<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Hi Colleagues!</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I did not follow all details of the preceding discussion. But I
feel motivated to comment to two points which came up here again
and again. <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>One point is the de Broglie wave. For this I recommend everyone
to look into the thesis of de Broglie. It is in original in
French, but there is a nice translation done by Al Kracklauer *).
And I find it easily visible that de Broglie's idea of his wave is
based on an error. <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>*) <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://aflb.ensmp.fr/LDB-oeuvres/De_Broglie_Kracklauer.pdf">http://aflb.ensmp.fr/LDB-oeuvres/De_Broglie_Kracklauer.pdf</a><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>De Broglie has meant to have detected the following conflict:
Physics assumes that there is a permanent oscillation in a
particle (like an electron) which depends on its (full) energy
according to the equation: E = h*f , where f is the internal
frequency. Question was: what happens if the particle is set to
motion? Clearly its energy increases by the kinetic energy. So the
frequency f has to increase. On the other hand SR assumes dilation
which means that the internal frequency has to decrease. This was
seen as a logical conflict which kept de Broglie (in his own
words) busy for some lengthy time. Then in his view he found a
solution which was the introduction of a new wave, just the de
Broglie wave.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>The problem with de Broglie is that he misunderstood the
situation. He was right in that the internal oscillation slows
down by dilation (if seen e.g. from the side). However if the
particle interacts with another particle being in a different
motion state (for instance at rest) then this other particle sees
a higher frequency caused by the Doppler effect. And the Doppler
effect is about the inverse square of dilation, so the apparent
frequency is increased according to the energy equation. And there
is no problem.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>It is not even necessary to refer to the Doppler effect in this
case. If the Lorentz transformation is properly used then it
indicates an increase of the frequency rather a decrease. So it
encloses already the implication of the Doppler effect: The
according Lorentz transformation says about the speed of proper
time: dt' = gamma*(dt-vx/c<sup>2</sup>). So, if in the simple
case the interacted particle is at rest and so v=0, then because
gamma>1 t' will run faster than t . No de Broglie wave is
needed.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>The other point: there are some considerations here about the
energy / mass of the electron where the energy is always related
to the electric (or "electromagnetic") properties of the electron.
This cannot work. Helmut Hönl has in the 1940s attempted to deduce
the mass of the electron from its electrical energy. The result
was too small by a factor of about 300. (And this is BTW the
relation between the strong and the electrical force.) As a
consequence of the work of Hönl it was concluded that it is
impossible to determine the mass of the electron classically.
Conclusion was that the mass can only be treated by quantum
mechanics. - However if it is utilized that the strong force is
stronger by the given factor and the strong force is used for the
determination of mass then the result is correct. I have done this
calculation as some of you know using the strong force and the
result conforms to the measurement with a precision of almost 10<sup>-6</sup>.
(My talk in San Diego.)<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>The objection to this determination is normally that the electron
is not subject to the strong force because it was never observed
to react with a particle which has the strong force as the
dominant one. But this is falsified in so far that at the electron
ring DESY in Hamburg an interaction between electrons and quarks
on the basis of the strong force was observed around the year
2004. There was then an ad hoc explanation introduced for this
observation by the assumption of a new exchange particle mediating
between electrical and strong forces which was called
"leptoquark". It was then attempted to verify the leptoquark at
the Tevatron. But without any result. So this looks like a clear
indication that the electron is also subject to the strong force,
however with a very small coupling constant.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>So, what do you think about this?</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Best regards<br>
Albrecht</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 10.11.2017 um 15:07 schrieb André
Michaud:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:201711101407.vAAE7sFg021011@mail131c0.megamailservers.com">
<title></title>
<div class="userStyles" style=" font-family: Arial; font-size:
12pt; color: #000000;">
<p style="margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:"Times
New Roman","serif"">Hello John,</span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><br>
<span style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Ok thanks. Taking this in
also. </span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><br>
<span style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">I will develop an opinion
as I read your articles and correlate your grounding
premises with my own angle. </span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><br>
<span style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Best Regards</span></span></p>
<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 Fri, 10 Nov 2017 04:37:50 +0000, John Williamson <john.williamson@glasgow.ac.uk>
wrote:</john.williamson@glasgow.ac.uk></i><br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<style type="text/css"><!--
-->
</style>
<style type="text/css"><!--
-->
</style>
<style type="text/css">[id^="ads_"], .trc_related_container div[data-item-syndicated="true"], .trc_rbox_div .syndicatedItem, .trc_rbox_border_elm .syndicatedItem, .trc_rbox .syndicatedItem, #tads.c, #rhs_block > #mbEnd, .commerce-inset, a[href*=".trust.zone"], iframe[src^="http://ad.yieldmanager.com/"], iframe[id^="google_ads_iframe"], iframe[id^="google_ads_frame"], div[itemtype="http://schema.org/WPAdBlock"], div[id^="div-gpt-ad"], div[id^="dfp-ad-"], div[id^="advads-"], div[id^="MarketGid"], a[href^="https://www.googleadservices.com/pagead/aclk?"], a[href^="https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/"], a[href^="http://www.yourfuckbook.com/?"], a[href^="http://www.socialsex.com/"], a[href^="http://www.liutilities.com/"], a[href^="http://www.fleshlight.com/"], a[href^="http://www.fbooksluts.com/"], a[href^="http://www.adskeeper.co.uk/"], a[href^="http://websitedhoome.com/"], a[href^="http://us.marketgid.com"], a[href^="http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/"], a[href^="http://online.ladbrokes.com/promoRedirect?"], a[href^="http://mgid.com/"], a[href^="http://marketgid.com"], a[href^="http://affiliate.coral.co.uk/processing/"], a[href^="http://adultfriendfinder.com/p/register.cgi?pid="], a[href^="http://adserving.unibet.com/"], a[href^="http://ads.betfair.com/redirect.aspx?"], a[href^="http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/"], a[href^="http://ad.doubleclick.net/"], a[href^="http://ad-emea.doubleclick.net/"], a[href*="/adrotate-out.php?"], .yom-ad, .wp_bannerize, .wpInsertInPostAd, .wnad, .withAds, .widget-advertisement, .wideAd, .view_ad, .type_ads_default, .trc-content-sponsored, .tower-ad { display: none!important; }
