<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Calibri Light";
panose-1:2 15 3 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
h4
{mso-style-priority:9;
mso-style-link:"Heading 4 Char";
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
span.Heading4Char
{mso-style-name:"Heading 4 Char";
mso-style-priority:9;
mso-style-link:"Heading 4";
font-family:"Calibri Light",sans-serif;
color:#2E74B5;
font-style:italic;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0
{mso-style-name:m_2566033424145280623m_-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0;}
span.m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:m_2566033424145280623m_-3002516575426363278m_-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle25
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">Thanks, Chip, for inspiring the group to identify how to logically challenge the continuing unhealthy status-quo in physics
<b><i>thinking</i></b> as a coherent group. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">As I have mentioned many times earlier, our thinking logics always develops the “right” theory since they match the founding postulates. It is a vicious cycle. We are stuck in this vicious cycle because “evidence
based science” is the best practical approach to explore the unknowns of nature. Further, by raising our human invented “working” mathematical logics to the status of un-challenge-able logics; we have surrendered the evolution of a big chunk of our enquiring
minds. [see the 1-slide last attachment] <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"> Therefore, we need to pro-actively introduce a cultural agreement to develop organized challenges to the founding postulates behind all the “working theories” based upon our latest understanding.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"> However, we need to identify a
<b><i>referent platform</i></b> connected to nature’s reality for continuous exploration, which will assure our steady advancement when used<b><i> repeatedly and iteratively</i></b> to break the limitations of the prevailing logics behind “evidence based science”.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"> That is called Reverse System Engineering Thinking [the first attachment]. Nature herself appears to be the most creative system engineer at all levels – from the grand galaxy clusters to the living single
cells. Historically, the system engineering thinking is displayed by all those children who eventually contribute something of value in understanding nature during their adult lives. Such children always show the propensity of opening up their most treasured
toys and then try to put them back together. That is the bottom-up reverse system engineering thinking, which we are genetically endowed with. However, through generations, the modern culture is in the process of destroying this evolutionary gift. Even modern
scientists have been making a short-cut out of this system engineering thinking assuming that the mathematical successes of Einstein and Heisenberg can be repeated indefinitely and still we will be in tune with nature! We are finding today, that in spite of
their theories working well, we are in a sustained disarray.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"> We need to anchor our imaginative thinking logics to the referent plane of nature’s System Engineering
<b><i>Interaction Processes</i></b>. Both Relativity and QM avoid addressing the <b>
<i>Interaction Processes </i></b>in nature. They have remained focused on Measurable Data Modeling Epistemology (being happy with Evidence Based Science). Interestingly, there is enormous amount of literature on the “Measurement Problem”; but almost none on
how to visualize the invisible interaction processes, which represent the <b><i>realities,</i></b> a level deeper behind the perpetually evolving nature.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">Sincerely,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">Chandra.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">PS: I took “Classical and Quantum Coherence” from late Prof. L. Mandel at the Rochester U. During that time, he was already at “the top of the world” as the experimental demonstrator of single photon interference
using a home-built Ruby-laser. When the cooling system of that laser started leaking, Mandel gave that to me to fix it and use it to measure the coherence properties of this pulsed laser (the then part of my research project). Another graduate student had
already built a newer Ruby laser for their ongoing “single photon” projects. However, I never believed in the “indivisible single photon interference” based purely on causality argument. Mandel knew my view point since I “stupidly” expressed that in my very
first entry interview with him. My latest definition of photons and the impossibility of “indivisible single photon interference” can be appreciated from the 11-page VG (2<sup>nd</sup> attachment).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> General [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Chip Akins<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, October 04, 2017 8:37 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion' <general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] How we progress<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Hi All<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Here is a rant from my soapbox again.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">It may be time to digress for a moment, and discuss why it is that we have not been able to unravel these mysteries of physics in our recent history.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">First, we should probably recognize that, in spite of our many advances, and some brilliant minds working on these problems, we, as a species are quite adolescent in this particular endeavor.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">We have allowed ourselves, in our recent past and current theoretical philosophy, to be constrained once again, by beliefs in theories which are not entirely correct or complete. This has had a large impact on
our scientific advancement in the last century. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">My opinion is that we should remain practical, question anything and everything which we assume, and follow the evidence, wherever that leads. If we can refrain from adding arbitrary beliefs into our theories,
and especially refrain from accepting the existing arbitrary beliefs embedded within current theories as complete and accurate, we simply accomplish more. But during this endeavor we should avoid including explanations which contain any aspect of the “magical”.
