<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Albrecht:</p>
<p>I mentioned the Michelson Morley experiment because the URL I
sent is an interesting alternative that gives a completely
different answer which is probably wrong Watch <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNEryiOKkrc">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNEryiOKkrc</a></p>
<p>However in general this experiment is extremely pertinent because
the inability to detect ether drift is one of the main pillars of
Einstein's approach and one of the main pillars of my
consciousness theory of why why we should not detect the
background space which is attached and generated by us. I am
working on my book fro ROutledge Press and would be happy to start
sending you parts of it for comments on this observer oriented
event theory. <br>
</p>
<p>You are very right I should learn more about synchrotrons but we
re not discussing the standard text book approach and its
assumptions so I am hoping you will meet me half way and tell my
specifically why you think I'm wrong instead of generally asking
me to go look at a text book and hoping I would guess your
objection. <br>
</p>
<p>Now you've started to be mores specific and I greatly appreciate
that. The definition of momentum is <span class="MathJax"
id="MathJax-Element-14-Frame" tabindex="0" style="text-align:
center; position: relative;" data-mathml="<math
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"
display="block"><mrow
class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"><mover><mi>p</mi><mo
stretchy="false">→</mo></mover></mrow><mo>=</mo><mstyle
displaystyle="true"
scriptlevel="0"><mfrac><mrow><msub><mi>m</mi><mi>p</mi></msub><mrow
class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"><mover><mi>v</mi><mo
stretchy="false">→</mo></mover></mrow></mrow><msqrt><mn>1</mn><mo>−</mo><mfrac><msup><mi>v</mi><mn>2</mn></msup><msup><mi>c</mi><mn>2</mn></msup></mfrac></msqrt></mfrac></mstyle></math>"
role="presentation"><nobr><span class="math"
id="MathJax-Span-66" style="width: 6.485em; display:
inline-block;"><span style="display: inline-block; position:
relative; width: 5.988em; height: 0px; font-size: 108%;"><span
style="position: absolute; clip: rect(0.398em,
1005.99em, 4.14em, -1000em); top: -2.16em; left: 0em;"><span
class="mrow" id="MathJax-Span-67"><span
class="texatom" id="MathJax-Span-68"><span
class="mrow" id="MathJax-Span-69"><span
class="munderover" id="MathJax-Span-70"><span
style="display: inline-block; position:
relative; width: 0.556em; height: 0px;"><span
style="position: absolute; clip:
rect(3.385em, 1000.5em, 4.392em, -1000em);
top: -4.012em; left: 0em;"><span class="mi"
id="MathJax-Span-71" style="font-family:
MathJax_Math; font-style: italic;">p</span><span
style="display: inline-block; width: 0px;
height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="position: absolute; top: -4.093em;
left: 0.114em;"><span style="height: 0em;
vertical-align: 0em; width: 0.471em;
display: inline-block; overflow: hidden;"></span><span
class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-72"
style="font-family: MathJax_Main;"> <span
style="height: 0em; vertical-align: 0em;
margin-left: -0.247em;"></span></span><span
style="display: inline-block; overflow:
hidden; height: 1px; width: 0em;"></span><span
style="display: inline-block; width: 0px;
height: 4.012em;"></span></span></span></span></span></span><span
class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-73" style="font-family:
MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.278em;">=</span><span
class="mstyle" id="MathJax-Span-74"
style="padding-left: 0.278em;"><span class="mrow"
id="MathJax-Span-75"><span class="mfrac"
id="MathJax-Span-76"><span style="display:
inline-block; position: relative; width:
3.873em; height: 0px; margin-right: 0.12em;
margin-left: 0.12em;"><span style="position:
absolute; clip: rect(3.032em, 1001.78em,
4.485em, -1000em); top: -4.794em; left: 50%;
margin-left: -0.9em;"><span class="mrow"
id="MathJax-Span-77"><span class="msubsup"
id="MathJax-Span-78"><span
style="display: inline-block;
position: relative; width: 1.309em;
height: 0px;"><span style="position:
absolute; clip: rect(3.385em,
1000.86em, 4.209em, -1000em); top:
-4.012em; left: 0em;"><span
class="mi" id="MathJax-Span-79"
style="font-family: MathJax_Math;
font-style: italic;">m</span><span
style="display: inline-block;
width: 0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="position: absolute; top:
-3.862em; left: 0.878em;"><span
class="mi" id="MathJax-Span-80"
style="font-size: 70.7%;
font-family: MathJax_Math;
font-style: italic;">p</span><span
style="display: inline-block;
width: 0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span></span></span><span
class="texatom" id="MathJax-Span-81"><span