.topads, .top_ads, .top_ad_wrap, .top_ad_div, .top_ad, .topAds, .top-advert, .top-ad-wrapper, .top-ad-content, .top-ad-container, .top-ad, .textads, .textad, .text_ads, .text_ad, .textAd, .text-ads, .text-ad-links, .text-ad, .td-header-ad-wrap, .td-ad, .tc_ad_unit, .taboola-ad, .story-ad, .sticky-ad, .sponsorlink, .sponsoredTop, .sponsoredLinks, .sponsorBottom, .sponsorBlock, .sponsor-logo, .sponsor-box, .smallads, .small_ad, .smallAd, .slide-ad, .skyscraperAd, .sky_ad, .skinAd, .singleAd, .single-ad, .sidebaradbox, .sidebar-ads, .sideAd, .side-bar-ad-position1, .side-ad, .showAd, .serp-adv-item, .section-sponsor, .searchads { display: none!important; }
.searchad, .searchAds, .rightadv, .rightad, .right_ads_column, .right_ad, .rightAd, .right-ad, .review-ad, .results-ads, .resultad, .reportAdLink, .reklama, .reklam, .region-top-ad-position, .refreshAds, .rectangle_ad, .rbRectAd, .rail-ad, .pushdown-ad, .publicidade, .pub_728x90, .pub_300x250m, .pub_300x250, .promoAd, .premiumAdOverlayClose, .premiumAdOverlay, .postad, .post_ad, .post-sponsored, .post-ad, .pm-ad, .player_hover_ad, .player_ad, .playerAd, .plainAd, .pfAd, .page_ad, .page-ad, .overlay-ads, .openx, .oio-banner-zone, .oasad, .node-ad, .newsAd, .nav-ad, .myTestAd, .module-ad, .mod-adopenx, .middle_AD { display: none!important; }
.mid_ad, .marketing-ad, .main-ads, .logo-ad, .listad, .list-ads, .list-ad, .leftad, .leftAd, .leaderboard-ads, .leaderboard-ad, .js-sticky-ad, .js-ad, .item-container-ad, .item-ads, .ipsAd, .interstitial_ad_wrapper, .insert-post-ads, .innerad, .inner_ad, .imgad, .img_ad, .horizontal_ad, .homepage_ads, .homepage-ad, .homead, .homeAd, .home-ads, .home-ad, .headerads, .headerad, .header_advert, .header_ad_center, .header_ad, .headerAd, .header-advert, .header-ad, .hasads, .has-ad, .greyAd, .gpt-ad, .googleAds, .googleAdSense, .google-sponsored, .google-ad-square-sidebar, .gallery-ad, .forumAd, .footerad, .footer_ad, .footer-ads { display: none!important; }
.footer-ad, .flash-advertisement, .featuredAds, .featuredAdBox, .featured-ad, .ec-ads-remove-if-empty, .easyazon-block, .download_ad, .displayAd, .dfp_ad, .dfp-tag-wrapper, .dfp-ad-unit, .dfp-ad, .desktop-ad, .custom-ad, .cp-adsInited, .content_tagsAdTech, .content_ads, .contentAds, .contentAd, .container_row_ad, .container_ad, .chitikaAdBlock, .change_AdContainer, .category-advertorial, .category-ad, .card-ad, .can_ad_slug, .btn-ad, .boxadv, .boxad, .box_adv, .box_ads, .box-recommend-ad, .box-radvert, .box-ads, .bottom_ad_block, .bottomAdvert, .bottomAds, .bottom-left-ad, .bottom-ads, .bottom-ad, .blog-ads, .block-simpleads, .block-ec_ads, .block-ad, .bannerad, .banner_ads, .banner_ad, .banner_728x90 { display: none!important; }
.bannerAd, .banner300, .banner160x600, .banner-ads, .banner-ad, .b_ad, .b-advert, .article_ad, .article-advert, .after-post-ad, .afs_ads, .adzone, .adwords, .adverttext, .adverts, .advertorial, .advertisment, .advertising_block, .advertising_banner, .advertiser, .advertisement-block, .advertisement-1, .advertbox, .advert_list, .advert_container, .advert_box, .advert_area, .advertText, .advertLink, .advertContainer, .advertColumn, .advert2, .advert-wrapper, .advert-horizontal, .advert-content, .advert-container, .advert-box, .advert-block, .adv_txt, .adv_300, .adv300, .adunit, .adtop, .adtile, .adtable, .adstop, .adspace, .adslot_blurred, .adslot_1, .adslot { display: none!important; }
.adside, .adshome, .adscontainer, .adsbygoogle, .adsbottombox, .ads_wrapper, .ads_top, .ads_div, .ads_catDiv, .adsWidget, .adsBox, .adsBlock, .ads1, .ads-top, .ads-title, .ads-section, .ads-right, .ads-item, .ads-inline, .ads-holder, .ads-header, .ads-col, .ads-box, .ads-bg, .ads-area, .ads-ad, .ads-300-250, .ads-3, .ads-2, .ads-1, .adrow2, .adrow1, .adright, .admiddle, .admain, .adlist, .adlink, .adkit, .adinfo, .adholder, .adheader, .adfree, .adframe, .addiv, .adcont, .adcomment, .adcolumn, .adbutton, .adbottom, .adbar { display: none!important; }
.adbanner, .adarea, .ad_wrapper, .ad_wrap, .ad_unit, .ad_trick_left, .ad_trick_header, .ad_title, .ad_text, .ad_spot, .ad_space, .ad_slug_table, .ad_promo, .ad_outer, .ad_middle, .ad_leaderboard, .ad_item, .ad_img, .ad_header, .ad_head_rectangle, .ad_global_header, .ad_description, .ad_container, .ad_bottom, .ad_body, .ad_block, .ad_banner, .ad_Right, .ad_960, .ad_728x90, .ad_336, .ad_3, .ad_2, .ad_160x600, .ad_160, .ad_1, .adWrap, .adWidget, .adTopHome, .adTitle, .adText, .adSpot, .adSpace, .adRow, .adRotator, .adRight, .adResult, .adPod, .adPanel, .adOverlay { display: none!important; }
.adModule, .adMod, .adMiddle, .adMessage, .adLink, .adItem, .adImg, .adHoldert, .adHolder, .adHeadline, .adHeaderblack, .adHeader, .adHead, .adFrameCnt, .adFrame, .adElement, .adDiv, .adContent, .adChoicesLogo, .adBox, .adBottomBoard, .adBlock, .adBar, .ad90, .ad728, .ad468, .ad300, .ad-zone, .ad-wrapper, .ad-wrap, .ad-wide, .ad-vertical-container, .ad-unit-300-wrapper, .ad-unit, .ad-top, .ad-text, .ad-stack, .ad-square, .ad-source, .ad-sidebar, .ad-served, .ad-section, .ad-scroll, .ad-row, .ad-right, .ad-rail, .ad-placement, .ad-panel, .ad-med-rec, .ad-loaded { display: none!important; }
.ad-links, .ad-link, .ad-left, .ad-leaderboard, .ad-leader-top, .ad-item, .ad-inner, .ad-img, .ad-holder, .ad-header, .ad-enabled, .ad-display, .ad-cell, .ad-cat, .ad-button, .ad-btn, .ad-border, .ad-body, .ad-block, .ad-banner, .ad-970, .ad-300x250, .TopAdContainer, .SponsoredContent, .RelatedAds, .MBoxAdMain, .LazyLoadAd, .IM_ad_unit, .HomeAds, .BannerAd, .AdvertContainer, .AdTitle, .AdSidebar, .AdPanel, .AdInfo, .AdHere, .AdBox, .AdBody:not(body), .AdBar, .ADBAR, #videoads, #videoAd, #under_story_ad, #topbannerad, #topadvert, #topad, #top_ads, #top_ad_game, #top_ad, #topBannerAd { display: none!important; }
#topAdvert, #topAdSpace_div, #topAdSpace, #topAd, #top-ad-content, #top-ad, #theAd, #text-ads, #takeover_ad, #sponsors-home, #sponsoredwellcontainertop, #sponsoredwellcontainerbottom, #sponsoredTop, #sponsorText, #sponsorAdDiv, #skybox-ad, #sky_advert, #sidebar_ads, #sidebar_ad_1, #sidebar_ad, #sidebar-ads, #side_ads, #sideAd, #search_ads, #searchAd, #search-sponsor, #right_adsense, #right_ads, #rightAd, #rh-ad, #reklama, #publicidad, #promo-ad, #prerollAd, #pre_advertising_wrapper, #player_ads, #myAd, #my-adsFPAD, #msad, #mpu_container, #mpu2_container, #mpu2, #mini-ad, #main_ad, #mainAd, #logo_ad, #logoAd, #leftads, #leftad, #left_ads { display: none!important; }
#left-ad, #leaderboardad, #leaderboard-advertisement, #leaderboard-ad, #leaderBoardAd, #leaderAd, #ka_adRightSkyscraperWide, #influads_block, #homead, #header_ad, #headerAdContainer, #headerAd, #header-ads, #head-ad, #gridAdSidebar, #googlead, #google_ads, #google-ads, #game-ad, #frameAd, #footer_ads, #footer_ad, #featuredAds, #featured-ads, #featuread, #download_ad, #div_prerollAd_1, #divAd, #dfp_ad_Home_728x90, #dfp_ad_Entry_728x90, #dart-container-728x90, #ctlDisplayAd1_lblAd, #contentad, #content_adv, #content_ads, #contentAd, #content-header-ad, #companionAd, #cmn_ad_tag_head, #centerads, #bottomad, #bottom_ad, #bottomAds, #bottomAd, #body_ad, #bigad, #bigAd, #bannerad, #banner_topad, #banner_ad { display: none!important; }
#bannerAdWrapper, #bannerAd, #banner-ad, #adwrapper, #advtop, #adverts, #advertising_wrapper, #advertisetop, #advertisement1, #advertise, #advertbox3, #advert_box, #advertContainer, #advert2, #advert1, #adv-top, #adv-masthead, #adtop, #adtext, #adstop, #adspot-300x250-pos-2, #adspot-300x250-pos-1, #adspace_top, #adspace, #adsensewide, #adsense_inline, #adsense_block, #adsense, #adsdiv, #ads_wrapper, #ads_top, #ads_right, #ads_bottom, #adsHeader, #ads1, #ads-wrapper, #ads-col, #adright, #adposition3, #adnews, #adlayer, #adlabel, #adimg1, #adheader, #adhead, #adframe:not(frameset), #adcontent, #adcontainer1, #adcontainer, #adcode { display: none!important; }
