<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<!--[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:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Roboto;
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:STIXGeneral-Italic;
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:STIXGeneral-Regular;
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:STIXVariants;
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@STIXVariants";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
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:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.ecxyiv2438876326
{mso-style-name:ecxyiv2438876326;}
span.ecxyiv2438876326mathjaxpreview
{mso-style-name:ecxyiv2438876326mathjax_preview;}
span.ecxyiv2438876326mathjax
{mso-style-name:ecxyiv2438876326mathjax;}
span.ecxyiv2438876326math
{mso-style-name:ecxyiv2438876326math;}
span.ecxyiv2438876326mrow
{mso-style-name:ecxyiv2438876326mrow;}
span.ecxyiv2438876326mi
{mso-style-name:ecxyiv2438876326mi;}
span.ecxyiv2438876326mo
{mso-style-name:ecxyiv2438876326mo;}
span.ecxyiv2438876326texatom
{mso-style-name:ecxyiv2438876326texatom;}
span.ecxyiv2438876326mn
{mso-style-name:ecxyiv2438876326mn;}
span.ecxyiv2438876326st
{mso-style-name:ecxyiv2438876326st;}
span.ecxyiv2438876326apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:ecxyiv2438876326apple-converted-space;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle35
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor="white" lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Excellent logical arguments, Wolf!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Chandra.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></a></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext"> General [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Wolfgang Baer<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, June 08, 2016 6:03 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] inertia<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p>Albrecht and Richard:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>This is an interesting discussion and certainly the nature of inertia an interesting topic
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>But if ' "Field" is a human abstraction to describe the effect of a charge onto another charge.'
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Then the charges are located at the absorber and emitter , the photon is a structure of disturbance that propagates from one charge to the other.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>How do you possibly get to the "if a photon has a field" ?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>If I eat a lot of garlic and walk into a closed room containing you. Then when I say "hello" I am emitting a field of garlic smelling particles and lucky you would pick up the smell by absorbing those particles. You would then say that the garlic smell is
contained in the particles which make up the field of particles. Which is Albrecht's view of photons - they are carriers of hidden properties.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>However the sound I make when saying "hello" is a pressure disturbance producing a pressure field in the media NOT a particle field. THere is no garlic property attached to the pressure wave picked up by my ear.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>So you are arguing over the fundamental nature of a photon. Is it a particle that can carry hidden properties from one place to another. Have not Bell's theorem experiments discounted this possibility?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p>best<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>wolf<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><o:p> </o:p></p>
<pre>Dr. Wolfgang Baer<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Research Director<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Nascent Systems Inc.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>E-mail <a href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com">wolf@NascentInc.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 6/8/2016 1:34 PM, Albrecht Giese wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p>Hello Richard,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>thank you for your response. - My comments again in the text below.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Am 04.06.2016 um 20:20 schrieb Richard Gauthier:<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hello Albrecht, <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> I understand your deductive logic for thinking that photons are composite, but I think your beginning premise "electric charges can only interact with other electric charges” is faulty. And although your second premise “electrons can
interact with photons” is correct, your conclusion "a photon must contain electric charges” is therefore, like your first premise, also faulty. Electric charges can interact with electric fields which are not electric charges.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">What is a field? "Field" is a human abstraction to describe the effect of a charge onto another charge. If we notice that at a specific position in the space is a force acting on a charge, we call this phenomenon a "field". What else is
a field? It is the effect of a charge at a certain distance, nothing else. - So, the natural consequence is that if a photon has a field, which means that it has an interaction with a charge, it must contain a charge. Or, what else can the notion of a "field"