class="mrow" id="MathJax-Span-82"><span
class="munderover"
id="MathJax-Span-83"><span
style="display: inline-block;
position: relative; width:
0.491em; height: 0px;"><span
style="position: absolute; clip:
rect(3.384em, 1000.47em,
4.209em, -1000em); top:
-4.012em; left: 0em;"><span
class="mi"
id="MathJax-Span-84"
style="font-family:
MathJax_Math; font-style:
italic;">v</span><span
style="display: inline-block;
width: 0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="position: absolute; top:
-4.094em; left: 0.049em;"><span
style="height: 0em;
vertical-align: 0em; width:
0.471em; display:
inline-block; overflow:
hidden;"></span><span
class="mo"
id="MathJax-Span-85"
style="font-family:
MathJax_Main;"> <span
style="height: 0em;
vertical-align: 0em;
margin-left: -0.247em;"></span></span><span
style="display: inline-block;
overflow: hidden; height: 1px;
width: 0em;"></span><span
style="display: inline-block;
width: 0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span
style="display: inline-block; width: 0px;
height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="position: absolute; clip:
rect(2.675em, 1003.75em, 4.845em, -1000em);
top: -2.866em; left: 50%; margin-left:
-1.876em;"><span class="msqrt"
id="MathJax-Span-86"><span style="display:
inline-block; position: relative; width:
3.753em; height: 0px;"><span
style="position: absolute; clip:
rect(2.856em, 1002.73em, 4.668em,
-1000em); top: -4.012em; left: 1em;"><span
class="mrow" id="MathJax-Span-87"><span
class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-88"
style="font-family: MathJax_Main;">1</span><span
class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-89"
style="font-family: MathJax_Main;
padding-left: 0.222em;">−</span><span
class="mfrac" id="MathJax-Span-90"
style="padding-left: 0.222em;"><span
style="display: inline-block;
position: relative; width:
0.766em; height: 0px;
margin-right: 0.12em;
margin-left: 0.12em;"><span
style="position: absolute;
clip: rect(3.29em, 1000.65em,
4.205em, -1000em); top:
-4.446em; left: 50%;
margin-left: -0.323em;"><span
class="msubsup"
id="MathJax-Span-91"><span
style="display:
inline-block; position:
relative; width: 0.646em;
height: 0px;"><span
style="position:
absolute; clip:
rect(3.514em, 1000.33em,
4.205em, -1000em); top:
-4.012em; left: 0em;"><span
class="mi"
id="MathJax-Span-92"
style="font-size:
70.7%; font-family:
MathJax_Math;
font-style: italic;">v</span><span
style="display:
inline-block; width:
0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="position:
absolute; top: -4.217em;
left: 0.343em;"><span
class="mn"
id="MathJax-Span-93"
style="font-size: 50%;
font-family:
MathJax_Main;">2</span><span
style="display:
inline-block; width:
0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span></span></span><span
style="display:
inline-block; width: 0px;
height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="position: absolute;
clip: rect(3.29em, 1000.61em,
4.205em, -1000em); top:
-3.549em; left: 50%;
margin-left: -0.305em;"><span
class="msubsup"
id="MathJax-Span-94"><span
style="display:
inline-block; position:
relative; width: 0.609em;
height: 0px;"><span
style="position:
absolute; clip:
rect(3.515em, 1000.3em,
4.205em, -1000em); top:
-4.012em; left: 0em;"><span
class="mi"
id="MathJax-Span-95"
style="font-size:
70.7%; font-family:
MathJax_Math;
font-style: italic;">c</span><span
style="display:
inline-block; width:
0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="position:
absolute; top: -4.217em;
left: 0.306em;"><span
class="mn"
id="MathJax-Span-96"
style="font-size: 50%;
font-family:
MathJax_Main;">2</span><span
style="display:
inline-block; width:
0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span></span></span><span
style="display:
inline-block; width: 0px;
height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="position: absolute;
clip: rect(0.787em, 1000.77em,
1.235em, -1000em); top:
-1.269em; left: 0em;"><span
style="display:
inline-block; overflow:
hidden; vertical-align: 0em;
border-top: 1.3px solid;
width: 0.766em; height:
0px;"></span><span
style="display:
inline-block; width: 0px;
height: 1.049em;"></span></span></span></span></span><span
style="display: inline-block; width:
0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="position: absolute; clip:
rect(3.554em, 1002.75em, 3.97em,
-1000em); top: -4.891em; left: 1em;"><span
style="display: inline-block;
position: relative; width: 2.753em;
height: 0px;"><span style="position:
absolute; font-family:
MathJax_Main; top: -4.012em; left:
-0.084em;">−<span style="display:
inline-block; width: 0px;
height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="position: absolute;
font-family: MathJax_Main; top:
-4.012em; left: 2.059em;">−<span
style="display: inline-block;
