<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<div class="userStyles" style=" font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000;">Hello John,<br>
<p style="margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">You are absolutely right.</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"">In fact de Broglie derived this relation with respect to the values of the Bohr ground state orbit energy parameters.</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"">Heisenberg did the same, except that he formulated the relation so that it could account for a precision drift of the chosen velocity on either side of the selected velocity value about the ground orbit of the Bohr atom.</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"">In 1923, he himself expressed his uncertainty principle as delta_x delta_p equal-or-larger-than h, which is the same as delta_x approx_equal to h / (m delta_v_x), which is fundamentally de Broglie's single valued h/mv for the Bohr ground state orbit.</span></span><br>
<br>
This is at the origin of Heisenberg's statistical solution.</p>
<br>
Best Regards
<footer class="signatureDivContainer">
<footer class="signatureContainer" style="display:inline;">---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
http://www.gsjournal.net/<br>
http://www.srpinc.org/</footer>
</footer>
<footer class="replyforwardcontainer"><br>
<br>
<span>On Thu, 23 Nov 2017 03:17:31 +0000, John Williamson <john.williamson@glasgow.ac.uk> wrote:</john.williamson@glasgow.ac.uk></span><br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<style type="text/css"><!--
body
{font-family:Helvetica,Arial;
font-size:13px}
-->
</style>
<style id="owaParaStyle" type="text/css">P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}
</style>
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color: #000000;font-size: 10pt;">Dear Albrecht,<br>
<br>
Your error is more fundamental than you know. See below in green.
<div style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #000000; font-size: 16px">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRpF178154" style="direction: ltr;"><font face="Tahoma" color="#000000" size="2"><b>From:</b> General [general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] on behalf of Viv Robinson [viv@universephysics.com]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, November 22, 2017 10:49 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Albrecht Giese; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Compton and de Broglie wavelengththe "error"</font><br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial; font-size:13px; margin:0px; line-height:auto">Dear Albrecht,</div>
<div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial; font-size:13px; margin:0px; line-height:auto"> </div>
<div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial; font-size:13px; margin:0px; line-height:auto">IMHO you have a fundamental flaw in your first paragraph below. A single electron cannot generate an interference pattern, any more than can a single photon. An observer moving with a single electron will, if the screen is angled towards him, see only a single spot where the electron impinged upon that screen. That is all. If he repeats that observation say 10,000 times he will still only see on spot each time the electron impinges upon the screen. If the spots are recorded, each time he travels with another electron he will see an interference image slowly appear because it is dependent upon the frame of reference of the slit and screen. The motion of the observer does not interfere with that pattern.</div>
<div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial; font-size:13px; margin:0px; line-height:auto"> </div>
<div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial; font-size:13px; margin:0px; line-height:auto">Sincerely</div>
<div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial; font-size:13px; margin:0px; line-height:auto"> </div>
<div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial; font-size:13px; margin:0px; line-height:auto">Vivian Robinson</div>
<div class="bloop_sign" id="bloop_sign_1511389963683457792"> </div>
<p class="airmail_on">On 23 November 2017 at 8:24:21 AM, Albrecht Giese (<a href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" target="_blank">phys@a-giese.de</a>) wrote:</p>
<blockquote class="clean_bq" type="cite">
<div>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"><span>Dear André,</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"> </p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"><span>the "error" which I see for de Broglie is his assumed relation lambda = h / momentum . </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"> </p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"><span><font color="008000">Your error, and this is an error not an "error" is that you assume that de Broglie "assumed <span>lambda = h / momentum. Louis de Broglie did not assume </span><span>lambda = h / momentum - he derived it. From relativity. Please do not assume what you think other people assume. Remember, de Broglie was very smart, and this relation had to come from somewhere, no? It would be instructive for you to understand the how and why he did this before making uninformed comments on it.</span></font></span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"> </p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"><span>This relation fails at any linear transformation. Take as an example the scattering of electrons at a multi-slit. If you look at it from the rest frame of the multi-slit then de Broglie's wavelength describes correctly the generated interference pattern. However, if this situation is observed by someone moving at the side of the electron the result is completely wrong. Assume as an extreme situation that the observer moves together with the electron. Then in the frame of the observer the electron has the momentum = 0 and so the wavelength is infinite. This means: no interference! But the pattern does of course not disappear and will be visible to the observer. This shows that de Broglie does not even fulfil Galileo's physical rule of relativity believed and proven since 600 years.</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"> </p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"><span>Regarding the particle mass: My equation is simple: m = h(bar) / (c*R) , where R is the radius of the particle. And R can be easily determined by use of the known magnetic momentum of the particle.</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"><span>The mag. momentum of a circling elementary charge is classically: mm = (1/2)*c*e<sub>0</sub>*R</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"><span>The mag. moment of particles is known. So, R can be determined. This R inserted into the equation above yields the particle mass with an accuracy of about 10<sup>-3</sup>. - This is now based only on the strong force. If the result is corrected by the influence of the electrical charge, this yields the Landé factor in case of the electron. This applied yields the mass with an accuracy of 2*10<sup>-6</sup>.</span><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"><span>References for this are:<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.ag-physics.org/rmass" target="_blank">www.ag-physics.org/rmass</a> and<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.ag-physics.org/electron" target="_blank">www.ag-physics.org/electron</a>.</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"> </p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"><span>Hope this explains it. Otherwise please ask.<br>
