<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>TO Viv, Graham, Chip, Albrecht ... etc.</p>
<p>I am willing to accept Viv's challenge in her 7/15/2017 reply
that states " State the science behind it. Then use mathematics to
show that the effect of the science matches observation."</p>
<p>This has been my goal all along. However to have any chance of
acceptance I must ask for two conditions that will grantee a fair
playing field of open minds.</p>
<p>1) You must be able to accept the statement "What happens on a
macro scale, happens whether anyone is looking or not.".(7/4/2017)
as an assumption that itself needs proof rather than an a-priory
truth <br>
</p>
<p>2) Experimental proof i.e. predictions match observations; Must
allow me to include the interpretation of experimental results
without the a-priory assumption #1 stated above. <br>
</p>
<p>If you do not agree to these two conditions then any theory or
experimental result justifying the theory will be interpreted
under the requirement of consistentcy with the a priory assumption
#1 in a kind of circular self fulfilling logic that now new idea
can ever hope to penetrate. In this case it would be better not to
bother communicating on fundamental issues.</p>
<p>Specifically Viv You state : "Newton's mechanics and Maxwell’s
electromagnetism, form the basis of the physical world. Apply
Newtonian mechanics to properties of the photon as I outlined a
while ago and you get general relativity." I have no reference to
this conjecture and no entry in my E-mail list from you addressing
this approach but it describes my approach very well and please
provide references again.</p>
<p>If I get some agreement I will be writing a mathematical appendix
to a book I am writing for Routledge Press that is intended to
describe an action theory formulation of physics that will reduce
to both quantum and classic theory and therefore be compatible
with all experimental verification of these disciplines with the
additional property that the conscious experience is explicitly
included in the theory. <br>
</p>
<p>best wishes</p>
<p>Wolf<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/16/2017 10:26 AM, Chip Akins
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:013b01d2fe58$a1b53430$e51f9c90$@gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]-->
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@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:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",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
{mso-style-priority:99;
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;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
p.ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal, li.ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal, div.ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal
{mso-style-name:ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal;
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.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
color:black;}
.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;}
--></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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Thank you Eric<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">I need to review
your work on this as well. And compare your thought to the
results of the research I have been doing on electric
charge, fields, and displacement of space.<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="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><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 class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Eric Reiter<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, July 16, 2017 12:10 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Photon Emission - Space<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">If
anyone talks about continuous absorption, explosive
emission, you need to include my work. I reported the
only experiments that demonstrate this effect at your
conference; a good theory also. There was no feedback
from hardly anyone. Wolf came to my lab and saw it.
Do my letters reach other blog members or is it
filtered? Please, the model of the photon does not
allow for continuous absorption. Call it light.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Thank
you.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Eric
Reiter <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">
<hr width="100%" size="2" align="center"></span></div>
<div id="ydpdb0fddc0yahoo_quoted_0618162421">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">On
Sunday, July 16, 2017, 10:04:04 AM PDT,
Roychoudhuri, Chandra <<a
href="mailto:chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu"
moz-do-not-send="true">chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div id="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059">
<div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#280E70">Chip:
Excellent!</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#280E70">Thanks
for contacting me on the “dipole” issue. </span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#280E70">I
am going to do some searching to find the
latest/best article on “abrupt dipole
transition in emission”, which then evolves
into a classical wave packet. The other model
is, “dipole quantum cup”, in absorption.
However, my thoughts (expressions) on these
topics are still in the process of evolving
(not moving away though!).</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#280E70">Chandra.
</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div id="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059yqt53076">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid
#E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">
General [<a
href="mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Chip Akins<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, July 16, 2017 8:58
AM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Nature of Light and
Particles - General Discussion' <<a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [General] Photon
Emission - Space</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Hi
Chandra<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">I
recall you mentioning something about light
being emitted or absorbed by <b>dipoles</b>.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">My
work, on electric charge as a displacement
of the tensor medium of space, has been
quite productive and yields remarkably
accurate results. But it seems to indicate
that a dipole field may be required for the
emission or absorption of energy. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Can
you elaborate on your thoughts on this
topic? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Is
there a reference to a paper where you
discuss this?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">This
“tensor medium of space” approach explains
exactly why the binding energy for hydrogen
is 13.6eV, but it also suggests that there
are specific requirements for radiation and
absorption which go beyond the simple
suggestion that “an accelerated charge
radiates”.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">I
think that is a good thing, because it also
explains why electrons in “orbit” in an atom
do not continuously radiate.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Chip<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <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="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">
General [<a
href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Dr Grahame
Blackwell<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, July 16, 2017 5:22
AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles
- General Discussion <<a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General]
Consciousness, time etc</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Wolf,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Of
all the various emails flying about, I had
to respond immediately to this one.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">I
really DON'T reject your contention -
indeed I agree with it 100%!
