<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Dear André,</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>the "error" which I see for de Broglie is his assumed relation
lambda = h / momentum . 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.<b> </b>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.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>The mag. momentum of a circling elementary charge is classically:
mm = (1/2)*c*e<sub>0</sub>*R</p>
<p>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> .<br>
<br>
</p>
<p>References for this are: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.ag-physics.org/rmass">www.ag-physics.org/rmass</a>
and <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.ag-physics.org/electron">www.ag-physics.org/electron</a>
.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Hope this explains it. Otherwise please ask.<br>
<br>
Albrecht<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 18.11.2017 um 22:54 schrieb André
Michaud:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:201711182154.vAILsZ6x030257@mail141c0.megamailservers.com">
<title></title>
<div class="userStyles" style=" font-family: Arial; font-size:
12pt; color: #000000;">
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">Dear Albrecht,</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">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></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">The same for de Broglie in
my opinion, he worked with the knowledge available a
the time.</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">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></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%"> 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></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 Sat, 18 Nov 2017 21:56:34 +0100, Albrecht Giese <phys@a-giese.de>
wrote:</phys@a-giese.de></i><br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<p>Dear André,</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>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.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>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.)</p>
<p> </p>
<p>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.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Best regards<br>
Albrecht</p>
<p> </p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 13.11.2017 um 00:55 schrieb
André Michaud:</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:201711122355.vACNtQb5031278@mail131c0.megamailservers.com"
type="cite"> </blockquote>
</footer>
</div>
<title></title>
<div class="userStyles" style=" font-family: Arial; font-size:
12pt; color: #000000;">
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">Dear Albrecht,</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">Regarding the discovery of
the discrete resonance states of electrons in atoms,
here is a direct quote from a contribution by
Einstein to a book co-authored by himself, </span></span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%">Schrödinger, Pauli,
Rosenfeld, Born, Joliot-Curie Irene. &
Frederick, Heisenberg, Yukawa and a few others, that
was published in </span></span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">1953 as </span></span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%">a tribute to Louis de
Broglie for his 60<sup>th</sup> birthday, each of
them providing one chapter, Einstein even
collaborating to 2 distinct chapters besides
contributing the introduction, the complete text
drafting a detailed overview of the state of
knowledge in fundamental physics in 1952: </span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="DE"><span
style="line-height:115%">Einstein A., Schrödinger
E., Pauli W., Rosenfeld L., Born M., Joliot-Curie I.
& F., Heisenberg W., Yukawa H., et al. </span></span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%">(1953). </span></span><b><i><span
style="font-size:12.0pt"><span
style="line-height:115%">Louis de Broglie,
physicien et penseur.</span></span></i></b> <span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%">Éditions Albin Michel,
Paris.</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%">He contributed the
Introduction in German, which he felt more
comfortable using (translated to French by the
editors on the facing pages). Here is how he began
this intro on page 4 of this book:</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="DE"><span
style="line-height:115%">"<em>Ich will dem zusammen
mit Frau B. Kaufman verfassten Beitrag zu diesem
Bande einige Worte vorausschicken in der einzige
Sprache, in der ich mich mit einiger Leichtigkeit
ausdrücken kann. Es sind Worte der Entschuldigung.
Sie sollen zeigen, warum ich, trotzdem ich De
Broglie visionäre Entdeckung des inneren
Zusammenhanges zwischen discreten Quantenzuständen
und Resonanzzuständen in relativ jungen Jahren
bewundernd miterlebt habe, doch unablässig nach
einem Wege gesucht habe, das Quantenrätsel auf
anderem Wege zu lösen oder doch wenigstens eine
Lösung vorbereiten zu helfen.</em>".</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">My translation to English:
</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">"<em>I wish to say, at the
beginning of this contribution prepared in
collaboration with Mrs. B. Kaufman, a few words in
my own language, the only one in which I can
express myself with any ease. They are words of
apology. They are meant to explain why, despite
the fact that I have witnessed with admiration in
my years of relative youth, the brilliant
discovery by Louis de Broglie of the intimate
relation between the discrete quantum states and
resonance states, I nevertheless ceaselessly
attempted to resolve the quanta enigma in another
way, or at least to help in preparing such an
alternate solution.</em>"</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">I am confident that all of
these other renowned contributors, who were all
alive and practicing when de Broglie made this
discovery would have objected to such a statement if
it hadn`t been factual. </span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">I certainly could trace
another source that I recall having read where it is
clearly mentioned that this discovery by de Broglie
was what initially inspired Schrödinger.</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">Actually, the best source
of de Broglie's thoughts is his huge legacy of
numerous </span></span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%">papers, and more that 25
quite substantial books, most if not all of which
have never been translated to English.</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%">As for Hönl's solution,
inasmuch as his mass calculation for the electron
matches the experimentally confirmed value, I see no
problem with it, just like I see no problem with all
other alternate theoretical solutions matching the
experimentally obtained value. I think that all
ideas deserve to be considered.</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Best
Regards</span></span></span><br>
---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.gsjournal.net/" moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.srpinc.org/</a><br>
<i>On Sun, 12 Nov 2017 22:56:32 +0100, Albrecht Giese <phys@a-giese.de>
wrote:</phys@a-giese.de></i><br>
<br>
Dear André,
<p>the resonant state of electrons in atoms was according to my
knowledge an argument of Schrödinger, maybe also used by Bohr.