Our job, as scientists, is to explain, not to indoctrinate with a new belief system. For such indoctrination has caused us so many roadblocks historically, preventing our progress.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Chandra has correctly suggested that we need a new way of thinking, a new way of addressing the inadequacies of our current understanding and theory. And collective thinking, collaboration definitely helps. But
that is only one aspect of what it seems we need to change in order to make progress. Individually we also need to readdress what we accept as correct which comes from existing theory. Yep, it requires work.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="color:black">Historically it has been those who
<b>question the current beliefs</b>, and those who find practical explanations which
<b>replace previous theory</b>, who have contributed to the advancement of physics.
<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">I cannot think of one example where this was done without collaboration, without learning from and sharing ideas with others. But clearly the collaboration was not the factor which made the difference, for collaboration
occurs constantly, but real progress does not. It is the creative intelligence which weeds out the chaff and replaces it with sound logical causal foundation. That is the mindset and mental work which becomes fruitful.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">We have been stagnant for a century. Perhaps that indicates it is time to go back and question our full set of foundations. Keeping what is provable, and discarding anything arbitrary, replacing it with concepts
which are causal. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Then, when all of us as individuals share our thoughts, we are working with new material, and we can grow a coherent theory with a greater chance of success.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">I have a list of things which I think are arbitrary and are embedded in current theory.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Perhaps if we each create and share such a list, we can spark thoughts in each other and achieve more individually and collectively?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">If you agree with this suggestion, I will certainly be happy to provide my list.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Thoughts?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Chip<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Andrew Meulenberg<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, October 02, 2017 10:56 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> John Williamson <<a href="mailto:John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk">John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk</a>>; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <<a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>>;
Andrew Meulenberg <<a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com">mules333@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> robert hudgins <<a href="mailto:hudginswr@msn.com">hudginswr@msn.com</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] A composite electron?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Dear All,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">John W. has raised a point (below) that I do not think has been addressed in this forum. Since a photon travels at the speed of light, time does not exist for it. In its frame, it is created and absorbed simultaneously.
This would imply that the source and destination are 'joined' in time by the photon, even if they are light years apart. Is this true? Or, does the interaction 'break' the connection at both ends? Does time stop when traveling at c (in vacuum) or when traveling
at the speed of light in a medium? If the photon is connected to its source and sink, then it is not moving at c. In its own frame, it is not moving at all.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">This discussion then introduces some questions about the nature of the photon that becomes a lepton. Interaction depends on time. Does this prevent a photon from "interacting with itself"? A 'bound' photon,
as an electron (a soliton), is traveling at the speed of light in its self-defined medium; but, probably, at less than c. It becomes its own destination. It does not have any connection with its source. (Or does it?) What are the implications?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Andrew M.<br>
_ _ <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 9:04 AM, John Williamson <<a href="mailto:John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk" target="_blank">John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">Dear everyone,<br>
<br>
It is perhaps worth pointing out that there is yet another theory where the photon requires two corpuscles of charge. it is called quantum electrodynamics, where the emitting and absorbing corpuscles are both necessarily charged. As Al has been saying all along,
no such thing as a photon without charge. <br>
<br>
Regards, JGW. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="color:black">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</span></div>
<div id="m_2566033424145280623m_-3002516575426363278divRpF955412">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"> General [general-bounces+john.williamson=<a href="mailto:glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank">glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
on behalf of Andrew Meulenberg [<a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target="_blank">mules333@gmail.com</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, October 02, 2017 1:20 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion; Andrew Meulenberg<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Martin Rivas; David Hestenes; robert hudgins<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] A composite electron?</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black">Dear Folks,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">The composite electron model has a history of which I was not aware. From mid-right column of page 4 of (free access):<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><a href="https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/" target="_blank">https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/</a><b>the-last-challenge-of-modern-physics</b>-2090-0902-1000217.php?aid=87682<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div style="margin-left:30.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0"><span style="color:black">Louis de Broglie elaborated a most promising hypothesis to help</span></span><span style="color:black"><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">explain these special characteristics of the photon [7]. Having analyzed</span><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">them in light of the verifed aspects of the various pertaining theories,</span><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">he eventually concluded that the only way for an electromagnetic</span><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">photon to satisfy at the same time Bose-Einstein's statistic and Planck's</span><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">law, and to perfectly explain the photoelectric e</span></span><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0"><span style="font-family:"Cambria Math",serif;color:black">ff</span><span style="color:black">ect