#adbox, #adbody, #adboard, #adblock, #adbar, #adbanner, #adbackground, #adaptv_ad_player_div, #ad_wrapper, #ad_wrap, #ad_unit, #ad_topslot, #ad_table, #ad_square, #ad_space, #ad_overlay, #ad_main, #ad_leaderboard, #ad_header, #ad_global_above_footer, #ad_content, #ad_container, #ad_center, #ad_banner, #ad_area, #ad_728_90, #ad_5, #ad_4, #ad_3, #ad_2, #ad_1, #adText, #adPosition0, #adLink1, #adLeader, #adLayer, #adHolder, #adHeader, #adGallery, #adFrame, #adDiv, #adComponentWrapper, #adBelt, #adBanner1, #adBanner, #ad728x90, #ad728, #ad468, #ad-wrapper, #ad-unit { display: none!important; }
#ad-top-wrapper, #ad-top-banner-placeholder, #ad-top, #ad-text, #ad-rotator, #ad-right, #ad-panel, #ad-main, #ad-leaderboard, #ad-header-728x90, #ad-header, #ad-container, #ad-bottom, #ad-bg, #ad-background, #ad-area, #ad-2, #ad-1, #WNAd41, #TopAd, #SponsoredLinks, #RightAdBlock, #PreRollAd, #HouseAd, #ContentAd, #BottomAds, #BottomAdContainer, #Advertisements, #AdvertiseFrame, #Adcode, #AdImage, #AdHeader, #AdContainer, #AdColumn, #AD_banner, #AD_Top, div[id^="google_ads_iframe_"], .top-banners, .banners_block, object[width="300"][height="300"], img[width="728"][height="90"], img[width="468"][height="60"], iframe[width="600"][height="100"], iframe[width="300"][height="250"], iframe[width="240"][height="400"], iframe[width="100%"][height="120"], [id*="reklama"], [src*="/banners/banner"], A[href$="/reklama"], [class^="advertisement"] { display: none!important; }
[id^="commentAd"], [id^="adv-"], .banneritem, a[href*="/ad/click/"], #ads, img[width="88"][height="31"], a[href^="https://metrika.yandex.ru/stat/"], a[href^="http://www.liveinternet.ru/stat/"], a[href^="http://metrika.yandex.ru/stat/"], object[width="640"][height="160"], object[width="640"][height="100"], object[width="300"][height="60"], object[width="260"][height="130"], object[width="200"][height="200"], object[width="1000"][height="270"], object[width="1000"][height="250"], object[width="100"][height="100"], img[width="240"][height="400"], iframe[width="100%"][height="60"], iframe[width="100%"][height="250"], embed[width="640"][height="160"] { display: none!important; }
</style>
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color:
#000000;font-size: 10pt;">Actually <font size="2"
face="Tahoma" color="#000000">André I take it back,<br>
<br>
If you look at the post I sent to Chip I've argued that
one needs to consider five superimposed spaces: space,
flow in space, electric field, magnetic field and spin,
but I am forgetting myself and warnings from Carver Mead
not to double-count. While this is true, these spaces are,
indeed coupled by linear differential equations: this
means that the odd may be taken to depend on the even and
vice-versa, meaning that only three can be dynamically
independent. They are all anyway coupled and
interdependent though the extended theory of 4D
space-time, if it is indeed the solution to Hilbert's
sixth that is.<br>
<br>
Regards, John.</font>
<div style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #000000;
font-size: 16px">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRpF118328" style="direction: ltr;"><font
size="2" face="Tahoma" color="#000000"><b>From:</b>
General
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
on behalf of John Williamson
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk">John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, November 10, 2017 4:26 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org">srp2@srpinc.org</a>;
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Mark, Martin van der<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Compton and de Broglie
wavelength</font><br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div style="direction:ltr; font-family:Tahoma;
color:#000000; font-size:10pt">Hello <font size="2"
face="Tahoma" color="#000000">André,<br>
<br>
This is getting more and more interesting! Not
promising to look at them straight away as I've lots
to do today but will save them as a treat for later.<br>
<br>
I agree that the magnetic field encompasses some
aspects of spin in that is a kind of "turning
thing", but I think one eventually needs both!<br>
<br>
Regards, John.</font>
<div style="font-family:Times New Roman;
color:#000000; font-size:16px">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRpF346207" style="direction:ltr"><font
size="2" face="Tahoma" color="#000000"><b>From:</b>
André Michaud [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org">srp2@srpinc.org</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, November 09, 2017 11:10
PM<br>
<b>To:</b> John Williamson;
<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: [General] Compton and de
Broglie wavelength</font><br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div class="userStyles" style="font-family:Arial;
font-size:12pt; color:#000000">
<p style="margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Hello John,</span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Just one
last comment with regard to what we put on
the table.</span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">I just
quickly scanned your 3 papers and listened
to your talk.</span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">We may
effectively have a direct match
space-wise, because in the trispatial
geometry, your magnetic space and your
spin space are one and the same.</span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">You'll see
why when you read about how spin can be
related to the expansion-regression
process of the magnetic component during
the EM reciprocal swing.</span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Best
Regards</span></span><br>
---</p>
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><br>
<br>
<i>On Thu, 09 Nov 2017 13:49:23 -0500, André
Michaud wrote:</i></div>
<div class="userStyles" style="font-family:Arial;
font-size:12pt; color:#000000"><br>
<i>On Thu, 9 Nov 2017 17:33:42 +0000, John
Williamson wrote:</i><br>
<br>
<style type="text/css"><!--
-->
</style>
<div style="direction:ltr; font-family:Tahoma;
color:#000000; font-size:10pt">Right-ho <font
size="2" face="Tahoma" color="#000000">André,
I will go green ...</font>
<p style="margin-right:0in; margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:#800080"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif"">Ok,
I'll go violet (colors getting
drowded)</span></span></span></p>
<div style="font-family:Times New Roman;
color:#000000; font-size:16px">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRpF636588" style="direction:ltr"><font
size="2" face="Tahoma" color="#000000"><b>From:</b>
André Michaud [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org">srp2@srpinc.org</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, November 09, 2017
4:29 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> John Williamson;
<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: [General] Compton
and de Broglie wavelength</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div class="userStyles"
style="font-family:Arial;
font-size:12pt; color:#000000">Hi John<br>
<br>
<span style="color:#ff0000">I'll go red
inline for my answers.</span><br>
<br>
<i>On Thu, 9 Nov 2017 10:26:38 +0000,
John Williamson wrote:</i><br>
<style id="owaParaStyle" type="text/css"><!--
p
{margin-top:0;
margin-bottom:0}
p
{margin-top:0;
margin-bottom:0}
-->
P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}
</style>
<style type="text/css"><!--
-->
</style>
<div style="direction:ltr;
font-family:Tahoma; color:#000000;
font-size:10pt">Hello Andre and
Grahame,<br>
<br>
Sorry Andre, have not looked at the
trispatial stuff, have been far too
busy with the day job for the last few
weeks. Sounds interesting though.
Could you please point me to the
references again (apologies if you
have already given them). I will go
blue below.<br>
<br>
<span style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">No sweat.
