<div dir="ltr"><div>Dear Albrecht,<br><br></div>comments below<br><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 6:15 AM, Albrecht Giese <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" target="_blank">phys@a-giese.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Dear Andrew, dear Richard, and dear All,</p>
<p>I think that the cause of all problems regarding the electron is
caused by the assumption given by Hestenes in his paper:<br>
</p>
<p>"High energy scattering experiments limit the size of the
electron to less that 10<sup>−16</sup> cm, ... which rules out
models of the electron as an extended body."</p></div></blockquote><div>I also disagree with this statement. This is one of the items that I feel can be corrected in his model. So it is necessary to examine his assumptions (and those of the electron accelerator groups) and his (their) logic. <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>This assumption causes a blocking of an understanding of the
electron (and other particles).<br>
</p>
<p>I have discussed this assumption with professors of the DESY
accelerator in Hamburg, where such experiments have been performed
very extensively. One of them was the research director at that
accelerator. The conclusions from these discussions resulted in
the following:<br>
</p>
<p>At first the result that the size of the electron is that small.
If we look at those experiments, then the result is in fact the
size of the <i>electric charge </i>in the electron. And now we
have to see that the usual assumption that the electron is built
up by the electric charge only is a possible one, but not the only
possible one.</p></div></blockquote><div>I agree that, in energetic scattering experiments, the electric charge may be diminished either in size or magnitude, or both. This may compensate for the relativistic effects of potentials that can greatly increase (by ~2 orders of magnitude) the interaction forces. However, I believe that charge and mass are directly connected (and I now think that spin is tied into that connection) and Hestenes work may be able to help us derive this effect. Of course, we also have to examine the assumptions of the scattering analysis and the relativistic near-field effects.<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>The other result of these experiments was that it was not
possible to break up the electron by the bombardment with other
particles of a sufficiently high energy. So it was concluded that
the electron is not built by any constituents. - But this latter
conclusion is only true if it is assumed that the constituents do
have individual masses. If we however assume that the constituents
are mass-less then such an electron can never be decomposed by
bombardment. Because if one constituent is accelerated at any huge
acceleration, the other one can follow this acceleration without
any restriction. So, no breakup can happen.<br>
</p>
<p>Here now can my model serve as an explanation. In my model the
electron (like any other elementary particle) is built by two
constituents which do not have any mass at all. The particle as a
whole has an inertial behaviour, but that is a dynamical process
which I have repeatedly described here and at our meetings. It is
also described on my website with the title "Origin of Mass".
(This site has top ranking in the internet for this title
continuously since 15 years, so there exists a lot of response).</p>
<p>If this model is used, we can explain the properties of e.g. the
electron like the inertial mass, the magnetic moment, the
constancy the spin, the zitter frequency <i>with high precision </i>and
without the need for quantum mechanical considerations. No free
parameters are needed. The parameters used in the model are merely
the speed of light c, Planck's constant h, the elementary charge e<sub>0</sub>,
and as a type dependent variable the size of the particle (which
is of course much greater than the one cited also by Hestenes). So
I am asking again: what else is needed? Or what are objections
against this model?</p></div></blockquote><div>I'll have to reread your paper to make specific comments. From a quick refresher, I find some very useful developments and some weaknesses. I don't like the use of paired identical particles. On the other hand, if these can be distortions of, or oscillations in, space and time, I would be much happier. While your assumption of massless charge pairs is not very illuminating, my assumption that spin is a result of physical motion about a time axis may not be much better. Nevertheless, both provide a basis for physical observables and for the testing of physical models.<br><br></div><div>Best regards,<br><br></div><div>Andrew<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Best regards<br>
Albrecht<br>
</p><div><div class="m_6034641129745152495h5">
<br>
<div class="m_6034641129745152495m_-3786212815325519655moz-cite-prefix">Am 15.09.2017 um 16:09 schrieb Richard
Gauthier:<br>
</div>
</div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="m_6034641129745152495h5">
<div>Hi Andrew and all,</div>
<div> I’m familiar with Hestene’s zitter model of the
electron, though I don’t follow his Clifford spacetime algebra
that he used to derive it from the Dirac equation. Hestenes
doesn’t call his helically-circulating (with helical radius