while obeying</span></span><span style="color:black"><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">Maxwell's equations and conforming to the symmetry property of</span><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">complementary corpuscles in Dirac's Hole Theory, would be for it to</span><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">be made not of one corpuscle, but of two corpuscles, or half-photons,</span><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">that would be complementary, like the electron is complementary to</span><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">the positron in Dirac's Hole Theory [15].</span><br>
<br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">This conclusion mandates the association of charges (possibly</span><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">unsigned) to each half-photon, and consequently to the photon itself, ...</span>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="margin-left:30.0pt">
<div style="margin-left:30.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0"><span style="color:black">7. Michaud A (2016) On De Broglie’s Double-particle Photon Hypothesis. J Phys</span></span><span style="color:black"><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">Math 7: 153.</span>
<br>
<br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">15. De Broglie L (1937) New physics and quanta, Flammarion, 2</span></span><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;color:black">nd
</span><span style="color:black">1993 new</span></span><span style="color:black"><br>
<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278gmail-fontstyle0">Preface.</span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black">This would imply that, historically, the Nature of Light is even more curious than most of us thought.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Andrew M.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Richard Gauthier <<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_blank">richgauthier@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">Hello Martin (and all),<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> Thank you for this summary of your CC-CM approach to a moving particle such as an electron. My approach to modeling an electron is quite similar to
yours, except that in my approach the CC (center of charge) is the position of a light-speed spin-1/2 charged quantum particle that I call a choton. It is in circular motion in a resting electron and moves helically in a moving electron. The linear momentum
of the choton in a resting electron is Po=mc=2.73x10^-22 kg m/s = 0.511 MeV/c (and its energy is mc^2= 0.511 MeV) and this momentum mc circles with radius Ro= L-compton/4pi = hbar/2mc = 1.93x10^-13m at the zitterbewegung frequency f-zitt=2mc^2/h. The choton’s
average position as the choton circles around is what you call the CM (center of mass). In a resting electron the choton (at the position CC) and the CM are separated by the distance Ro, with the choton circling around its CM at the zitter frequency. Due to
its circular motion with its changing momentum direction, the choton appears to be acted on by a centripetal force Fc=dp/dt = w Po = w-zitt Po = 0.424 N , where w-zitt (omega-zitt) = 2 mc^2/hbar = 1.55 x 10^21 rad/sec. The choton’s centripetal acceleration
A-cent in this circular motion in a resting electron is A-cent = r w^2 = Ro (w-zitt)^2 = 4.66x10^29 m/s^2. My article “Derivation of the inertial mass m=Eo/c^2 of an electron composed of a circling spin-1/2 charge photon” at <a href="https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research%23papers" target="_blank">https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research#papers</a> (4<sup>th</sup> article)
also shows that the above circling choton (spin-1/2 charged photon) has an inertial mass m = Eo/c^2 = 0.511MeV/c^2 derived from its circling momentum mc=Eo/c.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black"> When no external force (besides the apparent 0.424 N central force) acts on the choton, the moving electron model moves longitudinally with velocity
<b>v</b> and with momentum <b>p</b>=gamma m<b>v</b>. The choton circulates with its longitudinal momentum component P-long = gamma mv, which is the electron’s linear momentum, and with a transverse momentum component P-trans = Po = mc. Using the Pythagorean
equation, this gives the choton’s total momentum directed along its helical trajectory as P-total^2 = P-long^2 + P-trans^2 = (gamma mv)^2 + (mc)^2 = (gamma mc)^2, or P-total = gamma mc. The choton’s corresponding total energy is E-total = P-total c = gamma
mc^2, which is the same as a relativistic electron’s total energy. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<h4 style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:9.0pt;margin-left:0in">
<span style="color:black;font-weight:normal"> When an external electric field </span>
<span style="color:black">E</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal"> acts on the circulating choton, the choton (with its inertial mass m=0.511 MeV/c^2) is accelerated by a net force
</span><span style="color:black">Fnet</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal"> equal to the rapidly rotating centripetal force
</span><span style="color:black">Fc</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal">= 0.424 N plus the external force
</span><span style="color:black">F</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal">=-e</span><span style="color:black">E.
</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal">The total force on the choton is
</span><span style="color:black">Fnet</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal"> =
</span><span style="color:black">Fc</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal"> + e</span><span style="color:black">E
</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal">= m </span><span style="color:black">a-total