width: 0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="font-family: MathJax_Main;
position: absolute; top: -4.012em;
left: 0.433em;">−<span
style="display: inline-block;
width: 0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="font-family: MathJax_Main;
position: absolute; top: -4.012em;
left: 0.975em;">−<span
style="display: inline-block;
width: 0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="font-family: MathJax_Main;
position: absolute; top: -4.012em;
left: 1.517em;">−<span
style="display: inline-block;
width: 0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span></span><span
style="display: inline-block; width:
0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="position: absolute; clip:
rect(2.677em, 1001.02em, 4.848em,
-1000em); top: -4.014em; left: 0em;"><span
style="font-family: MathJax_Size2;">√</span><span
style="display: inline-block; width:
0px; height: 4.012em;"></span></span></span></span><span
style="display: inline-block; width: 0px;
height: 4.012em;"></span></span><span
style="position: absolute; clip:
rect(0.787em, 1003.87em, 1.235em, -1000em);
top: -1.269em; left: 0em;"><span
style="display: inline-block; overflow:
hidden; vertical-align: 0em; border-top:
1.3px solid; width: 3.873em; height: 0px;"></span><span
style="display: inline-block; width: 0px;
height: 1.049em;"></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span
style="display: inline-block; width: 0px; height:
2.16em;"></span></span></span><span style="display:
inline-block; overflow: hidden; vertical-align: -2.005em;
border-left: 0px solid; width: 0px; height: 3.774em;"></span></span></nobr></span></p>
<p><span class="_Tgc _y9e">However the derivation of this equation
is not at all straight forward since we are talking about three
dimensions and the formula is different in the direction of
motion vs the cross direction terms. In the circular orbit we
are talking about a momentum in te radial direction vs one in
the angular direction and furthermore the particle is in an
accelerated frame. <br>
</span></p>
You are saying particles are accelerated to near the speed of light
and easily measured, yes but this is a one way near speed of light
measurement and one needs to examine this carefully.<span
class="_Tgc _y9e">I've read in numerous places that the Large
Hadron Collider is capable of accelerating protons at 0.999999991
c,- At those speeds the circumference of "C" is the stationary
distance and the time is the time statinary period tp measured at
one point whenever the particle comes around. so its velocity is
C/tp, However the particle is stationary in its own reference
frame and only feels a radial gravitational pull outward for which
the factor under the integral depends upon the log of the radius</span><br>
<br>
Furthermore we must talk about the momentum of a charged particle
since presumably the momentum is measured by the curvature on a
charge induced by a magnetic field.<br>
<br>
This it gets very complex and your recommendation to understand more
is appropriate. However is the situation not similar to the central
force problem of a particle moving in an atom where the
gravitational and electric forces are balanced <br>
<br>
<br>
i will try to get you a calculation which shows that for an atom the
assumption that charge and mass are at a point is no longer valid
and in fact the two are separated. Thus the momentum of a particle
is dependent upon the separation distance. this allows me to
calculate the momentum and energy of a particle from contant mass
and force since the correction factors are used to explain an
internal geometry to matter rather than a change in the value of
mass.<br>
<br>
please stand by<br>
<br>
Wolf<br>
<br>
<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 8/18/2017 8:18 AM, Albrecht Giese
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:320ecd97-0387-c8ab-1de5-66e497cbdfae@a-giese.de">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<p>Wolf,</p>
<p>why do you mention the Michelson Morley experiment? It was not
the purpose of it to determine the speed of light. And it is in
no way suitable to do this determination. It was designed to
measure the ether drift. <br>
</p>
<p>A particle accelerator is, on the other hand, a very good way
to determine the behaviour of c. Because when the particle flies
along the chain of acceleration sections, the fields of these
sections have to be switched in a properly synchronized way so
that an acceleration can happen. Therefore the speed of the
particle is very simple logic. At which point do you doubt this
process?</p>
<p>If it is now visible that this speed has an upper bound (more
is not necessary), but the momentum of the particle increases
permanently, then the increase of mass is the only explanation.
