<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Albrecht:</p>
<p>i would be interested in the copy but I think I have access to
the referenced paper.</p>
<p>Chandra makes a good point in that as one goes to higher
frequencies wave packets tend to become more localizable and
therfore perhaps your experiment can be explained by a localized
wave rather than a particle</p>
<p>but this brings me to another question that has bothered me since
highschool. The wavelength of light is a propagation phenomena in
he direction of propagation how do people justify using it as a
measure of the wavefront size. This in radar frequencies is the
beam width. seems to me the wavelength only comes into play
because the at shorter wavelengths the beam width and be made
narrow using larger antennas. so the wave front size is determined
by the materal shpe through which the energy passes not the
wavelength<br>
</p>
<p>if we do crossection calculations using a photon model we would
be dealing with many photons , which is Chandra's argument in his
SPIE 2015 paper , the presence of many wave packets in the photo
elecric effect tells us something about the binding energy of
electron dipoles not aboit the particle nature of light. Does the
frequency of many wve packets reaching a threshold to produce an
electron positron pair not also tell us something akin to a
loading theory explained by the properties of space, that when
stimulated by many waves at a specific frequency will react at
one point because the waves randomly add up to cross a threshhold
not because the light is made of little bullets.</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">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/2/2017 12:01 PM, Albrecht Giese
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:14844045-1b4f-5913-36f6-d9133015ae83@a-giese.de">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<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"
moz-do-not-send="true"><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" 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>