<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:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" 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=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@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 lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoPlainText>Hi Andrew<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>So how can we discover why it is that the electron at rest can only contain <span style='color:black'>1.23559003630488E+20 of these “mass quanta”?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>Why not twice as many, or half as many?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>In our understanding of physics and the physical constants, what is it that explains the specific quantization of mass of the electron?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>Chip<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>-----Original Message-----<br>From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of ANDREW WORSLEY<br>Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2017 4:38 AM<br>To: ANDREW WORSLEY <member@aworsley.fsnet.co.uk>; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>; phys@a-giese.de<br>Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group; Pilot Wave unnecessary</p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Hi Grahame/All<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Heres the answer to the momentum of a photon.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Lets start with the conventional eaquation for the photon<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>E = hf.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>What does that actually mean?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Lets break this down, h is the fundamental quantum of energy.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Actually dimensionally energy multiplied by time, but every thing at the quantum level has a frequency so that's fine. so we have [E].[T]. [T^-1] = E.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>But remeber we are talking quantum physics here, so the minimum quantum frequency =1<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Or if we are using integers of the value n, then E=hn.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>We can liken this to currency, the total amount of money you have is eqaul to the minimum currency (lets say the cent) multiplied by the number of cents.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Equally the total amount of energy you have is equal to the minumum energy currency (h) multiplied by the number of quanta (n) So E =hn.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>But waht does that really mean? On a quantum scale lets take a single photon lets say a gamma ray photon with a frequency of 10 ^28. That means it is composed of 10^28 fundamental quanta each with the energy h.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>So on a comparative level the single quanta would be like the volume of a tiny droplet of water and the single gamma ray photon equivalent to the volume of all the water on the planet Earth - so now we are talking quntum physics small small small.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Now if we assume for, now that E= mc^2 is correct, then if our minimum quantum of energy is h then the minumum energy h = mc^2, and by definition the <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>minimum mass quantum(mq) is mq=h/c^2.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>So waht is the mminumum momentum p of the minimum photon with a single quantum with a velocity c.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Well p = mv = h/c^2 x c = h/c<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>So the momentum of your photon is p = hn/c or if you prefer to stick with convention hf/c.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Al of this and the rest of quantum physics is readily understandable<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>See<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271959433_Everything_is_Physics_Book_1_Understanding_physics_at_the_fundamental_level"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271959433_Everything_is_Physics_Book_1_Understanding_physics_at_the_fundamental_level</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Hope this helps <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Andrew<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>========================================<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Message Received: Jan 29 2017, 09:24 AM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>From: "ANDREW WORSLEY" <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>To: "Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion" , "<a href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>phys@a-giese.de</span></a>" <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Cc: <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group; Pilot Wave unnecessary<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Hi All,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Agreed there is no pilot wave as such, just a phase wave velocity Vw, as opposed to group wave velociity (v).<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>This is an accepted physical quantity, such that phase wave velocity Vw = c^2/v, and Vw.v =c^2.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>It's all, that is quantum mechanics, explained here.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271959433_Everything_is_Physics_Book_1_Understanding_physics_at_the_fundamental_level"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271959433_Everything_is_Physics_Book_1_Understanding_physics_at_the_fundamental_level</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Andrew<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>========================================<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Message Received: Jan 24 2017, 11:21 PM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>From: "Roychoudhuri, Chandra" <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>To: "<a href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>phys@a-giese.de</span></a>" <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>, "Nature of Light and Particles -<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>General Discussion" <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Cc: <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group; Pilot Wave unnecessary<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Hi Albrecht: Greetings,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>All of our thoughts and models are evolving. Nobody has a definite model, as yet, at least not me.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>However, I strongly disagree with the de Broglie "Pilot Wave" concept. It demands extra unnecessary complexities. If this model is to be a REAL physical one, <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>then we would need a separate physical pilot wave, guiding the physical "particle". Built out of what? This pilot wave expands with time making the localization of <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>the particle impossible after a very long time!<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>In the tension filed oscillating model, only the tension filed is the physical field; the localized oscillation represent the physical particle, emergent as a complex <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>excited state of the field. The oscillator does not expand its shape with time. Otherwise free electrons and protons could not have been tracked in long-path <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>accelerators. Indeterminacy is limited only by our limited capability to assign the right initial conditions, as in the LHC or in other accelerators. Nature does not <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>suffer from "Uncertainty Principle", like human math does!<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>The grand MISTAKE of old times was the assumption that, exp[iwt] = exp[i2.pi.ft] = exp.[i2.pi.(E/h)t], as in Schrodinger's equation, was thought to represent a <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>"plane wave"! Unfortunately, the expression represents any harmonic oscillator - it could be a pendulum, or an LCR circuit, and hence it can also represent a <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>localized a harmonic oscillator of a tension filed, albeit complex in spatial structure. This is a conceptually simpler model without the need for any well-trained <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>"Pilot", while keeping Schrodinger very happy since "f" is the internal harmonic frequency of the new "model" particle! De Broglie would also have been happy <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>with <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>this model since he also struggled for the rest of his life to make it more realistic! We do have a more realistic concept; albeit, not the final, detailed model.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Chandra.