mean?<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">For example, an electron is accelerated to radiate a photon. The electron then annihilates with a positron to produce two photons. So there are no more electric charges, and only photons remain.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I think that this is a quite easy situation. If an electron "annihilates" with a positron then both charges unify to build the photon. - The situation with an accelerated electron is a bit different. If there is enough energy, then obviously
a pair of a positive and a negative charge can be built. This generation of pairs of charges also takes place at particle collisions in an accelerator or a storage ring (like the LHC). At each collision a lot of new particles is generated, most of which are
charged, so a lot of new pairs of charge is generated.<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Your second explanation also is faulty. No one knows the composition of a photon. A photon may consist of a single particle with a helical spatio-temporal movement. For example, my model of a spin-1 photon is that a photon is composed
of a single transluminal energy quantum (TEQ) moving helically at speed c sqrt(2) but having a longitudinal speed of c. It has energy E=hf. It has the photon’s momentum p=h/lambda and it has spin 1 hbar.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">TEQ? What is energy? In my understanding (which is generally critical about QM) energy is a property of an object, like speed or momentum or spin are properties of an object. You cannot have a piece of velocity somewhere, similarly you
cannot have a piece of energy, without having an object which carries this. - I know that in QM energy is something by itself, but just this is a core point of the weirdness of QM in my understanding. And, what is an object? In my understanding candidates
for objects are charges, like the electrical charge or the charge of the strong force. A configuration of such charges can build a higher order object. Do we really need more?<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Its forward helical angle is 45 degrees for all different energies of photons. Now I think that this TEQ generates speed-of-light quantum Huygens wavelets which predict where it will be found in the future, and which allow the photon to
display reflection, refraction, diffraction, and interference and to go through double slits as a quantum wave pattern, and yet be detected as a single localized particle on the other side.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">What is a wavelet? Not so familiar for me. But phenomena like reflection, refraction, diffraction and interference can be explained by the superposition of oscillating fields which are the extended influences of moving charges. A particle
model like the one which I have proposed with mass-less constituents can perfectly explain these phenomena like reflection, diffraction and interference and also the fact that behind a double slit there is still a particle present. This particle existed the
entire time, so as it was assumed by de Broglie when he introduced the pilot wave. I think that it is really not necessary to assume all the further properties of nature (like a Huygens wavelet), the situation seems to be much easier. And why should we make
it more complicated than necessary?<br>
<br>
<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">Albrecht<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<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 Jun 4, 2016, at 7:41 AM, Albrecht Giese <<a 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">the experimental evidence that a photon must be a composite object happens e.g. in every radio exchange. The photon interacts with electric charges, this is only possible if one
assumes that the photon has electric charge. Now, as it is electrically neutral as a whole, there must be a balance of positive and negative electric charge(s). Those have to have some separation as otherwise they could not react with an outside charge. This
is one of the indications that a photon has to be composite.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The other way to understand the photon is the way of quantum mechanics. In the view of QM the photon is merely a quantum of energy. Any further understanding of it is - by the view
of QM - not possible. To treat a photon physically and quantitatively requires the use of the QM formalism, however, (as usual at QM) without a direct understanding. - This is the position of QM which is formally allows for a point-like photon. But I think
that no one in our group is willing to follow QM in this respect. All efforts undertaken here come from the desire to have a physical understanding. And this includes necessarily (in my view) that the photon is composite.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt">Albrecht<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Am 03.06.2016 um 00:53 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"> My electron model is built of a single circulating spin-1/2 charged photon. It is not built “by photons”. I know of no experimental evidence that a photon is a composite particle as you claim. Please cite any accepted experimental evidence
that a photon is a composite particle. Thanks.<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 Jun 2, 2016, at 1:37 PM, Albrecht Giese <<a 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">Zero evidence for a composite particle? I think that the evidence for a composite particle model is very obvious:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">- The model explains the mass and the momentum of a particle with NO new parameters, from the scratch<br>
- The model explains the magnetic moment of a particle classically with no new parameters<br>
- The model explains the constancy of the spin classically<br>
- The model explains the equation E = h*f classically (was never deduced before)<br>