</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal">in the non-relativistic case or
</span><span style="color:black">Fnet</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal"> = d</span><span style="color:black">p-total</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal">/dt in the relativistic case. The choton’s helical motion (the motion of
the CC) will be changed by the external electric field </span><span style="color:black">E
</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal">acting on the choton, and the choton’s CM (average position) will be affected accordingly, and move in the direction of the applied external force
</span><span style="color:black">E</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal">.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></h4>
<h4 style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:9.0pt;margin-left:0in">
<span style="color:black;font-weight:normal"> There are also quantum mechanical features of the above motion. As the choton changes its helical trajectory due to the applied electric field
</span><span style="color:black">E</span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal">, the choton’s transverse momentum component P-trans = mc adjusts its orientation so that P-trans continues to be transverse to the choton’s new longitudinal motion with its
new longitudinal component velocity </span><span style="color:black">v’ </span><span style="color:black;font-weight:normal">(the new electron velocity). In this way the calculated spin of the choton electron model continues to be Ro x Po = hbar/2 and the Pythogorean
momentum relation continues to be P-total^2 = P-long^2 + P-trans^2 (which is mathematically equivalent to the relativistic energy-momentum equation E^2 = p^2 c^2 +m^2 c4). Further information on the spin-1/2 charged photon model is at “Electron’s are spin
1/2 charged photons generating the de Broglie wavelength” at <a href="https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research#papers" target="_blank">
https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research#papers</a> (19<sup>th</sup> article).</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></h4>
<h4 style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:9.0pt;margin-left:0in">
<span style="color:black;font-weight:normal"> In summary, the choton electron model does not need to be a rigid body to maintain the relation between CC and CM. All forces (including the apparent centripetal force F-cent) act on the choton (at the CC), which
has its own inertial mass, producing the choton’s acceleration and average center of mass position CM. </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></h4>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">with warm regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">On Sep 25, 2017, at 2:18 AM, Martin Rivas <<a href="mailto:martin.rivas@ehu.es" target="_blank">martin.rivas@ehu.es</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Dear Wolfgang and Richard,</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Thank you for your interest. I will try an answer to your hints and questions.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">In my opinion there is no need to find a mechanism for binding together the center of mass and center of charge</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">of the electron.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">For any arbitrary mechanical system, once the total external force F is determined, we use this total</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">force to compute the trajectory of the CM by considering that this point (CM) is a point particle of mass</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">m, the total mass of the system, and solve the corresponding differential equations dp/dt=F. The linear momentum p</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">is expressed in terms of the CM velocity v, as usual p=mv in a non-relativistic framework, or p=gamma(v)mv<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">in a relativistic one.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">This is known as the center of mass theorem.<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">In the case of an elementary particle the hypothesis is that the interacting property, the charge,</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">either electric, weak or strong charge, can be associated to a single point, the center of charge.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">An elementary particle is such a simple system that its interacting structure can be reduced to a single</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">point (the CC) and no further multipoles.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">To know the position of this point is important to determine from there the fields produced by the elementary</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">particle and also, by assumption, the force produced by the external fields on the particle, which is</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">just the evaluation of the external fields at the particle center of charge.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">In the Preamble of my Notes I consider as an example the possibility that an elementary particle can be<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">considered as a rigid body. All electromagnetic structure can be reduced to a single point, the CC.<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">But this point is by assumption a different point than the CM. What we get is that once the trajectory<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">of the CC is determined,</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">the trajectory of the CM can also be computed as an average trajectory of the other. And we have not to worry</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">about how these two points are bound together. We can also compute the trajectory of the CM as usual,</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">as a Newtonian equation, but the total external force is not defined at the CM but rather at the CC.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The CC satisfies fourth order differential equations which have helical solutions, so that the center<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">of the helix corresponds to the CM trajectory.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">In this way there is no need in this formalism to consider that an elementary particle</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">to be a helically-moving charged photon-like object. It can be reduced to a single point, the CC.