If we want to understand the thoughts and the basic concept
(and also possible logical errors) of de Broglie, then the
best source will be his PhD thesis. De Broglie and others
(like the Nobel committee) have later attempted to see more
consequences of the detection of de Broglie, but the originals
are in the thesis. So, I recommend again to read it.</p>
<p>Regarding a solution for the mass (not for the charge) of the
electron, there is this (modified) approach of Hönl referring
to the strong force. And as the result of this model is so
precise - as a wrote: almost 10<sup>-6</sup> - then I do not
see this as only a direction but as a true result. And not to
overlook that this calculation does not use any free
parameters. It is correct by using known physical constants.</p>
<p>Best regards<br>
Albrecht</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 11.11.2017 um 21:35 schrieb
André Michaud:</div>
</div>
<title></title>
<div class="userStyles" style=" font-family: Arial; font-size:
12pt; color: #000000;">
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 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%">Dear Albrecht,</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">From the Nobel internet
site and other sources, looks like he won the Nobel
in 1929 for his intuition in 1924 that electrons in
atoms were stabilized in resonance states, which
inspired Schrödinger the wave function approach that
gave birth to Wave Mechanics, then complemented by
Heisenberg`s statistical energy spread solution that
then resulted in fully workable Quantum Mechanics.</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">Regarding the actual mass
and charge of the electron, from my perspective, any
solution not in conflict with the experimentally
measured mass and charge of the electron can only be
in the right direction.</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">Best Regards</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<br>
---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.gsjournal.net/" moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.srpinc.org/</a><br>
<br>
<i>On Sat, 11 Nov 2017 20:42:24 +0100, Albrecht Giese <phys@a-giese.de>
wrote:</phys@a-giese.de></i><br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<p>Dear André,</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I am quite sure that de Broglie invested a lot of more
thoughts into physical problems. Like your example of
consequences of Maxwell's theory.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But if we look into <u>de Broglie</u>'s thesis, then it is
obvious that</p>
<p>1.) This was the beginning of de Broglie's work on this topic
(not denying his later activities)</p>
<p>2.) He concluded the necessity of the de Broglie wave, as a
new phenomenon, in just this paper. And BTW for this idea
published in this paper he received the Nobel price. So it was
the essential cornerstone. And his deduction was based on a
conflict which he saw regarding Special Relativity and
energy-to-frequency. (A conflict which in fact does not
exist.)</p>
<p> </p>
<p><u>Hönl</u>: The mass of the electron was of course already
measured at that time and the result known to Hönl. But Hönl
was a theorist and his intention was to derive the mass of the
electron from theory. He used a model of the electron which
was not so different from my model (but different). But he
assumed what is common sense in physics up to these days that
the electron contains only electrical energy. This did not
give him a usable result. But a precise result is achieved if
the strong force is assumed for the particle. And this latter
assumption is meanwhile no longer in conflict with main stream
physics.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Best regards<br>
Albrecht</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 10.11.2017 um 21:53 schrieb
André Michaud:</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:201711102053.vAAKrl86032616@mail131c0.megamailservers.com"
type="cite"> </blockquote>
</div>
<title></title>
<div class="userStyles" style=" font-family: Arial; font-size:
12pt; color: #000000;">
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">Dear Albrecht,</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"><span
style="line-height:115%"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">I have just a few comments
(<span style="color:#008080;">green color in-line</span>).<br>
<br>
Best Regards</span></span></span></span></span><br>
---</p>
<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.gsjournal.net/" moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.srpinc.org/</a><br>
<br>
<i>On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 20:52:01 +0100, Albrecht Giese <phys@a-giese.de>
wrote:</phys@a-giese.de></i><br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<p>Hi Colleagues!</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.</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.</p>
<p>*) <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://aflb.ensmp.fr/LDB-oeuvres/De_Broglie_Kracklauer.pdf"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://aflb.ensmp.fr/LDB-oeuvres/De_Broglie_Kracklauer.pdf</a></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>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 style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="color:#008080;"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span
style="font-family:
"Calibri","sans-serif";"><span
style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height: 115%;">I am somewhat familiar
with de Broglie's work. This is not the reason why
he did not succeed. He perfectly understood
Maxwell's wave theory, and he was trying to
describe permanently localized photon in a way
that would remain fully Maxwell's equations
compliant.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="color:#008080;"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span
style="font-family:
"Calibri","sans-serif";"><span
style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height: 115%;">He was trying to do
this by means of adapting the wave function to the
purpose, but since Quantum Mechanics could not be
completely reconciled with electromagnetism as
Feynman himself remarked in his "Feynman`s
Lectures...", he did not succeed. </span></span></span></span></span><br>
<br>
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family:
"Times New Roman","serif";"><i>"There
are difficulties associated with the ideas of
Maxwell's theory which are not solved by and not
directly associated with quantum mechanics...when
electromagnetism is joined to quantum mechanics, the
difficulties remain" Richard Feynman. 1964.</i></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="color:#008080;"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span
style="font-family:
"Calibri","sans-serif";"><span
style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height: 115%;">Note that physics does
not "assume" that there is a permanent oscillation
in elementary charged particles. It has been
experimentally established that the electron is of
electromagnetic origin since the Blackett and
Occhialini discovery in the 1930's that pairs of
massive electron/positrons can be produced from
the conversion of sufficiently energetic massless
electromagnetic photons. So this is not a simple
"oscillation" that is involved, but an