- The model explains the relativistic increase of mass and the mass-energy relation E=m*c^2 independent of Einstein's space-time ideas.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">And what is the evidence that the electron is NOT a composite particle? Your electron model is built by photons, where the photon is also a composite particle. So, what?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I do not know any other particle models with this ability. Do you? Such properties are taken as a good evidence in physics. Or why do main stream physics trust in the existence
of an up-quark and a down-quark? For both there was no direct evidence in any experiment. The reason to accept their existence is the fact that this assumption makes some other facts understandable. - The model of a composite particle is in no way weaker.<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 31.05.2016 um 20:19 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 and all,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Since there is zero experimental evidence that the electron is a composite particle, I will no longer comment on Albrecht's electron model, which postulates as a principal feature that the electron is a composite particle, unless new
experimental evidence is found that the electron is a composite particle after all.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Galileo’s and Newton's “law of inertia" is clearly an expression of conservation of momentum of objects or “bodies” in the absence of an imposed external net force. It revolutionized mechanics because Aristotle had taught otherwise. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> If a resting electron is a circulating light-speed electrically charged photon with circulating momentum Eo/c, then an external force F on the electron equals the additional rate of change of momentum dp/dt of the circulating charged
photon corresponding to that external force: F=dp/dt , beyond the constant rate of change of momentum of the circulating charged photon. The ratio of this applied force F (for example due to an applied electric field) to the circulating charged photon’s additional
acceleration “a" is called the electron's inertial mass and is defined by F=ma or m=F/a . There is no separate mass-stuff or inertia-stuff to be accelerated in a particle. There is only the circulating momentum Eo/c of the circling speed-of-light particle
with rest energy Eo , that is being additionally accelerated by the applied force F. Since the value m = Eo/c^2 of a resting particle (derived from the rate of change of the circulating momentum Eo/c as compared to its centripetal acceleration) is the same
value in different reference frames, it is called the particle’s invariant mass m, but this invariant mass m is still derived from the resting particle’s internally circulating momentum Eo/c . If the electron is moving relativistically at v < c, it has an
additional linear momentum p=gamma mv, which when added vectorially to the transverse circulating momentum Eo/c gives by the Pythagorean theorem a total circulating vector momentum P=gamma Eo/c = gamma mc=E/c where E is the electron’s total energy E=gamma
mc^2. This is the origin of the electron’s relativistic energy-momentum equation E^2 = p^2 c^2 + m^2 c^4 which is just another way to write the Pythagorean momentum vector relationship above: P^2 = p^2 + (Eo/c)^2 .<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> In my understanding, the Higgs field gives a non-zero invariant mass (without being able to predict the magnitude of that mass) to certain particles according to the relativistic energy-momentum equation, so that any particle moving
at v < c in a Higgs field has invariant mass m > 0. But the inertia of that invariant mass m is not explained by the action of the Higgs field, in my understanding.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> To try to theoretically explain why a photon has momentum p = hf/c and energy E=hf is a separate topic beyond trying to explain why a particle has inertial mass, or resistance to acceleration by an applied force.<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>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On May 30, 2016, at 1:04 PM, Albrecht Giese <<a 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 id="ecxyqtfd65703">
<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 new paper has again a lot of nice mathematics. However, it again does not answer the question of inertia. As earlier, you relate the inertial mass of an electron to the mass
of the circling photon which builds in your understanding the electron. Then the mass and the momentum of the electron is calculated from the mass and momentum of the photon.
<br>
<br>
Such calculation is of course possible if one follows this picture of an electron. However, it does not answer the question of what the cause of inertia and momentum of the photon is. You take this as an 'a priory' fact. But this is not our present state of
understanding. Physics are able to go deeper. <br>
<br>
You write in your paper: "The fact is that the inertial property of the mass of elementary particles is not understood". How can you write this? Main stream physics have the Higgs model which is assumed to describe the mass of elementary particles. And I have
presented a model which uses the fact that any extended object inevitably has inertia. The reason is, as you know, that the fields of the constituents of an extended object propagate with the finite speed of light. If the extension of an elementary particle
is taken from its magnetic moment, this model provides very precisely the mass, the momentum, and a lot of other parameters and properties of a particle.
<br>
<br>
If you intend to explain the mass of an electron by the mass of a photon, you should have an appropriate explanation of the mass and other parameters of a photon. Otherwise I do not see any real progress in the considerations of your paper.
