<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<div class="userStyles" style=" font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000;">Hi Richard,<br>
<br>
I agree with you here that this is an incremental progress over the previous view, Moreover it is now in sync with de Broglie's original twin halph-photons hypothesis.<br>
<br>
As I already mentioned, possibly the best that can be had in 4D geometry.<br>
<br>
Note that In the trispatial geometry, all of this is accomplished without the energy involved ever exceeding the speed of light.<br>
<br>
Best Regards
<footer class="signatureDivContainer">
<footer class="signatureContainer" style="display:inline;">---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
http://www.gsjournal.net/<br>
http://www.srpinc.org/</footer>
</footer>
<footer class="replyforwardcontainer"><br>
<br>
<span>On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:15:08 -0800, Richard Gauthier <richgauthier@gmail.com> wrote:</richgauthier@gmail.com></span><br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div>HI Ray (and all),</div>
<div>You are right that an electron logically can’t be composed of a photon which is composed of an electron-positron pair (or other dipole particle structure) where each half of the dipole is composed of a photon which is composed of… ad infinitum. I think that an electron that is composed from its beginning as a spin-1/2 charged half-photon (not a photon) solves this logical dilemma. I think most of us started out thinking that an electron, if it is composed of a light-speed object, must be composed of a uncharged photon of spin 1 which somehow curls up to become a charged spin-1/2 electron with rest mass m. But I now think that this approach has become a dead-end. Rather, a pre-electron (a spin-1/2 charged half-photon) produced with pre-positron in e-p pair production from a sufficiently energetic spin-1 photon (having net charge zero) starts out already electrically charged and having spin 1/2, so it doesn’t have to change from a spin-1 uncharged particle into a a spin-1/2 charged particle by curling up and losing half its spin while gaining its charge and mass due to its being curled up in a double-loop. Rather the spin-1/2 charged photon retains the spin-1/2 and electric charge e and inertial mass (and its rest mass m) that it started with coming (with a positron) from a photon in e-p pair production. This light-speed (in its longitudinal direction) charged spin-1/2 particle composing an electron is not curled up anyway when the electron it composes is moving very highly relativistically at v < c. Then the light-speed particle composing the relativistic electron retains its charge e, its spin-1/2 and its mass m while moving at light-speed c (longitudinally) along its helical trajectory with forward helical angle theta given by cos (theta) = v/c and with an electron velocity (along its helical axis) of v < c. The spin-1/2 charged photon maintains its spin-1/2 at highly relativistic velocities because it retains the same internal superluminal speed c sqrt (2) (and transverse momentum component value p= h/lambda and its helical radius value R= lambda/4pi) that it had while composing the composite photon from which it emerged in e-p pair production. Only now lambda is much shorter when the electron is very highly relativistic. So at highly relativist velocities the charged photon’s spin remains Sz = R x p = lambda/4pi x h/lambda = h/4pi = hbar/2 = spin-1/2 . To me this understanding represents real, if incremental, progress in understanding photons and electrons (and particles in general.)</div>
<div>Richard</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Nov 27, 2017, at 12:54 PM, Ray Fleming <<a href="mailto:rayrfleming@gmail.com">rayrfleming@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">Richard,</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large"> </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">As I mentioned. The De Broglie quote in your recent paper expresses that the half-wavelength photons are Dirac Fermions. So a photon can be treated a a series of pairs of Dirac Fermions.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large"> </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">So I see these models of an electron as a photon are saying that the electron is made of a pair of Dirac Fermions while not showing why the electron is matter with negative charge rather than the opposite. Then there is the circularity issue an electron is made of a photon which is an electron-positron pair, which are both photons, which are both electron-positron pairs,...</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large"> </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">Of course Dirac Fermions will behave like Dirac Fermions, but unless we break the circular logic we cannot achieve anything definitive. For my part I see <u>The</u> Dirac Fermion, the electron as what is fundamental. That said, I do not have a model for it. I do appreciate all the fine work on the problem.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large"> </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">One thing a lot of papers have in common is talking about the point like nature of an electron, while several including my own derivation of electron mass show that it relates to a size around the Compton wavelength. If we are to understand the true structure of an electron we need to perform scattering experiments with electrons and photons rather than protons, and at lower energies that allow us to see what is going on an the Compton scale. As I say in a couple of my books, proton scattering to find the size of an electron is simply an attempt to find the diameter of the center of a hole.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large"> </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large">Ray</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Richard Gauthier <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_blank">richgauthier@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt;text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica">Hello John, Martin, Vivian, Chip,</span><span style="font-family:Helvetica">André, Grahame, Albrecht, Ray</span><span style="font-family:Helvetica">and all, </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt;text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica">Three of our members, that I know of, have derived the de Broglie wavelength in different ways from our double-looping-photon-like-<wbr>object electron models having spin-1/2: John (and Martin), Vivian and myself. I don’t know if Grahame, </span><span style="font-family:Helvetica">André, Chip or Albrecht have derived the de Broglie wavelength from their electron models (and if so, where), but I would like to know.</span></p>
