<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" 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"><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23588">
<STYLE>@font-face {
font-family: Calibri;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Tahoma;
}
@page WordSection1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in; margin: 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; }
P.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
LI.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
A:visited {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.EmailStyle17 {
FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d; mso-style-type: personal-reply
}
..MsoChpDefault {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-style-type: export-only
}
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 lang=EN-US link=blue bgColor=#ffffff vLink=purple>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Many thanks Chandra!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>I love the thinking behind this
'Perpetual Scout' concept; as you say, the Perpetual Scout seems to have been
led off-course by the (apparently more efficient) 'fetch-execute cycle' (to
borrow a computing term).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>I look forward to seeing the video
(and the pretty lady!) when the internet is less cluttered, and to reading your
epistemology article tomorrow morning.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Thanks again,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Grahame</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000080 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu
href="mailto:chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu">Roychoudhuri, Chandra</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">Nature of Light and
Particles - General Discussion</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, July 03, 2016 9:14 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [General] double photon
cycle, subjective v objective realities</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><A
href="http://www.ted.com/talks/julia_galef_why_you_think_you_re_right_even_if_you_re_wrong?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2016-07-02&utm_campaign=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email&utm_content=talk_of_the_week_buttonA">http://www.ted.com/talks/julia_galef_why_you_think_you_re_right_even_if_you_re_wrong?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2016-07-02&utm_campaign=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email&utm_content=talk_of_the_week_buttonA</A>
12-minute TED-talk by Julia Galef<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Hello Everybody:
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">This 12-min. talk, by a
non-physicist pretty young lady, is worth for all of us to listen to
periodically. This is a diversion out of directly discussing physics problem.
But, I hope this diversion will be energizing for most of you.
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Our successful survival
driven all of us to evolve as slaves of “Motivated Reasoning”. Understand the
“Problem” as quickly as possible and then “Execute” the “Correct” solution. In
contrast, scientists are supposed to be of “Perpetual Scout Mindset”, always
looking for higher and higher order connectivity between all natural phenomena
by constantly looking for an-harmony within the current working theory to
<B><I>discover “Higher Order</I></B> <B><I>Conceptual
Continuity”.</I></B><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Unfortunately, our last 100
years of physics thinking has been demonstrating a higher degree of “Motivated
Reasoning” over the “Perpetual Scout Mindset”, looking for <B><I>“Higher
Order</I></B> <B><I>Conceptual Continuity”</I></B> in all natural
phenomena.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">We can always be energized
and motivated to do so by thinking how our productive thinking could be
connected to our “Collective Sustainable Evolution” (live for-ever through our
progenies). After all, “live for-ever” is our deepest emotional desire.
Adoption of thinking like <B><I>“reverse-system engineers”</I></B> helped our
forefathers to assure the rise of the human species to become the “top dog”
through persistent discovery of tools and technologies.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">So, dreaming of
<B><I>“Collective Sustainable Evolution”</I></B> as <B><I>“Reverse
System Engineers”</I></B> may not be a serious waste of our
time!<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Chandra.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><A name=_MailEndCompose><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></A></P>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> General
[mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
<B>On Behalf Of </B>Richard Gauthier<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, July 02, 2016
5:48 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [General] double photon cycle, subjective v
objective realities<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Hello Grahame, Vivian and Chip,<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> I think we can all help each other by
critically examining each other’s particle models and pointing out possible
errors. For example, I spotted 2 serious calculational/conceptual errors in
Vivian’s electron model which he hasn’t acknowledged yet. The first is in his
derivation of the lateral radius of a double-looping-photon electron model as
it changes with electron speed, which he claims goes as 1/gamma (in your model
the lateral radius of the double-looping photon’s trajectory doesn't change
with electron speed, while in my model the lateral radius of the circulating
photon’s trajectory decreases as 1/gamma^2 with the electron’s speed). The
second significant error is in his derivation of the de Broglie wavelength,
using the relativistic energy-momentum equation for the electron and its
circulating photon. Can you spot these two errors? Vivian’s article is
attached below.<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>If you no longer
wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General
Discussion List at grahame@starweave.com<BR><a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/grahame%40starweave.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><BR>Click
here to unsubscribe<BR></a><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>