"electromagnetic oscillation", that can only be
the self-sustaining mutual induction of electric
and magnetic aspects of electromagnetic energy
that was hypothesized by Maxwell and was later
experimentally confirmed by Hertz and others. </span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="color:#008080;"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span
style="font-family:
"Calibri","sans-serif";"><span
style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height: 115%;">De Broglie did not
misunderstand the situation at all. He simply came
to the same conclusion that Feynman expressed
later in his "Feynman`s lectures on Physics". I
don't recall that it was in relation with SR.</span></span></span></span></span></span></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.</p>
<p> </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.)</p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt"><span style="color:#008080;"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span
style="font-family:
"Calibri","sans-serif";"><span
style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height: 115%;">To your second point,
to my knowledge, the exact mass of the electron
had been measured and was known with precision
already at the beginning of the 20th century, ref
the Kaufmann experiments, for example, and many
others. So seems to me that the failure of </span></span><span
style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height: 115%;">Hönl to establish it 40
years later by a method he conceived simply shows
that his method was not appropriate, not that the
mass of the electron was suddenly impossible to
measure by other methods.</span></span></span></span></span></span></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> </p>
<p>So, what do you think about this?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Best regards<br>
Albrecht</p>
<p> </p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 10.11.2017 um 15:07 schrieb
André Michaud:</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:201711101407.vAAE7sFg021011@mail131c0.megamailservers.com"
type="cite"> </blockquote>
</div>
<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>
<br>
---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.gsjournal.net/" moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.srpinc.org/</a><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"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true">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" moz-do-not-send="true">srp2@srpinc.org</a>;
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">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></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"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">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">
<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/"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true">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" moz-do-not-send="true">grahame@starweave.com</a>;
<a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
style="color:blue;
text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
style="color:blue;
text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
style="color:blue;
text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
style="color:blue;
text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank">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" moz-do-not-send="true">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/"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank"
title="srp2@srpinc.org"> André
Michaud</a></div>
<div style="font:10pt arial"><b>To:</b>
<a
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank"
title="richgauthier@gmail.com">
richgauthier@gmail.com</a> ; <a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank"
title="general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">
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/" moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank">
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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true" style="color:blue;
text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">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/"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a
href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true" style="color:blue;
text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">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/"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a
href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
moz-do-not-send="true"
target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true" target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true" target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true" target="_blank">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
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">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
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">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" moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true">"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>
</div>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"> </fieldset>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" moz-do-not-send="true">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" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of
Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">srp2@srpinc.org</a><br>
<br>
<a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/srp2%40srpinc.org?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
moz-do-not-send="true">Click here to unsubscribe</a>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"> </fieldset>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" moz-do-not-send="true">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" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of
Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">srp2@srpinc.org</a><br>
<br>
<a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/srp2%40srpinc.org?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
moz-do-not-send="true">Click here to unsubscribe</a>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"> </fieldset>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" moz-do-not-send="true">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" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of
Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">srp2@srpinc.org</a><br>
<br>
<a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/srp2%40srpinc.org?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
moz-do-not-send="true">Click here to unsubscribe</a><br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"> </fieldset>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" moz-do-not-send="true">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" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of
Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org">srp2@srpinc.org</a><br>
<br>
<a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/srp2%40srpinc.org?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
moz-do-not-send="true">Click here to unsubscribe</a><br>
<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>