<!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=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23588"><BASE href="x-msg://130/">
<STYLE>@font-face {
font-family: Cambria Math;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Calibri;
}
@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
}
P.msonormal0 {
FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-style-name: msonormal; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
LI.msonormal0 {
FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-style-name: msonormal; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
DIV.msonormal0 {
FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-style-name: msonormal; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
SPAN.apple-tab-span {
mso-style-name: apple-tab-span
}
SPAN.apple-converted-space {
mso-style-name: apple-converted-space
}
SPAN.EmailStyle20 {
COLOR: black; mso-style-type: personal
}
SPAN.EmailStyle21 {
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>Chandra,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Thank you for this very lucid
representation of the facts, which mirrors pretty precisely my own view of the
matter.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>I have said for some time that, at a
fundamental level, NOTHING is actually physically moving. At a higher
conceptual level it's convenient to talk (and think) of 'waves moving through
space', as a model of systematic variations in field effects. At a higher
level still, some of those variations may be modelled as 'localised looped
waves' aka 'particles'. Up another level and we have chemistry, another
level again and we have biology. So we build our experience of reality in
layers, each of those layers being seen as actual/factual (whatever 'fact'
means).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>[If we were to burrow down, rather
than up, we would find ourselves in levels where the concepts of 'time' and
'space' have no meaning - just as 'up' and 'down' have no meaning in deep
space. I personally believe we ultimately have to tackle those deeper
levels if we are to overcome certain limitations in our understanding that are
blocking our way at present...]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Hopefully, then, we can move on from
these cyclical discussions/arguments about mass (all kinds), charge, momentum -
recognising that these are all simply artefacts of the 'looped-wave' structure
of 'matter'. Indeed, given the universal inertial reference frame that you
speak of and that I've been speaking of for nearly 20 years (laying to rest the
myth of objective relativity), the realities of 'gravitation' and 'curvature of
spacetime' can be seen likewise as artefacts of the spatially extended (alocal)
manifestation of those systematic variations in the underlying substrate of the
cosmos (which you refer to as the CTF). We could even, hopefully,
recognise that the 'force carrier' particles (gauge bosons) are in fact just
conceptual stand-ins for what's really going on.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Simple recognition of these
self-evident facts, if effectively communicated, could move our species forward
to a significant degree.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Best regards,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Grahame</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </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">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<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> Wednesday, January 04, 2017 12:21
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [General] Our forum in the
absence of our SPIE conference.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Chip, Richard:
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> Let us recall the
original experiment of electron-positron (pair production) after a high energy
gamma ray is stopped by the layers of Pb-nuclei (Lead
plates).<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> A
<B><I>charge-less</I></B> and <B><I>material-less</I></B> entity (gamma)
giving birth to two oppositely <B><I>charged</I></B> particle along with
<B><I>material</I></B>-like behavior. So, our imagination can remain widely
open as to what brings out this “charge” and “mass” like properties out of a
gamma ray.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> My
postulate is that these properties are derivatives of the complex
“self-looped” dynamic movement of the stationary space (Complex Tension Field,
or CTF). Let us also remember that these properties (charge, mass, etc.)
become manifest as instrumental transformations in our experiments and,
further, they represent interpretations by our limited human knowledge (albeit
steadily increasing). They exist in our mind (“knowledge”) as our
interpretations of diverse observations. And these interpretations get
enhanced with more experiments and more thinking; while we keep on unifying
more and more phenomena.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> Locality
and stability of the particles (electrons and protons) require that the parent
oscillations be self-looped. But, <B><I>the CTF itself is not moving</I></B>!
It is always stationary. The entire cosmic space, as CTF, represents the
universal <B><I>inertial reference frame</I></B>. It is the perturbation
induced <B><I>potential gradient of different kinds</I></B>, generated in CTF,
that are executing the undulations; whether it is the simple propagating EM
waves of any frequency; or it is the localized self-looped oscillation for
particles. The entire manifest (observable) universe constitutes these diverse
<B><I>excited states</I></B> of the stationary CTF.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> In this model, the
secondary potential gradients generated in the CTF always has the same rate of
spatial change given by “c-squared” = “Epsilon/Mu”; Epsilon and Mu are two of
the various intrinsic properties of the CTF. EM waves are open-ended
undulating gradients and hence propagates perpetually until absorbed through
some physical interaction process. Remember, the CTF itself is not moving,
only the undulations. That is the fundamental characteristics of our wave
equation.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> In
this model, particles are also generated out of very similar undulating
potential gradients of the CTF; but in the high-energy generation process;
they become self-looped and hence localized (free particles are not plane
waves!). If phase matched (resonant), then they are stable; which is the
origin of energy quantization out of “classical” harmonic
oscillation.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> The
key point here is that the “c”, representing the spatial rate of change of the
right kind of potential gradient of CTF, is not a displacement velocity of
CTF. Nothing is physically moving. CTF is stationary.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> So,
when a particle is modeled as a self-looped oscillation (“rate of change”) of
the potential <B><I>gradients of field</I></B>, CTF, changing at the rate of
“c”; it does not represent the velocity of any “material” or a
“substance”. Further, the translation of the entire particle is limited to
“c”. Because, <B><I>any attempts to push it to any higher velocity, the
particles will break up into high energy gamma rays traveling as EM waves with
the velocity “c”. </I></B>Results of LHC point to this mode of
thinking.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> I
hope, this gives a bit more coherent picture in support of my postulate that
CTF could represent the foundation for another new attempt to a unified field
theory; <B><I>where everything is an emergent property of the same
CTF</I></B>. For particles, these various complex gradients give rise to the
observed properties that we measure during interactions between them. “Mutual
forces” become manifest when different kinds of potential gradients
experience each other within each other’s vicinity and attempt to preserve
their integrity (self-lopped oscillations). We do not need separate exchange
particles for the particles to experience different forces. The null result of
MM experiment then becomes a positive support for the CTF-
postulate.<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.</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri',sans-serif; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #e1e1e1 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2
face=Arial></FONT> </DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>