<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>At the risk of both repeating and sounding crazy</p>
<p>I've been developing a theory of physics that includes subjective
experiences and identifies a background space with every observer
<br>
</p>
<p>It would then seem that the speed of light is constant for every
observer because it is tied to the material which generates the
space of that observer. If we look at the relationship between
observer and the reference frame and realize the reference frame
defines the space for that observer Einstein's constant becomes
the speed of each observers "Now" <br>
</p>
<p>I have a paper for the Vigier conference tat explores this
possibility which I will send if interest exists</p>
<p>Wolf<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/3/2017 12:37 PM, André Michaud
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:201711031937.vA3JbwYW009823@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"">I indeed see what
you mean.</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"">Since the constant
velocity of light is established in such certain
terms as an absolute velocity, what actually came
to my mind was the idea of possibly establishing
the asymptotic speed of light itself as the
absolute reference with respect to which all
motion could be measured.</span></span></span></span></span><br>
<br>
I'll have a look at Albrecht's work.</span></p>
<br>
André
<footer class="replyforwardcontainer"><br>
<i>On Fri, 3 Nov 2017 12:25:40 -0500, "Chip Akins" <chipakins@gmail.com>
wrote:</chipakins@gmail.com></i><br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<style type="text/css"><!--
/* 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;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 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;}
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;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
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.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
color:black;}
.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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Hi Andre (and
Albrecht) and 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">I think that
if Einstein’s statement “<i>light is propagated in empty
space with a velocity c which is independent of the
motion of the source</i>” is true, then the only
reference which makes any sense is the frame of space
itself. It is implicit within the statement that the
reference frame for this velocity is space itself.
Lorentz argued that there must be a fixed frame of space
for these same reasons.<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">What we
observe is exactly compatible with this concept, that
there is a fixed frame of space, and that we are not
able to measure our motion relative to that fixed frame
because matter is made of confined propagating energy
which moves at the same velocity as light. Then, in a
Euclidian three dimensional space, we would experience
the exact transformations Lorentz suggested are
required. As a result we would always measure the speed
of light to be the same speed. In this causal form of
relativity there is no room for the supposition that all
motion is relative. For motion is, in such a situation,
relative to the frame of space.<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">The impulse
which is momentum (a specific force for a finite time)
is quite compatible, it seems, with your concept of the
importance of kinetic energy in the behavior of
propagating disturbances which make up all particles.<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">One reason I
am interested in the kinetic energy analysis is because
it would be nice to better understand the subject of
momentum as it refers to the propagation of energy
through space. I think it would be helpful if we
understood the mechanisms which create this momentum.<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">Albrecht has
done some work in this area, using a novel approach
which evaluates the behavior of “extended bodies” in
space, which is also very interesting.<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>
<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">
André Michaud [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org">mailto:srp2@srpinc.org</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, November 03, 2017 11:23 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com">chipakins@gmail.com</a>;
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org">srp2@srpinc.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Fwd: [General] Relativity<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">Hi Chip,</span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">I have been thinking about what
you wrote here:</span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">"Einstein stated that “<i>light is
propagated in empty space with a velocity c which is
independent of the motion of the source</i>”, which
is an incomplete statement, logically inconsistent,
because <b>the<i> velocity c in empty space </i>has
no meaning, unless we use the fixed frame of space,
or some other reference, as the logical reference
for that velocity.</b> A velocity simply must be
stated in reference to something."</span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">My own view on this hinges on the
kinetic energy viewpoint that you seem to have taken
an interest in.</span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">On page 14 of my paper on the de
Broglie photon hypothesis, you will find my take on
this issue, which relates the "<b>some other logical
reference</b>" that you mention, to the physical
presence of momentum related translational kinetic
energy:</span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">"Now this brings up the old issue
of what this </span><span style="color:black"
lang="EN-CA">"</span><span style="color:black">equilibrium</span><span
style="color:black" lang="EN-CA">" </span><span
style="color:black">constant velocity of photons in
vacuum (free moving kinetic energy) is relative to in
reality. Is it relative to the medium? To the point of
emission? To the point of absorption? To the observer?