<h3 style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:11px"><span style="font-size:13px;font-family:Helvetica;font-weight:normal">The three de Broglie wavelength derivations from the above electron models are at:</span></h3>
<h3 style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:11px"> </h3>
<h3 style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:11px"> </h3>
<h3 style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:11px"><span style="font-size:13px;font-family:Helvetica;font-weight:normal">1</span><span style="font-size:13px;font-family:Helvetica">. </span><span style="font-size:13px;font-family:Helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,34);font-weight:normal">Is the electron a photon with toroidal topology?”, J.G. Williamson and M.B.van der Mark, </span><span style="font-size:13px;font-family:Helvetica;font-weight:normal"><a href="http://www.cybsoc.org/electron.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.cybsoc.org/<wbr>electron.pdf</a>, section 6, pp15-16.</span></h3>
<p class="MsoNormal">2 <span style="color:rgb(51,51,51);background-color:rgb(241,241,241)">“A Proposal on the Structure and Properties of an Electron”, VNE Robinson,</span><a href="https://www.academia.edu/10819172/A_Proposal_on_the_Structure_and_Properties_of_an_Electron" target="_blank">https://www.<wbr>academia.edu/10819172/A_<wbr>Proposal_on_the_Structure_and_<wbr>Properties_of_an_Electron</a> , section 9, p.13</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Helvetica">3. <span style="color:#333333;background:#f1f1f1">“Electrons are spin 1/2 charged photons generating the de Broglie wavelength”, Richard Gauthier,</span></span><a href="https://www.academia.edu/15686831/Electrons_are_spin_1_2_charged_photons_generating_the_de_Broglie_wavelength" target="_blank">https://www.<wbr>academia.edu/15686831/<wbr>Electrons_are_spin_1_2_<wbr>charged_photons_generating_<wbr>the_de_Broglie_wavelength</a>, section 11, pp 9-11. What I call “charged photons” in my article I am now calling “charged half-photons”, but this does not affect the derivation.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Helvetica">Since we are focusing on the validity of the de Broglie wavelength relation in this email thread, I would like to know if anyone, besides myself, sees any serious error in any of the three de Broglie wavelength derivations above. If there is an error in the derivation in my electron model, I would certainly like to know what it is, and I think that the others feel the same about theirs. Thanks!</span></p>
<div style="margin-bottom: 12pt;"> </div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Helvetica">Richard</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Nov 24, 2017, at 3:41 PM, André Michaud <<a href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org" target="_blank">srp2@srpinc.org</a>> wrote:</div>
<div>
<div class="m_-8935547569608684897userStyles" style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;font-family:Arial;font-size:12pt">Hello Chip,<br>
<br>
You touch an important point by highlighting that at α*<i>c</i>velocity, would-be dilation or contraction tiny at these velocities, since it lies in the very low relativistic velocity range.<br>
<br>
A note however regarding motion at such velocity on a "trajectory" about the nucleus of the hydrogen atom, Heisenberg concluded that the electron did not have to translate at any velocity to remain captive on the ground state orbital. From my analysis from the trispatial perspective, I tend to agree with him. Considering how both electrons have to remain by structure midway between the two protons in a hydrogen molecule for their covalent bounding to be logically explainable, this seems to be factual from my perspective.<br>
<br>
Best Regards<br>
---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
<a href="http://www.gsjournal.net/" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">http://www.gsjournal.net/</a><br>
<a href="http://www.srpinc.org/" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">http://www.srpinc.org/</a><br>
<br>
<span>On Fri, 24 Nov 2017 17:13:54 -0600, "Chip Akins"wrote:</span><br>
<div class="m_-8935547569608684897WordSection1">
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Hi Albrecht and Andre</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">First, Albrecht, I agree that the de Broglie wave, as envisioned by de Broglie, leaves much unexplained, and may well be simply wrong, even though it sort of fits partial mathematical descriptions which seem to be shedding some light on the atomic orbitals in a narrow set of circumstances. This failure of the de Broglie hypothesis to work in all circumstances is a part of the reason I started looking into this subject more. The de Broglie wave also seems to fit double slit experiments, but does not really offer a foundation of physical cause. It just seems to work that way without really disclosing the physical reasons for the de Broglie wave itself. So I think we should look for a better foundation, a causal and concrete explanation, instead of building elaborate theoretical structure on speculation which still remains unexplained. So, yes, there are occasions where the speculation of de Broglie can be applied, and we get the right numbers, but that does not mean the theory is correct and we should stop looking for the actual answers.</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Andre is onto something when he looks for a relationship between the fields of the proton and the fields of the electron to sort out these issues of the quantization of orbitals. However I will have to do some more math to see if the magnetic field relationships can actually be the answer. At this point, prior to doing the requisite math, I think there is also the possibility that certain dynamics of the electric fields created by the proton and electron will explain the quantization of orbitals. But this is premature speculation. And is sort of a moot point because the dynamics of electric fields are the cause of magnetic fields.</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">There exists a beat frequency which is ¼ the de Broglie wavelength, and this beat frequency is a natural condition of the electron in the significantly sub-light speed orbital (example: a mean circular path at α*<i>c</i>velocity), so it requires no speculation about dilation or contraction (which are tiny at these velocities).</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">So I think you are both quite correct to look into these issues. We have a lot to gain by reexamining our theoretical basis.</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Chip</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div>
