<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Albrecht:</p>
<p>That equation waS copied out of Einsteins 1905 Paper , I gave the
book back to the Library and will have to order it again to verify
exactly the context Einstiein used it. It may be I copied the
formula wrong and Einstein actually wrote c = c<sub>0</sub>*(1/(1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>)
which the gives c<sup>2</sup> = c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup> +v<sup>2</sup>.</p>
<p>In any case if I multiply by the mass "m" of the particle and
takes the small velocity approximation one gets mc<sup>2</sup> =
mc<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup> *(1/(1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>)
=~ mc<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>+1/2 mv<sup>2</sup></p>
<p>I believe the point I was trying to make is that the classic
Lagrangian = T-V which equals mc<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>+1/2 mv<sup>2
</sup>if mc<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>= -GmMu/Ru . So I'm saying if
we simply recognize that a mass "m" even stationary has a
gravitational potential inside the mass shell of the universe then
at least to terms v4/c4 a completely classic model actually gives
us all of the experimentally verified Relativity predictions. <br>
</p>
<p>Furthermore if we write mc<sup>2</sup> = m<sub>0</sub>c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>
*(1/(1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>)
then it is quite arbitrary to which parameter m<sub>0</sub> or c<sub>0
</sub>one apples the SRT correction to. You like applying it to
the mass and say that mass increases. I thought it makes more
sense to apply it to the speed of light <br>
</p>
<p>Whether I made a mistake in copying Einsteins formula or not the
argument I was trying to make is the same. The speed of light
depends upon the gravitational potential in which the measurement
of the speed of light is made, it is not constant</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Wolf<br>
</p>
<p> <br>
</p>
<p> <br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Dr. Wolfgang
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 7/30/2017 12:00 PM, Albrecht Giese
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:b029f006-e522-0df0-71f5-f5d2b7dc40d9@a-giese.de">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<p>Wolf,</p>
<p>in my mail of July 6 I have explained that any particle
accelerator and particularly a synchrotron is a permanent check
for the speed of light, and in particular also a check of the
Lorentz transformation where it describes the behaviour of an
object being accelerated towards c. And that a behaviour of
physics regarding c different from the Lorentz transformation
would require a different design of particle accelerators. So,
the opinion of main stream regarded the measured value of the
speed of light is permanently confirmed.<br>
</p>
<p>And in your mail of July 4 you presented the following equation
for the speed of light:<br>
c<sup>2</sup> = c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup> *(1/(1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>).<br>
What ever the conditions for this equation should be, there
exist conditions for c to go to infinity. To this equation I
have referred. <br>
</p>
<p>Albrecht<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 29.07.2017 um 08:21 schrieb
Wolfgang Baer:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:4c4116f9-1264-5123-93c1-d39644cc4036@nascentinc.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<p>Clarification: <br>
</p>
<p> I have submitted equations in which the approximation of (
+2mm<sub>l</sub>G/r -2mc<sup>2</sup>- mv<sup>2</sup>)<sup>-1/2</sup>
=<sup> </sup>~ <sup> </sup>1/2 mv<sup>2</sup> + mc<sup>2</sup>
-mm<sub>l</sub>G/r</p>
<p>So that simply by recognizing that mc<sup>2 </sup>is the
classic potential energy inside a mass shell -m *Mu* G/Ru
ofthe Universe we get a very simple cosmology that is
completely consistent with all known experiments - the
assumption is simply that the speed of light as a surrogate
for the speed of all electromagnetic phenomena is dependent
upon the gravitational potential which was shown by Shapiro's
experiments. and light bending.and clock slow downs. I
interpret c<sup>2</sup> is the universe escape velocity. <br>
</p>
<p>This does not mean the speed of light is infinite but only
that if we could get outside the mass shell in flat space
where the gravitational energy of the universe mass is zero
the speed of light is some reference c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>
In both case the speed of lighjt and the energy is only
determined to an arbitrary reference constant what is
important is the relative energy or speed of light <br>
</p>
<p>I'm tired of not being recognized as an intelligent physicist
doing physics. I'm only claiming that the the first order
approximation is all I know that has been experimentally
verified length contraction and close to speed of light
experiments are only verified through circular reasoning <br>
</p>
<p>I have asked Albrecht for references to experiments that show
otherwise a half dozen times but am always ignored <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>wolf<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" moz-do-not-send="true">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/28/2017 8:54 AM, Albrecht
Giese wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:c5412a70-519c-b7ce-cfea-9c95bc84890b@a-giese.de">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<p>Chandra,</p>
<p>you have written here a lot of good and true
considerations; with most of them I can agree. However two
comments from my view:</p>
<p>1.) The speed of light: <br>
The speed of light when <i>measured in vacuum </i>shows
always a constant value. Einstein has taken this result as a
fact in so far that the real speed of light is constant.