Consciousness is the ultimate substrate,
IMO - it's the 'ocean' in which all the
'fish' (physical phenomena) swim, and
indeed all of those 'fish' are themselves
woven by consciousness (mixing my
metaphors a bit here!). More than this,
time and space (spatial dimensions)
are themselves constructs of
consciousness. My point is simply:
accepting all of that, we don't need to
keep referring to it (any more than we
need to keep referring back to the breed
of sheep that our sweater initially comes
from!) in order to discuss and analyse
physical effects. YES, those physical
effects ARE created and sustained by
consciousness - but in a coherent and
consistent way, subject to 'physical laws'
(defined and given form by consciousness,
sure - but we can take that as read
without constantly referring back to it).
So we can reason in respect of those
'physical realities' in respect of the
'physical laws' that are built into them.
In the same way, we all agree that a log
cabin is made of wood, which has a
cellular structure; but once we have
ascertained the properties of the wood
we're using, we can carve it into
different shapes, make roof timbers,
structural supports etc of it without
having to constantly remind ourselves that
it originally came from a tree with these
types of leaves and this particular
cellular structure - though the cellular
structure is crucial to the properties of
the wood, we can take and use those
properties 'as they turn out', without
having to relate them constantly to that
cell structure. So it is, in my view,
with 'space-time' properties of 'physical
realities' (given that they are in fact
constructs of constructs of constructs of
... ultimately, consciousness).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">With
regard to your note in light blue, you may
be surprised also to hear that I have for
some long time held the view that you have
expressed (I think), namely that time is
the consequence of the experience of
consciousness sequentially along energy
lines [the issue of 'sequential' as a
causation of time rather than a
consequence is a difficult one, but not
impossible to conceptualise, as I do in
the following items]. You may be
interested in my article: 'Time, Light and
Consciousness', published by the SMN ten
years ago <a
href="http://transfinitemind.com/SMN_article.php"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://transfinitemind.com/SMN_article.php</a> (see
my 4th para: "time is the process of
consciousness moving along energy
lines") , also my blog post: 'Time doesn't
exist: a step-by-step proof' <a
href="http://www.grahameb.com/realitycheck/?p=425"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.grahameb.com/realitycheck/?p=425</a> .<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Thanks
for taking such trouble to put your ideas
across. I'm sure we're on the same page -
just looking at that page from a slightly
different angle.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">All
the best,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Grahame<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid
navy 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
4.0pt;margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">-----
Original Message ----- <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"
style="background:#E4E4E4"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">
<a href="mailto:wolf@nascentinc.com"
target="_blank"
title="wolf@nascentinc.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">Wolfgang Baer</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">To:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">
<a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank"
title="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists..natureoflightandparticles.org</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Sent:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">
Sunday, July 16, 2017 7:46 AM<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Subject:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">
Re: [General] JW on STR twin Paradox<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Grahame;<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">I
agree we need to stop the ping pong. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">And
I have to digest "Layers of Reality" since
it is an intriguing title and as such
could reflect much of my own thinking.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">That
you reject my contention that your
personal conscious perception space
underlies and always provides the aether
in which all objects you percieve exist
including the clock and the observer
riding along with it , and therefore is in
my opinion missing key to understanding
SRT and GRT and precisely relevant to your
discussion with Albrecht, is for me sad
but I assume it is because i'm not making
myself clear. I'll try to put a better
formulation together and get back in a few
weeks. Can't help making a last comment to
your comment in blue below.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">best<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Wolf<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<pre><span style="color:#26282A">Dr. Wolfgang Baer<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:#26282A">Research Director<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:#26282A">Nascent Systems Inc.<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:#26282A">tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:#26282A">E-mail <a href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">wolf@NascentInc.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">On
7/15/2017 9:07 AM, Dr Grahame Blackwell
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Wolf
(and Chip),<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">First
and most important point: I have no
wish or intention to get drawn into
the sort of 'email ping-pong' (aka
'tit-for-tat') that I've watched going
on here over this issue, so I'll try
to address these points simply with
facts as I see them - no blame, no
criticism, just observations.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Second:
the fact that I propose that certain
phenomena can be explained in a wholly
mechanistic way, without reference to
consciousness, doesn't mean that I
don't regard consciousness as having a
part to play in the
perceptual/cognitive process - far
from it. In my view consciousness is
absolutely key to anything we perceive
or analyse; however, in my view also,
consciousness has provided/evolved for
itself perceptual and analytical tools
that behave in a totally consistent
way; therefore, for analytical
purposes we can regard measurements
and conclusions as being 'so' (i.e.