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">But three degrees of freedom are not sufficient to describe spin 1/2 objects.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Later I need some extra three degrees of freedom to describe orientation, so that an elementary</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">particle becomes a localized and orientable mechanical system. The particle moves and rotates.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">From the quantum mechanical point of view we need the orientation variables to have spin operators</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">with 1/2 spectrum. The analysis in the preamble shows that if the two centers are different points, then</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">the CC has to be moving at an unreachable velocity for every inertial observer. This is the speed of light but we have</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">no photons moving around. Just the motion of the CC.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">At this stage of the formalism what we have are electromagnetic forces. Gravity is absent by assumption</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">because we are in a Restricted Relativity Principle framework. The electromagnetic forces are computed in terms</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">of the motions of the CC's of the particles that interact.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Bohr atom.<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The usual conception that the electron, in the ground state, describes an orbit,<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">either circular or elliptic trajectory around the CM of the proton is misleading.<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The reason is that in the ground state of the atom, the orbital angular momentum of the electron is L=0. It is a S-state.<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Literally it means from the classical point of view that the linear momentum of the electron,<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">and therefore the trajectory of the CM of<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">the electron, has to be pointing always to the CM of the proton. It has to be a back and forth trajectory</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">around the CM of the proton, a straight trajectory. This is impossible for a spinless point particle because</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">the two particles will collide at the common CM. But if the electron has two separate points,<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">there is no problem that the motion of the CM of the electron go through the CM of the proton, while the CC<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">of both particles will never meet each other. For the electron the separation between CM and CC is 10^{-13} m,</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">while the estimated size of the proton is smaller, around 10^{-15} m, 100 times smaller.<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The CC of the electron will never collide with the charge of the proton.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Best regards</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Martin</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">De:</span></b><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"> </span></span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">Richard
Gauthier [<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_blank">mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com</a>]<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<b>Enviado el:</b><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span>lunes, 25 de septiembre de 2017 4:50<br>
<b>Para:</b><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span>Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>CC:</b><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span>Martin Rivas; David Hestenes<br>
<b>Asunto:</b><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span>Re: [General] A composite electron?</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Hello Martin,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> I would like to know if you have ever considered your helically-moving-lightspeed-charge electron model (which is similar to David Hestene's helically-moving-lightspeed-charge zitter electron model) to be a
helically-moving charged photon-like object (which I call a “choton” — rhymes with “photon" -- for “charged photon”). A helically-moving lightspeed charged photon-like object would have its inertial mass centered on its helical axis (as in your electron model)
and so It seems that it would be quite similar in many ways to your electron model, including having the electron's spin 1/2 due to its helical radius of hbar/2mc. Furthermore, a helically-circling charged photon-like object would have the ability to generate
the electron’s relativistic de Broglie wavelength L-db= h/(gamma mv) due to its wave motion (and wavelength lambda = h/(gamma mc) for a relativistic electron of energy E=gamma mc^2 = hf= hc/lambda) along its helical trajectory.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">On Sep 24, 2017, at 12:20 PM, Martin Rivas <<a href="mailto:martin.rivas@ehu.es" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">martin.rivas@ehu.es</span></a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Tank you Richard,</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Best regards</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Martin</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">De:</span></b><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"> </span></span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">Richard
Gauthier [<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com</span></a>]<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<b>Enviado el:</b><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span>domingo, 24 de septiembre de 2017 8:45<br>
<b>Para:</b><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span>Martin Rivas<br>
<b>CC:</b><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span>Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Asunto:</b><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span>Fwd: [General] A composite electron?</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Hello Martin, <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">You must have been accidentally left off of the reply list. So I am forwarding Wolf’s latest reply which is directed partly to you. You can send any reply back to <a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a> .