However if we follow the Lorentzian interpretation of
relativity then only the <i>measured </i>c is constant. It
looks constant because, if the measurement equipment is in
motion, the instruments change their indications so that the
result shows the known constant value. - I personally follow
the Lorentzian relativity because in this version the
relativistic phenomena can be deduced from known physical
behaviour. So, it is true physics.<br>
</p>
<p>There is a different understanding of what Wolf thinks. He
has in the preceding discussion here given an equation,
according to which the speed of light can go up to infinity.
This is to my knowledge in conflict with any measurement.<br>
</p>
<p>2) The quantisation of light:<br>
This was also discussed repeatedly here in these mails. And
I have (also) repeatedly referred to my PhD experiment,
which was Compton scattering at protons. An electron of
defined energy was converted into a photon. The photon was
scattered at a proton at extreme small angles (so almost no
influence) and then re-converted into an electron-positron
pair. This pair was measured and it reproduced quite exactly
(by better than 2 percent) the energy of the originals
electron. This was repeated for electrons of different
energies. - I do not see any explanation for this process
without the assumption that there was a photon (i.e. a
quantum) of a well defined energy, not a light wave. <br>
</p>
<p>How does this fit into your understanding?</p>
<p>Best wishes<br>
Albrecht</p>
<p>PS: Can I find your book "Causal Physics" online?<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 26.07.2017 um 18:52 schrieb
Roychoudhuri, Chandra:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:BN6PR05MB323431CF49B41C7C99221EC393B90@BN6PR05MB3234.namprd05.prod.outlook.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<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:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
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
{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;
color:black;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
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;
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:"Consolas",serif;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.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">Wolf: <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">You have said it well:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i>“Concentrating on finding the
mechanisms of connection between the Hallucination and
the reality is my approach. I think the constant speed
of light assumption is one of the first pillars that
must fall. If there is such a constant it should in my
opinion be interpreted as the speed of Now…”. <o:p></o:p></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yes, “constant c” is a fundamentally
flawed postulate by the theoretician Einstein, so fond
of “Gedanken Experiments”. Unfortunately, one can cook
up wide varieties of logically self-consistent
mathematical theories and then match them up with
“Gedanken” experiments! We know that in the real world,
we know that the velocity of light is dictated by both
the medium and the velocity of the medium. Apparently,
Einstein’s “Gedanken Experiment” of riding the crest of
a light wave inspired him to construct SRT and sold all
the mathematical physicists that nature if 4-diemsional.
Out of the “Messiah Complex”, we now believe that the
universe could be 5, or, 7, or 11, or, 13, ….
dimensional system where many of the dimensions are
“folded in” !!!! By the way, running time is not a
measurable physical parameter. We can contract or dilate
frequency of diverse oscillators, using proper physical
influence, not the running time. Frequency of
oscillators help us measure a period (or time interval).
<span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Wise human thinkers have recognized
this “Hallucination” problem from ancient times, which
are obvious (i) from Asian perspective of how five
blinds can collaborate to construct a reasonable model
of the Cosmic Elephant and then keep on iterating the
model ad infinitum, or (ii) Western perspective of
“shadows of external objects projected inside a cave
wall”. Unfortunately, we become “groupies” of our
contemporary “messiahs” to survive economically and feel
“belonging to the sociaety”. The result is the current
sad state of moribund physics thinking. Fortunately,
many people have started challenging this moribund
status quo with papers, books, and web forums. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So, I see well-recognizable
renaissance in physics coming within a few decades! Yes,
it will take time. Einstein’s “indivisible quanta” of
1905 still dominates our vocabulary; even though no
optical engineer ever try to propagate an “indivisible
quanta”; they always propagate light waves.
Unfortunately, they propagate Fourier monochromatic
modes that neither exits in nature; nor is a causal
signal. [I have been trying to correct this fundamental
confusion through my book, “Causal Physics”.]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Coming back to our methodology of
thinking, I have defined an iterative approach in the
Ch.12 of the above book. I have now generalized the
approach by anchoring our sustainable evolution to
remain anchored with the reality of nature! “Urgency of
Evolution Process Congruent Thinking” [see attached].<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">However, one can immediately bring a
challenge. If all our interpretations are cooked up by
our neural network for survival; then who has the
authority to define objective reality? Everybody, but
collaboratively, like modeling the “Cosmic Elephant”.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Let us realize the fact that the
seeing “color” is an interpretation by the brain. It is
a complete figment of our neuro-genetic interpretation!