actuality) at a certain level, we
don't need to agonise over how
consciousness has provided us with
them or what underlies them. [Some
may find my talk: 'Layers of Reality'
useful to understand my take on such
things: <a
href="http://transfinitemind.com/layers_of_reality.php"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://transfinitemind.com/layers_of_reality.php</a> , username:
xxxxx , password: xxxxx .] I
believe, Wolf, that if you were aware
of my own view on how central
consciousness is to the whole process,
it would surprise even you.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">With
those points in mind, I have
responded, Wolf, to your comments to
me, under those comments, in maroon
text.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Grahame<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border:none;border-left:solid navy
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
4.0pt;margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">-----
Original Message ----- <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"
style="background:#E4E4E4"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">
<a href="mailto:wolf@nascentinc.com"
target="_blank"
title="wolf@nascentinc.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">Wolfgang
Baer</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">To:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">
<a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank"
title="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists..natureoflightandparticles.org</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Sent:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">
Friday, July 14, 2017 10:02 PM<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Subject:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">
Re: [General] JW on STR twin Paradox<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Chip
and Graham:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Chip:
First I would like to agree with your
agreement regarding Special
relativity: "But I do agree that
Special Relativity, as written and
discussed by Einstein himself, has a
fundamental paradoxical logical
inconsistency, which cannot be
explained away by layers of additional
“interpretation” of his theory." This
was my original intent. First 1) to
show that inconsistencies exist in SRT
, second 2) to show that GRT was one
avenue of development that utilizes
gravity and acceleration to address
the problems in SRT and to forward our
understanding of gravity, and thirdly
3) to open the door for new
directions. I did not anticipate
getting blind sided by alternative
interpretations that then did not
further the discussion into step two
and three. At least not in a step by
step logical way.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Chip
second: "When several “observers” read
the data then collected and
communicate about that data, it is
clear to us that we have all viewed
the same data. It is therefore quite
ridiculous to assume that we, the
“observers”, had a notable effect on
the outcome of the automated
experiment weeks earlier." It is
ridiculous only within the context of
an Aristotelian framework of reality
in which one assumes there is a thing
called "the same data". What if Plato,
Kant and to some extent quantum theory
is correct and the data no matter how
or when it is viewed is and always has
been in the eye of the beholder? Then
the observer does influence the
outcome of the experiment because for
him the data he sees<b> is reality</b>
and that reality will depend upon how
he sees it.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">The
question I ask myself is can a useful
and quantitative physics be built
without "the same data" assumption.
In philosophy this is called the
"naive reality" assumption and
Aristotle's view that we are looking
out through the windows of our senses
at an objective real world has won the
day for 500 years and it seem
ridiculous to challenge all the greats
who have come to this conclusion. But
that is what I am doing.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Graham;
First If you feel that your exchange
with Albrecht was "as specifically
limited to physical realities" and
want to stay within the limits of your
definition of physical realities and
exclude how the nature of perception,
and your(my) truism that perception is
a tool of the conscious mind, effects
and to a large extent determines our
physical theories (which I believe is
at the center of understanding both
SRT and GRT and why they are
incompatible with quantum theory)
then I am sorry I interjected my
comments into your discussion. Please
keep taking and I'll just listen
quietly.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Wolf,
I am by no means dismissing your
observations on consciousness as
irrelevant to the issue of perception
- far from it. I'm simply observing
that the phenomena that Albrecht and I
have been discussing can be explained
fully satisfactorily in terms of
mechanistic interactions, without
resorting to how consciousness
interprets those interactions. In
simple terms, using my idea of 'layers
(or levels) of reality' we are simply
discussing 'facts' as presented to our
brains for analysis - trusting that
consciousness uses a consistent,
coherent and useful form in which to
convey those 'facts' (i.e.deeper
realities) to our mental processing
circuits, given that consciousness and
those processing circuits are all on
the same side! In this respect,
introducing consideration of how
consciousness has processed those
deeper realities in order to present
those 'facts' to our brains in a more
digestible format is to introduce an
unnecessary and (IMO) unhelpful level
of complexity to this issue.
Certainly there is a time and a place
for discussion of consciousness - but
(again IMO) this is not it.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">However
I find it very important to have a
polite foil to discuss what I believe
is the greatest of the grand
challenges confronting science - i.e.
the unification of subjective and
subjective experience into a new
integrated theory not of every thing,
but of every action.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">I
agree that that is indeed very
important - but it's not the subject
of the conversation that Albrecht and
I were having - that's all I was
trying to say.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Graham2;
Your second paragraph includes the
typical words "an observer or
measuring device moving with that
object will draw conclusions (by human
inference or solid-state logic) that
the object is at rest (and therefore
they are also) - wholly as a
consequence of their/its own physical
makeup being altered by that state of
motion. Likewise that moving
observer/device will assess an
objectively static object (such as an
atom) as being in a state of motion,
for exactly the same reason." The key
here is "observer or measuring device
moving with" I am only talking about
an observer. A measuring device only
relays information someone must be at
the end of the chain to realize the
information. The observer is <b>in</b>
the measuring device, he cannot get
out. He receives information and
translates it into his mental display.
