<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Andre:</p>
<p>This looks very interesting. I've often though Einstein's
equations (Lorenz Transforms) are correct but that along with the
speed of light postulate they represent a whole world view I am
not too sure of. Glad to see an alternative. Can you provide
references to Kaufman and Abrahams work?</p>
<p><span style=""><i><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">"I know that the
very idea that the Coulomb force induces
physically existing kinetic energy in charges
appears strange to most, but I found that so much
can be explained with this idea that I just can't
see how physical reality could be otherwise." </span></span></span></span></span></span></i><span
style="font-size:11pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif""><font size="+1">Are
you talking pure electricity or mass-charged
particles. Is not the electromagnetic vector potential
related to momentum i.e. kinetic energy? <br>
</font></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p><span style=""><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif""><font size="+1">Is
there any concept that charge and mass need a
force to bind them together in your idea?</font></span></span></span></span></span></span><i><span
style="font-size:11pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif""><br>
</span></span></span></span></span></span></i></span></p>
<p>Chip: <span style="">that “<i>Absolute uniform motion cannot be
detected by any means.</i>” does this statement not apply only
to a limited class of experiments.</span></p>
<p><span style="">Can we not say we detecting our motion relative to
the cosmic background by simply looking out is legitimate?</span></p>
<p><span style="">Wolf<br>
</span></p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/31/2017 8:50 PM, André Michaud
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:201711010350.vA13ooXi015488@mail68c0.megamailservers.com">
<title></title>
<div class="userStyles" style=" font-family: Arial; font-size:
12pt; color: #000000;">
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Hi Chip,</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Thank you for your
welcoming message. I remember that we crossed
paths before on ResearchGate, but I don't recall
the specifics.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">You really are
going to the crux of the matter with this question
"How do you view and understand the causes for
“relativity”?"</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Fist time I have to
actually answer it so directly.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Contrary to most
(seems to me, from decades of interaction with
others) my first contact with relativity was
through a book by Henri Poincare "La science et
l'hypothèse", which led me directly to study the
experiments carried out by Walter Kaufmann that
Max Abraham interpreted, both of whom, I learned
much later, got the gamma factor idea from
Woldemar Voigt with whom Abraham had contacts, and
who seems to have been to first to establish the
concept. </span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">From Kaufmann's
experiments with relativistic electrons in a
bubble chamber, the gamma factor simply gives the
exact measure of how much kinetic energy is
induced in accelerating charged particles with
velocity as they are accelerated by the ambient
electric and magnetic fields he used to control
the moving electrons during his experiments, as
demonstrated by his results, half of which
converts to a velocity related momentary mass
increment which is measurable transversally, which
is what the Kaufmann experiments demonstrate,</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Only later did I
study Einstein's SR concept grounded on the idea
that the gamma factor applies to time dilation and
length contraction. Since I already was in
agreement with Abraham and Poincare's views about
the Kaufmann experiment, I always stuck with this
view as matching more closely physical reality.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">So to me,
"relativity" simply relates to the fact that
energy is induced non-linearly (according to the
gamma factor) with velocity of charged particles
by the Coulomb force, or with proximity between
charge particles also due to the Coulomb force. It
has no other implications from my perspective.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">I know that the
very idea that the Coulomb force induces
physically existing kinetic energy in charges
appears strange to most, but I found that so much
can be explained with this idea that I just can't
see how physical reality could be otherwise. </span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
Best Regards
<footer class="signatureDivContainer">
<footer class="signatureContainer" style="display:inline;">---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.gsjournal.net/">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.srpinc.org/">http://www.srpinc.org/</a></footer>
</footer>
<footer class="replyforwardcontainer"><br>
<br>
<i>On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 19:18:58 -0700, Richard Gauthier <richgauthier@gmail.com>
wrote:</richgauthier@gmail.com></i><br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
Hi Andrew,
<div>I forwarded the following from Chip on the discussion
list.</div>
<div>Richard</div>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>Begin forwarded message:</div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(0, 0, 0,
1.0);"><b>From: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;">"Chip Akins" <<a
