<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=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:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 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:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
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:"Times New Roman",serif;}
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;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
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;}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:#20188C;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
.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;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:2145729517;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:354169724 67698705 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-text:"%1\)";
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></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 vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:#003300'>Chandra,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:#003300'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:#003300'>I am glad to see you designating the energy density of your CTF. You say, </span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:#993366'>“Some ~94% of the energy of the universe is always held ("kept") as tension energy in the Complex Tension Field (CTF)…The observable energy ~6% (?, as far as I recall), consisting of both EM waves and particles, are different forms of <b><i>excitations</i></b> of this CTF.”</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> It appears as if you are equating the energy currently assigned to dark matter and dark energy to instead be the energy of the CTF. Is this a correct interpretation of your statement?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>The “critical” density of the universe obtained from the Friedmann equation of general relativity amounts to about 10<sup>-9</sup> J/m<sup>3</sup> when converted to energy density. Since we are using round numbers, it would appear that you are claiming that the CTF has energy density of about 10<sup>-9 </sup>J/m<sup>3</sup>. Is this correct? I read some of your publications including <b><i>Resonant energy absorption and the CTF hypothesis</i></b> and I have not found any model of the CTF that can be quantified into a specific energy density. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>On 1/21/17 you wrote, <span style='color:#003300'>“</span><span style='color:#993366'>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.” </span>I do not understand this statement since it is possible for the physical component of spacetime to have a fundamental frequency (Planck frequency for example) without implying “running time”. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>I believe that we agree on several key points, but before I discuss this further I want to be sure that I understand the properties of the CTF. Therefore, please answer or reference publications which answer the following questions:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=1 type=1><li class=MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst style='margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'>Do you have a quantifiable model of the CTF with a quantifiable energy density?<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle style='margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'>Does the CTF have a quantifiable resonance frequency?<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraphCxSpLast style='margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'>Are photons waves which propagate in the CTF? If so, can the energy density of photons exceed the energy density of the CTF?<o:p></o:p></li></ol><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:#003300'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:#20188C'>John M.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;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>From:</b> General [mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Roychoudhuri, Chandra<br><b>Sent:</b> Sunday, January 29, 2017 8:11 AM<br><b>To:</b> ANDREW WORSLEY <member@aworsley.fsnet.co.uk>; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] light and particles group<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Andrew: Basically, I agree with you. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>However, my numbers are a bit different. My postulate is a bit different. Some ~94% of the energy of the universe is always held ("kept") as tension energy in the Complex Tension Field (CTF); which helps sustain observable universe. This observable energy ~6% (?, as far as I recall), consisting of both EM waves and particles, are different forms of <b><i>excitations</i></b> of this CTF.<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><a name="_MailEndCompose"></a><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>-----Original Message-----<br>From: General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>] On Behalf Of ANDREW WORSLEY<br>Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2017 8:14 AM<br>To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion; <a href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de">phys@a-giese.de</a><br>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>Here's the thing space has energy and turn momentum and if you like effective mass<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>In actual fact 70% of the energy of the Universe is in "empty" space, otherwise know as dark energy..<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>Message Received: Jan 24 2017, 10:42 PM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>From: "Chip Akins" <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>, "'Nature of Light and Particles - 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<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Hi 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><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Thank you for the pilot wave reference. But of course if a particle is a wave then it would not need the same sort of treatment.<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>I thought you might like that approach due to your model. <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>But the personal struggle I have with your model is simply that it does not tell us what particles are, and my quest is to understand specifically that.<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>Warm Regards<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>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>From: General<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>[mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>org] On Behalf Of Albrecht<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 4:34 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><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><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 view a particle is a bullet surrounded by a "pilot wave"<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>which accompanies this bullet and guides it. - This approach was once strictly rejected by Heisenberg. But 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 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><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><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><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"<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>itself. <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>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><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 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><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><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><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>And now perhaps we have the most fundamental form of momentum = delta Fc<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>sine(theta) t = E/c.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><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><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>From: General<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>[mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>org] 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><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><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><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><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", 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 kinetic motion).<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><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>From: General<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>[mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightan<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>dparticles.org] 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><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><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 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 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><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 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><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 observe. <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>I agree that a transfer of energy must implicitly also transfer momentum.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Momentum is a measureable result of energy. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><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 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 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><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 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><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 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 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><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 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><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><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>From: General<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>[mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>org] 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>><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><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><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><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 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><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><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><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Grahame<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>----- Original Message ----- <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>From: Chip Akins <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 10:54 PM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><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><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><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><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>"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureofligh<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>tandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><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:chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu</span></a> <a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/chandra.roychoudhuri%40uconn.edu?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/chandra.roychoudhuri%40uconn.edu?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>