<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Wolf:</p>
<p>Chandra does not hit the point in so far as the discussion was
not about the extension of the photon but about the question
whether it has a defined energy content. This is an important
criterion for whether it is a particle or only a wave packet. So
our point is about the energy transferred and not the size of
something.<br>
</p>
<p>Regarding the width of the beam of a radar or of any
configuration of dipoles: The beam width generated depends on the
relation between the wave length and the extension of the antenna.
This is a result of the superposition of the constituents of a
beam similar to the superposition and the refraction at a lattice,
which we know from optics. <br>
</p>
<p>The fact that in my experiment the energy of the originating
electron is reproduced when the photon is re-converted by pair
production shows that the exact energy is carried by the photon.
The pair building process can on the one hand not be initiated if
the energy is too low to provide that rest energy of electron and
positron. In the other hand above this threshold the pair
production process does not have any preference for a specific
energy. So, there is nothing like summing up the energy until the
pair is produced, but the energy of the pair depends on nothing
else than the energy of the originating electron. And this energy
is transported by one photon. Any other process would yield a
different result. - Or does anyone have a different explanation?<br>
</p>
<p>Albrecht<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am Wed, 2 Aug 2017 23:08:52 -0700
schrieb Wolfgang Baer <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:wolf@nascentinc.com"><wolf@nascentinc.com></a>:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:498cdfe1-8876-98f6-6bed-438197b6d1d4@a-giese.de">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<br>
<div class="moz-forward-container">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<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" moz-do-not-send="true">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" 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>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>