That is why none of us will succeed in quantitatively
defining the subtlety of color variation of any
magnificent color painting without a quantitative
spectrometer. The “color” is not an objective parameter;
but the frequency is (not wavelength, though!). One can
now recognize the subtle difference, from seeing
“color”, to <b><i>quantifying energy content per
frequency interval.</i></b> This is “objective”
science determined by instruments without a “mind”,
which is reproducible outside of human interpretations.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">And, we have already mastered this
technology quite a bit. The biosphere exists. It has
been nurturing biological lives for over 3.5 billion
years without the intervention of humans. We are a very
late product of this evolution. This is an objective
recognition on our part! Our, successful evolution
needed “instantaneous color” recognition to survive for
our day-to-day living in our earlier stage. We have now
overcome our survival mode as a species. And we now have
become a pest in the biosphere, instead of becoming the
caretaker of it for our own long-term future. <b><i>This
is the sad break in our wisdom.</i></b> This is why
I am promoting the concept, “Urgency of Evolution
Process Congruent Thinking”. This approach helps
generate a common, but perpetually evolving thinking
platform for all thinkers, whether working to understand
Nature’s Engineering (Physics, Chemistry, Biology, etc.)
or, to carry out our Social Engineering (Economics,
Politics, Religions, etc.).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sincerely,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Chandra.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><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;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">
General [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
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>Wolfgang Baer<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 26, 2017 12:40 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Role of observer, a
deeper path to introspection<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p>Chandra:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Unfortunately the TED talk does not work on my machine
but the transcript is available and Anl Seth states what
many people studying the human psyche as well as eastern
philosophy have said for centuries , Yes we are
Hallucinating reality and our physics is built upon that
hallucination, but it works so well, or does it? <o:p></o:p></p>
<p>However as Don Hoffmancognitive scientist UC Irvine
contends <a
href="https://www.ted.com/talks/donald_hoffman_do_we_see_reality_as_it_is"
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://www.ted.com/talks/donald_hoffman_do_we_see_reality_as_it_is</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p>What we see is like the icons on a computer screen, a
file icon may only be a symbol of what is real on the
disk, but these icons as well as the "hallucinations"
are connected to some reality and we must take them
seriously. Deleting the icon also deletes the disk which
may have disastrous consequences.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>For our discussion group it means we can take Albrechts
route and try to understand the universe and photons
first based upon the idea that it is independently real
and then solve the human consciousness problem or we can
take the opposite approach and rebuild a physics
without the independent physical reality assumption and
see if we cannot build out a truly macroscopic quantum
theory. Concentrating on finding the mechanisms of
connection between the Hallucination and the reality is
my approach. I think the constant speed of light
assumption is one of the first pillars that must fall.
If there is such a constant it should in my opinion be
interpreted as the speed of Now , a property we
individually apply to all our observations. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p>best<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Wolf<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>Dr. Wolfgang Baer<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Research Director<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Nascent Systems Inc.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>E-mail <a href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com" moz-do-not-send="true">wolf@NascentInc.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 7/23/2017 2:44 PM, Roychoudhuri,
Chandra wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">Dear
colleagues:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">Lately
there has been continuing discussion on the role of
observer and the reality. I view that to be healthy.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">We
must guide ourselves to understand and model the
universe without human mind shaping the cosmic
system and its working rules. This suggestion comes
from the fact that our own logic puts the universe
to be at least 13 billion years old, while we, in
the human form, have started evolving barely 5
million years ago (give or take). </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">However,
we are not smart enough to determine a well-defined
and decisive path, as yet. Our search must
accommodate perpetual iteration of thinking strategy
as we keep on advancing. This is well justified in
the following TED-talk. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">Enjoy:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"><a
href="https://www.ted.com/talks/anil_seth_how_your_brain_hallucinates_your_conscious_reality?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2017-07-22&utm_campaign=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email&utm_content=talk_of_the_week_image"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.ted.com/talks/anil_seth_how_your_brain_hallucinates_your_conscious_reality?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2017-07-22&utm_campaign=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email&utm_content=talk_of_the_week_image</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#1F497D">Chandra.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>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" moz-do-not-send="true">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href=<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" 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></pre>
<pre>Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre></a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</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:phys@a-giese.de" moz-do-not-send="true">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br>
<table style="border-top: 1px solid #D3D4DE;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width: 55px; padding-top: 18px;"><a
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><img
src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif"
alt="" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;"
moz-do-not-send="true" height="29" width="46"></a></td>
<td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 17px; color:
#41424e; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,
Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 18px;">Virenfrei.
<a
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient"
target="_blank" style="color: #4453ea;"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.avast.com</a> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<a href="#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1"
height="1" moz-do-not-send="true"> </a></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" moz-do-not-send="true">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" moz-do-not-send="true">"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>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" moz-do-not-send="true">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<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>