<html dir="ltr">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<style type="text/css" id="owaParaStyle">P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}</style>
</head>
<body class="" style="word-wrap:break-word" fpstyle="1" ocsi="0">
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color: #000000;font-size: 10pt;"><style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"MS ??";
mso-font-charset:78;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-536870145 1791491579 18 0 131231 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-536870145 1107305727 0 0 415 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-536870145 1073743103 0 0 415 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"MS ??";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;
mso-ansi-language:EN-US;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-default-props:yes;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"MS ??";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;
mso-ansi-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:595.0pt 842.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt;
mso-header-margin:35.4pt;
mso-footer-margin:35.4pt;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
-->
</style>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"" lang="EN-US">Dear Richard,<br>
<br>
Indeed Einstein was not first, and indeed it should be Minkowski space. Also, considering ctau (ctau = sqrt(tsquared – xsquared-ysquared-zsquared), for the unitiated) is also very interesting, and leads to certain simplifications. The first thing one loses,
however, on making the switch, is the possibility of deriving the Maxwell equations as the base 4-vector differential acting on the ct,x,y,z basis. The reason for this is that the Minkowski algebra is not a division algebra. There are regions, other than zero,
where division itself is undefined, one of these being anywere on a lightline such that ctau is zero.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"" lang="EN-US">This problem has led many led many - see Penrose book “the road to reality” for example – to discard Minkowski algebra as “not
well behaved mathematically”. One striking case where “mere maths” misdirects from an interesting line of enquiry.
<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>I would nonetheless recommend that all of you read the Penrose book. It is quite brilliant further and answers most, if not pretty much all of the “questions” arising in this forum.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"" lang="EN-US">It was the study of division in a Minkowski algebra,<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">
</span>and of its effects, that led Martin and I to five years work on the paper initially entitled, "On division and the algebra of reality". We have submitted versions of the paper twice, and had it rejected twice (on the grounds that it has all been done
before (not true at all!), or that there was no practical physical application (also manifestly not true)). We are still working on that paper, though it taking second place for other work that Martin and I have to finish.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"" lang="EN-US">So a little bit yes, but mostly no is the answer. It does make things a bit simpler as it does some of the projection to 3D, but
loses some of the more sophisticated theoretical basis of the full 4D approach.<br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"" lang="EN-US">Regards, JohnW.</span><span style="color:blue" lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<div style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #000000; font-size: 16px">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRpF822879" style="direction: ltr;"><font size="2" face="Tahoma" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> General [general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] on behalf of Richard Gauthier [richgauthier@gmail.com]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, August 24, 2017 6:08 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Darren Eggenschwiler; Pete Delaney; Innes Morrison; rgk1@york.ac.uk; Mark, Martin van der<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] STR twin Paradox<br>
</font><br>
</div>
<div></div>
<div>Hi John (and everyone),
<div class=""> Thanks for your insightful inputs and clarifications about your own way(s) of thinking.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">You wrote: <font class="" face="Times"><span class="" style="font-size:17px">In this paper (</span></font>your paper<font class="" face="Times"><span class="" style="font-size:17px">) an attempt will be made to avoid any superfluous complexity,
keep everything possible continuous and linear and keep the a-priori basis as simple as possible. Accordingly, all that will be introduced are four vector basis “directions” in space and time, their properties under multiplication and division, and a rest
mass-energy term.</span></font></div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I want to remind you (and others) that the concept of spacetime was the creation of Minkowski and not Einstein. Minkowski graphed ct as the orthogonal time axis and x,y,z as the three orthogonal spatial axes, as you also seem to be doing in your
quote above. But as I proposed in my article “Relativity Simplified” at <a href="https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research" class="" target="_blank">
https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research</a> and as it turned out several others proposed previously and independently (see
<a href="http://euclideanrelativity.com" class="" target="_blank">euclideanrelativity.com</a>), if you plot s=c tau (the spacetime interval quantity) rather than the time coordinate ct as the fourth orthogonal dimension and x,y,z as the other three orthogonal
dimensions, you simplify the Minkowski spacetime diagram approach to becoming pythagorean rather than hyperbolic diagrams. You also obtain (as I show in my article) the corresponding mass-energy-momentum diagrams corresponding to the mass-energy-momentum relations
in helical models of the relativistic electron composed of a photon-like object (such as those of Vivian, Grahame, Chip and myself, and perhaps in your latest electron model as well), as well as explaining the relativistic energy-momentum equation E^2 = p^2