<br>
<br>
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 30.05.2016 um 07:40 schrieb Richard Gauthier:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hello Vladimir,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Thanks. That could be an explanation. But I’m hoping I can find a simpler explanation, if possible.<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 May 29, 2016, at 7:29 PM, Vladimir Tamari <<a href="mailto:vladimirtamari@hotmail.com">vladimirtamari@hotmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><br>
Richard, <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">without going into the details of your model, you mentioned:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#AC193D">"It may be that vector momentum is just not conserved within fundamental particles even though it is conserved between two or more particles in their mutual interactions"</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#444444"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#444444">In cellular-automata schemes, such as my<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://vladimirtamari.com/beautiful_univ_rev_oct_2011.pdf">Beautiful Universe</a>,
a particle is made up of a pattern of spinning nodes in a matrix. The same type of spinning nodes also form the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>surrounding magnetic, gravitational or electrostatic field etc. Any changes in the angular momentum
or the axis of spin of the constituent nodes of a particle (or photon wave) is transmitted as a domino effect adjusting the angular momentum of surrounding nodes both internally and externally. The domino effect is diffused unto infinity in inverse-square
fashion. Nothing is hidden or lost or subject to uncertainty, and energy is always conserved. </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#444444">In your case by taking the photon and electron in isolation conservation issues seem to be arising? Hope this helps.</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#444444">Best wishes</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#444444">Vladimir</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
<hr size="3" width="100%" align="center" id="stopSpelling">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:
<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a><br>
Date: Sat, 28 May 2016 17:31:33 -0700<br>
To: <a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
CC: <a href="mailto:jsarfatti@aol.com">jsarfatti@aol.com</a><br>
Subject: Re: [General] inertia<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Hello all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> I’ve been thinking about the unexplained 0.424 Newtons force acting on a circulating double-looped charged photon to keep it in its trajectory. Any double-looping-photon electron model
should have this force acting on the circling photon, such John and Martin’s model and Chip’s model. The force doesn’t have an obvious source. It continuously changes the direction of the circling momentum without changing the resting energy of the photon.
It may be that vector momentum is just not conserved within fundamental particles even though it is conserved between two or more particles in their mutual interactions. I believe that the Dirac equation solution for a free electron hints at this internal
non-conservation of momentum also during zitterbewegung motion of the free electron whose average velocity is v but whose eigenvalue for speed is c. The position-momentum relations for the double-looped photon model of the electron, as I recall, are below
or just at the the exact uncertainty expression of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle: delta x times delta p > 1/2 hbar , for position and momentum of an object in a particular coordinate direction. So it might not be possible to experimentally determine
if linear momentum is conserved or not within a particle. The indirect evidence that there is such circulating momentum in a particle is the inertial mass m=Eo/c^2 of the particle as it is derived from the photon’s circulating momentum p=Eo/c . If there is
circling momentum for a single particle, then momentum conservation within the particle IS being violated. An analogy: just as an electron has spin but it not experimentally known what inside it is “spinning", an electron has inertial mass but it is not known
what inside the particle is “massing”. But but the spin and the inertial mass are known experimentally. A double-looping photon model explains both what is “spinning" and what is “massing" in an electron.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">On May 27, 2016, at 11:50 AM, Richard Gauthier <<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Hello all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Jack Sarfatti, a well-known physicist, wrote back to me about my article saying that no one cares about this work, that it is just re-inventing the wheel and that it is not a good problem
to work on. Comments?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">On May 26, 2016, at 8:25 PM, Richard Gauthier <<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Dear John W, Martin, Chandra, Alexander, Chip, Andrew, Vivian, Albrecht, John M, David and all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><A New Derivation of E=mc^2 explains a particle's inertia.pdf>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Here’s my latest input to the inertia/particles discussion: my proposed new derivation of Eo=mc^2 and the inertial mass of a particle from the momentum of a circling photon.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">On May 17, 2016, at 6:47 PM, Richard Gauthier <<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">David <o:p>
</o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> These newly discovered photons seem very similar to helically-moving spin-1/2 charged photons, except for their lack of electric charge. Perhaps these new spin-1/2 photons become spin-1/2
charged photons when they curl up in pairs of photons with opposite charge, as in e-p pair production : "</span><span style="font-family:"Roboto","serif";background:white">Researchers made their discovery after passing light through special crystals to create