hbar/2mc = Lambda-compton/4pi) light-speed charged-particle
zitter electron model a spin-1/2 charged photon, but it sounds
like it could be one to me. Dirac said in his Nobel lecture: </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Cambria">“It is found that an electron which seems to us to
be moving slowly, must actually have a very high frequency
oscillatory motion of small amplitude superposed on the
regular motion which appears to us. As a result of this
oscillatory motion, the velocity of the electron at any time
equals the velocity of light. This is a prediction which
cannot be directly verified by experiment, since the
frequency of the oscillatory motion is so high and its
amplitude is so small. But one must believe in this
consequence of the theory, since other consequences of the
theory which are inseparably bound up with this one, such as
the law of scattering of light by an electron, are confirmed
by experiment.” </span><font size="3" face="Cambria"><a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1933/dirac-lecture.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.nobel<wbr>prize.org/nobel_prizes/physics<wbr>/laureates/1933/dirac-lecture.<wbr>pdf</a> ,
p322.</font><span style="font-family:Cambria;font-size:12pt"> </span></p>
</div>
<div> Dirac's electron description also seems consistent
with the idea that the electron is a spin-1/2 charged photon. </div>
<div> Richard</div>
<br>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Sep 14, 2017, at 8:57 PM, Andrew Meulenberg
<<a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target="_blank">mules333@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="m_6034641129745152495m_-3786212815325519655Apple-interchange-newline">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Dear Richard,<br>
<br>
</div>
I noticed that you are following Hestenes on researchgate.
Have you read his <br>
<h3><a href="http://geocalc.clas.asu.edu/pdf/ZBWinQM15**.pdf" target="_blank">Zitterbewegung in
Quantum Mechanics <font size="2"><span style="font-weight:normal"><br>
D. Hestenes, published in: Foundations of Physics,
Vol. 40, 1-54 (2010); (also available at</span></font></a><font size="2"> </font><span style="font-weight:normal"><a href="http://geocalc.clas.asu.edu/html/GAinQM.html" target="_blank">http://geocalc.clas.asu.edu/ht<wbr>ml/GAinQM.html</a>)</span></h3>
<p>If so, I think there are some important
points, which we could discuss, that pertain to both
photons and electrons. For example, below eq 44:</p>
<p style="margin-left:40px"><span class="m_6034641129745152495m_-3786212815325519655gmail-fontstyle2">"<b>S</b> </span><span class="m_6034641129745152495m_-3786212815325519655gmail-fontstyle0">cannot be a timelike
bivector, though it can be null</span> "</p>
<p>and</p>
<p style="margin-left:40px">"<span class="m_6034641129745152495m_-3786212815325519655gmail-fontstyle0">for a lightlike particle<i> [a photon]</i> the spin must be a
lightlike bivector.</span>"</p>
<p>He doesn't come out and say that electron spin
is a spacelike bivector; but, he should. (Perhaps he has
done so in another paper?) <br>
</p>
<p>Once it is recognized that spin is a rotation
about a time axis (for all but photons), rather than a
space axis, many of the QM problems associated with
electrons and their interactions are reduced or
eliminated.</p>
<p>Andrew M.<br>
</p>
<p><br style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">
</p>
</div>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the
Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_blank">richgauthier@gmail.com</a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflig<wbr>htandparticles.org/options.<wbr>cgi/general-natureoflightandpa<wbr>rticles.org/richgauthier%<wbr>40gmail.com?unsub=1&<wbr>unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="m_6034641129745152495m_-3786212815325519655mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
</div></div><pre>______________________________<wbr>_________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="m_6034641129745152495m_-3786212815325519655moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" target="_blank">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a class="m_6034641129745152495m_-3786212815325519655moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">"http://lists.natureoflig<wbr>htandparticles.org/options.<wbr>cgi/general-natureoflightandpa<wbr>rticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?<wbr>unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div id="m_6034641129745152495m_-3786212815325519655DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-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"><img src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif" alt="" style="width:46px;height:29px" 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" style="color:#4453ea" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<a href="#m_6034641129745152495_m_-3786212815325519655_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1" height="1"> </a></div></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target="_blank">mules333@gmail.com</a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflig<wbr>htandparticles.org/options.<wbr>cgi/general-natureoflightandpa<wbr>rticles.org/mules333%40gmail.<wbr>com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div>