c^2 + m^2 c^4 as a pythagorean momentum relationship.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">So I am wondering if your four-vector basis “directions” approach would be modified and simplified by the c tau, x,y,z 4-vector approach, as compared with the standard ct,x,y,z approach. The former (c tau) approach simplifies the diagraming of
relativistic space-time relationships and can assist in particle modeling. And the concept of “spacetime” itself could actually be modified by the ctau,x,y,z approach as compared to the ct,x,y,z approach of Minkowski, which was incorporated into Einstein’s
general theory of relativity in order to retain in general relativity, as I understand it, the (ds)^2 = (c dt)^2 -(dx)^2 - (dy)^2 - (dz)^2 invariance relationship (where ds = c dtau), which however also remains in the c tau diagrammatic approach.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""> Richard</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<div class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Aug 23, 2017, at 8:28 PM, John Williamson <<a href="mailto:John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk" class="" target="_blank">John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div class="" style="font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px; direction:ltr; font-family:Tahoma; font-size:10pt">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" lang="EN-US">Hello Darren, Chip, Grahame and everyone,</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">So, coming back to Chandra’s questions on what has come out of the discussion:</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">It has been an interesting perspective for me to participate in discussions with group. It seems that nearly everyone is of accord here that “everything is made of light” is a reasonable
statement, especially when applied to elementary particles such as the electron. The old paper of Martin and mine on “Is the electron a localized photon”, is taken on board and accepted almost as an accepted matter of fact. Usually, elsewhere, this is the
aspect I needed to argue upon, at least until Martin and I started to develop our extended theory of electromagnetism in the noughties. In this respect I feel treated in some respects as an old guy who had a pretty good idea a couple of decades ago, but is
a bit out of touch with some of the modern developments. This is not a complaint: I quite like this position for a change!</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">On the other hand the new theory, and the points made in the four papers Martin and I submitted to the 2015 conference have not been discussed at all, pretty much, in this forum.
Let me illustrate with specific examples.</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">Though the series was ostensibly on the nature of the photon, the presentation of a fully relativistic photon wave-function, based on an extension of the Maxwell equations, went down
like a lead balloon. What a surprise!</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">On the new theory, we have learned nothing at all over and above where we were already from the discussion in this group, except for some aspects in discussion with people we were
already involved with, such as Viv, Nick Green and Richard. There have been a few interesting discussions at a decent level, such as that with Al, which were enjoyable but never properly resolved. There was also the interesting issue of Alex’s theories, though
these are both perpendicular and parallel to our way of thinking: he goes with extending gravitation, we with extending electromagnetism. Further there have been a few notable references to the external literature of which I was unaware such as the existence
of Phat photons (thanks David).<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">The lack of any engagement on making progress out of the present “dark ages of physics” (which I and a few others keep banging on about) is why Martin gave up and jumped out a year
ago. Our role in the discussion has been, to my growing astonishment, merely to defend standard physics as-it-is. In other words, to act as a lecturer.<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>I would like to be a student too!<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">Having said that there is much that I have learned, some on how to communicate and some on “what not to do”. It is interesting how hard it is to get things across even to intelligent
people who are pre-disposed to listen. One should be careful using analogies to describe the complicated: folk will understand the analogy, but not the complicated and then argue with the analogy! People do not usually argue with each other, but tend to form
a view of what the other is saying and then argue with that. In this respect they are then only arguing with themselves.</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">The lesson is: one should be careful not to ascribe views to others they would disagree with. Now I am terrifyingly hopeless in following these precepts myself, as I will now illustrate
with respect to some of thing said recently by others. What a hypocrite!</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">Now a completely different point I have been wanting to bring up for some time but have not found the courage to do so. I’m going to pick on one or two people I (hope I) know will
be resilient enough to stay friends …</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" lang="EN-US">Firstly Grahame, you are quite wrong to suggest that special relativity claims that there is a “</span><span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">metaphysical property of space-time that results
in objects BEING (not just appearing) different lengths just because observers are in different states of motion and two clocks BOTH going slower than each other.”</span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">It is precisely the Lorentz view that suggests things actually shrink with reference to their motion through the Aether. The Einstein view, at least as expressed in the principle
of general covariance, is that everything is a matter of perspective, just as Darren suggests, and that everything and every inertial frame is equivalent.</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">As it happens I subscribe to neither view entirely. For me, there is an absolute, local reference frame and the local properties of space and time not only matter, but are crucial