a light beam with a hollow, screw-like structure. Using quantum mechanics, the physicists theorized that the beam's twisting photons were being slowed to a half-integer of Planck's constant.</span><span style="font-family:"Roboto","serif";color:#333333">”</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Roboto","serif";color:#333333"> Richard</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Roboto","serif";color:#333333"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">On May 17, 2016, at 1:56 PM, <<a href="mailto:davidmathes8@yahoo.com">davidmathes8@yahoo.com</a>> <<a href="mailto:davidmathes8@yahoo.com">davidmathes8@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5808">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5808">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5808">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">If pbotons weren't confusing enough...just as Williams proposed a quantum number for energy, these researchers are proposing a quantum number for angular momentum.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5808">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_6237">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">The article<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_6239">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><a href="http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2016/05/17/Scientists-discover-new-form-of-light/9061463490086/" target="_blank">Scientists discover new form of light</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_6242">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5808">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Roboto","serif"">"The newly discovered form of light, however, features photons with an angular momentum of just half the value of Planck's constant. The difference sounds small, but researchers say the significance
of the discovery is great.'</span><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5808">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5808">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">The paper<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5825">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><a href="http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/4/e1501748.full" target="_blank">There are many ways to spin a photon: Half-quantization of a total optical angular momentum | Science
Advances</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5946">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5807">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">Best<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5807">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5807">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">David<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5807">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5862">
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">
<hr size="1" width="100%" align="center">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""> </span></span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Richard
Gauthier <<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>To:</b><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <<a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<b>Cc:</b><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Alexander Burinskii <<a href="mailto:bur@ibrae.ac.ru">bur@ibrae.ac.ru</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Saturday, May 14, 2016 12:30 AM<br>
<b id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_6278">Subject:</b><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Re: [General] inertia</span><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div id="ecxyiv2438876326">
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5855">
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5861">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">Hello Chandra and all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1463518019710_5854">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> This is very good news. I’ve been reading several of Alexander Burinskii’s recent (2015 and 2016) published papers on his Kerr-Newman bag model of the electron (2 pdf’s attached). His
approach integrates black-hole gravitational theory, Higgs theory and electromagnetism to produce a internally-light-speed model of the electron with radius hbar/2mc like John W and Martin’s, Chip’s, Vivian’s and my double-looping-photon electron models. Alexander's
electron model is energetically stable, contains a circulating light-speed singularity (a photon?) in addition to an electromagnetic wave circling along its outer rim along a circular gravitational string, has g=2 (Dirac magnetic moment of magnitude 1 Bohr
magneton), is a fermion and carries the electron’s charge. I think Alexander’s electron model has much to offer, coming from a different perspective than much of our group’s electron modeling. I request Alexander to give us a summary of the key features (and
perhaps a brief history) of his electron model, emphasizing the nature of its stability (an important issue in circling-photon electron models.) I hope that this will stimulate a critical discussion of his approach in comparison with our various approaches
to electron modeling, which could lead to better light-speed-based electron models coming up to the next SPIE “What are photons” conference in San Diego in August 2017.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyiv2438876326yqtfd01392">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> Richard <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">On May 12, 2016, at 6:12 PM, Roychoudhuri, Chandra <<a href="mailto:chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu">chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">I will request Burinskii to participate in our next conference. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">Chandra. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="ecxyiv2438876326composer_signature">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:#575757">Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S® 5 ACTIVE™, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><br>
<br>
-------- Original message --------<br>
From: Richard Gauthier <<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a>><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
Date: 5/12/2016 2:09 AM (GMT-05:00)<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <<a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
Cc: Alexander Burinskii <<a href="mailto:bur@ibrae.ac.ru">bur@ibrae.ac.ru</a>><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
Subject: Re: [General] inertia<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">Dear John W, Martin, Chandra, Vivian, Andrew, John M, Chip, Albrecht, Hodge and others,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> I am in contact with the Russian physicist and academician Alexander Burinskii (arXiv page of his articles at<a href="http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND+Alexander+Burinskii/0/1/0/all/0/1">http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND+Alexander+Burinskii/0/1/0/all/0/1</a> ,
biography at<a href="http://www.scirp.org/journal/DetailedInforOfEditorialBoard.aspx?personID=10183">http://www.scirp.org/journal/DetailedInforOfEditorialBoard.aspx?personID=10183</a> ), who has written a very interesting article on arXiv: “Gravity vs. quantum
