/mc) and 2) with a
centripetal acceleration of 4.66 x 10^29
m/s^2 in the double-looping charged-photon
model (see the above link for these two
calculations), how to explain why the
circulating electric charge doesn’t radiate
away the charged photon's energy 0.511MeV
almost instantaneously, if classical
radiation laws from an accelerating electric
charge apply (which apparently they don’t).
Perhaps charge-conservation forbids this.
This, by the way, is also a problem for your
circling 2-particle electron model since
each particle has charge Q= -1/2 e and they
both have a similarly huge centripetal
acceleration while moving in a circle with
the single-loop radius hbar/mc in your
model. But it may also be that the electron
is in a quantum "ground state" that doesn’t
radiate its rest-mass energy 0.511 MeV away,
like the electron's energy level -13.6 eV in
the quantum ground state of the hydrogen
atom, which is a minimum energy value for
the hydrogen atom. The source of the 0.414 N
force on the double-looping photon may be
found in the future, or perhaps the charged
photon follows some kind of electric-charge
geodesic and doesn't radiate unless it
departs from this geodesic.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Richard<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Apr 20, 2016, at
4:25 AM, Albrecht Giese <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
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:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Dear
Richard,<br>
<br>
the article about the inertia of the
photon is a good presentation of cases
where the inertia is visible, and the
calculation complements this in a very
good way.<br>
<br>
Anyway I have two comments:<br>
<br>
1.) The "principle of equivalence"
which means here the weak equivalence
is not the only possible explanation
for the fact that every object has the
same acceleration in a gravitational
field. The other possibility is that
gravitational acceleration has nothing
to do with mass and with a force. That
is particularly visible in the case of
the deflection of photons passing the
sun. Many authors (e.g. Roman Sexl)
have shown that this can be fully
explained as a refraction process.<br>
<br>
2.) The calculations of the inertial
mass of a photon are very good.
However they do not cover the question
what the origin of inertia in physics
is. As you mention,the Higgs model
does not work. It is a clear fact from
astronomical observations that the QM
Higgs field does not exist (conflict
between theory and observation being a
factor of > 10^57. You say that
this is an open question in physics.
Here I insist in the position that any
extended object inevitably has
inertia, and that another cause is not
needed. <br>
<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Am 12.04.2016 um
04:48 schrieb Richard Gauthier:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">Hello John W,
Martin, Andrew, Albrecht, John M,
Hodge, David, Chip and all, <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I’ve just
uploaded a new article “A photon
has inertial mass hf/c^2 in mirror
reflection and Compton scattering”
to <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://academia.edu/">academia.edu</a>
at <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.academia.edu/24307968/A_Photon_Has_Inertial_Mass_hv_c_2_in_Mirror_Reflection_and_Compton_Scattering">https://www.academia.edu/24307968/A_Photon_Has_Inertial_Mass_hv_c_2_in_Mirror_Reflection_and_Compton_Scattering</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I’ve
attached below a pdf copy for your
convenience. <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Basically I
show that when F=Ma is applied
to photon reflection and to
Compton scattering (viewed in
the center of momentum frame),
the photon is found to have an
inertial mass hv/c^2. The
Compton scattering calculation
also shows that the electron has
an inertial mass gamma m. I show
how the photon inertial mass
result could relate to the
circulating charged photon model
of the electron to generate the
electron’s inertial mass m from
the circling spin 1/2 charged
photon's momentum mc.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Comments and
criticisms on the new results
are welcome.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Richard<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Apr
10, 2016, at 11:59 AM,
Albrecht Giese <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
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:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">John,<br>
<br>
Yes, any extended object
has inertia. I think
that this is not too
difficult to understand
and to visualize. So
again:<br>
<br>
What makes an object to
be extended? The
constituents have to be
bound to each other so
as to maintain a
distance. If now one of
the constituents is
moved, the other
constituents will follow
to keep this distance.
But that does not happen
instantaneously as the
binding field propagates
"only" with the speed of
light. That means that
for a very short time
the other constituents
remain where they are
and the binding fields
originating in them will
not change. So, for this
short time the
constituent being moved
has to be taken out of
the potential minimum of
the fields of the other
constituents. This
requires a force. After
a short time, the speed
of light permits the
other particles to move
and also their fields to
move. And as a
consequence there is no
longer a force
necessary. - This fact
that for an intermediate
time a force is
necessary to change the
motion state of an
object is called
inertia. - Really too
difficult?<br>
<br>
The calculation shows
that in fact a smaller
object has more inertia.