to understanding the nature of the Universe. Within any local frame, however, because everything scales with the properties of light, including the local scales of any rulers and clocks it can be shown that there is no local measurement one can make (within
this framework) that will tell you whether or not you are in the one and only inertial frame at the centre of your apparent universe.</span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">That remains true, of course, until one looks out of your spherical window (the one at the front of your spaceship) at the (not local) universe outside. Here it is relatively easy
to establish your motion with respect to the external universe- just look at the blue and red shift! The position<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class=""> </span>is then a derived extension of the principle of general covariance locally,
while denying it globally.</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" lang="EN-US">Now coming on to Chip to illustrate this, he said in a recent post:</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'" lang="EN-US">“So John, my friend. You may choose to disregard the suggestion that the all<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">motion is relative</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>portion
of SRT is in error. We all have our theoretical preferences. </span><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Times" lang="EN-US"></span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'" lang="EN-US"> </span><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Times" lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'" lang="EN-US">I seldom make predictions, but I will make one now.</span><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Times" lang="EN-US"></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'" lang="EN-US">It may not happen within our lifetimes, but I feel that experiment will prove that all motion is not relative, and that motion is actually relative to the background of space.”</span><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Times" lang="EN-US"></span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" lang="EN-US">Hey, I agree. Also I do not think one needs to wait – it is easy to do it already and has been for some time. Also you said in a slightly older post responding to Chandra’s request:</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">“From John Williamson I learned to take another look at the evidence, and to consider that all particles and fields are made of disturbances in space. This may or may
not have been what John intended, but that is what reading his and Martin van der Mark’s work conveyed to me.”</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">Firstly, thank you. Secondly I am not at all unhappy as to your conclusions. Here is what I said from the beginning in my introduction to the 2015 “electron” paper submitted
to SPIE in 2015. Look at it!</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 12pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">“</span><span class="" style="font-size:13pt; font-family:Times" lang="EN-US">A companion paper has outlined many aspects of the theoretical basis to be used here.</span><span class="" style="font-size:9pt; font-family:Times; position:relative; top:-5pt" lang="EN-US">1<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span class="" style="font-size:13pt; font-family:Times" lang="EN-US">Space-time,
at its simplest, is described by four and only four “linear” degrees of freedom. Within this space-time exists energy encapsulated in light and material particles: photons, leptons and hadrons. It has been fashionable in science, for the past half-century
or so, to take complicated starting positions involving an extensive a-priori mathematical and conceptual structure to describe these objects. Complex groups have been taken as the starting points of many theories too numerous to mention. Further, there has
been a tendency to wish to “quantise” everything from the beginning. It should seem self-evident that, in doing that, one loses the possibility of finding out why such things may be quantised at all. Putting in a quantisation or a symmetry observed experimentally
as a starting axiom has some merit of course, but is a poor starting choice if one wants to understand the origins of that quantisation or symmetry. In this paper an attempt will be made to avoid any superfluous complexity, keep everything possible continuous
and linear and keep the a-priori basis as simple as possible. Accordingly, all that will be introduced are four vector basis “directions” in space and time, their properties under multiplication and division, and a rest mass-energy term.</span><span class="" style="font-family:Times" lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">”</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">In other words ALL that goes into the theory is space, time and root energy. Take out space and time and all one is left with, literally, is a theory isomorphic to the
mathematics of real numbers. Good stuff, but not exactly new! Put space and time in and one gets all of the Maxwell equations, four new equations relating quantum spin and charge, a DERIVATION of the transformation equations of special relativity, a fully
relativistic wave-function for the photon with TWO phases (hence dealing with Chandra’s (correct) objection to simple wave-functions not dealing with more than one “phase”. A new solution of the electron and positron. A method of calculating the elementary
charge from first principles, an understanding of the nature of fermions and hence an understanding of the mechanism of the exclusion principle. Once again, all that goes in is space, time and root energy. No principle of covariance. No ‘elementary” particles
(they come out). No SU(2), no SU(3), no E8, no quarks, no gluons, no Higgs. Just space, time and root energy. Not a bad set of results for something just quite so simple.</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">So, you see. You have projected onto me that I view general covariance as a starting point. No way! I have derived an extension of it, from first principles, within a
deeper paradigm. So here you are, making up what you think I think and then arguing against that. And here I am, making up what I think you think I think and arguing against that.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">Bad news for everyone: I am a fully trained 21<sup class="">st</sup><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>century physicist. This means I have no problem whatsoever