To this or that reference frame, or multiple reference
frames, inertial, non inertial, Galilean, moving or
not, etc.?</span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">A deeply ingrained habit has
developed since the beginning of the 20th century to
hypothesize various reference frames in attempts to
make sense of the experimentally observed data. But in
physical reality, velocity depends on only one
criterion: the actual presence of translational
kinetic energy. If translational kinetic energy is
present and if the local electromagnetic equilibrium
allows it, there will be velocity in vacuum, relative
to there being absence of translational kinetic
energy, irrespective of any hypothesized reference
frame or frames. </span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><u><span
style="color:black">The absolute lower velocity
limit</span></u><span style="color:black">, as seen
from this perspective, would be an electron possessing
zero translational kinetic energy in excess the energy
making up its rest mass. Of course, such an electron
totally deprived of translational kinetic energy can
only be theoretical, because all massive particles are
subject to gravitational or electrostatic acceleration
in physical reality from the moment they start
existing. </span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><u><span
style="color:black">The absolute upper velocity
limit</span></u><span style="color:black"> involving
electromagnetic oscillation is reached when an amount
of translational (aka unidirectional) kinetic energy
propels <b><u>an equal amount</u></b> of kinetic
energy captive in transverse electromagnetic
oscillation, that is, a free moving photon for
example, as described in this paper. </span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><u><span
style="color:black">The only other possible case</span></u><span
style="color:black"> between these two limits
involving electromagnetic oscillation, applies to an
amount of kinetic energy captive in transverse
electromagnetic oscillation being propelled by <b><u>a
lesser amount</u></b> of translational kinetic
energy, such as the kinetic energy making up the rest
mass of an electron, plus the transversely oscillating
half of its carrier-photon's kinetic energy, both
quantities being propelled by the unidirectional half
of the carrier-photon's quantum of kinetic energy. The
velocity of such a system will mandatorily lie between
zero and asymptotically close to the speed of light."</span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">This is the one logical possible
other reference that I have identified.</span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">Best Regards</span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">---
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin</span><br>
<a href="http://www.gsjournal.net/"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">http://www.gsjournal.net/</span></a><br>
<a href="http://www.srpinc.org/" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">http://www.srpinc.org/</span></a><br>
<br>
<span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><i>On
Tue, 31 Oct 2017 19:23:45 -0700, Richard Gauthier
wrote:</i><br>
<br>
Forwarded from Chip <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Begin
forwarded message:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">From:
</span></b><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">"Chip
Akins" <</span><a
href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">chipakins@gmail.com</span></a><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">></span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Subject:
[General] Relativity</span></b><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Date:
</span></b><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">October
31, 2017 at 6:46:19 AM PDT</span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">To:
</span></b><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">"'Nature
of Light and Particles - General Discussion'"
<</span><a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">></span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Reply-To:
</span></b><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Nature
of Light and Particles - General Discussion <</span><a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a><span
style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">></span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">Hi Grahame (and Andre)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">A while back, we briefly
discussed the idea that SR is not “logically
self-consistent” even though many conclude
that it is mathematically self-consistent.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">Regarding logical
self-consistent issues…<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">In order to address this
point I think we would need to take a look at
the “landscape” as it relates to “relativity”.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">While doing this, if we
look at causes, which is to say that we use
the concept of cause-and-effect as our guiding
principle, as you have properly stressed, we
can come to logical conclusions which simply
do not agree with SR in all details.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">So we can take a look at
many of the known conditions to guide the
development of a composite view of the causes
for “relativity”.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">Sound waves travel through
a medium. Sound waves exhibit the Doppler
Effect simply because they travel at a “fixed”
speed through a “homogeneous” medium,
regardless of the velocity of the object
emitting the waves.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">Light also exhibits the
Doppler Effect in space.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">So there is an indication
that some similarities may exist between the
causes of the Doppler Effect in sound and in
light.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">Einstein stated that “<i>light
is propagated in empty space with a velocity
c which is independent of the motion of the
source</i>”, which is an incomplete
statement, logically inconsistent, because the<i>velocity
c in empty space</i>has no meaning, unless
we use the fixed frame of space, or some other
reference, as the logical reference for that
velocity. A velocity simply must be stated in
reference to something.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">Einstein also stated that,
“<i>Absolute uniform motion cannot be detected
by any means.</i>” Which is indicated by
experiment as well. So no problem here.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">And he then followed with
the assertion that “<i>This is to say that the
concept of absolute rest and the ether have
no meaning.</i>” (<i>Paraphrased</i>)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">This second conclusion is<i>not</i>fully
logically supported by the evidence presented,
and is logically inconsistent with the
assertion that “<i>light is propagated in
empty space with a velocity c which is
independent of the motion of the source</i>”.
