<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <p>Dear Eric,</p>
    <p>it is not so simple to mail you my thesis, because by that time
      (1975) nothing was made available online. My original paper is
      more than 80 pages, so not so easy to scan it. But DESY has
      published in advance a short form of the experiment, accessible by
      the following reference:</p>
    <p>G. Buschhorn et al.,  <span>Measurement of proton compton
        scattering at 6 GeV and small momentum transfers,</span> 
      Physics Letters B, Volume 33, Issue 3, 1970, pp. 241-244.</p>
    <p>Do you have access to Physics Letters? In case not, I can mail
      you a copy of it.</p>
    <p>Regards<br>
      Albrecht<br>
    </p>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 01.08.2017 um 20:52 schrieb Eric
      Reiter:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:1770707350.4893859.1501613527270@mail.yahoo.com">
      <div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times,
        serif;font-size:medium;">
        <div>Eric says: Dear Albrecht. </div>
        <div>Please.  I would like a copy of your thesis.  </div>
        <div>Thank You.  Eric S Reiter</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <hr>
        <div id="ydp69cfd7dfyahoo_quoted_2142183522"
          class="ydp69cfd7dfyahoo_quoted">
          <div style="font-family:'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial,
            sans-serif;font-size:13px;color:#26282a;">
            <div>On Monday, July 31, 2017, 2:26:20 PM PDT, Wolfgang Baer
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wolf@nascentinc.com"><wolf@nascentinc.com></a> wrote:</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>
              <div id="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608">
                <div>
                  <p>Albrecht:</p>
                  <p>Thank you for Einsein's Paper especially a german
                    version. As I said I can no longer remember the
                    exact reference for the formula and but it was a
                    book edited by Sommerfeld " The principle of
                    Relativity" in which several of Einsteins papers
                    were translated into english. I'll try to chase it
                    down.</p>
                  <p>I'm sorry I do not find your references to
                    synchotron experiments that prove the speed of light
                    is constant, I do have your thesis experiment but
                    thought this pertained to the photon question , nor
                    can I find your equation of the change in c in a
                    gravitational field.<br clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p>But in any case is the formula mc<sup>2</sup> = m<sub>0</sub>c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>
                    *(1/(1 + 2x/c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>)
                    = ~  m<sub>0</sub>c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup> + mx -
                    (1/2)v<sup>2</sup>  where "x" the local
                    gravitational potential,  not correct for a single
                    mass particle traveling at velocity v , and is the
                    approximation not correct for v< c? <br
                      clear="none">
                  </p>
                  According to Mach's principle  mc<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>
                  = -mMuG/Ru   in other words mc<sub>0</sub><sup>2 </sup>is
                  the gravity potential in intergalactic space but still
                  inside the mass shell <br clear="none">
                  <br clear="none">
                  So these considerations gives me a very simple classic
                  visualization of most of the relativistic effects, 
                  when v<sup>4</sup>/c<sup>4</sup> terms can be
                  neglected. All I've done is acknowledged that there is
                  a universe mass shell gravity effect on the  speed of
                  light, and if we accept that then we can retain most
                  of our classic physics. <br clear="none">
                  <br clear="none">
                  What I am looking for is experiments that prove
                  Einstein's general relativity is correct beyond the v<sup>4</sup>/c<sup>4</sup>
                  approximation. <br clear="none">
                  <br clear="none">
                  <br clear="none">
                  <br clear="none">
                  AS an interesting aside if you accept that all we need
                  to do is include the Mass shell in the gravity
                  potential then we can rewrite the energy relation as a
                  momentum relationship <br clear="none">
                  <br clear="none">
                  mc = m<sub>0</sub>c<sub>0</sub> *(1/(c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>
                  + 2x  - v<sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>) =  m<sub>0</sub>c<sub>0</sub>
                  *(1/(V-T)<sup>1/2</sup>) = m<sub>0</sub>c<sub>0</sub>
                  *(1/(L)<sup>1/2</sup>) <br clear="none">
                  <br clear="none">
                  and multipying by c<sub>0</sub><br clear="none">
                  gives    mcc<sub>0</sub> = m<sub>0</sub>c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup> 
                  *(1/(L)<sup>1/2</sup>) <br clear="none">
                  which suggests the Relativistic correction simply
                  accounts for the fact that phase rather than group
                  velocity is used in some measurements like michelson
                  morely and light bending while group velocity is used
                  in Shapiro's measurements. I have not pursued this but
                  always wondered that the wave mechanics has a phase x
                  group velocity be a constant.<br clear="none">
                  <br clear="none">
                  Wolf<br clear="none">
                  <pre class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-signature">Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail <a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
                  <div class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-cite-prefix">On
                    7/31/2017 8:08 AM, Albrecht Giese wrote:<br