Or do you have another one? - The increase of momentum is easily
measured in a magnetic field.</p>
<p>From these facts together the increase of mass has to be
concluded. I do not know any other explanation. Do you have one?</p>
<p>Your doubt of this is in my view a consequence of the fact that
you have never looked into the design of a synchrotron. You
should do that urgently before presenting unchained statements
about relativistic facts. <br>
</p>
<p>Albrecht<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 17.08.2017 um 08:16 schrieb
Wolfgang Baer:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:ddc8528c-fc3f-9bd8-3920-4ec33bba8607@nascentinc.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<p>wel the first thin I would like to see is nano second pulses
reproducing a michelson Morely type experiment <br>
</p>
<p>But the simplest thing is to look at the theory of the
synchroton design you keep talking about are you talking
about the energy formula</p>
<p> m*c<sup>2</sup> = m<sub>0</sub>*c<sup>2</sup> *(1/(1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>)<font
size="-1"> </font> that we both agree on. If so then we are
only in disagreement about the interpretation and the
assmptions inside tha<font size="-1">t i</font>nterpretation<font
size="-1">, observations like this E-mail in front of your
nose are facts I do not dispute facts, I'm interested in <br>
</font></p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>by the way have you seen <br>
</p>
<div class="" style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT;"><br
class="">
</div>
<div class="" style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT;"><font
class="" face="TimesNewRomanPSMT"><a
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T0d7o8X2-E"
class="" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T0d7o8X2-E</a><br>
<br>
The truth is hard to come by.<br>
<br>
Wolf<br>
<br>
</font></div>
<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 8/16/2017 7:42 AM, Albrecht
Giese wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:0dc5ad30-70e6-f9e5-256c-8f1ae27ed3e1@a-giese.de">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<p>So, what is <i>your </i>way to measure the speed of light
so that you trust the result?<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 16.08.2017 um 07:56 schrieb
Wolfgang Baer:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:24371479-20f6-67e1-a010-f1bc44e5dd89@nascentinc.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<p>You still do not grasp the idea that theory and therefore
the assumption of theory determine the interpretation and
therfore what we thing we are seeing.<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 8/15/2017 12:44 PM, Albrecht
Giese wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:340c668f-8163-c981-8561-c895ea8bb980@a-giese.de">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<p>Wolf: <br>
</p>
<p>it may be good to have new ideas or new insights, but
please do not offer equations which are in clear
conflict to safe experiments. <br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 15.08.2017 um 07:45
schrieb Wolfgang Baer:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7a82bab5-1de6-d724-6d10-5efc345348f8@nascentinc.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<p>Albrecht:</p>
<p>You said "Your equation Your equation m*c<sup>2</sup>
= m<sub>0</sub>*c<sup>2</sup> *(1/(1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>)<font
size="-1"> </font>is correct. It describes the
increase of mass at motion. But your equation <font
size="+1"> </font>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>)
does not have any meaning for me. And I do not
understand how you have deduced it. I have asked you
the other day what this equation means in your view,
but you did not answer this.' <br>
</p>
<p>I thought I had answered many times. Lets assume we
both agree on this equation m*c<sup>2</sup> = m<sub>0</sub>*c<sup>2</sup>
*(1/(1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>) is
correct.</p>
<p>Now how do you interpret it?</p>
<p>If you believe in Einsteins postulate that c is
constant then you can logically divide c oyt of the
equation and get m = m<sub>0</sub>*(1/(1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>)
which you believe has been proven in accelerator
designs.</p>
<p>I on the other hand recognize that Einstein's
postulate is precisely a postulate, an initial
assumption that may or may not be correct.</p>
<p>We are both and all of us in this discussion group
exploring the validity of initial assumptions.
Therefor Allow me to assume Eistein's assumption is
one way of developing a theory but not the only way.