I also work a day job so I
also indulge when time
allows. I'll give the links
in context below for
consistency. </span></span></span></span></span></div>
<div style="direction:ltr;
font-family:Tahoma; color:#000000;
font-size:10pt"> </div>
<div style="direction:ltr;
font-family:Tahoma; color:#000000;
font-size:10pt"><font color="008000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Tough
stuff, but all fun huh?</span></span></span></span></font><br>
<br>
<span style="color:#800080"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Indeed!</span></span></span></span></span>
<div style="font-family:Times New
Roman; color:#000000;
font-size:16px">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRpF736765"
style="direction:ltr"><font
size="2" face="Tahoma"
color="#000000"><b>From:</b>
General
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
on behalf of André Michaud
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org">srp2@srpinc.org</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, November
07, 2017 9:24 PM<br>
<b>To:</b>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:grahame@starweave.com">grahame@starweave.com</a>;
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General]
Compton and de Broglie
wavelength</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<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%">The
3D perspective
doesn't rule out at
all the de Broglie
wavelength. Quite
the contrary. To my
knowledge, the de
Broglie wavelength
is the only way to
account for the
energy of the
electron in motion
in the 4D space
geometry. The reason
is that the
self-staining mutual
induction of the
electric and
magnetic fields of
the energy making up
the invariant rest
mass of the electron
cannot be described
in a 4D spacetime
geometry. At least,
it never was.</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%"><font
color="0000FF">Yes
this can be done
now. One needs to
build in a (root)
rest mass to the
basis of the field
(Maxwell)
equations. There
is an example of
this in my my two
2015 SPIE papers,
though there is a
flaw in the
underlying
handedness of one
of the fields in
that theory, the
basic method is
still valid.</font></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%">It
can be described
however in the
trispatial geometry,
and so can that of
its carrying energy
separately, that is
the energy that
causes the electron
to move and also
accounts for its
velocity related
transverse
relativistic mass
increment.</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%"><font
color="0000FF">This
sounds very
interesting. There
is a sense in
which my new
theory is
quadri-spatial. I
wonder if there is
some common ground
here? I really
need to look at
your stuff. </font></span></span></span></span></span><br>
<br>
<span style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Quite
possibly, I have not had
a look at your material,
but obviously we are
exploring the same
issues.</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 10pt"><span
style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><font
color="008000">Indeed,
from what you say
below these may be
EXACTLY the same
issues.</font></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%">What
I wrote was that the
de Broglie
wavelength that
combines both is not
valid in the
trispatial geometry,
and is replaced by a
resonance effect
between the energy
of the invariant
rest mass of the
electron and that of
its separately
definable carrying
energy. </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%"><font
color="0000FF">Sounds
as though you need
a wave defining
these two.</font></span></span></span></span></span><br>
<br>
<span style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Exactly
right! And I have no
idea of how to go about
this, because while the
wavelength of the rest
mass of the electron
remains fixed at the
Compton wavelength
value, that of its
carrying energy varies
with velocity while the
electron is
accelerating, which
causes the combined
resonance volume to vary
with increasing
velocity, so the
resonance volume
fluctuates as a function
of time. In the
trispatial geometry I
tentatively associate
Zitterbewegung to this
resonance effect. </span>
</span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 10pt"> </p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 10pt"><span
style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><font
color="008000">I think
you are very close. In
my model the Compton
frequency is
fundamental, but
double-covering, which
givesthe
zitterbewegung
frequency. If you do
the relativstic
transformations
correctly, the de
Broglie wavelength
falls out of this
beautifully, as Martin
first derived in 1991
(or maybe 92 - do you
remember Martin?).
Martn is also working
a=on an updated and
definitive paper on
this at the moment.</font></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
are right tough,
there is an
orthogonal factor
involved between the
electric charges of
the carrying energy
and that of the
electron. But
unfortunately, I
don't know how to
explain this from
the 4D perspective.
I don't think it can
be.</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%"><font
color="0000FF">In
my theory the mass
and fields go in
as an initially
neutral fluid.
Charge is derived
as a result of new
topological
solutions allowed
by the extended
Maxwell equations.
The theory is 4D
from the
beginning. Both
the de Broglie
wavelength and the
proper
transformations of
energy-momentum,
both for the case
of photons and
material particles
may be (are!)
derived.</font></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Wow!
In the trispatial
geometry, what you call
a "neutral fluid", I
identify as fundamental
"kinetic energy" as
induced in charges by
the Coulomb force,
coupled with the fields
concept being seen as
only sorts of "maps"
describing the real
territory (the behavior
of the energy), so there
really seems to be
common grounds between
both our angles on these
issues. I put this in
perspective in the long
but I think required
setting-in-perspective
at the beginning of the
de Broglie
double-particle photon
paper:</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:#800080"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><font
color="008000">As I
have said to others -
there are good
features in the double
particle picture, but
this is seriously
challenged by
experiment. In
particular with two
particles you
immediately need
forces to conbfine
them. these forces and
particles would show
up in the scattering
cross sections and
they do not. This was
a good idea of de
Broglies, but I fear
it is ultimately a
dead end as it falls
foul of a large body
of experimental
evidence.</font><br>
<br>
In the double-particle
picture of the
trispatial geometry,
there is a
self-sustaining
reciprocating swing
between double component
electric state and
single component
magnetic state, with the
recall property being
due to the Coulomb Force
acting from the
trispatial junction.
This is how the
self-maintaining swing
is explained in the
spatial geometry,
combined with a property
of the "substance"
kinetic-energy to
constantly remain in
motion.</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:#800080"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">I
don't think the twin
"particles" would show
up so much with respect
to the frontal
cross-section, because
in the trispatial model,
the max transverse
amplitude of the
electric swing is only
(alpha lambda)/(2 pi),
and they cannot really
be "particles" in the
sense of separate quanta
such as electrons for
example. In this
geometry, they are part
of a single
incompressible quantum
that elastically
oscillates.</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><br>
<span style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><a
href="https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/on-de-broglies-doubleparticle-photon-hypothesis-2090-0902-1000153.pdf"
style="color:blue;
text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/on-de-broglies-doubleparticle-photon-hypothesis-2090-0902-1000153.pdf</a></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:#800080"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">For
the related electron and
the up and down quarks
inner structures I also
add the links to the two
paper that describe the
related mechanics of
their establishment in
the trispatial geometry
if you want to have a
look:</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:#800080"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The
Mechanics of
Electron-Positron Pair
Creation in the 3-Spaces
Model:</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><a
href="http://ijerd.com/paper/vol6-issue10/F06103649.pdf"
style="color:blue;
text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://ijerd.com/paper/vol6-issue10/F06103649.pdf</a></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:#800080"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The
Mechanics of Neutron and
Proton Creation in the
3-Spaces Model:</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt"
lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><a
href="http://www.ijerd.com/paper/vol7-issue9/E0709029053.pdf"
style="color:blue;
text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.ijerd.com/paper/vol7-issue9/E0709029053.pdf</a></span></span></span><br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
style="color:#ff0000">The
charges in the
trispatial model are a
"recall effect" towards
the trispatial junction,
and their intensity is
related to the distance
at which opposite
"charges" happen to
momentarily be on either
side of the junction.