                      clear="none">
                  </div>
                  <blockquote type="cite"> </blockquote>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p>Wolf,</p>
                  <p>attached I have added here the original paper of
                    Einstein from 1905 as a facsimile (so in German). I
                    cannot find your equation in his paper.</p>
                  <p>Regarding the change of c in a gravitational field:
                    I have given you several times the equation for
                    that. So not a point of discussion. But you
                    complained in the other mail that you have asked me
                    half a dozen times for a measurement of the speed of
                    light, without response as you said. For this I have
                    given you the reference to my earlier mail where I
                    referred to and explained the permanent measurement
                    of c in particle accelerators, particularly in
                    synchrotrons. Also in synchrotrons it follows from
                    the finiteness of c  that the mass <i>m </i>increases
                    with an increasing energy of the particles. <br
                      clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p>Further questions?</p>
                  <p>Albrecht<br clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <br clear="none">
                  <div class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-cite-prefix">Am
                    31.07.2017 um 08:08 schrieb Wolfgang Baer:<br
                      clear="none">
                  </div>
                  <blockquote type="cite"> </blockquote>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <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 clear="none">
                  </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 clear="none">
                  </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 clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p>Wolf<br clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p> <br clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p> <br clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <pre class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-signature">Dr. Wolfgang 
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail <a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
                  <div class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-cite-prefix">On
                    7/30/2017 12:00 PM, Albrecht Giese wrote:<br
                      clear="none">
                  </div>
                  <blockquote type="cite"> </blockquote>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <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 clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p>And in your mail of July 4 you presented the
                    following equation for the speed of light:<br
                      clear="none">
                    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
                      clear="none">
                    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 clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p>Albrecht<br clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <br clear="none">
                  <div class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-cite-prefix">Am
                    29.07.2017 um 08:21 schrieb Wolfgang Baer:<br
                      clear="none">
                  </div>
                  <blockquote type="cite"> </blockquote>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p>Clarification: <br clear="none">
                  </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 clear="none">
                  </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 clear="none">
                  </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
                      clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p>I have asked Albrecht for references to experiments
                    that show otherwise a half dozen times but am always
                    ignored <br clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p><br clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p>wolf<br clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <pre class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-signature">Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail <a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
                  <div class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-cite-prefix">On
                    7/28/2017 8:54 AM, Albrecht Giese wrote:<br
                      clear="none">
                  </div>
                  <blockquote type="cite"> </blockquote>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <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 clear="none">
                    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 clear="none">
                  </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 clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p>2) The quantisation of light:<br clear="none">
                    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 clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p>How does this fit into your understanding?</p>
                  <p>Best wishes<br clear="none">
                    Albrecht</p>
                  <p>PS: Can I find your book "Causal Physics" online?<br
                      clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <p><br clear="none">
                  </p>
                  <br clear="none">
                  <div class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-cite-prefix">Am
                    26.07.2017 um 18:52 schrieb Roychoudhuri, Chandra:<br
                      clear="none">
                  </div>
                  <blockquote type="cite"> </blockquote>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608WordSection1">
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal">Wolf:</p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal">You
                      have said it well:</p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><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…”.