href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">chipakins@gmail.com</a>></span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(0, 0, 0,
1.0);"><b>Subject: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b>Re: [General]
half-photons??</b></span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(0, 0, 0,
1.0);"><b>Date: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;">October 31, 2017 at
4:00:37 AM PDT</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(0, 0, 0,
1.0);"><b>To: </b></span><span style="font-family:
-webkit-system-font, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica,
sans-serif;">"'Nature of Light and Particles -
General Discussion'" <<a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>></span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(0, 0, 0,
1.0);"><b>Reply-To: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Nature of Light and
Particles - General Discussion <<a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>></span></div>
<div>
<div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1;
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; -webkit-text-stroke-width:
0px;">
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span
style="">Andre<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> </div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span
style="">I am delighted that you might
participate in our discussion group. I have read
some of your work and comments on ResearchGate
and find you to be a thoughtful, intelligent
contributor to the process of discovery.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> </div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span
style="">Thank you for forwarding some of your
thoughts through Richard. I am hoping you will
join our group so that we can all benefit from
your insights as well.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> </div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span
style="">As you have pointed out, the postulate
that “<i>Absolute uniform motion cannot be
detected by any means.</i>” Does not mean that
“<i>the concept of absolute rest and the ether
have no meaning</i>”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> </div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span
style="">For if matter is made of energy, and
energy always takes the propagating form,
whether as light or confined to create matter,
then it would be very difficult indeed for us to
detect our motion through the medium (ether).
This situation would also cause the appearance
of relativity.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> </div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span
style="">So, there is another view, which is
more causal than Einstein’s, where “relativity”<b>is
the result of the medium of space</b>and the
way energy creates matter and light.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> </div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span
style="">Is this your opinion as well? How do
you view and understand the causes for
“relativity”?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> </div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span
style="">Chip<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> </div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> </div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> </div>
<div>
<div style="border-style: solid none none;
border-top-color: rgb(225, 225, 225);
border-top-width: 1pt; padding: 3pt 0in 0in;">
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><b><span
style="font-size: 11pt; font-family:
Calibri, sans-serif;">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size: 11pt; font-family:
Calibri, sans-serif;">General [<a
href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
style="color: purple; text-decoration:
underline;" moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]<b>On
Behalf Of</b>Richard Gauthier<br>
<b>Sent:</b>Friday, October 27, 2017 3:38 PM<br>
<b>To:</b>Nature of Light and Particles -
General Discussion <<a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
style="color: purple; text-decoration:
underline;" moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b>André Michaud <<a
href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org"
style="color: purple; text-decoration:
underline;" moz-do-not-send="true">srp2@srpinc.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b>Re: [General] half-photons??<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div>
<h1 style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in;
font-size: 24pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman',
serif; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size:
11pt; color: rgb(75, 75, 75);
background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248);
font-weight: normal; background-position:
initial initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">Hello Grahame, Vivian, Chip, John W,
Martin, Andrew and all,</span><o:p></o:p></h1>
<h1 style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in;
font-size: 24pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman',
serif; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size:
11pt; color: rgb(75, 75, 75); font-weight:
normal;">Here are forwarded some more
thoughtful comments/responses from</span><span
style="font-size: 10.5pt; color: rgb(75, 75,
75); background-color: rgb(239, 243, 246);
font-weight: normal; background-position:
initial initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">André</span><span style="font-size:
11pt; color: rgb(75, 75, 75); font-weight:
normal;">that I think are relevant to your SR
discussions.</span><o:p></o:p></h1>
<h1 style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in;
