<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<div class="userStyles" style=" font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000;">
<p style="margin:0in 0in 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-CA"><span style="line-height:115%">Hi Grahame,</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 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-CA"><span style="line-height:115%">You write "</span></span><i> </i><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span style="line-height:115%">At any given instant in time a snapshot of the physical state of the universe is given by the totality of the leading edges (or wavefronts) of the electromagnetic energy flows that make up all the particles and free energies in the universe at that time</span></span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span style="line-height:115%">"</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 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-CA"><span style="line-height:115%">I must say that I also drew converging conclusions with regard to time, and so did a group of European researchers.</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 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-CA"><span style="line-height:115%">You might be interested in an article published last year by Amrit Sorli et al. analyzing what Einstein called the "NOW" moment, title "Cosmology of Einstein's NOW":</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 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-CA"><span style="line-height:115%"><a href="http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajmp.s.2016050401.11.pdf" style="color:blue; text-decoration:underline">http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajmp.s.2016050401.11.pdf</a></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 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-CA"><span style="line-height:115%">My personal conclusion is only slightly different from yours, as I would formulate this idea as:</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 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-CA"><span style="line-height:115%"> "</span></span><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span style="line-height:115%"> At any given instant in time each of us records in his neocortex what his senses let him perceive of the physical state of the universe given by the totality of the leading edges (or wavefronts) of the electromagnetic energy flows that make up all the particles and free energies in the universe at that instant of time</span></span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span style="line-height:115%">"</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 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-CA"><span style="line-height:115%">Each of us thus internally builds a personal, thus subjective, model of what is occurring in physical reality as the "present moment" progresses, which "present moment" is the only moment that we can be aware of.</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 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-CA"><span style="line-height:115%">My own conclusions in this regard can be found in Section "8. The Time Dimension" of this article, titled "</span></span><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span style="line-height:115%">On the Birth of the Universe and the Time Dimension in the 3-Spaces Model</span></span><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span style="line-height:115%">":</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 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-CA"><span style="line-height:115%"><a href="http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajmp.s.2016050401.17.pdf" style="color:blue; text-decoration:underline">http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajmp.s.2016050401.17.pdf</a></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Best Regards</span></span></span><br>
<footer class="signatureDivContainer">
<footer class="replyforwardcontainer">André<br>
<br>
<br>
<i>On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 10:08:29 -0000, "Dr Grahame Blackwell" <grahame@starweave.com> wrote:</grahame@starweave.com></i><br>
<br>
</footer>
</footer>
</div>
<title></title>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"><meta name="GENERATOR" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080">Wolf [et al.],</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080">I have no doubt that time is a subjective experience of consciousness - that, as you say, the speed of light is in fact the speed at which consciousness moves through 'instants' of reality, i.e. as you put it: "<font size="3" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Einstein's constant becomes <font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080">[IS, in fact]</font>the speed of each observer's "Now".</font>"</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080">I first presented this view myself 10 years ago in an article in published the journal of the Scientific & Medical Network [Network Review, Issue 95, Dec 2007], in the following words:</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080">"</font></div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="TEXT-JUSTIFY: inter-ideograph; TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 6px 15px 0px"><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080"><font face="Times New Roman"><b><u><span style="COLOR: #333399">The Role of Consciousness in Time Perception</span></u></b></font></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="TEXT-JUSTIFY: inter-ideograph; TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 6px 15px 0px"><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080"><font face="Times New Roman"><span style="COLOR: #333399">At any given instant in time a snapshot of the physical state of the universe is given by the totality of the leading edges (or wavefronts) of the electromagnetic energy flows that make up all the particles and free energies in the universe at that time. (In passing it's worth noting that this may have a bearing on Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, since the 'position' of a fundamental sub-atomic particle will at that instant be reduced to a single point in the cyclic path of the energy flow forming that particle – which will vary in position and direction at different points in that cycle.)</span></font></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="TEXT-JUSTIFY: inter-ideograph; TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 6px 15px 0px"><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080"><font face="Times New Roman"><span style="COLOR: #333399">As time progresses successive snapshots will be given by corresponding advances in each of those energy flows. From the point of view of an eternal observer, unhampered by the temporal limitation of observing only one instant at a time, each of those energy flows will form a continuous thread weaving its way through space as it also progresses through what we call 'time'.</span></font></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="TEXT-JUSTIFY: inter-ideograph; TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 6px 15px 0px"><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080"><font face="Times New Roman"><span style="COLOR: #333399">Almost certainly our perception of three-dimensional space is a consciousness-mapping of some deeper reality, but since we're built to think in these terms it makes sense to visualise that succession of snapshots by some spatial analogy. A common model is to think of a succession of frames from a cine film or video recording, but this tends to lose the continuity of those energy flows. Perhaps a better model is that of a four-dimensional spherical crystal, growing outwards from the centre as time progresses (though of course from the eternal perspective that crystal simply <b><i>is</i></b>).</span></font></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="TEXT-JUSTIFY: inter-ideograph; TEXT-ALIGN: justify; MARGIN: 6px 15px 0px"><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080"><font face="Times New Roman"><span style="COLOR: #333399">Each instant in time is then an infinitely thin three-dimensional layer of that hypersphere, like the layers of an onion. The strands of light-energy snake outwards from the Source at the centre, weaving their intricate patterns of successive instants of reality in synchronisation with one another as they shape our ongoing cosmic destiny. Consciousness, flowing outward from the Source at the speed of light, experiences successive layers of this amazing hypersphere of light as instants of being, each perfect in its own way.</span></font></font></p>