Stabilized for the
electron and positron,
but varying for the
photon. Not explainable
in 4D geometry, but
summarized in the first
column of page 6 of this
other paper in the
3-spaces geometry with
summary description of
the 3-spaces geometry:</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
style="color:#ff0000"><font
color="008000">This
sounds to me as though
it has some
similarities to my
concept, not of the
electron, but of the
quarks as composed of
underlying
electromagnetic like
interactions.</font></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><br>
<span style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><a
href="https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/the-last-challenge-of-modern-physics-2090-0902-1000217.pdf"
style="color:blue;
text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/the-last-challenge-of-modern-physics-2090-0902-1000217.pdf</a></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><br>
<span style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
style="color:#ff0000">It
would indeed be
interesting if all of
this could be described
from the more easily
dealt with 4D geometry
as you seem to have been
exploring. </span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><br>
<span style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">I know
that ideas like
"trispatial geometry"
and "3-spaces" sound
overly exotic, but they
really are not. Simply
an expansion of the
concept of the magnetic
field vs electric field
vectorial cross product
giving the related
triply orthogonal
electromagnetic relation
between electric aspect,
magnetic aspect, and
direction of motion of
any point of Maxwell's
spherically expanding
electromagnetic
wavefront in plane wave
treatment, being applied
to the point source of
the wave, which allows
the emitted quantum to
remain localized as it
starts moving at c from
the point of emission,
which would explain EM
photons' permanent
localization.</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><font
color="008000">I agree
completely, and two of
my "3D space are
indeed the three of
electric and the three
of magnetic (properly
the six of
electromagnetic,
relativistically of
course). My other two
are the three of
mass-current and the
three of spin. I also
agree about the
localisation.</font></span></span></span><br>
<br>
<span style="color:#800080"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">We
seem to really wading in
the same waters then.</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 10pt"><br>
<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%">In
short, the de
Broglie wavelength
in 4D spacetime
geometry is a valid,
but more general
representation of
the combined
resonance effect of
both the electron
energy and its
carrying energy in
the 3-spaces
geometry.</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%"><font
color="0000FF">As
Grahame mentioned,
Martin van der
Mark derived this
independently from
our rotating
photon model in
1991, see the
comment below.</font></span></span></span></span></span><br>
<br>
<span style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Would
you have a link to this
paper by Martin?</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 10pt"><font
color="008000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">This
is Martin and my 1997
paper on the localised
photon and is available
here:</span></span></font></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 10pt"><br>
<font color="008000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><cite
class="_Rm"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.cybsoc.org/electron.pdf">www.cybsoc.org/electron.pdf</a></cite></span></span></font></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 10pt"><span
style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><font
color="008000">There
is also a talk of mine
on there somewhere,
with my model for the
quarks.</font></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 10pt"><span
style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><font
color="008000">The
SPIE papers are
available under my
name on the Glasgow
university website.</font></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 10pt"><br>
<span style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><font
color="008000"><cite
class="_Rm">eprints.gla.ac.uk/110966/
and </cite></font></span></span></span><br>
<span style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><font
color="008000"><cite
class="_Rm"><cite
class="_Rm">eprints.gla.ac.uk/110952/1/110952.pdf</cite></cite></font></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:#800080"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Ok, Il
have a look at your
material and Martin's.</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:#800080"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Maybe
we should wait until we
both have had time to
look at the others stuff
before trying to
correlate ideas more
closely.<br>
We are nearing
exhaustion of the usable
color range.</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:#800080"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Best
Regards<br>
<br>
André</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 10pt"><span
style="color:#ff0000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">This
definitely looks like a
quite exciting
conversation.</span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 10pt"><font
color="008000"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Agreed!</span></span></font><br>
<br>
<span style="color:#ff0000">Best
Regards</span><br>
---</p>
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><br>
<br>
<i>On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 19:49:07
-0000, "Dr Grahame Blackwell"
wrote:</i><br>
<br>
</div>
<style type="text/css"><!--
body
{direction:ltr;
font-family:Tahoma;
color:#000000;
font-size:10pt}
p
{margin-top:0;
margin-bottom:0}
body
{scrollbar-base-color:undefined;
scrollbar-highlight-color:undefined;
scrollbar-darkshadow-color:undefined;
scrollbar-arrow-color:undefined}
body
{scrollbar-base-color:undefined;
scrollbar-highlight-color:undefined;
scrollbar-darkshadow-color:undefined;
scrollbar-arrow-color:undefined}
body
{scrollbar-base-color:undefined;
scrollbar-highlight-color:undefined;
scrollbar-darkshadow-color:undefined;
scrollbar-arrow-color:undefined}
body
{direction:ltr;
font-family:Tahoma;
color:#000000;
font-size:10pt}
body
{scrollbar-base-color:undefined;
scrollbar-highlight-color:undefined;
scrollbar-darkshadow-color:undefined;
scrollbar-arrow-color:undefined}
body
{scrollbar-base-color:undefined;
scrollbar-highlight-color:undefined;
scrollbar-darkshadow-color:undefined;
scrollbar-arrow-color:undefined}
body
{scrollbar-base-color:undefined;
scrollbar-highlight-color:undefined;
scrollbar-darkshadow-color:undefined;
scrollbar-arrow-color:undefined}
body
{direction:ltr;
font-family:Tahoma;
color:#000000;
font-size:10pt}
-->
BODY {direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color: #000000;font-size: 10pt;}BODY {scrollbar-base-color:undefined;scrollbar-highlight-color:undefined;scrollbar-darkshadow-color:undefined;scrollbar-track-color:undefined;scrollbar-arrow-color:undefined}
</style>
<div><font face="Arial"
color="#000080"><font size="2">Hi
<font color="#000000">André,</font></font></font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"
color="#000080">I
don'tunderstand why a 3-D
perspective rules out de
Broglie wavelength - it
certainly doesn't in my
3-dimensionally based
scenario. The de Broglie
wavelength is the wavelength
attributable to the
energy-flow component of the
electron's formative photon
responsible for particle
motion (as identified by
Davisson & Germer), whilst
the Compton wavelength is the
wavelength of the formative
photon in a static electron -
which gives the cyclic
component of the formative
photon travelling helically as
a moving electron. In that
moving electron those two
components combine as sides of
a right-angled triangle
(Pythag again!) to give the
full gamma-factored frequency
of energy-flow in that moving
particle, corresponding to the
'relativistically' increased
energy content of the moving
particle. [It's true, of
course, that de Broglie
wavelength never appears as
the peak-to-peak length of a
wave in its own right, only as
the 'wavelength' of a
component of the full photon
wave that forms a moving
electron.]</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"
color="#000080">Only the
cyclic component will be
apparent to an observer (or
instrument) travelling with
that electron - the linear
component is not apparent due
to a form of Doppler effect.
This is well shown in John
Williamson & Martin van
der Mark's paper 'Is the
Electron a Toroidal Photon?',
in which they refer to these
components as "time-like" and
"space-like". I don't agree
with their proposal that this
explains de Broglie's 'Harmony
of the Phases' - in my view a
time dilation factor seems to
have gone missing - but the
identification of these
components as collinear-with
(de Broglie)and orthogonal-to
(Compton) the direction of
particle motion is very well
reasoned and presented.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"
color="0000FF">No this is not
so - Martin derived the
harmony of phases from this
independently in around 1991.
It was pointed out to us in
1994 by Ulrich Enz ( on
circulating in Philips a
second attempt to publish that
paper) that the Harmony of
phases had first been
described by de Broglie in his
thesis.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"
color="#000080">This
perspective on particle
energy-flow can be used to
explain fully the phenomenon
referred to as 'inertial mass'
without reference to any
extraneous bosons or fields,
it also provides a direct
derivation of E = mc^2 without
any reference to SR.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"
color="#000080">Best regards,</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"
color="#000080">Grahame</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div>----- Original Message -----</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;
background:#e4e4e4"><b>From:</b>
<a
href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org"
target="_blank"
title="srp2@srpinc.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">
André Michaud</a></div>
<div style="font:10pt arial"><b>To:</b>
<a
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"
target="_blank"
title="richgauthier@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">
richgauthier@gmail.com</a> ;
<a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank"
title="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">
general@lists..natureoflightandparticles.org</a></div>
<div style="font:10pt arial"><b>Sent:</b>
Tuesday, November 07, 2017
3:45 PM</div>
<div style="font:10pt arial"><b>Subject:</b>
Re: [General] The Entangled
Double-Helix Superluminal
Photon Model</div>
<div> </div>
<div class="userStyles"
style="font-family:Arial;
color:#000000; font-size:12pt">
<p style="margin:0in 0in 10pt"><span
style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:'Calibri','sans-serif'">Hi Richard,</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'">Thanks for the link. I had a
quick look, and this
brings me to clarify
why I wrote that there
can be no de Broglie
wavelength from the
trispatial geometry
perspective because I
observe that I did not
clarify this point.</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'">It is due to the fact that in
the trispatial
geometry, the carrying
energy of a moving
electron is a full
fledged
electromagnetic
"carrier-photon",
which possesses its
own wavelength, which
is separate from the
Compton wavelength of
the electron. </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'">In the trispatial geometry,
there can be no common
de Broglie wavelength,
but only a state of
resonance between both
wavelengths, whose
form and extent of
volumes as a function
of time depends
uniquely on the
possibly varying
energy of the carrier
photon as the electron
progresses in space
since the wavelength
of the energy making
up the invariant rest
mass of the electron
is invariant.</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'">This means that to describe
electrons in motion
from the trispatial
perspective, the
structure of the wave
function needs to be
adapted to account for
this. This is
something beyond my
abilities to do, but
that you or others
would be better
equipped math wise to
do eventually. </span></span></span><br>
<br>
Best Regards<br>
---</p>
<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><br>
<br>
<i>On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 06:25:31
-0800, Richard Gauthier
wrote:</i>
<div>Hello<span
style="font-family:Arial">André</span>and
all,</div>
<div>Thanks you for your
detailed comments comparing
our approaches, which I will
come back to. One link to my
Schroedinger equation
article is <a
href="https://www.academia.edu/10235164/The_Charged-Photon_Model_of_the_Electron_Fits_the_Schr%C3%B6dinger_Equation"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://www.academia.edu/10235164/The_Charged-Photon_Model_of_the_Electron_Fits_the_Schrödinger_Equation</a>.