in thinking many contradictory things together at the same time. Even I do not know what I think I think: the rest of you have no chance!</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; background-color:white" lang="EN-US">Cheers, JohnW.</span><span class="" style="color:blue" lang="EN-US"></span></div>
<div class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; font-size:16px">
<hr tabindex="-1" class="">
<div id="divRpF954300" class="" style="direction:ltr"><font class="" size="2" face="Tahoma"><b class="">From:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" class="" target="_blank">general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
on behalf of Darren Eggenschwiler [<a href="mailto:darren@brandcalibre.com" class="" target="_blank">darren@brandcalibre.com</a>]<br class="">
<b class="">Sent:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Tuesday, August 22, 2017 10:33 PM<br class="">
<b class="">To:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Chip Akins; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion; Viv Robinson<br class="">
<b class="">Cc:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Darren Eggenschwiler; Innes Morrison; Mark, Martin van der<br class="">
<b class="">Subject:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Re: [General] STR twin Paradox<br class="">
</font><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""></div>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div dir="auto" class="">Hi Chip,</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Fair warning: I'm significantly out of my depth in this crowd, and that may become clear. However, I utterly adore reading this ongoing discussion and for the first time have a tiny morsel to contribute:</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">A vague friend of mine recently introduced me to the principle of explosion, and consequently paraconsistent logic (PL), and your example sounds very much like an example of it. When I first heard it, I was immediately reminded of quantum
mechanics and Schrödinger's cat:</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Clock A ran slower than Clock B = true</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Clock B ran slower than Clock A = true<br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Therefore</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">I am a time traveling space octopus = true </div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><span class="" style="color:rgb(34,34,34); font-family:Roboto-Regular,HelveticaNeue,Arial,sans-serif; font-size:18px; background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">ex falso (sequitur) quodlibet</span></div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Perhaps someone who is familiar with the mathematics of PL could make a useful link between SRT and and whatever the useful part of PL is?</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Otherwise I'd suggest: each of the premises above is true for each observer, perhaps we are each in our own universes as defined by what is relative to us.</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Thank you for including me in this wonderful thread.</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">- Darren</div>
<br class="">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div class="">On Tue, 22 Aug 2017 at 20:40, Chip Akins <<a href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" class="" target="_blank">chipakins@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width:1px; border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204); border-left-style:solid; padding-left:1ex">
<div class="" lang="EN-US">
<div class="m_-8632981855997019234WordSection1">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">Hi Vivian<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">I would like to return to a discussion briefly which was ensuing a couple of months ago.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">Thank you for the careful explanation offered in the email below.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">However the point I was attempting to make a couple of months ago, deals only with the concept that all motion is relative in SRT.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">So let us set up an experiment which excludes all effects of GRT, acceleration, gravity etc. and only evaluates this notion of SRT that all motion is relative.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">We have two identical clocks, moving relative to each other.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">For the sake of this experiment, let us imagine that we have a means of synchronizing their clocks regardless of their separation. Or at least to start recording data at the same time, like when each reaches a predetermined distance
from the other. (All Doppler effects accounted for.)<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">An observer with clock A thinks clock B is moving.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">An observer with clock B thinks clock A is moving.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">After the “relative” motion has occurred for some time, the two clocks pass by in very close proximity to each other and exchange their data.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">The observer with clock A assumes the reading from Clock B will indicate that time has passed more slowly for B than for A. The observer with clock B assumes the reading from Clock A will indicate that time has passed more slowly for
A than for B. Both cannot be correct.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">Clearly because of this, there IS A PARADOX, and that paradox is undeniably embedded in the notion that all motion is relative. Bringing in arguments from other theories, and proclaiming that there is no paradox<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">does