You are also welcome to join the discussion group if you like.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> with warm regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Begin forwarded message:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">From:<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span></b><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Wolfgang
Baer <<a href="mailto:wolf@nascentinc.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">wolf@nascentinc.com</span></a>></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Subject: Re: [General] A composite electron?</span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Date:<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span></b><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">September
23, 2017 at 11:14:31 PM PDT</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">To:<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span></b><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Reply-To:<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span></span></b><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Nature
of Light and Particles - General Discussion <<a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a>></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">I looked at Martin's<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299636714_Kinematical_Theory_of_Elementary_Spinning_Particles_Lecture_Notes" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299636714_Kinematical_Theory_of_Elementary_Spinning_Particles_Lecture_Notes</span></a></span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">and was<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Quite interested in several problems he discussed. First the question of how to address charge separation from mass when charge cancels to a neutral. I’ve had the same thoughts that somehow one must treat the
centers of positive and negative charge separately and then put them together. I do not know if he is listening but one idea I have been mulling through is that the sign of charge is somehow associated with the observers time , so that plus and minus charge
is associated with before and after the observers now. Just a wiff of something going through my head.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">The other however is the force relationship between the Lorenz force on one side and the Newtonian force on the mass<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">He then equates the two but that leaves a separate pull on a charge and one on a mass. So I’ve postulated a force holding the two together and approximated the force between charge and mass as Fcm and its opposite
Fmc as two additional forces that must happen inside material and have been trying to connect them to the weak and strong force, but without success. Mainly because I do not know that much about elementary particles.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> But it is clear to me that we have two parallel systems of force categories when looking at material from the outside. One is Electromagnetic governed by Maxwell and the Lorenz force on charges the other is Gravito-inertial
forces governed by Einstein<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">We just assume charge and mass must be held together or these two force types would operate completely independently and we would have nothing of the kind of material we actually experience.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> I’ve modeled such internal force simply by a spring with a spring constant that is infinity when we assume charge and mass are co located, but then as the spring constant become finite all kinds of interesting
effects can happen. One I’ve asked Albrecht to look at is to see if we consider the Bohr atom and assume that the central force between proton and electron pulls the mass and charges apart slightly. The coulomb force would be a bit greater since the inertial
balancing force would pull the mass outward.<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span>Would such a system account for the fine structure? And would we get Sommerfelds fine structure
constant out of it. I do not have the background to do such a calculation but wish I could find someone who could do it or have a reference to someone who has done it.If you get any leads on thios kind of thing let me know<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Perhaps Martin if you are listening could shed light on this problem with his Kinem,atic Theory of elementary particles?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">best for now<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Wolf<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<pre><span style="color:black">Dr. Wolfgang Baer<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">Research Director<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">Nascent Systems Inc.<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">E-mail <a href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">wolf@NascentInc.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">On 9/22/2017 9:36 PM, Andrew Meulenberg wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black">Dear Wolf,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black">This whole concept is new to me (only weeks old), so i can't recommend anything yet. I'm just trying to find the time to scan/read what looks promising. However, it may be something
to draw a number of models together (given a little 'wiggle-room'). .<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
One of the questions to be addressed is certainly on what holds the centers together. So, your thoughts could be very important. My first instinct is to look at the whirlpool effect as exemplified by the Falaco effect (see various papers<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><cite>like</cite></span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:black"><a href="https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0101098" target="_blank"><cite><span style="color:purple"> </span></cite><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"><i><span style="color:purple"> </span></i></span><span style="color:purple">Falaco