font-size: 24pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman',
serif; margin-bottom: 24pt;"><span
style="font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(75, 75,
75); font-weight: normal;">Richard</span><o:p></o:p></h1>
<h1 style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in;
font-size: 24pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman',
serif; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size:
11pt; color: rgb(75, 75, 75);
background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248);
font-weight: normal; background-position:
initial initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">André:</span><o:p></o:p></h1>
<h1 style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in;
font-size: 24pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman',
serif; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size:
11pt; color: rgb(75, 75, 75);
background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248);
font-weight: normal; background-position:
initial initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">Thank you for forwarding the
discussion between Vivian, Grahame and Chip. I
must say that over the years, I have come
across most of similar comments about SR and
various flavors of photon and electron inner
structure proposals, either just reading about
them or partaking in the discussions.</span><o:p></o:p></h1>
<h1 style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in;
font-size: 24pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman',
serif; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size:
11pt; color: rgb(75, 75, 75);
background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248);
font-weight: normal; background-position:
initial initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">I appreciate you sending me such
updates. Causes me to think of these issues
from a fresh angle. Thank you for your offer
to actively join the group, but I prefer to
wait until one or other member wishes to
exchange with me. As previously mentioned, I
am quite happy just contributing my ideas to
you, and let you be the judge of whether or
not you communicate my thoughts in the
meantime if you deem useful in context. As far
as I am concerned, I am discussing with you
personally, simply because you are interested
in my opinion.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(75, 75,
75); font-weight: normal;"><span
style="background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248);
background-position: initial initial;
background-repeat: initial initial;">I have
some comments of my own regarding SR. It
seems to be generally assumed that SR is
completely electromagnetism compliant. I was
once presented with this paper by Richard E.
Haskell, as giving the full derivation of
all Maxwell's equations in addition to
Lorentz force from special relativity and
Coulomb's law:</span></span><br>
<br>
<span style="font-size: 11pt; font-weight:
normal;"><a
href="http://www.cse.secs.oakland.edu/haskell/Special%20Relativity%20and%20Maxwells%20Equations.pdf"
style="color: purple; text-decoration:
underline;"
title="http://www.cse.secs.oakland.edu/haskell/Special%20Relativity%20and%20Maxwells%20Equations.pdf"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:
rgb(66, 139, 202);">http://www.cse.secs.oakland.edu/haskell/Special%20Relativity%20and%20Maxwells%20Equations.pdf</span></a><br>
<br>
<span style="color: rgb(75, 75, 75);"><span
style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">I find it very well done and
indeed clearly explaining SR and its
origins.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">Here are some remarks that came
to mind as I read it:</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">On page 10, Einstein's first
postulate is stated as follows: Absolute
uniform motion cannot be detected by any
means. The following conclusion by the
author regarding this postulate seems to
be totally inappropriate to me: "This is
to say that the concept of absolute rest
and the ether have no meaning." I fail to
see how this conclusion can logically
derive so straightforwardly from the
stated first postulate.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">In my own book (</span></span><span
class="a-size-large"><span style="color:
rgb(17, 17, 17);">Electromagnetic
Mechanics of Elementary Particles: 2nd
Edition--Richard</span></span><span
style="color: rgb(75, 75, 75);
background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248);
background-position: initial initial;
background-repeat: initial initial;">),
metaphorically speaking of course, as
formulated, this first postulate is a
totally arbitrary axiomatic assertion not
grounded on experimentally observed data
about physical reality. Consequently, it is
an invalid premise to draw any conclusion
about physical reality. Also, I am positive
that absolute uniform motion of free
electromagnetic energy in vacuum has been
detected and confirmed out of any doubt. Its
uniform velocity has also been derived by
Maxwell from second partial derivatives of
the equations of Ampere and Gauss, which
themselves were established from
experimental data 40 years before.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="color: rgb(75, 75, 75);"><span
style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">His second postulate (on page 10
also) (light is propagated in empty space
with a velocity c which is independent of
the motion of the source), is in reality
Maxwell's rightfully arrived at conclusion
40 years previously from the second
partial derivatives from which he
established the speed of light as being c,
which is a conclusion that Einstein