not dismiss this logical problem inherent in SRT’s notion that all motion is relative</i>.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">If one clock is more stationary with regards to the CMB it is likely that is the one which will be more correct in their prediction of the clocks readings.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">They cannot both be correct.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">If they cannot both be correct, then all motion is NOT relative, but time is slowed for objects moving relative to space itself.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<b class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></b></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="">Chip<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="border-style:solid none none; border-top-color:rgb(225,225,225); border-top-width:1pt; padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<b class=""><span class="" style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span class="" style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Viv Robinson [mailto:<a href="mailto:viv@universephysics.com" class="" target="_blank">viv@universephysics.com</a>]<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">
<b class="">Sent:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Wednesday, June 14, 2017 10:44 PM<br class="">
<b class="">To:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Chip Akins <<a href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" class="" target="_blank">chipakins@gmail.com</a>>; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <<a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" class="" target="_blank">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>></span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="" lang="EN-US">
<div class="m_-8632981855997019234WordSection1">
<div class="">
<div class="" style="border-style:solid none none; border-top-color:rgb(225,225,225); border-top-width:1pt; padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><br class="">
<b class="">Cc:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>'Darren Eggenschwiler' <<a href="mailto:darren@makemeafilm.com" class="" target="_blank">darren@makemeafilm.com</a>>; 'Innes Morrison' <<a href="mailto:innes.morrison@cocoon.life" class="" target="_blank">innes.morrison@cocoon.life</a>>;
'Mark, Martin van der' <<a href="mailto:martin.van.der.mark@philips.com" class="" target="_blank">martin.van.der.mark@philips.com</a>><br class="">
<b class="">Subject:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Re: [General] STR twin Paradox<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="" lang="EN-US">
<div class="m_-8632981855997019234WordSection1">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">Hi All,<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">The best way to sort out a problem is to understand the physics behind a situation and then use mathematics to calculate the magnitude of the physical effect attributed to it. Lets look
at the so called "twin paradox".<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">Two observers O1 and O2 are next to and at rest with each other. Both have accurate atomic or whatever clocks. O2 is accelerated to speed v, travels for time t at v, is decelerated to rest
wrt to O1, accelerated to v towards O1, again travels for a time and finally is decelerated to rest next to O1. They compare clocks. O2’s clock has slowed down wrt O1. Yet O2 has observed O1 traveling at v. So why doesn’t O1’s clock slow down wrt to O2?<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">The answer is the acceleration. To accelerate O2, a force is applied to it. The combination of force and distance adds energy to O2 that is not added to O1. That energy is added to O2 in
terms of kinetic energy or momentum change. No matter how small is the energy that is added, it is split between mass and velocity and causes a time dilation. They are the special relativity theory (SRT) corrections. That is something that O2 experiences and
O1 does not experience.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">The fundamental difference that O2’s acceleration makes is that its mass increases as well as its velocity. Its time wrt O1 decreases. So while O2 may see O1 accelerating away, O1 is not
the one experiencing the acceleration. Therefore O1 is not the observer whose mass is increasing and whose time is dilating. That is the physical reason why there is no "twin paradox". <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">Time dilation due to acceleration and deceleration (calculable from gravity equivalence) appears to be cumulative. Acceleration effects may make a difference if O2 is rapidly accelerated
to v and then immediately rapidly decelerated to rest wrt O1, followed by a rapid acceleration to v and an immediate deceleration to rest next to O1. O2 will show SRT time dilation effect equal to the integrated effect of its relativistic velocity wrt O1.
Those interested could calculate the acceleration effect from gravity equivalence and see how they compare.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">Apart from that the time delay O2 experiences is because of the velocity multiplied by time effect. When the time traveled is much longer than the acceleration time, the time delay experienced
by O2 will, for all practical purposes, be due to the SRT correction. <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">The above has described the physics of the so called “twin paradox”. There is no paradox. O2’s time slows relative to O1 because O2 is the one that has been accelerated. Einstein was correct
on both situations, the relativistic time correction and that they are only experienced by the accelerated observer. <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">Of course you are free to disagree with the above. However if you feel compelled to point out that it is wrong, it is best done by forwarding the physics that makes it wrong and then present
the mathematics required to show the magnitude of the physical effect. Then show how it agrees with experimental observation. In doing that remember that experimentalist using accurate atomic clocks have many times verified the SRT time corrections. <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234bloop_customfont" class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">There are two ways by which the SRT corrections can be applied. One is that there is an absolute zero reference somewhere in space and all corrections are applied from it. The other is
that the SRT corrections are a property of any particle moving wrt another. I have previously published some calculations that suggest that the rotating or toroidal photon model for the structure of matter is responsible for the SRT corrections of matter.