theory: Is the electron really pointlike?” at <a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0225">http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0225</a> . He draws on the interesting resemblance of Kerr-Newman gravity formulations to the properties of the Dirac electron as a light-speed
particle that can only be measured at sub-light speeds. Here’s part of the abstract:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="ecxyiv2438876326"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">"Contrary to the widespread opinion that gravity plays essential role only on the Planck scales, the Kerr-Newman gravity displays a new dimensional
parameter </span></span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326mi"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"STIXGeneral-Italic","serif";border:none windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in">a</span></span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326mo"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"STIXGeneral-Regular","serif";border:none windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in">=</span></span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326mi"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:STIXVariants;border:none windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in">ℏ</span></span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326mo"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"STIXGeneral-Regular","serif";border:none windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in">/(</span></span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326mn"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"STIXGeneral-Regular","serif";border:none windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in">2</span></span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326mi"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"STIXGeneral-Italic","serif";border:none windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in">m</span></span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326mo"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"STIXGeneral-Regular","serif";border:none windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in">),</span></span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> which
for parameters of an electron corresponds to the Compton wavelength and turns out to be very far from the Planck scale. Extremely large spin of the electron with respect to its mass produces the Kerr geometry without horizon, which displays very essential
topological changes at the Compton distance resulting in a two-fold structure of the electron background. The corresponding gravitational and electromagnetic fields of the electron are concentrated near the Kerr ring, forming a sort of a closed string, structure
of which is close to the described by Sen heterotic string. The indicated by Gravity stringlike structure of the electron contradicts to the statements of Quantum theory that electron is pointlike and structureless. However, it confirms the peculiar role of
the Compton zone of the "dressed" electron and matches with the known limit of the localization of the Dirac electron." </span></span><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> I think that there some potential for Alexander Burinskii's Kerr-Newman gravity approach to the electron and the various double-looping photon models of the electron to find some common
ground which may benefit both approaches to modeling the electron. In particular the centripetal force of 0.424 N causing a photon of energy 0.511 MeV to move in a closed double-looping trajectory of radius Ro=hbar/2mc in a resting electron model could be
related to the gravitational and electromagnetic fields and gravity stringlike structure of the Kerr-Newman electron model. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">On May 9, 2016, at 4:37 AM, Albrecht Giese <<a href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">Hello Richard,<br>
<br>
it is true that we do not know everything in physics (otherwise there would be no reason for further research). However, many facts and rules are understood, and I do not see a good reason to go behind this knowledge.<br>
<br>
From my 2-particle model it follows for leptons and for quarks that there is E = h*ny. The frequency is the circulation, the energy follows from the mass which the model yields, when using E = m*c^2. This latter relation also follows from this model. (I have
presented all this in San Diego; it was also discussed here earlier as I remember; and it is on my web site "The Origin of Mass". Of course I can explain it here again if there is a demand.)<br>
<br>
As these relations obviously also apply to the photon, it seems very plausible that the photon has a similar structure like a lepton and a quark. The rules apply if c is inserted for the speed. This also leads to p=h*ny/c.<br>
<br>
And which further details do we know about the photon? It must have an extension as it has a spin which is physically not possible without an extension. And it must have charges as it reacts with an electric field which is otherwise not explainable. There must
be at least two charges, a positive and a negative one, as the photon as a whole is neutral. The spin is twice the one of a lepton or a quark, this may be an indication that the photon is built by 4 sub-particles rather than 2 of the kind which I have described.<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
So, if the photon has positive and negative charges, which means that it has sub-particles with positive and negative charges, it is quite plausible that the photon can decompose into a positive and a negative elementary particle, so into a positron and an
electron.<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
(You may call this speculative. But it has some strongly plausible aspects which I am missing in the other models presented here.)<br>
<br>
The curling-up which you have mentioned has an orbital component. To move on an orbit needs some physical conditions. E.g. an influence which causes the acceleration to its center. This should be physically explained.<br>
<br>
The conflict between the necessary Higgs field and the vacuum field in the universe is treated in the article of F.J. Tipler in<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<em><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">arXiv</span></em><span class="ecxyiv2438876326st">:</span><em><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">astro</span></em><span class="ecxyiv2438876326st">-</span><em><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">ph</span></em><span class="ecxyiv2438876326st">/</span><em><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">0111520v1
.</span></em><span class="apple-converted-space"><i> </i></span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326st">It is well known by particle physicists I have at conferences here</span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326st">asked</span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326st">several