                      </i></p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"> </p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal">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;"></span></p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"> </p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal">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.</p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"> </p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal">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”.]</p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"> </p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal">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].</p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"> </p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal">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”.</p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"> </p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal">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.</p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"> </p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal">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.).</p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"> </p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal">Sincerely,</p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal">Chandra.</p>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><span
                        style="font-size:11.0pt;">  </span></p>
                    <div>
                      <div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
                        1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in;">
                        <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><b><span
                              style="font-size:11.0pt;">From:</span></b><span
                            style="font-size:11.0pt;"> General [<a
                              shape="rect"
                              class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
                              rel="nofollow" target="_blank"
                              moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]<b>On
                              Behalf Of </b>Wolfgang Baer<br
                              clear="none">
                            <b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 26, 2017 12:40
                            AM<br clear="none">
                            <b>To:</b> <a shape="rect"
                              class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" rel="nofollow"
                              target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br
                              clear="none">
                            <b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Role of
                            observer, a deeper path to introspection</span></p>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"> </p>
                    <p>Chandra:</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?</p>
                    <p>However  as Don Hoffmancognitive scientist UC
                      Irvine  contends <a shape="rect"
href="https://www.ted.com/talks/donald_hoffman_do_we_see_reality_as_it_is"
                        rel="nofollow" target="_blank"
                        moz-do-not-send="true">
                        https://www.ted.com/talks/donald_hoffman_do_we_see_reality_as_it_is</a></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.</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. </p>
                    <p>best</p>
                    <p>Wolf</p>
                    <pre>Dr. Wolfgang Baer</pre>
                    <pre>Research Director</pre>
                    <pre>Nascent Systems Inc.</pre>
                    <pre>tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432</pre>
                    <pre>E-mail <a shape="rect" href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
                    <div>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal">On
                        7/23/2017 2:44 PM, Roychoudhuri, Chandra wrote:</p>
                    </div>
                    <blockquote
                      style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt;">
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><span
                          style="font-size:14.0pt;">Dear colleagues:</span></p>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><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></p>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><span
                          style="font-size:14.0pt;"> </span></p>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><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></p>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><span
                          style="font-size:14.0pt;"> </span></p>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><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></p>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><span
                          style="font-size:14.0pt;">Enjoy:</span></p>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><span
                          style="font-size:14.0pt;"> </span></p>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><span
                          style="font-size:14.0pt;"><a shape="rect"
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"
                            rel="nofollow" target="_blank"
                            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></p>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><span
                          style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#1F497D;"> </span></p>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><span
                          style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#1F497D;">Chandra.</span></p>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><span
                          style="font-size:14.0pt;"> </span></p>
                      <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"><br
                          clear="none">
                        <br clear="none">
                        <br clear="none">
                      </p>
                      <pre>_______________________________________________</pre>
                      <pre>If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a shape="rect" href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a></pre>
                      <pre><a href=<a shape="rect" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>></pre>
                      <pre>Click here to unsubscribe</pre>
                      <pre></a></pre>
                    </blockquote>
                    <p class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608MsoNormal"> </p>
                  </div>
                  <br clear="none">
                  <fieldset
                    class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
                  <br clear="none">
                  <pre>_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" 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>
                  <br clear="none">
                  <div
                    id="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br
                      clear="none">
                    <table style="border-top:1px solid #D3D4DE;">
                      <tbody>
                        <tr>
                          <td colspan="1" rowspan="1"
                            style="width:55px;padding-top:18px;"><a
                              shape="rect"
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient"
                              rel="nofollow" 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;min-height:29px;"
                                moz-do-not-send="true" height="29"
                                width="46"></a></td>
                          <td colspan="1" rowspan="1"
style="width:470px;padding-top:17px;color:#41424e;font-size:13px;font-family:Arial,
                            Helvetica, sans-serif;line-height:18px;">Virenfrei.
                            <a shape="rect"
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient"
                              style="color:#4453ea;" rel="nofollow"
                              target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.avast.com</a>
                          </td>
                        </tr>
                      </tbody>
                    </table>
                    <div class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608yqt8044876986"
                      id="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608yqtfd90837"> <a
                        shape="rect"
                        href="#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"
                        rel="nofollow" target="_blank"
                        moz-do-not-send="true"> </a></div>
                  </div>
                  <div class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608yqt8044876986"
                    id="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608yqtfd46267"> <br
                      clear="none">
                    <fieldset
                      class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
                    <br clear="none">
                    <pre>_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a>
<a href=<a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" 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>
                    <br clear="none">
                    <br clear="none">
                    <fieldset
                      class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
                    <br clear="none">
                    <pre>_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" 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>
                    <br clear="none">
                    <br clear="none">
                    <fieldset
                      class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
                    <br clear="none">
                    <pre>_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a>
<a href=<a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" 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>
                    <br clear="none">
                    <br clear="none">
                    <fieldset
                      class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
                    <br clear="none">
                    <pre>_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" 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>
                    <br clear="none">
                    <br clear="none">
                    <fieldset
                      class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
                    <br clear="none">
                    <pre>_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a>
<a href=<a shape="rect" class="ydp69cfd7dfyiv5536154608moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" 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>
                    <br clear="none">
                  </div>
                </div>
              </div>
              <div class="ydp69cfd7dfyqt8044876986"
                id="ydp69cfd7dfyqtfd41830">_______________________________________________<br
                  clear="none">
                If you no longer wish to receive communication from the
                Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
                <a shape="rect" href="mailto:unquant@yahoo.com"
                  rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">unquant@yahoo.com</a><br
                  clear="none">
                <a href="<a shape="rect"
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/unquant%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
                  rel="nofollow" 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
                  clear="none">
                Click here to unsubscribe<br clear="none">
                </a><br clear="none">
              </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:phys@a-giese.de">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>