<div style="border-style:solid none none;border-top-color:rgb(225,225,225);border-top-width:1pt;padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:windowtext">General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">mailto:general-bounces+<wbr>chipakins=gmail.com@lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]<span class="m_-8935547569608684897Apple-converted-space"><wbr></span><b>On Behalf Of</b>Albrecht Giese<br>
<b>Sent:</b>Friday, November 24, 2017 4:25 PM<br>
<b>To:</b><a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">general@lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b>Re: [General] Compton and de Broglie wavelengththe "error"</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Hi André, Chip, and all,</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">if we discuss de Broglie's concept of a particle wave, we should in my view refer to his original work and not to others who have used the results (well understood or misunderstood) in other applications.</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">So, de Broglie in original:</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span lang="EN-GB">It is of course correct that de Broglie did not just “assume” his wave but he has deduced it from considerations about relativity. But his deduction is based on a severe error as I have explained in detail earlier. So, let’s do it again.</span></div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span lang="EN-GB">De Broglie has seen a logical conflict between the Einstein- Planck relation (1) E=h*frequency and (2) relativistic dilation; because according to (1) the frequency has to increase at motion and according to (2) dilation will cause the frequency to decrease. But his concern is an error as this conflict does not exist. Because we have to look at an interaction of particles, which is the relevant situation. Any interaction sees frequencies which are increased by the Doppler effect. And the Doppler effect gives an over-compensation of the normal relativistic slow down so that both frequencies above will fit on their own. The same result is achieved if the temporal Lorentz transformation is properly applied. - For de Broglie's new wave no justification exists at all.</span></div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span lang="EN-GB">The comment of two of you that a single electron does not produce an interference pattern is of course correct. One electron only produces one dot on the screen. But if we assume that a bunch of electron flies to the multi-slit with same speed then the argument works. There will be an interference pattern behind the multi-slit. But if we transform the experiment into the frame of the electrons then the momentum of the electrons is zero, and so the wavelength is infinite, and seen from that frame no interference pattern can occur. But it does occur, also visible for a co-moving observer, and that shows that de Broglie's idea is erroneous. - I have shown in calculations (but not in this place) why under certain circumstances the impression occurs that de Broglie is correct. But in general it is wrong. De Broglie's approach violates Galileo's relativity as well as Lorentzian relativity.</span></div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span lang="EN-GB">You have mentioned the good results of the use of the de Broglie wave to determine the quantization of atomic orbits. It is true that it works, but it has a similar problem like for the scattering of electrons. Assume a hydrogen atom moving into axial direction with a similar speed as the speed of the electrons in the orbits. Then the resulting momentum of the orbiting electrons increases by about 40% seen from the frame at rest. So the de Broglie wavelength has to decrease by this factor and the energy of these states has to change accordingly. But in practice there will be a much smaller energy change. So also in this case de Broglie fails at a more thorough look.</span></div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span lang="EN-GB">In the mails there have been some considerations about what de Broglie did "have in mind". But what he had in mind he has written in his PhD thesis. Anything about the energy states of atoms came later and by others (like Schrödinger and Bohr).</span></div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span lang="EN-GB">Now I will be wondering about objecting arguments.</span></div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span lang="EN-GB">Albrecht</span></div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><br>
<span lang="EN-GB">I thank you for your answers and arguments. I will now answer to it, of course. Which means to repeat my arguments of the last three weeks here where I have given argument which seem to have been overlooked.</span></div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Am 24.11.2017 um 01:20 schrieb Richard Gauthier:</div>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Hi John,<span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">André, Chip and all,</span></div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Deriving the de Broglie wavelength of an electron model without superluminal motion is easy (in hindsight, since de Broglie did it using special relativity.) But try getting, without superluminal motion, the spin-1 of a non-pointlike photon model (for a photon-in-a-box or otherwise) AND the spin-1/2 of a highly relativistic non-pointlike electron model. In either case there will be some longitudinal momentum Plong, at light speed for a photon model and at very near light speed for a highly relativistic electron model, as well as some significant locally transverse linear momentum Ptrans (even if the net transverse linear momentum of the photon model is zero as in the double-helix photon model) that generates spin Sz = R x Ptrans = 1 hbar for a photon model or 1/2 hbar for a highly relativistic electron model . A longitudinal light-speed or near-light-speed linear momentum vector plus a significant local transverse linear momentum vector gives a diagonal local linear momentum vector with a corresponding diagonal velocity vector whose magnitude is greater than c. Putting a photon model’s or electron model's transverse oscillatory motion, that generates its spin, into two different transverse dimensional spaces is ingenious, but if the photon is to move along longitudinally as a whole and not leave the two transverse dimensional spaces behind, I think there will still be some diagonal superluminal motion. I would be happy to see a proved counterexample.