<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="WordSection1">Dear John Macken, <br>
<br>
you have touched a question here which was discussed earlier but
still causes confusion; so I want to address it again as it has a
fundamental aspect. You cite: "<span style="color:#20188C">Maxwell
connected the speed of light to the properties of space (epsilon
and mu)".</span> It is the understanding that the speed of
light is determined by the equation<br>
<br>
c = sqrt(1/(mu<sub>0</sub>*epsilon<sub>0</sub>))<br>
<br>
This was the understanding of Maxwell based on his assumption that
electrical and magnetic phenomena are symmetric to each other.
This understanding was replaced by Special Relativity; when SRT
was introduced it became obvious that magnetism is a relativistic
side effect of the electrical phenomena. So, it should be better
written as <br>
<br>
mu<sub>0</sub> = 1/(c<sup>2 </sup>*epsilon<sub>0</sub>)<br>
<br>
because magnetism is a consequence of the limitation of c, not the
other way around. The limitation of c is not given by magnetism
but has another cause.<br>
<br>
This is the present state of main stream physics. I refer to the
following textbooks and sources:<br>
<br>
1) A.P. French: "Special Relativity" which has an introduction to
magnetism.<br>
2) W.G.V. Rosser "Classical Electromagnetism via Relativity" which
has a thorough derivation of magnetism<br>
3.) Veritasium <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http:www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFAOXdXZ5TM">http:www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFAOXdXZ5TM</a> which is
a nice introduction to magnetism via relativity by use of Youtube<br>
<br>
And to say it clearly again: This is not my personal opinion or my
personal model: It is the position of main stream physics, but
often overlooked.<br>
<br>
One point which makes the error of the original concept of Maxwell
obvious it the fact that we have electric sources (i.e. electrical
monopoles) but no magnetic monopoles.<br>
<br>
Albrecht<font size="-1"><br>
<br>
</font>
<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"">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
General
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]<b>On
Behalf Of </b>John Macken<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, January 21, 2017 4:14 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] light and particles group<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C">Chandra,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C">I have one quick
question for you and the group to consider. You mention that
Maxwell connected the speed of light to the properties of
space (epsilon and mu). To explain my question, I first have
to give some background which is accomplished by quoting a
short section of the previously attached paper.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:justify;text-autospace:none"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">“Gravitational waves (GWs) propagate
in the medium of spacetime. They are transverse quadrupole
waves which slightly distort the “fabric of space”. For
example, a GW propagating in the “Z” direction would cause a
sphere made from baryonic matter such as metal to become an
oscillating ellipsoid. When the sphere expands in the X
direction it contracts in the Y direction and vice versa. The
GW produces: 1) no change in the total volume of the
oscillating sphere 2) no change in the rate of time, 3) no
displacement of the center of mass of the oscillating sphere.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:justify;text-autospace:none"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Point #3
addresses an important point. If there are two isolated masses
such as two LIGO interferometer mirrors suspended by wires
[17], the passage of a GW does not move the mirror’s center of
mass. Instead of the mirrors physically moving, the GW
changes the properties of spacetime producing a redshift and a
blue shift on LIGO’s laser beams. This difference in
wavelength is detected by the interferometer as a fringe
shift…”<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C">With this
introduction, the questions are:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#20188C;mso-list:l0 level1
lfo1">Should a GW effect the permeability and permittivity of
free space?
<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#20188C;mso-list:l0 level1
lfo1">Should the two orthogonal polarizations of a GW produce
opposite effects on the permeability and permittivity of free
space?
<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#20188C;mso-list:l0 level1
lfo1">Since epsilon and mu determine the speed of light,
should a GW produce a different effect on the two orthogonal
polarizations of light?
<o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C">If the answer to
question #3 is yes, then this suggests that it should be
possible to detect GWs by monitoring the polarization of a
laser beam. It is vastly simpler to detect a slight
difference in the polarization of a single beam of light than
it is to detect the same optical shift between two arms of an
interferometer. The interferometer encounters vibration noise
to a much greater degree than is encountered in the
polarization of a single laser beam. Also, multiple laser
beams could identify the direction of the GW much better than
an interferometer.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C">Perhaps this is
off the subject of the discussion group. But it is an example
of a subject which might be low hanging fruit that could make
a historic contribution to physics. In the past I have made
the suggestion that GWs produce a polarization effect, but
this suggestion is lacking additional insight and analysis to
be taken seriously. Is there anyone in this group with the
expertise to contribute to this study?