With all sub atomic particles, proton, neutron electron and neutrino having a rotating or toroidal photon structure, the SRT corrections are automatically inbuilt into every particle. As such I am happy that Einstein’s SRT corrections will always apply. <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">Remember that all linear motions are relative to the observer. However accelerations and circular motions are absolute. O1 and O2 may start out at 0.5 c wrt O3. O2 may be decelerated to
rest wrt O3, remain at rest wrt O3 and then accelerated back to 0.5c to return to rest next to O1. O1 will still see O2’s clock as having lost time. O3 will see an entirely different situation. But remember O3 can only see what is happening to O1 and O2 by
using photons. O3’s time dilation observations of O1 and O2 must include the SRT corrections as well as Doppler effect and distance changes. Complex but calculable to those interested.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">Chip, regarding your analogy of A and B. At one stage in their life they were at the same place at the same time, even if it was only at birth. To find out which will be the younger you
need to establish their background. If A remained at rest and B was accelerated away from A, B will be the younger when they both meet up again. If they both travelled away with equal accelerations, velocities and time they will both appear the same age. Both
would be younger than a person born at the same place at the same time and remained at that place when they all met up again. <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">I am quite happy to accept that all linear motion is relative. It agrees with SRT and experiment. I am also satisfied that the rotating or toroidal photon model for an electron (and other
particles) gives a physical description that matches both SRT and observation. <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">Cheers,<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">Vivian Robinson<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">On 15 June 2017 at 12:43:26 AM, Chip Akins (<a href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" class="" target="_blank">chipakins@gmail.com</a>)
wrote:<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
<blockquote class="" style="margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
Hi John<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
Yes. When I used the large circle example, I was afraid that someone would divert the conversation from Special Relativity. I suppose I deserve that.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
Back to Special Relativity.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
One Twin (Twin B) is moving at a constant highly relativistic velocity toward Twin A. Twin B thinks Twin A is moving, Twin A thinks Twin B is moving. When twin B arrives at Twin A’s location, Twin A expects Twin B to be younger, Twin B expects Twin A to be
younger. Mutually exclusive conditions (if all motion is relative). So all motion is not relative. Simple, even for post grads, like you and me.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
I welcome constructive, logical, suggestions, but please refrain from condescension, it does not help the cause.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
Chip<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="border-style:solid none none; border-top-color:rgb(225,225,225); border-top-width:1pt; padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<b class=""><span class="" style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span class="" style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" class="" target="_blank">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><b class="">On
Behalf Of<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></b>John Williamson<br class="">
<b class="">Sent:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Wednesday, June 14, 2017 4:19 AM<br class="">
<b class="">To:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <<a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" class="" target="_blank">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>><br class="">
<b class="">Cc:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Darren Eggenschwiler <<a href="mailto:darren@makemeafilm.com" class="" target="_blank">darren@makemeafilm.com</a>>; Innes Morrison <<a href="mailto:innes.morrison@cocoon.life" class="" target="_blank">innes.morrison@cocoon.life</a>>;
Mark, Martin van der <<a href="mailto:martin.van.der.mark@philips.com" class="" target="_blank">martin.van.der.mark@philips.com</a>><br class="">
<b class="">Subject:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Re: [General] STR twin Paradox</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif">Hi Chip,<br class="">
<br class="">
What happens for a circulating (near) lightspeed object is, not that local time or length changes, but the ring appears to get smaller for the participant - shrinking to zero length ring at lightspeed. Clocks onboard act normally. They will feel, however, feel
an acceleration unless in free-fall, which can occur for a curved space -time or round the edge of the universe, for example. You really need to expand your thinking to General relativity (which is, of course, itself not the most general of all the possible
proper descriptions of space and time, as it has only a simple scalar curvature) to get a proper grip on this.<br class="">
<br class="">
Someone mentioned a muon storage ring. the stored Muons decay normally according to themselves, but see a much smaller ring. They also feel a permanent transverse acceleration. The is also (synchrotron)radiation, but this is from the system ring+muons, rather
than from the muons themselves.<br class="">
<br class="">
Most of the rest of the discussion on this has been at a level usually treated at undergraduate level. Grahame is right: you will not find a mathematical contradiction in special relativity. All this stuff has been done before.<br class="">
<br class="">
Hope this helps,<br class="">
<br class="">
Cheers, John.<br class="">
<br class="">
Regards, John W.</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria; text-align:center" align="center">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">
<hr class="" size="2" align="center" width="100%">
</span></div>
<div id="m_-8632981855997019234divRpF617198" class="">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 12pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<b class=""><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>General [general-bounces+john.williamson=<a href="mailto:glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" class="" target="_blank">glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
on behalf of Chip Akins [<a href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" class="" target="_blank">chipakins@gmail.com</a>]<br class="">
<b class="">Sent:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Tuesday, June 13, 2017 11:12 PM<br class="">
<b class="">To:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'<br class="">
<b class="">Subject:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Re: [General] STR twin Paradox</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
Hi Grahame<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
The reason for the huge circle in my thought experiment, is so that the velocity can be very close to c, causing relativistic time dilation, and that velocity dependent time dilation would dominate the experiment, while acceleration induced time variation would
be far less significant.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
And I agree with you that space possesses a reference rest frame where time is not retarded in any of these or similar circumstances.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