times the presenters of the Higgs model for this discrepancy. They have always admitted that this conflict exists, but some have tried to blame the astronomers for it. No one ever has presented a solution for the conflict.</span><br>
<br>
<span class="ecxyiv2438876326st">Albrecht</span><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Am 07.05.2016 um 23:32 schrieb Richard Gauthier:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">Hello Albrecht,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> Thank your for your further comments and questions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> Your are asking me why photons have momentum p=hv/c . That’s like asking why photons have energy E=hv . In physics nobody knows “why” anything happens. “Why?” questions always lead
back to a big unknown. Physicists observe nature qualitatively and quantitatively and search for cause-effect relations, equations, theoretical models and symmetry relations that work ("save the appearances"), and lead to further and better (more accurate)
physical predictions that often lead to practical applications and hopefully deeper “understanding” of physical phenomena.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> You ask why a spin-1/2 photon curls up. You could just as well ask why a spin-1 photon doesn’t curl up, since it has spin. (My transluminal energy quantum model of a spin-1 photon
at<a 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><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span> is
a helical model that is consistent with both a photon's spin-1 hbar and its forward linear momentum p=h/lambda). <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> Your own comments on the possible nature and make-up of photons are extremely speculative to say the least. You have no photon model at all. There is zero experimental evidence that
a photon is composite. You should at least try to show how a sufficiently energetic photon leads to your electron model in electron-positron pair production.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> You claim that astronomers deny the existence of a Higgs field strong enough to explain noticeable forces in elementary particles. That is a blanket statement that needs supporting
evidence. Please support your claim here with sources. It’s like claiming that “scientists say”. Thanks.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">On May 7, 2016, at 10:23 AM, Albrecht Giese <<a href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">Hello Richard,<br>
<br>
thank you for your mail. I still have questions to your explanations:<br>
<br>
To para 1):<br>
According to you explanations the circular motion is mainly achieved by the fact that the particles are "curling up". Which physical law do you have in mind that causes them to curl up? What are the quantitative consequences? - You say that there is a "configurational"
force which controls the internal motion of an electron and a positron. You assume that this may come from the Higgs field. I think that this is highly speculative as astronomers deny the existence of a Higgs field which is strong enough to be an explanation
for noticeable forces in elementary particles.<br>
<br>
To para 2):<br>
The momentum of a photon is h</span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Symbol">*n</span></span><span class="ecxyiv2438876326apple-converted-space"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> </span></span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">y/c,
true. But what is the physical mechanism causing this momentum? Still not answered.<span class="ecxyiv2438876326apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
I believe that my mass mechanism is applicable to the photon. The photon has an extension, so it has inertia by the standard mechanism for extended objects. And in addition I think that the photon may be composed by the same sub-particles ("basic particles")
like leptons and quarks. The question still open for me is, why the photon moves steadily with c. An explanation may be that it moves always into a certain direction with respect to its internal set up. On the other hand, the fact that the rest mass of the
photon is zero is nothing more than a mathematical result. Was never measured.<span class="ecxyiv2438876326apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
Albrecht<span class="ecxyiv2438876326apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Am Sat, 30 Apr 2016 um 17:22:00 schrieb Richard Gauthier:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt;background-color:rgb(255, 255,
255);word-spacing:0px">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">Hello Albrecht,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> <span class="ecxyiv2438876326apple-converted-space"> </span>Thank you for your two thoughtful questions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">To try to answer them:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">1) I think it is an incorrect assumption that only a second electric charge or a corresponding permanent field can cause a spin-1/2 charged photon to move in a circular
or helical configuration. Have you considered other possible explanations? One I have considered, in the context of e-p production, is that two uncharged spin-1/2 photons of are formed in the process of electron-positron pair production from a spin-1 photon
of sufficient energy (greater than 1.022 MeV). At first the two uncharged spin-1/2 photons both move forward together in a kind of unstable equilibrium. One has a negative charge potentiality and the other has a positive charge potentiality, yet both are still
neutral. These two uncharged spin-1/2 photons can either then unite with each other to form a spin-1 photon, or they can separate in the presence of a nearby charged nucleus and each curl up, gaining negative and positive charge respectively, as well as rest
mass Eo/c^2, and slowing down (as they become an electron and positron) to less than light-speed as they curl up. (Internally these spin-1/2 charged photons maintain light-speed c in their forward direction, but their curled-up configurations as a electron
and a positron have v < c .) Once they are both fully curled up to form a fully charged electron and positron, they continue to move apart. Now they each have a stable internal equilibrium (because of conservation of electric charge) and they cannot individually
unroll (except perhaps virtually) to become an uncharged spin-1/2 photon, and so they remain a stable electron and a stable positron. Their own charged curled-up stable equilibrium maintains them in their curled-up configurations, supplying the necessary configurational