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Richard</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">On Nov 23, 2017, at 12:19 PM, John Williamson <<a href="mailto:John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk</a><wbr>> wrote:</div>
</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif">Hi Richard and everyone,<br>
<br>
You do not need to add anything. "Superluminal" is not needed. If you consider light-in-a-box (including light in a box of its own making) the de Broglie wavelength follows from the beat frequencies of the proper relativistic transformations of the light going with the motion and that going against. Remeber, one needs to consider BOTH the Doppler shift AND the SR transformations. Then everything works. Martin is writing a definitive paper on this.</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif">Regards, John.</span></div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;text-align:center" align="center">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%"></div>
<div id="m_-8935547569608684897divRpF210496">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 12pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif">General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">general-bounces+john.<wbr>williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@<wbr>lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org</a>] on behalf of Richard Gauthier [<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">richgauthier@gmail.com</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b>Thursday, November 23, 2017 6:36 PM<br>
<b>To:</b><a href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">srp2@srpinc.org</a>; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b>Re: [General] Compton and de Broglie wavelengththe "error"</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Hello André, Chip, John and all,</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<h4 style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;font-weight:bold;margin-bottom:9pt"><span style="font-weight:normal">I also think that there is “an additional factor” that settles an electron into an atomic resonant state. In my view the electron is composed of this additional factor, a charged superluminal energy quantum that circulates and generates quantum waves having the de Broglie wavelength. These quantum waves self-resonate in regions around an atomic nucleus. When an available resonant region around an atomic nucleus is found, the superluminal energy quantum settles into this region and continues to emit quantum waves that for some period of time maintain it in this resonance state in the atom. The electron is more likely to be detected wherever the amplitude of this resonant state (the electron’s eigenfunction for this state) is larger.</span></h4>
<h4 style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;font-weight:bold;margin-bottom:9pt"><span style="font-weight:normal">This idea is not fully developed but is hinted at in “</span><span style="color:rgb(35,35,35);font-weight:normal">Transluminal Energy Quantum Model of a Spin-½ Charged Photon Composing an Electron”,</span><span style="color:rgb(35,35,35);background-color:white;font-weight:normal;background-position:initial initial;background-repeat:initial initial">“Electrons Are Spin</span><span style="color:rgb(35,35,35);font-weight:normal">-½<span style="background-color:white;background-position:initial initial;background-repeat:initial initial">Charged Photons Generating the de Broglie Wavelength”,</span></span><span style="font-weight:normal">“</span><span style="color:rgb(26,26,26);font-weight:normal">The Charged-Photon Model of the Electron Fits the Schrödinger Equation</span><span style="font-weight:normal">”and “</span><span style="color:rgb(26,26,26);font-weight:normal">The Charged-Photon Model of the Electron, the de Broglie Wavelength, and a New Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics" at<a href="https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research%23papers" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">https://richardgauthier.<wbr>academia.edu/research#papers</a>. What I called a charged photon in theses articles I am now calling a charged half-photon.</span></h4>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="color:rgb(26,26,26)">Richard</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">On Nov 23, 2017, at 8:52 AM, André Michaud <<a href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">srp2@srpinc.org</a>> wrote:</div>
</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Hi Chip, and all</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">You write: "<i><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif" lang="EN-CA">I prefer the second option, there is some additional factor interacting with the electron, to cause these quantized orbitals, and understand from Andre’s writings that he feels the same way.</span></i>"</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">You are exactly right about what I think. I came to the same conclusion as yourself (the second option) way back in fact when I finally lighted up to the fact that the wave function originally was related to electrons orbitals by Schrödinger because he was inspired in this direction by a conclusion of de Broglie that electrons had to be captive in some form of resonance state about nuclei.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">I think that this was sort of lost sight of in the community due to the acrimonious debate that raged on afterwards between the proponents of the Copenhagen school and the determinists, which indeed was fundamentally whether the first or second option applied in physical reality.