It is proportional to
the inverse of the
distance of the
constituents. The reason
is that on the one hand
the binding field is
universal for all
elementary particles, on
the other hand the
strength of the forces
is higher at smaller
distances, as we know it
from all forces. As I
have said many times,
the model provides
precise results. This
can be found on my web
site for those
interested. This
precision applies of
course also to the
relation between size
and mass.<br>
<br>
Since the time when I
started this discussion
about inertia 15 years
ago, I have made the
experience that a
certain portion of
discussion partners
(maybe 10 to 20 percent)
have problems to
understand and to
visualize this process
of inertia. Those
persons are mainly
physicists working in
theory and who are more
specialized for algebra
than for physics. But a
minority. Last month we
had the spring
conference of the German
Physical Society here in
Hamburg about particle
physics. Even though I
had to give my talks
about inertia and about
the error of de Broglie
in one out of 22
parallel sessions, most
people came into my
session. The acceptance
and the discussion about
these topics was very
encouraging. And this is
my permanent experience.<br>
<br>
Albrecht</span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><br>
<br>
<br>
</span><span
style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">Am
10.04.2016 um 06:44
schrieb John Williamson:</span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt;orphans:
auto;text-align:start;widows:
auto;-webkit-text-stroke-width:
0px;background-color:rgb(255,
255,
255);word-spacing:0px">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">Albrecht
- why do you think
that somethings
"extent" gives it
inertia? This is
simply non-sense. You
have just made this up
haven't you?<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
Experimentally smaller
things - with less
extent then - have
higher mass.<br>
<br>
JW.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:center"
align="center">
<hr align="center"
size="2"
width="100%"></div>
<div id="divRpF595153">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
class="apple-converted-space"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif"> </span></span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">General
[<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a></a>]
on behalf of
Albrecht Giese [<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a></a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Saturday, April 09, 2016 8:26 PM<br>
<b>To:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Andrew
Meulenberg; Nature
of Light and
Particles -
General Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Re: [General] inertia</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Dear Andrew,<br>
<br>
thank you for your
considerations and
arguments about my
mass model. And
please apologize
that I kept you
waiting for a
response. I was
off for several
days.<br>
<br>
My basic point is
that any extended
object necessarily
has inertia. That
is not just an
idea or a
possibility, it is
on the contrary
completely
inevitable. I
think that I have
explained why this
is the case. If
necessary I can of
course explain it
again.<br>
<br>
Now, if we assume
or accept that
elementary
particles are
extended, then the
inertia of
particles is
inevitably given.
And, as you have
cited it again,
the results for
leptons and quarks
are precise.<br>
<br>
The main argument
against my model
is the general
opinion that
elementary
particles,
particularly
electrons, are
point-like and
have no
constituents. The
argument of those
who have performed
the according
experiments is
that it was
attempted to
decompose the
electron by
bombarding it with
particles (like
protons) with
sufficiently high
energy, A
decomposition has
never occurred.
From this it was
concluded that the
electron has no
constituents. -
But this argument
does not apply to
my particle model.
The constituents
of an elementary
particle are
according to my
model mass-less.
So one of its
constituents may
be accelerated by
an arbitrary
amount, the other
one - as having no
own mass - can
follow
immediately. Not
even any force
will occur. -
Accordingly this
argument is not
applicable against
this model.<br>
<br>
And the rest is
known. If one
determines the
size of the
electron by the
evaluation of e.g.
its magnetic
moment, the result
for the mass
conforms very
precisely to the
measurement.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
It is true that
the assumption of
two constituents
for an elementary
particle is very
uncommon. But as
long as there are
no conflicting
facts such
assumption can be
made. It is a
common way in
physics by my
understanding. On
the other hand
there was a kind
of indication for
two constituents
described by the
article of Frank
Wilczek about the
electron in Nature
in summer 2013.<br>
<br>
The explanation of
inertia of an
electron by a
bound photon is in
my understanding
not a real
explanation as it
assumes that a
photon itself has
some kind of
inertia, without
explaining how
this works inside
a photon. So it
just diverts the
problem to another
particle, at least
as it was
explained during
this discussion
since October last
year. And also the
task to be done is
not only the mass
of an electron,
but the mass of
all particles,
i.e. all leptons
and all quarks. Do
you assume that
all these
particles are
built by bound
photons?<br>
<br>
So, in my
understanding, if
there is another
explanation for
inertia, then we
will have two
explanations in
parallel. Or, if
on the other hand
someone has or
knows an
experiment which
is in conflict
with my model,
that would of
course refute my
model. Up to now I
did not hear about
such results.<br>
<br>
Thank you again
for your
considerations.<br>
<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<br>
Fri, 1 Apr 2016
12:49:24 +0530
schrieb Andrew
Meulenberg :<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Dear
Albrecht,<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">You
have
repeatedly
based your
model on lack
of
alternatives
(with very
precise
results).