But the important thing, I believe, is that all motion cannot be relative, and there cannot be full reciprocity regarding the effects of motion. For if all motion is relative, then there is just no solution which satisfies the equations and does not present
a paradox. If all motion is relative, then twin A will be younger than twin B, and twin B will be younger than twin A. But of course these are mutually exclusive answers, so all motion is not relative.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
So as it stands, if I am reading the comments correctly, you, me, Chandra, and Albrecht, agree that there is a more Lorentzian form of relativity, (which I feel is caused by matter being made of confined light-speed energy) which is the proper physical form
of relativity in or universe.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
Thank you for your thoughts and comments!!!<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
Chip<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="border-style:solid none none; border-top-color:rgb(225,225,225); border-top-width:1pt; padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<b class=""><span class="" style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span class="" style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" class="" target="_blank">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><b class="">On
Behalf Of<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></b>Dr Grahame Blackwell<br class="">
<b class="">Sent:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Tuesday, June 13, 2017 2:09 PM<br class="">
<b class="">To:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <<a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" class="" target="_blank">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>><br class="">
<b class="">Subject:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Re: [General] STR twin Paradox</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:navy">Hi chip,</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:navy">I'm 100% with you on this!</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:navy">I really don't understand the notion that 'the universe is an observer effect' - it makes no sense to me whatsoever. By the same token, the notion that 'collapse of the wavefunction'
is precipitated by observation/measurement is to me quite fanciful - for me there is a much more straightforward explanation for the phenomenon referred to as 'wavefunction collapse' (which I don't believe to be a collapse of any kind!)</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:navy">I'm sorry for not responding to your previous post sooner; I was planning to send a comment, but have been fully occupied with other pressing matters of late. My observation relates
to your thought experiment in which each 'twin' sees the other as travelling in a large circle at high speed. For me there is no paradox at all in this from the SR perspective (though like you, I am of the firm opinion that there exists one unique objectively
static rest-frame [subject to Hubble expansion, of course], all other 'rest frames' are in motion in absoolute terms).</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:navy">If one twin is seen by the other as moving in a circle - however large - but regards themself as being at rest, then they will instead experience a force which the other twin will
regard as acceleration towards the centre of the circle but that they themself will regard as influence of a gravitational field (if you doubt this, just posit an accelerometer on their ship with a readout that can be seen by, or communicated to, their twin).
That influence will be directly comparable with the centripetal force of constant-speed circular motion and will be regarded by that twin as causing identical time dilation for them c.f. one outside the influence of that field. They will therefore expect
their OWN clock to be slowed by an exactly corresponding amount from the perspective of one not subject to that 'gravitational field' - so they will fully expect their clock and that of their twin to be retarded by a precisely-equal degree, and so that both
clocks would show identical times on comparison when again passing each other.</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:navy">[As a point of detail, making it a very BIG circle in no way reduces the validity of this analysis, it simply requires more accurate instrumentation - as is always the case with
regard to details of SR & GR.]</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:navy">As I said in my previous comment, it very much appears to me that SR is 100% self-consistent mathematically. This does not make it correct as a representation of physical reality
- but trying to discredit SR by attempting to find a flaw in the math is to me a non-starter! SR will ONLY be shown to be an incorrect assumption (in respect specifically of equivalence of all inertial reference frames) by consideration of the energetic formation
of particles (which can also be approached indirectly by way of the Energy-Momentum Relation).</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:navy">[Another point of detail: I have included a fairly exhaustive analysis of Hasselkamp et al's experiment in my book: this shows that even so-called '2nd order Doppler effect' cannot
be used to detect motion of the earth wrt the objective universal rest state, no matter how accurate readings or instrumentation. SR is a VERY tightly-meshed cage!]</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:navy">Best regards,</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:navy">Grahame</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<blockquote class="" style="border-style:none none none solid; border-left-color:navy; border-left-width:1.5pt; padding:0in 0in 0in 4pt; margin:5pt 0in 5pt 3.75pt">
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif">----- Original Message -----</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria; background-color:rgb(228,228,228)">
<b class=""><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif"> </span><a href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com" title="chipakins@gmail.com" class="" target="_blank"><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Chip
Akins</span></a><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<b class=""><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif">To:</span></b><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif"> </span><a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" title="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" class="" target="_blank"><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif">'Nature
of Light and Particles - General Discussion'</span></a><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<b class=""><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Sent:</span></b><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Tuesday, June 13, 2017 5:34 PM</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<b class=""><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Subject:</span></b><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Re: [General] STR twin Paradox</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
Hi Chandra<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
I don’t know if the others are not receiving my posts or if they are just being ignored.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
The current exchange is quite disheartening however.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
To postulate that an observer creates the universe he experiences is absurd in so many ways, and counter to the evidence in so many ways, that I cannot believe we have spent so much time in such a discussion.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
All the evidence suggests the universe existed before observers, and continues to exist as each of us dies. The universe does what it does whether we observe it or not. We can only make very slight, insignificant changes to the overall state of the universe.