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C">John M. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
General [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Roychoudhuri, Chandra<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, January 21, 2017 11:56 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] light and particles group<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#993366">“Gravitational
waves indicate vacuum energy exists”, paper by John Macken<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#993366"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#993366">John
M.: Thanks for attaching your paper.
<b><i>The title clearly indicates that we really are in basic
agreement. The cosmic space has physical properties.</i></b>
I have expressed my views a bit differently, that the cosmic
space is a
<b><i>stationary </i></b>Complex Tension Filed (CTF), <b><i>holding
100% of the cosmic energy</i></b> in the attached papers
and in my book, “Causal Physics”.
<b><i>If the so-called vacuous cosmic space and the CTF were
not inseparable, the velocity of light would have been
different through different regions of the cosmic space</i></b>!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#993366">
I just do not like to continue to use the word “vacuum”
because, in the English language, it has acquired a very
different meaning (“nothing”) for absolute majority of people
over many centuries. It is better not to confuse common people
by asserting new meanings on very old and very well
established words.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#993366"> Further,
in your support, the quantitative values of at least two
physical properties,</span>
<span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#993366">Epsilon & Mu,
of the comic space have already presented as quantified
properties by Maxwell around 1867 through his wave equation.
Recall (c-squared)=(1/Epsilon.Mu). These properties of the
cosmic space were already quantified before Maxwell by the
early developers of electrostatics and magneto statics.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#993366">
I assume that you are suggesting us that we need to postulate
and quantify other physical properties possessed by this
cosmic space (<b><i>Maxwellian or Faraday Tension Field</i></b>?),
so that the “emergent dynamic particles” out of this cosmic
space would display all the properties we have already been
measuring for well over a century.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#993366">
However, I disagree, as of now, that cosmic space is
“space-time” four dimensional. Because, the “running time” is
not a measurable physical parameter of any physical entity
that we know of in this universe. So, I assert that the
“running time” cannot be altered by any physical process.
<b><i>Humans have smartly derived the concept of “running
time” using various kinds of harmonic oscillators and/or
periodic motions.</i></b> We can alter the frequency of a
physical oscillator by changing its physical environment. Of
course, this is my personal perception, <b><i>not supported
by the entire group</i></b>. But, that is precisely the
purpose of this free and honest discussions so we can learn
from each other. As my understanding evolves; I might change
back my mind and accept space as four- or even
thirteen-dimensional.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#993366"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#993366">Chandra.<o:p></o:p></span></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"">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
General [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>John Macken<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, January 21, 2017 1:37 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion'; 'Andrew Worsley'<br>
<b>Cc:</b> 'M.A.'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] light and particles group<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C">Dear Chandra and
All,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C">You have said “</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">We definitely have advanced our
<b><i>collective understanding</i></b> that <b><i>space is
not empty and the particles are some form of emergent
properties of this same universal cosmic field.</i></b></span><span
style="color:#20188C">” The idea that space is not an empty
void has not been quantified in any model of spacetime
proposed by members of the group. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C">I have
concentrated in defining and quantifying the properties of the
vacuum and the results are presented in the attached paper.