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>From: General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a>] On Behalf Of Albrecht<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 5:34 PM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Hi Chip, hi all,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>regarding the ongoing confusion about the "wave structure" of particles I would like to remind you all of the approach of Louis de Broglie to this problem. In his <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>view a particle is a bullet surrounded by a "pilot wave" which accompanies this bullet and guides it. - This approach was once strictly rejected by Heisenberg. But <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>John Bell writes in his famous book "Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics" that he has investigated the discussion about the pilot wave and that <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>he did not find any serious physical counter-arguments to it. According to him, Heisenberg's activities against it were nothing else but bashing of de Broglie.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>I like this approach of de Broglie. I like it particularly because it fits seamlessly into my model of two orbiting massless sub-particles.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Albrecht<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Am 24.01.2017 um 12:35 schrieb Chip Akins:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Hi Chandra<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Yes. Momentum is measured as you indicated.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>But if the electron is a circulating "wave structure", and has the property of inertial mass, then momentum is likely an inherent part of the "wave" itself.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>As we have discovered, the inherent momentum of the confined wave can cause the property if inertial mass, which further clearly illustrates why E=mc^2.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>But since space is massless, there must be a mechanism which creates momentum for these waves, which is different from the way longitudinal momentum is <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>carried by a wave in a material medium made of particles of mass.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>This more fundamental form of momentum must be created without using mass, since no mass is present in "empty" space.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>So if this is how things work then we may have the most fundamental form of energy = differential displacement of space.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>And now perhaps we have the most fundamental form of momentum = delta Fc sine(theta) t = E/c.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>If this is true then delta Fc/Fc = pi, simply because that is the only form which yields the correct momentum of such a wave.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Chip<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>From: General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a>] On Behalf Of Roychoudhuri, Chandra<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:10 PM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Chip: I like your thinking approach.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Measurable "momentum" arises through energy exchange between scattering entities; specifically, when one of the entity possess the "inertial property", <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>we call particles. And, Newton correctly postulated that they tend to stay "inertial", "until acted upon by a force" (an entity that can "donate" energy to create <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>kinetic motion).<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Chandra.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>From: General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a>] On Behalf Of Chip Akins<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 9:28 AM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Hi Dr. Grahame Blackwell<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>What I was considering is trying to understand the mechanism for momentum in the propagation of energy in space. Whether that energy is in the form of light or <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>confined in particles of matter. For if we can show exactly how it is that momentum is a fundamental feature of energy, as it moves in space, we then have <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>specifically identified and understood the source for inertial mass.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>This may help us refine our models. I think that it will help us understand Planck's quantization of action and its causes as well. This research has already <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>helped me understand how light can have both spin and orbital angular momentum, and it may well lead to a better grasp of other basic principles.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Other reasons for looking into this in detail, are to better understand the correct set of wave equations, and spin. To understand the causes for what we <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>observe.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>I agree that a transfer of energy must implicitly also transfer momentum. Momentum is a measureable result of energy.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>But to me E=hf means that more energetic waves or particles are smaller. If that is correct then there is a cause. Probably the simplest explanation is that space <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>has an inherent opposition to displacement, which creates this force Fc I have been discussing. That is nice, simply because this force is also perfectly suited to <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>cause confinement, not only of waves in space, but also of elementary fermions.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>So if we can explore this possibility further, and create wave equations for waves which would be caused by the displacement and this opposing force, complete <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>with momentum and all the other measurables, then we may have foundations upon which we can model everything.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>I do not think that wave interference is sufficient to cause confinement. I have studied waves in great detail and still find that more than self-interference is <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>required for confinement of waves into soliton (circularly or spherically confined) solutions. So for me, it seems that this equal and opposite reaction of space to <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>the displacement caused by energy is the only logical path to explore.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>It is my hope (and intuition) that this path will lead to understanding the mass formation thresholds for electrons so that we might know why the electron's rest <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>mass is the specific value we measure.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Chip<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>From: General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a>] On Behalf Of Dr Grahame Blackwell<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 5:40 PM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion' ><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Hi Chip,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>I got a working copy, thanks.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>I see that of course you're going into far more intricate details mathematically than I was looking at. In this case, it seems to me, the question becomes: "How is <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>it that a photon travels through space?". As I've said, once that's tied down the fact that it carries momentum follows as a natural consequence.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>(To some extent it depends on how one defines momentum.)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Thanks again,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Grahame<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>----- Original Message -----<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>From: Chip Akins<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 10:54 PM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Once more.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Chip<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>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"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>phys@a-giese.de</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:member@aworsley.fsnet.co.uk"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>member@aworsley.fsnet.co.uk</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>chipakins@gmail.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/chipakins%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/chipakins%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</span></a>"><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText></a><o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>