A link to a related article
is at<a
href="https://www.academia.edu/9973842/The_Charged-Photon_Model_of_the_Electron_the_de_Broglie_Wavelength_and_a_New_Interpretation_of_Quantum_Mechanics"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.academia.edu/9973842/The_Charged-Photon_Model_of_the_Electron_the_de_Broglie_Wavelength_and_a_New_Interpretation_of_Quantum_Mechanics</a>.
Both articles can also be
downloaded from<a
href="https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research</a>.</div>
<div>An article making an
analogy between photons in a
cavity and electrons in an
atom is at<a
href="https://www.academia.edu/19894441/Photonic_Atoms_Predicted_by_the_Charged_Photon_Model_of_the_Electron"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.academia.edu/19894441/Photonic_Atoms_Predicted_by_the_Charged_Photon_Model_of_the_Electron</a>.</div>
<div>with warm regards,</div>
<div>Richard</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Nov 6, 2017, at
9:22 PM, André Michaud
<<a
href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">srp2@srpinc.org</a>>
wrote:</div>
<div> </div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="userStyles"
style="font-family:Arial;
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'">Hi
Richard,</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'">I
will try to explain
how I correlate my
understanding of the
wave-particle
duality with what I
perceive your
understanding is.
But it is very
difficult to do,
because, I
understand this in
the frame of the
expanded trispatial
geometry, while you
describe it from the
perspective of the
4D space geometry.</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'">Also,
from my
understanding, there
exists only
localized elementary
charged particles in
physical reality,
and even after they
stabilize in various
electromagnetic
equilibrium states
(nucleons, atoms,
molecules, larger
bodies), that
continue interacting
individually.
Because of this, to
me, there is no
discontinuity
between the
submicroscopic
level, the
macroscopic level
and even with the
astronomical level.
</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'">From
my perspective, when
I look at a baseball
in my hand and think
of how it interacts,
I see only the bunch
of electrons, up
quarks and down
quarks plus their
carrying energy that
make up its mass
that interact with
the bunch of
electrons, up quarks
and down quarks plus
their carrying
energy that make up
the mass of my own
body and the Earth.</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'">When
you write: "<i>The
question is, what
gives the photon
its individual
particle-like
nature and also
its statistical
wave-like nature.
Since the answer
is that "nobody
knows", </i>"</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'">I
would qualify the
last part as "<i> </i><i>Since
the answer is that
"nobody knows <b>from
the 4D space
geometry
perspective</b>",
</i>", which is
exactly what de
Broglie ended up
concluding.</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'">This
is what got me to
thinking and end up
exploding the three
ijk orthogonal
vectors describing
the electromagnetic
triply orthogonal
relation of any
point of the Maxwell
continuous EM
wavefront into 3
full fledged
orthogonal spaces,
to see if this could
help, and I found
that it does.</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'">But
from this
perspective,
particle-like
behavior of
localized elementary
particles such as
the photon amount
only to its
longitudinal inertia
coupled to a frontal
cross-section
related to the
extent of the
transverse
oscillation of its
electromagnetically
oscillating half,
and its wave-like
behavior can only be
the full extent of
this transverse
electromagnetic
oscillation.</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'">This
transverse
oscillation amounts
to a form of
resonance of the
energy of the
photon, and the
volume of space
visited by this
resonance is the
only thing that can
be described by the
wave function in the
trispatial geometry,<br>
metaphorically
speaking, like the
wave function can
describe the volume
visited by a
resonating
(vibrating) guitar
string, but here the
"guitar string" is
the energy half
quantum that
electromagnetically
oscillates.<br>
<br>
What you name its "<i>
</i><i>statistical
wave-like nature</i>"
to me is the
distribution of its
energy density
within the volume
that it resonates in
over a given time
period.</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'">When
you write: " <i>that
the
helically-moving
charged photon
(now I would call
it a half-photon)
composing an
electron produces
a quantum wave</i>"</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'">This
is a description
that belong to 4D
space. In the
3-spaces geometry,
this is not possible
because the
electromagnetic
oscillation is a
reciprocating swing
between both states.
The helical motion
of the twin charges
you describe however
in your 4D model is
theoretically
possible in the
trispatial geometry,
because both charges
are free to swivel
freely on the
Y-y/Y-z plane within
electrostatic space
while the photon
moves at c in
X-space, which is
why I think your
model is fine even
from my 3-space
perspective. The
only difference is
that in the
trispatial geometry,
the charges
symmetrically piston
in and out in
opposite directions
from zero presence
to full extent at
the frequency of the
reciprocating swing.</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'">But
there is no such
thing as a "quantum
wave" being produced
or emitted in the
trispatial geometry.</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'">The
only possibility for
the wave function to
apply (to the
trispaces photon
model) is to
describe the
resonance volume of
space occupied by
the oscillating EM
energy while
reciprocatingly
swinging between
electric state and
magnetic state.
Nothing is emitted
while the photon
travels.</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'">Our
approaches indeed
are not very
different as you
mention, but you
would have to really
get into the
trispatial geometry
to see how close
they are. The major
difference rests
with the integration
of the magnetic
aspect, a feature
that I see no
possibility to
coherently integrate
in the too
restricted frame of
4D space geometry.</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'">Yes
I have an electron
model based on the
trispatial photon
model. In fact,
there is even a
clear and seamless
mechanics of
decoupling of a
single 1.022 MeV or
more photon into a
pair of electron and
positron, but it can
make mechanical
sense only in the
trispatial geometry.</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'">Here
is a link to the
paper describing the
decoupling
mechanics, and also
the inner structure
of the electron (and
positron of course),
titled "The
Mechanics of
Electron-Positron
Pair Creation in the
3-Spaces Model":</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'"><a
href="http://ijerd.com/paper/vol6-issue10/F06103649.pdf"
style="color:blue;
text-decoration:underline" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://ijerd.com/paper/vol6-issue10/F06103649.pdf</a></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'">There
is no such thing in
the trispaces
geometry as a de
Broglie wavelength
as you conceive, so
I cannot comment or
relate anything to
it.</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'">When
you write: " <i>A
photon can be
"bound" in a wave
cavity in many
possible "resonant
states" depending
on its wavelength
just like an
electron can be
"bound" in an atom
in many possible
orbitals or
"resonant states"
depending on the
electron's energy
in the atom.</i><i>"</i></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'">When
I think of a photon
interacting, I see
it interacting with
one or many other
elementary
particles. To me a
photon interacting
with a wave cavity
such as you
consider, is only
one photon
interacting with a
bunch of other
individual photons
or other charged EM
particles such as
electrons,
positrons, up quarks
and down quarks, so
I do not know how to
correlate this with
what you say. In the
trispatial geometry,
free moving photons
cannot stabilize
into least action
resonance states
within atoms, but
they can communicate
their energy to
electrons so
captive, which
causes them to jump
farther away from
nuclei or even
completely escape.</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'">When
you say: "<i>Maybe
the electron gives
off one or more
photons while
adjusting to a
relatively stable
resonant energy
state in the atom.</i>"</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'">When
an electron
stabilizes in a
least action
resonance state in
an atom, only "one"
electromagnetic
photon can be
emitted, carrying
away the momentum
related kinetic
energy that the
electron accumulated
while accelerating
until stopped in its
motion as it was
being captured. For
example, a 13.6 eV
photon is emitted
when an electron is
captured by a proton
to form a hydrogen
atom.</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'">But
overall, I think we
really are looking
at the same thing
from different
angles, and seeing
practically the same
thing, but with
different color
glasses, so to
speak.</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'">I'd
have a look at your
paper "The
Charged-Photon Model
of the Electron Fits
the Schrödinger
Equation" (article
21)." Can you give
me a link?</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'">Best
Regards</span></span></span><br>
---</p>
<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
<a
href="http://www.gsjournal.net/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a
href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.srpinc.org/</a><br>
<br>
<i>On Mon, 6 Nov 2017
15:08:43 -0800, Richard
Gauthier wrote:</i>
<div>Hi André,</div>
<div>Thank you for your very
helpful comments and
questions. The reason that
in 2002 I switched from a
two-particle superluminal
quantum model of a photon
to a one-particle
superluminal quantum model
was that I thought that
the lack of experimental
evidence for two particles
in a single photon's
makeup would decisively
defeat this model. Now
with a second look it
seems that my own
rejection at that time of
essentially the same model
was premature. But I did
learn more about electron
and photon modeling
between then and now.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Referring to point 6 on
the question of
wave-particle duality, as
you know, the photon acts
like a point particle when
it is detected
individually by a
charge-coupled-device
(CCD) or other methods.