When we cause an interaction to occur by observation, it has an effect, but that does not mean that the universe is observer-centric. It just means that the universe does what it does. When interactions occur a set of rules exist which govern those interactions.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
In a universe which is in effect created in the mind of the observer, I am the only observer that I know to exist. The rest of the mentally imagined observers I interact with are figments of my mind. So it does no good to communicate with those figments and
try to convince those imagined others of anything.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
Experience indicates that this is not the type of universe we live in. Other sentient minds are present, all of us finding that Washington DC is located in the same spot and has the same buildings. We live in a single universe which has many sentient minds
all seeing principally the same thing. We know this because we communicate with others, and compare notes.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
Once we understand the physics well enough we can see that wave-function collapse is NOT required to explain an interaction. So the reason for some quantum physicists overreaching and concluding that the observer has a significant bearing on physics then is
a mute argument.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
We, as a species, seem to tend to look for the most “mentally stimulating” explanations, rather than sticking to the scientific approach, and looking for the most theoretically economical and practical answers.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
The universe has many lessons for us embedded within. One of the most striking lessons is the elegant simplicity of how everything works. If we keep this elegant simplicity in mind as we look for the rest of the answers, we are far more likely to find the
right answers.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
Warmest Regards<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
Charles (Chip) Akins<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="border-style:solid none none; border-top-color:rgb(225,225,225); border-top-width:1pt; padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Cambria">
<span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">_______________________________________________<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at<a href="mailto:viv@universephysics.com" class="" target="_blank">viv@universephysics.com</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/viv%40universephysics.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" class="" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/viv%40universephysics.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">
Click here to unsubscribe<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">
</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" class="">--<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">
</div>
<div class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class="" style="font-size:12.8px">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class=""><font class="" color="#999999"><br class="">
</font></div>
<div class=""><font class="" color="#999999">Darren Eggenschwiler</font></div>
<div class=""><font class="" color="#999999">Tech, Brand Calibre</font></div>
<div class=""><span class="" style="color:rgb(153,153,153); font-size:12.8px">07817 205 201</span><font class="" color="#999999"><br class="">
</font></div>
<div class=""><font class="" color="#999999"><br class="">
</font></div>
<div class=""><font class="" color="#999999"><a href="http://www.brandcalibre.com/" class="" target="_blank">www.</a></font><font class="" color="#666666"><a href="http://www.brandcalibre.com/" class="" target="_blank">brandcalibre</a></font><font class="" color="#999999"><a href="http://www.brandcalibre.com/" class="" target="_blank">.</a><span class=""><a href="http://www.brandcalibre.com/" class="" target="_blank">com</a></span></font></div>
<div class=""><span class="" style="color:rgb(153,153,153); font-size:12.8px">0141 212 6356</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<span class="" style="font-family:Helvetica; font-size:12px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px; float:none; display:inline!important">_______________________________________________</span><br class="" style="font-family:Helvetica; font-size:12px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<span class="" style="font-family:Helvetica; font-size:12px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px; float:none; display:inline!important">If
you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" class="" style="font-family:Helvetica; font-size:12px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px" target="_blank">richgauthier@gmail.com</a><br class="" style="font-family:Helvetica; font-size:12px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<span class="" style="font-family:Helvetica; font-size:12px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px; float:none; display:inline!important"><a
href="</span><a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" class="" style="font-family:Helvetica; font-size:12px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a><span class="" style="font-family:Helvetica; font-size:12px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px; float:none; display:inline!important">"></span><br class="" style="font-family:Helvetica; font-size:12px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<span class="" style="font-family:Helvetica; font-size:12px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px; float:none; display:inline!important">Click
here to unsubscribe</span><br class="" style="font-family:Helvetica; font-size:12px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<span class="" style="font-family:Helvetica; font-size:12px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px; float:none; display:inline!important"></a></span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>