solitons, cosmic strings in a swimming pool</span></a> RM Kiehn - arXiv preprint gr-qc/0101098, 2001 -<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://arxiv.org/" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">arxiv.org</span></a></span><cite><span style="color:black">).</span></cite><span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"><span style="color:black"> </span></span><span style="color:black">I
am slow with the mathematics; nevertheless, I find the concept to be useful and now I can apply it to the polarizability of, and forces between, two centers. My preference at the moment is to assume relativity and 3-space + time.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black">Richard has shown that his charged photon concept has wiggle room and therefore it is probably compatible with my present concepts (which also have wiggle room). Both of our models
may be compatible with a 2-center model.<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
I fear that Albrecht's twin particle model may not be given the wiggle room to incorporate the two-center model. If so, that is too bad, because both models might benefit from the comparison.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black">Since my twins were born, I have not had time to keep up with most of the discussions of this forum. (This lack of time is the result of a different 2-center model. Just this evening,
I had two pair of glasses, which I had left on my laptop, nearly destroyed.) So pointing out important threads might be necessary to bring me up-to-speed on some of the things presented as they pertain to the present discussion.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Andrew M.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black">_________________<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Wolfgang Baer <<a href="mailto:wolf@nascentinc.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">wolf@nascentinc.com</span></a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Andrew:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">I've been working on the concept of charge and mass center differences and forces thaT MAY HOLD THEM TOGETHER<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">You mention quite a few papers which one or which set would you recommend to find out more about what has been proposed?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">And yes I have suggested this to Albrecht but he has not felt it was what he has in mind, his idea is that the two rotating chrges are purely a elecromagnetic strong or weak force, I cannot remember which<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Wolf<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<pre><span style="color:black">Dr. Wolfgang Baer<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">Research Director<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">Nascent Systems Inc.<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">E-mail <a href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">wolf@NascentInc.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">On 9/20/2017 2:45 PM, Andrew Meulenberg wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black">Dear Richard and Albrecht,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black">Richard has expressed doubts about Albrecht's 2-body electron and Albrecht probably has reservations about Richard's charged photons.<br>
<br>
I just read a paper ("The dynamical equation of the spinning electron," J. Phys. A, 36, 4703, (2003), and also LANL ArXiv:physis/0112005, along.with some background papers) that Richard has referenced in his: The Dirac Equation and the Superluminal Electron
Model (<a href="https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research#papers" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research#papers</span></a>). I found a concept with which I was previously unfamiliar: the centers of mass
and charge being different. If this interesting concept is valid; then it might be possible that the two centers are the 'objects' that Albrecht has proposed for his composite electron. It might also apply to the charged photon.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black">Has anyone any comments on this concept (or n the author of the paper: Martin Rivas)?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Andrew M<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<pre><span style="color:black">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">Wolf@nascentinc.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"><a href=<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</span></a>><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"></a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
</blockquote>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">mules333@gmail.com</span></a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</span></a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<pre><span style="color:black">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">Wolf@nascentinc.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"><a href=<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</span></a>><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"></a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
</blockquote>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at<span class="m2566033424145280623m-3002516575426363278m-1158051194164779336apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">richgauthier@gmail.com</span></a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</span></a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="color:black"><br>
_______________________________________________<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" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>