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">After I came to the second option conclusion, I started to look around for descriptions of this resonance state that could be related to the wave function but found nothing, as if the only option that had been explored was the first one, with which the Heisenberg solution was in harmony and also later Feynman's path integral.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">To me, the idea of "resonance" always made me think of a vibrating guitar string, whose shape and extent of the volume visited by the transversally oscillating string can be described by the wave function.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">I suspected that this might have been what de Broglie had in mind also, and became convinced that the electron could remain localized while being captive within the theoretical volume defined by the wave function, on an axial resonance trajectory (sort of stochastic maybe to some extent) that may be describable mathematically and that could be due to electric versus magnetic interaction between the electron and the nuclei.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">I see that you lean in a similar direction Chip. I have explored the possible electric vs magnetic potential explanation to a large extent, but I am at a loss as to how to exactly mathematize the localized resonance trajectory proper within the volume definable by the wave function. You seem to be better equipped mathematically than me to address such an issue, with your¼ de Broglie wavelengthexploration.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">For a general overview of how the trispatial geometry allows defining this type of electromagnetic electron equilibrium states involving both electric and magnetic aspects of energy, here is my final paper on the whole concept:</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><a href="https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/gravitation-quantum-mechanics-and-the-least-action-electromagneticequilibrium-states-2329-6542-1000152.pdf" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">https://www.omicsonline.org/<wbr>open-access/gravitation-<wbr>quantum-mechanics-and-the-<wbr>least-action-<wbr>electromagneticequilibrium-<wbr>states-2329-6542-1000152.pdf</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Even though it involves an entirely new paradigm that may feel very unfamiliar at first, I hope it nevertheless makes some sense to you.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Best Regards</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 12pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
<a href="http://www.gsjournal.net/" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">http://www.gsjournal.net/</span></a><br>
<a href="http://www.srpinc.org/" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">http://www.srpinc.org/</span></a><br>
<br>
On Thu, 23 Nov 2017 05:16:52 -0600, "Chip Akins"wrote:</span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Hi All</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">But in all this, regarding de Broglie’s wavelength and the electron orbitals, there is still something missing.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Either we have to assume that the electron occupies the entire circumference of the orbital simultaneously by its wavefunction, or there is some additional factor interacting with the electron, to cause these quantized orbitals.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">I prefer the second option, there is some additional factor interacting with the electron, to cause these quantized orbitals, and understand from Andre’s writings that he feels the same way.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">In the hydrogen atom there is a simple, naturally occurring cause, for a “matter wave” which is exactly ¼ the de Broglie wavelength. This “matter wave” is a beat frequency created by the perceived frequency difference with motion, of the outer radius and inner radius of the electron as it circulates about the proton. I found this to be interesting, and wanted to share this observation.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Chip</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="border-style:solid none none;border-top-width:1pt;padding:3pt 0in 0in;border-top-color:rgb(225,225,225)">
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">mailto:general-bounces+<wbr>chipakins=gmail.com@lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a>]<b><wbr>On Behalf Of</b>André Michaud<br>
<b>Sent:</b>Wednesday, November 22, 2017 10:52 PM<br>
<b>To:</b><a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">general@lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b>Re: [General] Compton and de Broglie wavelengththe "error"</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Hello John,</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">You are absolutely right.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><br>
In fact de Broglie derived this relation with respect to the values of the Bohr ground state orbit energy parameters.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><br>
Heisenberg did the same, except that he formulated the relation so that it could account for a precision drift of the chosen velocity on either side of the selected velocity value about the ground orbit of the Bohr atom.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><br>
In 1923, he himself expressed his uncertainty principle as delta_x delta_p equal-or-larger-than h, which is the same as delta_x approx_equal to h / (m delta_v_x), which is fundamentally de Broglie's single valued h/mv for the Bohr ground state orbit.<br>
<br>
<span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">This is at the origin of Heisenberg's statistical solution.</span></div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 12pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><br>
<span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Best Regards ---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
<a href="http://www.gsjournal.net/" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">http://www.gsjournal.net/</span></a><br>
<a href="http://www.srpinc.org/" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">http://www.srpinc.org/</span></a><br>
<br>
On Thu, 23 Nov 2017 03:17:31 +0000, John Williamson wrote:</span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif">Dear Albrecht,<br>