perfectly understood.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">In reality, this is not an
axiomatic postulate as is being assumed,
but a well established conclusion derived
in direct line from equations themselves
established from experimental data by
Gauss and Ampere.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">So there is no requirement to
"modify our ideas about the nature of
time" as stated on page 10 to accommodate
the confirmed fact that light travels at
uniform velocity c in vacuum.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">Then comes the description of
two famous different inertial frames each
with an observer, moving at different
fixed velocities both stuck with the task
of seeing the same light as moving at a
constant velocity.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">First, naturally occurring
inertial motion at fixed velocities of
material bodies is impossible in physical
reality, so my view is that this set up
cannot possibly lead to any valid
conclusions with respect to physical
reality. If a body is not in immediate
contact with another body, it will
accelerate, so its velocity will
constantly change. If in contact with
another body, it will accelerate with this
second body and its velocity will also
constantly change.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">Second, whatever opinion these
two observers may have about the velocity
of light will not change its actual
physical velocity.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">You can see that the squared
velocities ratio of the Lorentz factor is
obtained from strictly mathematical
geometric considerations established at
equation (5) involving time to
axiomatically associate the Lorentz factor
to time with equation (6).</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">You will also observe the same
establishment of the Lorentz gamma factor
for the so-called "length contraction"
with equation (14) strictly from geometric
and algebraic consideration, which is not
a derivation from physically obtained
data, but from a construct obtained by
establishing a geometric set up that will
produce this relation between the
"mathematical" concept of length and the
gamma factor.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">I must say here that most of my
life, I had been convinced that the gamma
factor proper had been derived from
electromagnetic equations by Lorentz and
not from this geometric/algebraic
mathematical set up.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">The reason is that I have read
so much material since the 50's that I
didn't recall where I read about its
derivation from electromagnetic equations,
or even if this was a false memory. I
tried to relocate the source after I
derived it myself from an electromagnetic
equation (equation 66 in the following
paper, derived from equation 51, itself a
conversion from strictly electromagnetic
equation 34), to compare results, but
couldn't re-locate it. I then assumed by
default that it was Lorentz who had made
the original derivation from
electromagnetism and that I just did't
succeed in re-locating the source
document:</span></span><br>
<br>
<a
href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282353551_From_Classical_to_Relativistic_Mechanics_via_Maxwell"
style="color: purple; text-decoration:
underline;"
title="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282353551_From_Classical_to_Relativistic_Mechanics_via_Maxwell"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:
rgb(66, 139, 202);">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282353551_From_Classical_to_Relativistic_Mechanics_via_Maxwell</span></a><br>
<br>
<span style="color: rgb(75, 75, 75);"><span
style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">You can verify that from the
electromagnetic perspective the "gamma
factor" derived in this paper has nothing
to do with length or time contraction,
only with charged particles energy
increase with velocity (and with proximity
between charged particles according to the
Coulomb law).</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">I then investigated further and
found that all past derivations of the
gamma factor had been made from this
geometric/algebraic set up that was
initially established by Woldemar Voigt in
1887,</span></span><br>
<br>
<a
href="http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=2001ChJPh..39..211E&link_type=ARTICLE&db_key=PHY&high="
style="color: purple; text-decoration:
underline;"
title="http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=2001ChJPh..39..211E&link_type=ARTICLE&db_key=PHY&high="
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:
rgb(66, 139, 202);">http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=2001ChJPh..39..211E&link_type=ARTICLE&db_key=PHY&high=</span></a><br>
<br>
<span style="color: rgb(75, 75, 75);"><span
style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">who had epistolary contacts with
Larmor, Lorentz and Poincare, who also are
credited with developing the method. I
finally relocated where I had gotten the
idea that one of them had also derived it
from electromagnetism.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">It was due to Walter Kaufmann's
demonstration that the mass of the
electron varied with velocity according to
the relativistic equation during his
experimentation leading to the
identification of the transverse
relativistic mass of moving electrons,
that made use of the gamma factor
developed from the geometry/algebraic
method, but that finally no-one seemed to
have actually derived the gamma factor
directly from an electromagnetic equation,
before my own derivation in the above