If we assume mass is the invariant instead of the
speed of light then the very same equation we both
agree on could be written as m*c<sup>2</sup> = m*c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup>
*(1/(1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>).
Now we can cancel the "m' and get 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>
</p>
</blockquote>
The operation of accelerators show every day and every
second that the speed of particles has a limit at the
speed of light c. And as on the other hand the energy (or
momentum) of a particle in an accelerator is increased to
above any limit, the mass of that particles must increase.
There is no other explanation, or do you have one?<br>
</blockquote>
The operation of acceloators show m*c<sup>2</sup> = m<sub>0</sub>*c<sup>2</sup>
*(1/(1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>)<font
size="-1"> which can be interpreted in two ways. I
challenge you again to show me why your interpretation of
c remaining contant and m needs to increase is the right
one?<br>
</font>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:340c668f-8163-c981-8561-c895ea8bb980@a-giese.de">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7a82bab5-1de6-d724-6d10-5efc345348f8@nascentinc.com">
<p> </p>
<p>This may not have any meaning to you, but it that is
the case you do not understand how a community of
scientists could be so brain washed that they accept
an assumption for gospel truth and do not want to
understand circular reasoning which will always prove
the initial assumption is true.</p>
</blockquote>
Why do you not explain a physical process which is
described by your equation above: "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>
</blockquote>
I've explained this many times the speed of EM process in a
particle or coordinate frame built of particle is dependent
upon the total energy potential the particle experiences
gravitational potentialis one of the components the particle
is in. The speed of light and all processes including clock
rates slow down when the clock is in a lower gravity
potential<br>
mc<sup>2 </sup>=~ m c<sub>0</sub><sup>2</sup> + 1/2 mv<sup>2</sup>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:340c668f-8163-c981-8561-c895ea8bb980@a-giese.de">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7a82bab5-1de6-d724-6d10-5efc345348f8@nascentinc.com">
<p>Now i know you are smart enough to understand this
choice of initial assumptions.</p>
</blockquote>
Which initial assumptions do you mean?<br>
</blockquote>
That the speed of light is constant. instead of being
dependent on the energy potential it is in.<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:340c668f-8163-c981-8561-c895ea8bb980@a-giese.de">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7a82bab5-1de6-d724-6d10-5efc345348f8@nascentinc.com">
<p>An further more if we rewrite the equation we both
agree on as m*c<sup>2</sup> = m<sub>0</sub><sup>3/2</sup>*c<sup>3</sup>
*(1/(mc<sup>2</sup>-mv<sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>)we
would recognize the mc<sup>2</sup>-mv<sup>2</sup> in
the corrective factor as the negative classic
Lagrangian when the potential energy of the a mass
inside a universe mass shell is 1/2 mc<sup>2</sup>.
This means mc<sup>2</sup> is the escape energy to get
outside our Universe of mass surrounding us. In other
words we live in a flat space at the center od a ball
of mass. Simple and consistent with intuition. <br>
</p>
</blockquote>
This again assumes that the mass of an object is constant
if put to motion. This is clearly falsified by safe
experiments.<br>
</blockquote>
You keep saying clearly falsified but you do not show me the
safe experiments I believe the experiments you refer to are
based on this equation m*c<sup>2</sup> = m<sub>0</sub>*c<sup>2</sup>
*(1/(1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>) and I
keep saying it can be interpreted in two ways <br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:340c668f-8163-c981-8561-c895ea8bb980@a-giese.de">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7a82bab5-1de6-d724-6d10-5efc345348f8@nascentinc.com">
<p> </p>
<p>Now I ask you to show me experiments that cannot be
explained with the assumptions leading to 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>
</p>
</blockquote>
My question again - not answered by you - is: which
physical process is described by this equation in your
view? For me it is just a collection of symbols without
any message.<br>
</blockquote>
Ive again told you the physical process is to include the
gravity potential of the distant stars Machs principle<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:340c668f-8163-c981-8561-c895ea8bb980@a-giese.de">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7a82bab5-1de6-d724-6d10-5efc345348f8@nascentinc.com">
<p> </p>
<p>since I or we have shown you arguments that Einsteins
assumption is inconsistent with</p>
<p>1) gravity must be infinite or there would be a
tangential component to increase our orbit</p>
</blockquote>
Which gravity, i.e. the gravity of which object is
infinite in your view?<br>
</blockquote>
I meant the speed of gravity, this is also a problem with
your rotating charges unless the interaction speed is
infinite a tangential component will arise which makes the