force that maintains their circulating motion to form an electron or a positron. This configurational force that maintains each of them curled up would be a non-electrical force. Perhaps this configurational force that maintains the electron and the positron
curled up with rest mass and moving at less than light-speed c, comes from the Higgs field.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""> <span class="ecxyiv2438876326apple-converted-space"> </span>When an electron and positron meet, they may first form a positronium atom. Then they both uncurl and unite
to form an unstable neutral particle which decays immediately into two or three spin-1 photons, in the process of electron-positron annihilation.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">2) Why does the spin-1/2 charged photon have momentum? you ask. It is because it is a photon with momentum hv/c . My model of the spin-1/2 charged photon is similar to
my internally transluminal model of an uncharged photon, except that the spin-1/2 charged photon makes two helical loops instead of one per photon wavelength, and the spin-1/2 charged photon model's helical radius is 1/2 that of the helical radius of a spin-1
photon model , being R=lambda/4pi instead of lambda/2 pi. The uncurled transluminal spin-1/2 uncharged photon model curls up nicely into a curled-up double-looping spin-1/2 charged photon model of an electron. You can read about my superluminal uncharged photon
model at <a 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> or I can e-mail you a copy. I have
only talked about my current model of the superluminal spin-1/2 charged photon on the “Nature of Light and Particles” e-list during the past year.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">I hope these possible explanations of the spin-1/2 charged-photon model are helpful. I don’t think that you have a photon model yet that is consistent with your two-particle
electron model, in terms of e-p production and e-p annihilation.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">The figure below, which I included in this e-list some months ago, shows a curled-up spin 1/2 charged photon forming a resting electron (top graphic) and at different increasing
relativistic speeds (lower graphics). The green line is the double-looping helical trajectory of the circulating charged photon forming the electron, while the red line is the trajectory of the superluminal energy quantum of the spin-1/2 photon model. The
superluminal energy quantum in the resting electron moves on the surface of a mathematical horn torus. As the speed v of the electron model increases, the radius of the green helical trajectory decreases as 1/gamma^2 , while the radius of the red trajectory
of the superluminal quantum decreases as 1/gamma. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="1" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0" style="border:none;border-top:solid windowtext 1.0pt;border-top-color:rgb(170, 171,
182)">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="69" style="width:41.25pt;border:none;padding:13.5pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a 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 border="0" id="_x0000_i1027" src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/2016/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-v1.png"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td width="588" style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:15.0pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;color:rgb(65, 66,
78)">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.5pt"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Virenfrei.<span class="ecxyiv2438876326apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.avast.com">www.avast.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a><br>
<a href="<a 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>">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div id="ecxyiv2438876326yqtfd84749">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div id="ecxyqtfd65703">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:davidmathes8@yahoo.com">davidmathes8@yahoo.com</a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","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><a href="mailto:vladimirtamari@hotmail.com">vladimirtamari@hotmail.com</a><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/vladimirtamari%40hotmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">Click
here to unsubscribe</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">_______________________________________________<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 href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</a><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><br>
<a href="</span><a 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><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<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">phys@a-giese.de</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href=<a 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>><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre></a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="1" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0" style="border:none;border-top:solid #D3D4DE 1.0pt">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="69" style="width:41.25pt;border:none;padding:13.5pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a 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 border="0" id="_x0000_i1028" src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/2016/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange_184x116-v1.png"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td width="588" style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:12.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.5pt"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#41424E">Virenfrei.
<a 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" border="1" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0" style="border:none;border-top:solid #D3D4DE 1.0pt">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="69" style="width:41.25pt;border:none;padding:13.5pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a 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 border="0" id="_x0000_i1029" src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/2016/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange_184x116-v1.png"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td width="588" style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:12.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.5pt"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#41424E">Virenfrei.
<a 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"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href=<a 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>><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre></a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>