paper.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">If on your side, you know of
such a derivation directly from an
electromagnetic equation, I would really
appreciate a link to the paper, or a
reference to the paper if not available
online, so I can compare methods.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">All of this is meant to
emphasize that this derivation of the
gamma factor from an electromagnetic
equation confirms that from the
electromagnetism perspective, in physical
reality the gamma factor is related
strictly to energy increase with velocity
of charged particles such as the electron,
and under no circumstance to time dilation
or so-called "length contraction".</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">I place the word "so-called"
before "length contraction", because there
is a real problem with the very concept of
length contraction when applied to
physically existing bodies.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">I occasionally give the
following example to bring to mind the
immense distances that separate all
charged particles within the atoms of
which every macroscopic body is made.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">If a hydrogen atom was upsized
so that its central proton became as large
as the Sun, then the electron would
stabilize as far as Neptune's orbit, which
would make a hydrogen atom as large as the
whole solar system. This means that
distances between the charged particles
within atoms making up macroscopic bodies
are relatively astronomical.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">Given that all bodies are made
of such empty structures, the very concept
of "length" can be seen as meaningless
with respect to its physical composition,
and that what would be involved when the
possible "length contraction" of a
macroscopic body is considered, would
really minimally be a "distance
contraction" between the electronic
escorts and the nuclei of the constituting
atoms.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">This being said, such distance
contraction would apply by structure not
only to the length of macroscopic bodies,
but also to their other dimensions, which
are width and thickness.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">Given the assertion that SR is
deemed electromagnetism compliant, such
shortening of the distances between
electronic escorts and nuclei within
bodies subjected to "length contraction"
should involve a corresponding energy
increase within the mass of the body due
to the Coulomb law at play as a function
of the inverse square of the contracting
distances between charged electrons of the
electronic escorts and the charged nuclei.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">But, nowhere in SR is there a
provision for this energy increase in the
contracting mass of bodies moving at
relativistic velocities, which is a gaping
hole in the SR theory that seems not to
have attracted any attention.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">So, if SR does not account for
this energy increase mandated by the
Coulomb force, this means that SR is not
Maxwell equations compliant, because
Gauss's equation for the electric field,
which is Maxwell's first equation, is a
simple generalization of Coulomb's law,
which seems not to be applicable to bodies
sustaining length contraction according to
SR.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">Well, I hope this makes some
sense to you, and if you have input about
a prior derivation of the gamma factor
from an electromagnetic equation, I really
would appreciate.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">Best Regards,</span><br>
<br>
<span style="background-color: rgb(248, 248,
248); background-position: initial
initial; background-repeat: initial
initial;">André</span></span></span><o:p></o:p></h1>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top: 5pt; margin-bottom:
5pt;" type="cite">
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif;">On Oct 26, 2017, at 4:32 PM,
Dr Grahame Blackwell <<a
href="mailto:grahame@starweave.com"
style="color: purple; text-decoration:
underline;" moz-do-not-send="true">grahame@starweave.com</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Arial, sans-serif; color: navy;">Dear
Vivian (et al.)</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Arial, sans-serif; color: navy;">On
looking back over my email (below)just
sent, I'm concernedthat my reference to
"those who use language in such a way as
to bolster their arguments" might
possibly be misconstrued as a reference
to yourself. Please be assured that this
was not my intention, I certainly don't
regard you as having done this, I fully
appreciate that your usage was to
describe a particular situation rather
than to justify a line of argument. My
point about precise use of language
stands, and of course applies to all of
us; my point about misuse of words to
strengthen an argument was with
reference to a wholly hypothetical
situation which I cannot imagine
applying to anyone in this group.</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Arial, sans-serif; color: navy;">Best
regards,</span><span style="font-size:
10pt; font-family: Helvetica,
sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Arial, sans-serif; color: navy;">Grahame</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;">----- Original
Message -----<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<blockquote 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;
orphans: auto; text-align: start; widows:
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
word-spacing: 0px;" type="cite">
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color:
rgb(228, 228, 228);"><b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Arial, sans-serif;">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Arial, sans-serif;"><a
href="mailto:grahame@starweave.com"
style="color: purple;
text-decoration: underline;"
title="grahame@starweave.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">Dr Grahame
Blackwell</a><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"><b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Arial, sans-serif;">To:</span></b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Arial, sans-serif;"><a
href="mailto:viv@universephysics.com"
style="color: purple;
text-decoration: underline;"
title="viv@universephysics.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">Viv Robinson</a>;<a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" style="color:
purple; text-decoration: underline;"
title="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">Nature of
Light and Particles - General
Discussion</a><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"><b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Arial, sans-serif;">Sent:</span></b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Arial, sans-serif;">Thursday, October
26, 2017 11:58 PM<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"><b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Arial, sans-serif;">Subject:</span></b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Arial, sans-serif;">Re: [General]
half-photons??<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">Dear
Vivian,</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">Thanks
for your reply.</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">First and
foremost I need to say that I
haven’t<b>ever</b>“chosen to
misrepresent” you; that’s the sort
of emotive language that I find
quite unhelpful.To make assumptions
regarding the intentions of others,
and then state those assumptions as
fact, is always a risky business!I
have simply described my
understanding of what you have said
as it seems to me – and hopefully
always made it clear that this is
what I’m doing.[Why on earth would I<b><i>choose</i></b>to
misrepresent you?]</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">Second,
with regard to my being “pedantic”
over your choice of words: as I’ve
said, I’m quite relaxed over the use
of “crumpled” (though I see it quite
differently); however I cannot be so
casual about your use of the word
“requires” when your proposed
‘requirement’ is in fact just one of
at least two options.For me this
goes right to the heart of
scientific rigour: if, for example,
a medical researcher stated that
onset of a particular medical
condition ‘requires’ an elevated
temperature of five degrees above
the norm, when in fact under some
circumstances this need not be the
case, the consequences could be
catastrophic.</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">Many
parallel situations can be
envisaged, in almost every branch of
science.I’d go so far as to say that
I wouldn’t be able to have a
meaningful discussion with anyone
who used language in such a way to
bolster their own scientific
arguments.Certainly a view of the
nature of Relativity, or of the
structure of photons, that (in my
view) misuses language in this way
would be of absolutely no interest
to me.If this makes me a pedant
then, yes, I plead guilty as charged
– and I believe that science would
be the worse for it if others
investigating fundamental aspects of
our universe didn’t take the same
view.</span><span style="font-size:
10pt; font-family: Helvetica,
sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">I agree
100% with your proposal that the
circulating-photon model of an
electron (at a constant light-speed)
accounts fully for observed
phenomena attributed to Relativity;
this is a point that Chip and I have
both been quite vocal about pretty
much since we each joined this group
(as I understand your position on
this Chip – forgive me if that’s
incorrect in any way) and that I’ve
been writing about for nigh on 20
years.This causes a changed
perception/experience of time,
distance and object dimensions
precisely in line with the
observations that are put down to
Relativity.In this respect
Relativity<b><i>is</i></b>a thing,
and it’s fully explainable as such.</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">However
this explanation stops short –<b><i>well</i></b>short
– of supporting the proposal that
spacetime is of itself, by its
nature, ‘relativistic’ – i.e. that
all inertial states of motion are
equivalent, that there is no one
unique such state of motion that can
be termed ‘objectively static’, from
which all other states of motion may
be measured.In fact, it renders such
a proposal superfluous, since all
observed phenomena can be fully
explained without introducing this
additional constraint on the nature
of reality.[I include in this the
apparent reciprocity of
‘relativistic’ effects, which can be
derived directly from this particle
model.]</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">It is<b><i>that</i></b>‘Principle
of Relativity’ – the objective
equivalence of all inertial states
of motion – for which I see
absolutely<b><i>no</i></b>causation
proposed (I'm talking generally
here, not just about your
work).Certainly the circling-photon
model (on which we appear to be
agreed) offers no causal explanation
for such a proposed phenomenon – at
the same time as explaining very
clearly why such a proposal is
unnecessary to explain
‘relativistic’ effects.</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">So, then:
I thoroughly applaud both
experimental evidence and
mathematical rationale in support of
any theory – and (as I observed to
John W) I have never questioned