Both the apparently stationary object
"moving with the observer" and any
apparently moving object in his
display will be subject to the
Lonrentz transformations BECAUSE these
appearances are always created in the
medium of that observers mind. I
believe it is a grave error to treat
the properties of the mind as an
objective independent reality. But
everyone does it until Now!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="border:none;border-left:solid navy
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
4.0pt;margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">A
measuring device provides information
in a format determined by, and so
capable of assimilation by, an
observer. In that respect I fully
agree that the observer (or a former
observer who constructed the device)
is <strong><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">in</span></strong>
the measuring device, and what the
observer takes away from that device
is as much in the perception of that
observer as it is in the device
itself. However, I repeat: the
consciousness that constructed the
device is the <strong><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">same</span></strong>
consciousness as that which is making
use of the measurements it provides -
and both are working to the same aim.
So, just as one who knitted a sweater
and one who wears the sweater are both
well aware of the intrinsic
composition of the sweater (interwoven
strands of wool, taken from a sheep
then cleaned and dyed and spun), but
neither need to be troubled by that
detail when selling or wearing the
sweater, neither consciousness nor the
brain need to agonise over <strong><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">how</span></strong>
those data came to be served up in
that form, they can simply be
processed as facts - at the level of
logical reasoning (again, see my piece
on 'layers of reality'). The question
of 'how those facts came to be in that
form' is of great interest - but it's
a separate question from the one
currently at hand.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">I
do not understand your logic. When
referring to an observer riding along with
the clock one assumes that observer
measures the same reality as the conceiver
of the thought experiment put into the
space in which the clock and the observer
is conceived. This equating the ride along
observer's observations with the "reality"
built into the thought experimenter's
space is an example of the "naive reality'
assumption. Einstein assumed his
perceptive space was reality and of course
the speed of light in that reality would
be what ever it is "c" , and all observers
must get the same result when they measure
any quantity in that reality because that
is the reality and there is only one
correct one. There is nothing inconsistent
or illogical about SRT or GRT once one
accepts the assumption that the speed of
light is an independent of the observer
objective fact. That is the assumption I
question and it is quite relevant to your
discussion with Albrecht. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<blockquote
style="border:none;border-left:solid navy
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
4.0pt;margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Graham3:
I have no disagreement with your
reciprocity argument. I only wanted to
point out that in both the cases the
human observer experiences his motion
relative to the radiation source in
his own display space.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Agreed.
That's exactly why it's essential to
consider what effect a state of motion
has on that display space, in purely
physical terms. This is what I have
done.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Graham
4: "philosophers arguing about how
many angels can dance on the point of
a needle!" makes perfect sense to
people who believe in god, heaven, and
angels as the stake your life on it
truth. Physicists arguing about what
two measuring objects will conclude
about each other also makes perfect
sense to people who believe observers
can ride along with them and see them
as independent external objects
without recognizing that they (the
observers) are doing the seeing that
creates these objects.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="border:none;border-left:solid navy
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
4.0pt;margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Wolf,
there is the world of difference
between 100% hypothetical entities
such as angels and 100% physical
experiences such as travelling
alongside an object and taking
measurements of it. Assuredly the
latter is a level of perception that
is unquestionably quite a few layers
above that of ultimate reality (if
such exists), however it is also
something that falls within the remit
of physical experience and is
therefore fair game for physical
analysis (even if we accept - as I do
- that what we are analysing is an
effect of an effect of an effect ...
it is still self-consistent and so
susceptible to analysis - unlike
angels)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">I'll
try to get a copy of the relativity
myth , sounds like a good starting
point for my 3d) effort introduced in
paragraph 1 above.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Wolf,
I'm most flattered that you consider
that my culmination of 20 years' work
may be a good starting point for one
of your hypotheses. As long as you
give due attribution for every point
of mine that you make use of, you can
be as condescending as you like!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">G<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Best
wishes<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Wolf<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<pre><span style="color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<pre><span style="color:#26282A">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:#26282A">If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:#26282A"><a href=<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:#26282A">Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:#26282A"></a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:center" align="center"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">
<hr width="100%" size="2" align="center"></span></div>
<p class="ydpdb0fddc0yiv7825678059msonormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive
communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at <a
href="mailto:grahame@starweave.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">grahame@starweave.com</a><br>
<a href="<a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/grahame%40starweave.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/grahame%40starweave.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ydpdb0fddc0yqt55795">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication
from the Nature of Light and Particles General
Discussion List at <a
href="mailto:unquant@yahoo.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">unquant@yahoo.com</a><br>
<a href="<a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/unquant%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/unquant%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<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:Wolf@nascentinc.com">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>