But the statistical
distribution of photons
when many photons are
detected over an area
follows a predictable
wave-like pattern
predicted from the
wavelength of the photon
(which can actually be
measured consistently from
such experiments). The
question is, what gives
the photon its individual
particle-like nature and
also its statistical
wave-like nature. Since
the answer is that "nobody
knows", I proposed in my
electron model article
"Electrons are spin-1/2
charged photons generating
the de Broglie wavelength"
at <a
href="https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research#papers"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research#papers</a>
(article #16) that the
helically-moving charged
photon (now I would call
it a half-photon)
composing an electron
produces a quantum wave,
and showed mathematically
that this quantum wave
predicts the electron's de
Broglie wavelength along
the longitudinal direction
the electron (composed of
the helically-moving
charged photon) is moving.
That gave me confidence
that a photon model
(composed of 2 spin-1/2
charged photons) would
emit similar quantum waves
that would have the photon
model's helical wavelength
and frequency of rotation,
but would also have a wave
form and frequency and
would act like a quantum
wave function to provide
the necessary statistical
predictions about
detecting photons.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>You explain
wave-particle duality
differently in your photon
model, as due to
transverse electromagnetic
oscillations within your
photon model. Perhaps
these two approaches are
not so different. Do you
have an electron model
based on your tri-space
photon model, and if so
does your electron model
generate the de Broglie
wavelength?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Also, you said you
associate the quantum wave
of a photon with a
resonance volume
associated with the photon
rather than a
"wave-being-emitted" from
the photon. Again, our
approaches may not be so
different. A photon can be
"bound" in a wave cavity
in many possible "resonant
states" depending on its
wavelength just like an
electron can be "bound" in
an atom in many possible
orbitals or "resonant
states" depending on the
electron's energy in the
atom. I see the
superluminal energy
quantum composing an
electron as something that
seeks out through its
quantum waves the possible
resonant states in an atom
(or positive ion) it
meets, based on the
electron's energy and
wavelength, and then
establishes itself in an
energy state (with its
corresponding wave
function) in the atom
which is consistent with
the electron's energy (and
its de Broglie
wavelength). Maybe the
electron gives off one or
more photons while
adjusting to a relatively
stable resonant energy
state in the atom.
Something similar could
happen when a photon
enters a cavity where it
can settle into a
resonance state if it has
the necessary wavelength.
This I think is a new way
of looking at quantum
mechanics and is quite
tentative. My work
connecting the "spin-1/2
charged photon" electron
model with the
Schroedinger equation is
at "The Charged-Photon
Model of the Electron Fits
the Schrödinger Equation"
(article 21).</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Richard</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Nov 3, 2017, at
7:37 AM, André Michaud
<<a
href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">srp2@srpinc.org</a>>
wrote:</div>
<div> </div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="userStyles"
style="font-family:Arial;
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'">Hi
Richard,</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'">I
have been reading
your last paper:</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'"><a
href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320727586_Entangled_Double-Helix_Superluminal_Composite_Photon_Model_Defined_by_Fine_Structure_Constant"
style="color:blue;
text-decoration:underline" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320727586_Entangled_Double-Helix_Superluminal_Composite_Photon_Model_Defined_by_Fine_Structure_Constant</a></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'">Quite
interesting and
clearly described.
Easy to visualize.</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'">The
first point I note
is your use of a
pair of charges in
action within the
photon structure,
which is something I
agree must be the
case. Since light
can be polarized by
magnetic fields, it
makes complete sense
that charges, which
are known to react
to magnetic fields,
must be involved in
a localized photon
and that two of them
need be present and
interacting, since
how could a single
point-like behaving
charge ever be
polarized?</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'">Referring
to basic geometry, a
point can have no
particular
orientation in space
while two point
(charges) physically
located some
distance apart,
however close they
may be, and between
which a distance (a
line) can be
measured, can
transversally be
oriented in any
direction on a plane
perpendicular to the
direction of motion,
which light
polarisation seems
to involve.</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'">I
also agree with your
correlating them
with the concept of
two half spin
half-photons, which
gives the complete
photon a spin of 1,
which is in line
with de Broglie's
hypothesis.</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'">Since
you make them move
in a double helical
trajectory, they are
de facto in mutual
transverse alignment
with respect to the
direction of motion,
which makes your
photon polarizable
in conformity with
observation, and is
in agreement with
the known fact that
electromagnetic
energy involves
transverse
oscillation,
contrary to sound in
a medium which
involves
longitudinal
oscillation of the
medium. </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'">You
mention that Caroppo
(8) has developed a
hypothesis along the
same lines without
reference to de
Broglie, but I
couldn't locate it
to have a look
because no doubt by
mishap your (8)
refers to the
Einstein-Pololsky-Rosen
paper that fed
initiated the debate
with Bohr (if I
recall correctly)
and in which I
couldn't locate
Caroppo's name.</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'">Since
you make them spiral
along the
trajectory, their
slightly internal
superluminal
spiraling velocities
are consistent with
the fact the photon
proper would move at
c.</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'">You
assign fixed values
to both charges,
which is consistent
with the fact that
they remain at fixed
distances from the
axis of motion. This
is different from my
model, in which
their value varies
between a maximum
and zero at each
cycle. In my own
model, I see the
concept of charge as
a form of "recall
potential", so to
speak, that tends to
pull the energy
making up the
half-photons towards
each other. </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'">As
for a quantum wave
being generated by
the photon, I have
an entirely
different view of
how the wave
function applies to
elementary
particles. In
particular, since in
my view, the wave
function defines a
resonance volume
first and foremost,
I do not understand
it as being
something like a
"wave-being-emitted"
only as a resonance
volume within which
oscillating energy
quanta would be
contained in
resonance state
either while in
translational motion
or when stabilized
in some
electromagnetic
least action state.