either of these in respect of SR or
GR, in fact I have endorsed them to
the hilt.However, what I am saying,
and what is fully supported by
logical analysis of the
circling-photon particle model, is
that these experiments and math are
respectively illustrating and
documenting<b><i>perceived</i></b>reality
rather than<b><i>objective</i></b>reality.If
one recognises that effects
attributed to Relativity are, in the
main,<b><i>observer</i></b>effects
(including mechanical/atomic
‘observers’ such as clocks), coupled
with objective consequences such as
the electromagnetic foreshortening
of objects in motion
(Lorentz/Fitzgerald contraction),
then in my view we have a pretty
complete theory!</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">Where we
come a-cropper is when we (i.e.
mainstream science) insist on
tacking on a wholly unnecessary
‘addendum’ to the effect that
reality<b><i>is</i></b>in fact that
strange place that our
motion-affected senses and
instruments tell us it is – that
this train<b><i>is</i></b>longer
(not just<b><i>seems</i></b>longer)
for the guard on it than it is for
the trackside workman, that your
watch<b><i>is</i></b>going slow in
respect of my reference frame whilst
at the same time mine<b><i>is</i></b>going
slow in respect of your reference
frame.</span><span style="font-size:
10pt; font-family: Helvetica,
sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">This
distinction between ‘seems’ and ‘is’
may appear to be a bit irrelevant,
but in fact it’s absolutely crucial
if we’re to progress in our
practical understanding of the
universe.From inertia to
gravitation, from our handling of
time to our handling of space (and
so arguably for the future viability
of our species), every new physical
theory is required to conform to
this frame-invariance
constraint.Since that constraint on
physical laws is arguably totally
illusory, we are (it very much seems
to me) placing unnecessary obstacles
in our path to future discovery and
endeavour – ultimately, in our path
to the stars.</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">Best
regards,</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times
New Roman', serif; background-color:
white;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
color: navy;" lang="EN-GB">Grahame</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif; background-color: white;"><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size:
10pt; font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif;
background-color: white;
background-position: initial initial;
background-repeat: initial initial;">_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family:
Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span
style="background-color: white;
background-position: initial initial;
background-repeat: initial initial;">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"
style="color: purple; text-decoration:
underline;" moz-do-not-send="true">richgauthier@gmail.com</a></span><br>
<span style="background-color: white;
background-position: initial initial;
background-repeat: initial initial;"><a
href="<a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
style="color: purple; text-decoration:
underline;" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"></span><br>
<span style="background-color: white;
background-position: initial initial;
background-repeat: initial initial;">Click
here to unsubscribe</span><br>
<span style="background-color: white;
background-position: initial initial;
background-repeat: initial initial;"></a></span></span><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size:
12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<span 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; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none;
display: inline !important;">_______________________________________________</span><br
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; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">
<span 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; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 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><a
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" style="color:
purple; text-decoration: underline; 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; -webkit-text-stroke-width:
0px;" moz-do-not-send="true">richgauthier@gmail.com</a><br
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; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">
<span 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; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 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"
style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;
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; -webkit-text-stroke-width:
0px;" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a><span
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; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none;
display: inline !important;">"></span><br
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; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">
<span 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; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none;
display: inline !important;">Click here to
unsubscribe</span><br 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; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">
<span 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; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none;
display: inline !important;"></a></span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</footer>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>