E.g.,<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div
style="margin-left:60.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal">Why
2 particles in
the model? I
say it again:<br>
<br>
1) to maintain
the
conservation
of momentum in
the view of
oscillations<br>
2) to have a
mechanism for
inertia (which
has very
precise
results,
otherwise
non-existent
in present
physics)<br>
<br>
I will be
happy to see
alternatives
for both
points. Up to
now I have not
seen any.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">I'm sure that alternatives exist. Whether
they have very
precise
results to
support them
may be up for
debate.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
My own
relativistic
model for
inertia
depends on the
electron
being, in its
ground
(restmass)
state, a
spherically
bound photon.
Until that
concept is
accepted, it
makes little
sense to go
further in a
description.
However, if
accepted, it
then also
leads to
understanding
the inertia of
a photon.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Your two-particle model faces the same
challenge.
Unless you are
able to shape
that premise
into an
acceptable
form, it is
unlikely that
anything that
follows will
matter. Can
you (re)define
your particles
to be
acceptable to
an audience
and still
fulfill your
assumptions
and derived
results?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Andrew<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div
id="DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2">
<p
class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<table
class="MsoNormalTable"
style="border:none;border-top:solid
windowtext
1.0pt;border-top-color:rgb(170,
171,
182)"
border="1"
cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td
style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:15.0pt
.75pt .75pt
.75pt;color:rgb(65,
66,
78)"
width="470">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="line-height:13.5pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">This
email has been
sent from a
virus-free
computer
protected by
Avast.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.avast.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.avast.com">www.avast.com</a></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<table
class="MsoNormalTable"
style="border:none;border-top:solid
#AAABB6 1.0pt"
border="1"
cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td
style="width:41.25pt;border:none;padding:13.5pt
.75pt .75pt
.75pt"
width="55">
<p
class="MsoNormal"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="x-msg://32/redir.aspx?REF=02oHT6avpTxZIhLEkEsDCBgDAfQ4gy7EDcHGKbKFGQRSFbR4-mDTCAFodHRwczovL3d3dy5hdmFzdC5jb20vc2lnLWVtYWlsP3V0bV9tZWRpdW09ZW1haWwmdXRtX3NvdXJjZT1saW5rJnV0bV9jYW1wYWlnbj1zaWctZW1haWwmdXRtX2NvbnRlbnQ9ZW1haWxjbGllbnQ."
target="_blank"><span style="text-decoration:none"><img
moz-do-not-send="true"
id="_x0000_i1026"
src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/2016/icons/icon-envelope-open-tick-round-orange-v1.png"
border="0"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td
style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:15.0pt
.75pt .75pt
.75pt"
width="470">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="line-height:13.5pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#41424E">Virenfrei.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.avast.com/">www.avast.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to
receive communication from
the Nature of Light and
Particles General
Discussion List at<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a></a><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><br>
<a href="</span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a></a><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable"
style="border:none;border-top:solid
#AAABB6 1.0pt" border="1"
cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td
style="width:41.25pt;border:none;padding:13.5pt
.75pt .75pt .75pt" width="55">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient"
target="_blank"><span
style="text-decoration:none"><img
moz-do-not-send="true"
id="_x0000_i1027"
src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/2016/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-v1.png"
border="0"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td
style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:15.0pt
.75pt .75pt .75pt" width="470">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="line-height:13.5pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#41424E">Virenfrei.
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.avast.com">www.avast.com</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable"
style="border:none;border-top:solid #AAABB6
1.0pt" border="1" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td
style="width:41.25pt;border:none;padding:13.5pt
.75pt .75pt .75pt" width="55">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient"
target="_blank"><span
style="text-decoration:none"><img
moz-do-not-send="true"
id="_x0000_i1028"
src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/2016/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-v1.png"
border="0"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td
style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:15.0pt
.75pt .75pt .75pt" width="470">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="line-height:13.5pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#41424E">Virenfrei.
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.avast.com">www.avast.com</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable"
style="border:none;border-top:solid #AAABB6 1.0pt" border="1"
cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width:41.25pt;border:none;padding:13.5pt .75pt
.75pt .75pt" width="55">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient"
target="_blank"><span style="text-decoration:none"><img
moz-do-not-send="true" id="_x0000_i1029"
src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/2016/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-v1.png"
border="0"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:15.0pt .75pt
.75pt .75pt" width="470">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.5pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#41424E">Virenfrei.
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient"
target="_blank"><span style="color:#4453EA">www.avast.com</span></a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<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:Wolf@nascentinc.com">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a>
<a href=<a 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>
</body>
</html>