<br>
Your error is more fundamental than you know. See below in green.</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;text-align:center" align="center">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%"></div>
<div id="m_-8935547569608684897divRpF178154">
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif">General [<a href="mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">general-bounces+john.<wbr>williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@<wbr>lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a>] on behalf of Viv Robinson [<a href="mailto:viv@universephysics.com" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">viv@universephysics.com</span></a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b>Wednesday, November 22, 2017 10:49 PM<br>
<b>To:</b>Albrecht Giese; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b>Re: [General] Compton and de Broglie wavelengththe "error"</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div id="m_-8935547569608684897bloop_customfont">
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">Dear Albrecht,</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8935547569608684897bloop_customfont">
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">IMHO you have a fundamental flaw in your first paragraph below. A single electron cannot generate an interference pattern, any more than can a single photon. An observer moving with a single electron will, if the screen is angled towards him, see only a single spot where the electron impinged upon that screen. That is all. If he repeats that observation say 10,000 times he will still only see on spot each time the electron impinges upon the screen. If the spots are recorded, each time he travels with another electron he will see an interference image slowly appear because it is dependent upon the frame of reference of the slit and screen. The motion of the observer does not interfere with that pattern.</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8935547569608684897bloop_customfont">
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">Sincerely</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8935547569608684897bloop_customfont">
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">Vivian Robinson</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">On 23 November 2017 at 8:24:21 AM, Albrecht Giese (<a href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">phys@a-giese.de</span></a>) wrote:</div>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Dear André,</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">the "error" which I see for de Broglie is his assumed relation lambda = h / momentum .</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="color:green">Your error, and this is an error not an "error" is that you assume that de Broglie "assumed lambda = h / momentum. Louis de Broglie did not assume lambda = h / momentum - he derived it. From relativity. Please do not assume what you think other people assume. Remember, de Broglie was very smart, and this relation had to come from somewhere, no? It would be instructive for you to understand the how and why he did this before making uninformed comments on it.</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">This relation fails at any linear transformation. Take as an example the scattering of electrons at a multi-slit. If you look at it from the rest frame of the multi-slit then de Broglie's wavelength describes correctly the generated interference pattern. However, if this situation is observed by someone moving at the side of the electron the result is completely wrong. Assume as an extreme situation that the observer moves together with the electron. Then in the frame of the observer the electron has the momentum = 0 and so the wavelength is infinite. This means: no interference! But the pattern does of course not disappear and will be visible to the observer. This shows that de Broglie does not even fulfil Galileo's physical rule of relativity believed and proven since 600 years.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">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.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">The mag. momentum of a circling elementary charge is classically: mm = (1/2)*c*e<sub>0</sub>*R</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">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>.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">References for this are:<a href="http://www.ag-physics.org/rmass" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">www.ag-physics.org/rmass</span></a>an<wbr>d<a href="http://www.ag-physics.org/electron" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">www.ag-physics.org/electron</span></a>.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif">Hope this explains it. Otherwise please ask.<br>
<br>
Albrecht</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><a href="http://airmail.calendar/2017-11-18%2022:54:00%20AEST" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">Am 18.11.2017 um 22:54</span></a>schrieb André Michaud:</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif" lang="EN-CA">Dear Albrecht,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif" lang="EN-CA">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></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif" lang="EN-CA">The same for de Broglie in my opinion, he worked with the knowledge available a the time.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif" lang="EN-CA">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></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif" lang="EN-CA">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></p>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin<br>
<a href="http://www.gsjournal.net/" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">http://www.gsjournal.net/</span></a><br>
<a href="http://www.srpinc.org/" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">http://www.srpinc.org/</span></a><br>
<br>