So I have no comment
for this part.</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'">I
think your model is
consistent with
splitting into a
pair of separately
moving electron and
positron if it has
an energy of 1.022
MeV or more, just
like my own model.</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'">I
agree with your idea
of the charges of
both half-photons
being Q and -Q
relative to each
other, except in
mine, their
intensity cyclically
varies. I think your
use of the Coulomb
force to hold them
is consistent. In my
model, I am still
fuzzy about what the
Coulomb force really
is, so I am still in
search of how it
really applies
within the structure
of my model,
although I am
convinced that it
applies. </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'">I
have no comment on
entanglement.</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'">To
your possible
criticism No. 1)
regarding the
superluminal
velocity. I agree
that this is a
problem.</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'">You
put in the possible
criticism list the
idea No. 2) the
photon may be
composite. </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'">No
possible criticism
in this case in my
view. If the photon
was not composite,
it simply could not
be polarized. If it
was not composite,
it would behave
point-like like the
electron, a
structure that has
no orientation in
space. From my
perspective, the
very fact that it
can be polarized by
magnetic fields is
the proof that it is
internally
composite.</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'">Your
possible criticism
No. 3) is grounded
on Larmor's
hypothesis, not on
physically observed
behavior. No new law
is required. There
is no account on
record of electrons
accelerating in
straight line that
radiate energy while
accelerating. You
need to wiggle them
from side to side
along the trajectory
for them to release
synchrotron
radiation. Also, the
John Blewett
experiments with the
GE Betatron in the
1940`s showed that
electrons on
perfectly circular
orbits do not
radiate. Electrons
radiate in
cyclotron`s storage
rings only because
their trajectories
are forced into
"approximately
circular" orbits,
not "perfectly
circular" orbits.</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'">Your
No. 4) is no
criticism indeed, It
simply is a
possibility that
single high enough
energy photons could
possibly produce
muon-antimuon pairs
for example. Your
photon model is not
oversimplified. I
think it is ok in
this respect.</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'">Your
No. 5) I would
reformulate as
follows: "Light
"beam" (made of
individual photos)
easily pass through
each other. You
assume that their
internal charges
would interact with
each other and
disturb their photon
trajectories.</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'">If
the pair of charges
of each photon can
be polarized
transversally, which
is what is observed,
then what
interaction they may
have with each other
will be on the
transverse plane,
mutually affecting
only the orientation
of their mutual
polarities, which
would not affect
their trajectories,
which is what is
observed. Besides,
since they cross
paths each moving at
c, the interaction
is reduced to a
barely measurable
moment. We know they
interact however, as
proved by the
McDonald et. all
experiments at SLAC
in 1997 when they
mutually
destabilized
sufficiently for
some 1.022 MeV (or
more) photons in one
of the beams to
convert to electron
positron pairs.</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'">Your
Number 6). I see
wave-particle
duality of the
photon in the
following manner:
Longitudinal
point-like behaving
cross-section during
absorption, and
transverse
electromagnetic
oscillation
(wave-like behavior)
during motion. To me
this is the only
meaning of
wave-particle
duality.</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'">Your
Number 7) is
interesting. The
very structure of
the 2 charges model
of your photon model
and of mine provide
the answer. Both
charges being
rigidly maintained
by structure on
either side of the
axis of motion of
the photon, they can
freely swivel on the
perpendicular plane
from the minutest
transverse electric
or magnetic
interaction. This
characteristic alone
is sufficient in my
view for entire
beams of photons to
be forced into the
same polarity
orientation by
subjecting the beam
to any specific
electromagnetic
constraint
configuration. </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'">I
would add two items
to your list of
possible criticism</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'">8)
How does the photon
maintain its light
velocity?</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'">9)
Since photons are
supposed to be
electromagnetic, how
can the electric and
magnetic fields that
they are supposed to
be associated with
be described?<br>
<br>
Quite a biteful to
chew on! You seem to
have addressed most
issues that need to
be analyzed about
the photon.</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'">Best
Regards</span></span></span><br>
---</p>
<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
<a
href="http://www.gsjournal.net/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a
href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.srpinc.org/</a><br>
<br>
<i>On Tue, 31 Oct 2017
19:23:45 -0700, Richard
Gauthier wrote:</i><br>
<br>
Forwarded from Chip
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>Begin forwarded
message:</div>
<div style="margin:0px"><span
style=""><b>From: </b></span><span
style="">"Chip
Akins" <<a
href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">chipakins@gmail.com</a>></span></div>
<div style="margin:0px"><span
style=""><b>Subject:
</b></span><span
style=""><b>[General]
Relativity</b></span></div>
<div style="margin:0px"><span
style=""><b>Date: </b></span><span
style="">October 31,
2017 at 6:46:19 AM
PDT</span></div>
<div style="margin:0px"><span
style=""><b>To: </b></span><span
style="">"'Nature of
Light and Particles
- General
Discussion'" <<a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists..natureoflightandparticles.org</a>></span></div>
<div style="margin:0px"><span
style=""><b>Reply-To:
</b></span><span
style="">Nature of
Light and Particles
- General Discussion
<<a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists..natureoflightandparticles.org</a>></span></div>
<div>
<div
class="WordSection1"
style="text-transform:none; background-color:rgb(255,255,255);
text-indent:0px;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
letter-spacing:normal; word-spacing:0px">
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">Hi
Grahame (and
Andre)</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">Regarding
logical
self-consistent
issues…</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">In
order to address
this point I think
we would need to
take a look at the
“landscape” as it
relates to
“relativity”.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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”.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">Light
also exhibits the
Doppler Effect in
space.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">So
there is an
indication that
some similarities
may exist between
the causes of the
Doppler Effect in
sound and in
light.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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>)</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">We
can however, from
the evidence,
reconstruct a set
of conditions,
which is causal,
and yields results
which match
observation.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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?</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">So
there is a more
logically
consistent, causal
view, than the one
proposed by SR.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">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.</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">Are
there ways to
present this and
related
information which
better illustrates
the case from a
logical basis?</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">Thoughts?</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt">Chip</div>
<div
style="margin:0in
0in 0pt;
font-family:'Times
New Roman',serif;
font-size:12pt"> </div>
</div>
<span
style="text-transform:none;
background-color:rgb(255,255,255); text-indent:0px;
display:inline!important;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
float:none;
letter-spacing:normal;
word-spacing:0px">_______________________________________________</span><br
style="text-transform:none; background-color:rgb(255,255,255);
text-indent:0px;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
letter-spacing:normal; word-spacing:0px">
<span
style="text-transform:none;
background-color:rgb(255,255,255); text-indent:0px;
display:inline!important;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
float:none;
letter-spacing:normal;
word-spacing:0px">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="text-transform:none; background-color:rgb(255,255,255);
text-indent:0px;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
letter-spacing:normal; color:purple; word-spacing:0px;
text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">richgauthier@gmail.com</a><br
style="text-transform:none; background-color:rgb(255,255,255);
text-indent:0px;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
letter-spacing:normal; word-spacing:0px">
<span
style="text-transform:none;
background-color:rgb(255,255,255); text-indent:0px;
display:inline!important;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
float:none;
letter-spacing:normal;
word-spacing:0px"><a
href="</span><a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
style="text-transform:none; background-color:rgb(255,255,255);
text-indent:0px;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
letter-spacing:normal; color:purple; word-spacing:0px;
text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a><span
style="text-transform:none; background-color:rgb(255,255,255);
text-indent:0px;
display:inline!important;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
float:none;
letter-spacing:normal;
word-spacing:0px">"></span><br
style="text-transform:none; background-color:rgb(255,255,255);
text-indent:0px;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
letter-spacing:normal; word-spacing:0px">
<span
style="text-transform:none;
background-color:rgb(255,255,255); text-indent:0px;
display:inline!important;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
float:none;
letter-spacing:normal;
word-spacing:0px">Click
here to unsubscribe</span><br
style="text-transform:none; background-color:rgb(255,255,255);
text-indent:0px;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
letter-spacing:normal; word-spacing:0px">
<span
style="text-transform:none;
background-color:rgb(255,255,255); text-indent:0px;
display:inline!important;
font:12px Helvetica;
white-space:normal;
float:none;
letter-spacing:normal;
word-spacing:0px"></a></span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<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
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:grahame@starweave.com">grahame@starweave.com</a><br>
<a
href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/grahame%40starweave.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/grahame%40starweave.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</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:phys@a-giese.de">phys@a-giese.de</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>