There are alternate interpretations of this
evidence which are more causal and logical
than this.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">First, our inability to
measure something does not necessarily make it
meaningless. There are a myriad examples we
can give of things which we cannot directly
measure, but we have come to accept, because
of indirect evidence which stipulates their
existence.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">We can however, from the
evidence, reconstruct a set of conditions,
which is causal, and yields results which
match observation.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">For example, if light is
made of “stuff” that propagates through a
fixed frame of space at c, and if matter is
made of confined versions of the same “stuff”
also propagating (in confinement) at c in a
fixed frame of space, then we would have
exactly this set of circumstances. We would
not be able to detect our motion through space
by using an apparatus like the
Michelson-Morley experiment. Note: This
approach does not relegate as meaningless
anything which may in fact be quite important.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">But if “<i>the concept of
absolute rest and the ether have no
meaning.”</i>Then how do we explain<i>“light
is propagated in empty space with a velocity
c which is independent of the motion of the
source”</i>and the resultant Doppler Effect
when a moving object emits light?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">While I am fully aware of
the explanation that EM radiation is
represented by vector “fields”, and that they
somehow could propagate through an empty space
at a fixed velocity justified only by the
math. That is a less satisfactory answer
logically because it does not present<i>physical</i>cause.
This consideration, and the Doppler Effect,
coupled with the underlying physical cause
mentioned above, for us not being able to
detect our own motion through space, yields
two logically consistent reasons for looking
at space as a sort of medium, with a “fixed”
frame.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">Lorentz transformations
are a natural result of the situation
mentioned above regarding the constitution of
light a matter. These transformations are
required under the circumstances where light
and matter are made of the same “stuff” and
that stuff moves at the fixed speed c in a
fixed frame of space. This all occurs in a 3
dimensional Euclidian space.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">So there is a more
logically consistent, causal view, than the
one proposed by SR.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">When we run the math
describing the situation where space is a
medium in which the propagation of
disturbances is a fixed velocity, and light
and matter are made of these disturbances, we
obtain the set of Lorentz transformations, and
cause for “relativity” is shown, precisely and
clearly. This is a logically consistent basis,
and one which shows cause. In contrast to SR,
which is a different interpretation of the
same starting information, but does not show
cause, and does not appear to be as logically
consistent.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">Are there ways to present
this and related information which better
illustrates the case from a logical basis?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">Thoughts?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span
style="color:black">Chip<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black;background:white">_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><span
style="background:white">If you no longer wish
to receive communication from the Nature of
Light and Particles General Discussion List at</span></span><a
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:purple;background:white">richgauthier@gmail.com</span></a><br>
<span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><span
style="background:white"><a href="</span></span><a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:purple;background:white">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</span></a><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black;background:white">"></span><br>
<span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><span
style="background:white">Click here to
unsubscribe</span><br>
<span style="background:white"></a></span></span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
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:srp2@srpinc.org">srp2@srpinc.org</a><br>
<br>
<a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/srp2%40srpinc.org?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
moz-do-not-send="true">Click here to unsubscribe</a><br>
</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>