</div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080">"</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080">[If others think this crazy (as they may), I invite them to consider observations by Planck and <span class="st">Schrödinger</span> on consciousness, which they both considered to bethe fundamental driving force of the universe.]</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080">I'd agree also that "<font size="3" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">the speed of light is constant for every observer because it is tied to the material which generates the space of that observer</font>" [and, of course, that observer themself]. This is totally consistent with the logical observation that the 'time-experience' of that observer will itself be affected by those energy flows and the rate at which they pass through/around the observer (and any instruments they may use) - and so the time-experience of any observer/instrument will be tied to its state of motion ("reference frame") exactly in accordance with the findings of SR.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080">I.e. SR is an observer effect caused by the variation in cyclic-to-linear ratio of energy flows in an observer's 'reference frame' affecting the rate at which consciousness experiences the passage of time.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080">Grahame</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial" color="#000080">=========</font></div>
<blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT: #000080 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----</div>
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><b>From:</b> <a href="mailto:wolf@nascentinc.com" title="wolf@nascentinc.com">Wolfgang Baer</a></div>
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" title="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists..natureoflightandparticles.org</a></div>
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>Sent:</b> Sunday, November 05, 2017 10:43 PM</div>
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Relativity</div>
<div> </div>
<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</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"</p>
<p>I have a paper for the Vigier conference tat explores this possibility which I will send if interest exists</p>
<p>Wolf</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:</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:201711031937.vA3JbwYW009823@mail68c0.megamailservers.com" type="cite">
<div class="userStyles" style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<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: 12pt" 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: 12pt" 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: 12pt" 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<br>
<br>
<i>On Fri, 3 Nov 2017 12:25:40 -0500, "Chip Akins" <chipakins@gmail.com>wrote:</chipakins@gmail.com></i><br>
<br>
<meta name="Generator" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<style type="text/css">@font-face {
font-family: Helvetica;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Cambria Math;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Calibri;
}
@page WordSection1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in; margin: 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; }
P.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
LI.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
A:visited {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
P {
FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman",serif; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-style-priority: 99; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
SPAN.EmailStyle18 {
COLOR: black; mso-style-type: personal-reply
}
..MsoChpDefault {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-style-type: export-only
}
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-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #e1e1e1 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 11pt">From:</span></b><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> 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="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 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="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 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="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 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="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 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="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 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="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 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="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 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="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 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="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 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="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 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="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 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="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 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: 5pt; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt">
<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-FAMILY: 'Helvetica',sans-serif; BACKGROUND: white; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 9pt">_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Helvetica',sans-serif; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 9pt"><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-FAMILY: 'Helvetica',sans-serif; BACKGROUND: white; COLOR: purple; FONT-SIZE: 9pt">richgauthier@gmail.com</span></a><br>
<span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Helvetica',sans-serif; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 9pt"><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-FAMILY: 'Helvetica',sans-serif; BACKGROUND: white; COLOR: purple; FONT-SIZE: 9pt">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</span></a><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Helvetica',sans-serif; BACKGROUND: white; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 9pt">"></span><br>
<span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Helvetica',sans-serif; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 9pt"><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></div>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"> </fieldset>
<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>
<p> </p>
<hr>
<p> </p>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at grahame@starweave.com<br>
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/grahame%40starweave.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a></blockquote>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at srp2@srpinc.org<br>
<br>
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/srp2%40srpinc.org?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">Click here to unsubscribe</a><br>
</body>