<i><a href="http://airmail.calendar/2017-11-19%2006:56:34%20AEST" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 21:56:34 +0100</span></a>, Albrecht Giese wrote:</i></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Dear André,</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">there is no doubt that de Broglie has made great contributions to the development of physics. So, if there is an anniversary in honour of him and even the Nobel price, then as many as possible of his achievements are of course presented.</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">My concern, however, refers to a specific result of his early activities. The assumed necessity to introduce the "harmony of waves" and to deduce the "de Broglie" wavelength are based on a logical error and on a misunderstanding of SR.</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">It is a quite funny situation that in spite of this error his result seems usable to explain certain physical processes. It is one goal of my physical activities to understand this. In one fundamental case I have found an explanation. That is the scattering of electrons at a double / multiple slit. If such experiment is viewed from a specific inertial frame (the one normally used), de Brolgie's calculation conforms to the measurement. However in any other frame it fails. - I can explain why the de Broglie wave seems to work even though it is erroneous. (Not here but I can give you a reference if you want it.)</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Regarding Hönl I do not understand what you say. Hönl did NOT get a correct mass by assuming only the electrical force in the electron. He was wrong by a factor of about 300 as I wrote earlier. But the calculation which I did is correct with high precision and the formula does not have any free parameters, only the standard ones. I do not know any other model which has this. Do you? Then please give me a reference.</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Best regards<br>
Albrecht</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at<a href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">srp2@srpinc.org</span></a><br>
<br>
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/srp2%40srpinc.org?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">Click here to unsubscribe</span></a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at</span><a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif;color:purple">richgauthier@gmail.com</span></a><br>
<span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><a href="</span><a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif;color:purple">http://lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org/<wbr>options.cgi/general-<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org/<wbr>richgauthier%40gmail.com?<wbr>unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</span></a><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a></span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at</span><a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">richgauthier@gmail.com</span></a><br>
<span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif"><a href="</span><a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">http://lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org/<wbr>options.cgi/general-<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org/<wbr>richgauthier%40gmail.com?<wbr>unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</span></a><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif">"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a></span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
</div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><br>
<br>
</div>
<pre style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:10pt;font-family:'Courier New'">______________________________<wbr>_________________</pre>
<pre style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:10pt;font-family:'Courier New'">If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">phys@a-giese.de</a></pre>
<pre style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:10pt;font-family:'Courier New'"><a href=<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">"http://lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org/<wbr>options.cgi/general-<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org/<wbr>phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&<wbr>unsubconfirm=1"</a>></pre>
<pre style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:10pt;font-family:'Courier New'">Click here to unsubscribe</pre>
<pre style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:10pt;font-family:'Courier New'"></a></pre>
</blockquote>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
<div id="m_-8935547569608684897DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 12pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;text-align:center" align="center">
<hr style="color:rgb(144,144,144)" align="center" size="1" width="99%" noshade="noshade"></div>
<table class="m_-8935547569608684897MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse:collapse" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="padding:0in 11.25pt 0in 6pt">
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"> </div>
</td>
<td style="padding:0.75pt">
<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(61,77,90)">Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.<br>
<a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at<a href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">srp2@srpinc.org</a><br>
<br>
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/srp2%40srpinc.org?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">Click here to unsubscribe</a></div>
<span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">______________________________<wbr>_________________</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">
<span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at</span><a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" target="_blank">richgauthier@gmail.com</a><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">
<span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important"><a href="</span><a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" target="_blank">http://lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org/<wbr>options.cgi/general-<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org/<wbr>richgauthier%40gmail.com?<wbr>unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">"></span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">
<span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">Click here to unsubscribe</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">
<span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important"></a></span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</footer>
</div>
</body>