<br>
Albrecht</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px"> </p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><span><a href="http://airmail.calendar/2017-11-18 22:54:00 AEST" target="_blank">Am 18.11.2017 um 22:54</a>schrieb André Michaud:</span></div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div class="userStyles" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span><span style="font-size:11pt"><span style="line-height:16.86666488647461px"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-CA"><span style="line-height:18.399999618530273px">Dear Albrecht,</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span><span style="font-size:11pt"><span style="line-height:16.86666488647461px"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-CA"><span style="line-height:18.399999618530273px">I must say that I don't see as "errors" conclusions that were drawn before more precise knowledge was discovered. For example, I don't think that Newton made an "error" by not immediately concluding to the possibility the fixed velocity of light. He simply did not know about it because this had not yet been discovered.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span><span style="font-size:11pt"><span style="line-height:16.86666488647461px"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-CA"><span style="line-height:18.399999618530273px">The same for de Broglie in my opinion, he worked with the knowledge available a the time.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span><span style="font-size:11pt"><span style="line-height:16.86666488647461px"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-CA"><span style="line-height:18.399999618530273px">As i understand it, what we call the de Broglie wave is simply a representation of the sum of the energies of the rest mass of the electron plus the translational energy related to its momentum. How can this be wrong at the general level, unless I misunderstand the whole concept?</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span><span style="font-size:11pt"><span style="line-height:16.86666488647461px"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-CA"><span style="line-height:18.399999618530273px">As for Hönl and the mass of the electron, I was meaning this rhetorically. I simply mean that any solution that exactly provides the exact mass of the electron as experimentally measured by numerous means can only be a proper description, so your description has to be correct. The exact mass of the electron has been experimentally confirmed for over 1 century. I do not know where to look to examine your solution. Can you provide a link?</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<span>---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.gsjournal.net/" target="_blank">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.srpinc.org/" target="_blank">http://www.srpinc.org/</a><br style="font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px">
<br style="font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px">
<i style="font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px"><a href="http://airmail.calendar/2017-11-19 06:56:34 AEST" target="_blank">On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 21:56:34 +0100</a>, Albrecht Giese wrote:</i></span><br style="font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px">
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px"><span>Dear André,</span></p>
<span> </span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px"><span>there is no doubt that de Broglie has made great contributions to the development of physics. So, if there is an anniversary in honour of him and even the Nobel price, then as many as possible of his achievements are of course presented.</span></p>
<span> </span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px"> </p>
<span> </span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px"><span>My concern, however, refers to a specific result of his early activities. The assumed necessity to introduce the "harmony of waves" and to deduce the "de Broglie" wavelength are based on a logical error and on a misunderstanding of SR.</span></p>
<span> </span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px"> </p>
<span> </span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px"><span>It is a quite funny situation that in spite of this error his result seems usable to explain certain physical processes. It is one goal of my physical activities to understand this. In one fundamental case I have found an explanation. That is the scattering of electrons at a double / multiple slit. If such experiment is viewed from a specific inertial frame (the one normally used), de Brolgie's calculation conforms to the measurement. However in any other frame it fails. - I can explain why the de Broglie wave seems to work even though it is erroneous. (Not here but I can give you a reference if you want it.)</span></p>
<span> </span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px"> </p>
<span> </span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px"><span>Regarding Hönl I do not understand what you say. Hönl did NOT get a correct mass by assuming only the electrical force in the electron. He was wrong by a factor of about 300 as I wrote earlier. But the calculation which I did is correct with high precision and the formula does not have any free parameters, only the standard ones. I do not know any other model which has this. Do you? Then please give me a reference.</span></p>
<span> </span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px"> </p>
<span> </span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px"><span>Best regards<br>
Albrecht</span></p>
<span> </span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:Arial; font-size:15.833333015441895px"> </p>
<span> </span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at srp2@srpinc.org<br>
<br>
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/srp2%40srpinc.org?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">Click here to unsubscribe</a><br>
</footer>
</div>
</body>