orbit unstable <br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:340c668f-8163-c981-8561-c895ea8bb980@a-giese.de">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7a82bab5-1de6-d724-6d10-5efc345348f8@nascentinc.com">
<p>2) the perihelion correction is based upon the
calculation classic i.e. infinite speed of gravity
calculations</p>
</blockquote>
To my understanding the perihelion shift is caused by the
fact that the planet changes its mass during the orbit
because the speed changes.<br>
</blockquote>
That again is an interpretation but the prehelion shift is
calculated by assuming Newtons infinite gravity it again is
false reasoning. You can explain the shift by making new
assumptions, but if you apply those assumptions consistently
you get a different answer to the shift and one that is
inconsistent wih Einsteins calculations. We sent out the
paper on this i can dig it up and send itr again.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:340c668f-8163-c981-8561-c895ea8bb980@a-giese.de">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7a82bab5-1de6-d724-6d10-5efc345348f8@nascentinc.com">
<p>3) Shapiro's speed of light calculation</p>
</blockquote>
Shapiro's result for the speed of light is in full
agreement with Einstein and also in full agreement with my
approach to gravity.<br>
</blockquote>
it proves the speed of light is dependent u[pon the
gravito-inertial field the light is in and is not constant.
So why are you so critical of my 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>)
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:340c668f-8163-c981-8561-c895ea8bb980@a-giese.de">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7a82bab5-1de6-d724-6d10-5efc345348f8@nascentinc.com">
<p>4) Gravitational shielding during eclipses and
anomalies in satellite orbits (not sure about this
one) <br>
</p>
</blockquote>
Where was gravitational shielding observed? And which
anomalies in satellite orbits do you mean?<br>
</blockquote>
I cannot remember right now but maybe Candra sent some paper
that mentioned the anomalies and gravity effects measured
during an eclipse<br>
perhaps someone will remember the reference. <br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:340c668f-8163-c981-8561-c895ea8bb980@a-giese.de">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7a82bab5-1de6-d724-6d10-5efc345348f8@nascentinc.com">
<p> </p>
<br>
Einstein should have listened to Mach.<br>
</blockquote>
If Einstein would have listened to Mach he would have
accepted the existence of a fixed frame of reference (this
kind of an ether). I assume the same as Mach.<br>
</blockquote>
The why are you so critical? My on;y contribution is to
realize that the fixed frame of reference is the perceptive
space attached to each observer<br>
you must understand yourself in the picture or you have only
half the truth.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:340c668f-8163-c981-8561-c895ea8bb980@a-giese.de">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7a82bab5-1de6-d724-6d10-5efc345348f8@nascentinc.com">
<br>
<br>
Best wishes ,<br>
Wolf<br>
<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>
</blockquote>
Best wishes back<br>
Albrecht<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7a82bab5-1de6-d724-6d10-5efc345348f8@nascentinc.com">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/11/2017 4:24 AM,
Albrecht Giese wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:f4248e86-0d35-7b10-d248-1876fcb99f4b@a-giese.de">Your
equation m*c<sup>2</sup> = m<sub>0</sub>*c<sup>2</sup>
*(1/(1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>)<sup>1/2</sup>)<font
size="-1"> </font>is correct. It describes the
increase of mass at motion. But your equation <font
size="+1"> </font>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>)
does not have any meaning for me. And I do not
understand how you have deduced it. I have asked you
the other day what this equation means in your view,
but you did not answer this. Because why should the
speed of light change if something (what??) moves at
some speed v?</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" moz-do-not-send="true">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br>
<table style="border-top: 1px solid #D3D4DE;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width: 55px; padding-top: 18px;"><a
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><img
src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif"
alt="" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;"
moz-do-not-send="true" height="29"
width="46"></a></td>
<td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 17px; color:
#41424e; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial,
Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 18px;">Virenfrei.
<a
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient"
target="_blank" style="color: #4453ea;"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.avast.com</a> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<a href="#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"
width="1" height="1" moz-do-not-send="true"> </a></div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com" moz-do-not-send="true">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" moz-do-not-send="true">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com" moz-do-not-send="true">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" moz-do-not-send="true">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>