This paper analyzes the properties of spacetime encountered by
gravitational waves. The conclusion is that spacetime is a
sea of Planck length vacuum fluctuations that oscillate at
Planck frequency. This model can be quantified, analyzed and
tested. It is shown that this model gives the correct energy
for virtual particle formation. It also gives the correct
energy density for black holes, the correct zero point energy
density of the universe (about 10<sup>113</sup> J/m<sup>3</sup>)
and generates the Friedmann equation for the critical density
of the universe (about 10<sup>-26</sup> kg/m<sup>3</sup> = 10<sup>-9</sup>
J/m<sup>3</sup>). <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C">The reason for
mentioning this to a group interested in the structure of
electrons, photons and electric fields is that the
quantifiable properties of spacetime must be incorporated into
any particle or field model. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#20188C">John M.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
General [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Roychoudhuri, Chandra<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, January 21, 2017 8:45 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Andrew Worsley <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:worsley333@gmail.com">worsley333@gmail.com</a>>;
Light & particles. Web discussion <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> M.A. <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ambroselli@phys.uconn.edu">ambroselli@phys.uconn.edu</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] light and particles group<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Dear Andrew
Worsely: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> This is a
platform for ethical, serious and honest discussions on
scientific issues that the prevailing mainstream platforms
have been shunning. We definitely do not want to sow
unsubstantiated distrust within this group. <b><i>This not a
political forum where sophisticated deceptions are highly
prized; which has been intellectualized as “post-truth”!</i></b>
This is not a “post-truth” forum.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> So,
please, <b><i><span style="color:#C00000">help us</span></i></b><span
style="color:#C00000">
</span>by getting help from computer professionals before
repeating any further unsubstantiated accusations.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> If you
can definitively identify anybody within our group carrying
out unethical and destructive activities; obviously, we would
bar such persons from this group discussion.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Chandra.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Dear All
Participants: <o:p>
</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Please be
vigilant in maintaining the essential ethics behind this
discussion forum – honestly accept or reject others’ opinions;
preferably,
<b><i>build upon them. This is the main objective of this
forum as this would advance real progress in physics out
of the currently stagnant culture</i></b>. While we have
not come to realize any broadly-acceptable major break-through
out of this forum; we definitely have advanced our <b><i>collective
understanding</i></b> that <b><i>space is not empty and
the particles are some form of emergent properties of this
same universal cosmic field.</i></b> This, in itself, is
significant; because the approach of this group to particle
physics is significantly different from the mainstream. I
definitely see a better future for physics out of this
thinking: Space is a real physical field and observables are
manifestation (different forms of excited states) of this
field.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> Most of
you are aware that our SPIE conference series, which was
continuing since 2005, has been abruptly shut down without
serious valid justifications (complains from “knowledgeable
people” that “bad apples” have joined in). We certainly do not
want something similar happen to this web discussion forum due
to internal dissentions and internal unethical behavior.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Many thanks
for your vigilance and support.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Respectfully,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Chandra. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
Andrew Worsley [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:worsley333@gmail.com">mailto:worsley333@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, January 21, 2017 4:49 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> John Duffield<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Roychoudhuri, Chandra; ANDREW WORSLEY<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Andrew Worsley, light and particles group<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi John,<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Could be a coincidence, but some damn
troll from the discussion group (called Vladimir) has
screwed up my email which I have had problem free for the
last 20 years- and my computer is now going suspiciously
slow.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Andrew<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 7:44 PM, John
Duffield <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:johnduffield@btconnect.com" target="_blank">johnduffield@btconnect.com</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Chandra:
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Please can you add Andrew Worsley to the
nature of light and particles group. I’ve met him
personally, and think he has a valuable contribution
to make.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Apologies if you’ve already done this,
but Andrew tells me he’s received a
<i>blocked by moderator</i> message. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">John Duffield<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">7 Gleneagles Avenue<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Poole<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">BH14 9LJ<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">UK<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-GB"> </span><span
lang="EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-GB"> </span><span
lang="EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>From:</b>
John Duffield [mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:johnduffield@btconnect.com"
target="_blank">johnduffield@btconnect.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 09 January 2017 08:34<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Roychoudhuri, Chandra' <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu"
target="_blank">chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> 'ANDREW WORSLEY' <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:member@aworsley.fsnet.co.uk"
target="_blank">member@aworsley.fsnet.co.uk</a>>;
'John Williamson' <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk"
target="_blank">John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk</a>>;
'Martin Van Der Mark' <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:martinvandermark1@gmail.com"
target="_blank">martinvandermark1@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Andrew Worsley, light and particles
group<span lang="EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Chandra:
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Please can you add Andrew Worsley (<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:worsley333@gmail.com" target="_blank">worsley333@gmail.com</a>)
to the nature of light and particles group. I’ve met
him personally, and think he has a valuable
contribution to make. He has described the electron as
being what you might call a quantum harmonic
structure. The electron in an orbital is described by
spherical harmonics, the electron itself might be
described by spherical (or toroidal) harmonics. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">JohnD<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BN6PR05MB3234001E3A83282ED941BEF493730@BN6PR05MB3234.namprd05.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" 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>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>