<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Thank you Albrecht and Al these original papers give a great deal
of insight into the derivation and thinking <br>
</p>
<p>It is especially noteworthy that DeBroglie assumed SR results as
gospel and defined the comptom wave length purely from symbol
manipulation without any further physical <br>
</p>
<p>"(1.1.5) h*f = m<sub>0</sub>*c<sup>2</sup><br>
The frequency 'f' is to be measured, of course, <b>in the rest
frame of the energy packet."</b><br>
</p>
<p>This may address Albrechts "error" and convert it to a
"limitation"? <br>
</p>
<p>For reference Compton's paper is at <br>
</p>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://journals.aps.org/pr/pdf/10.1103/PhysRev.21.483">https://journals.aps.org/pr/pdf/10.1103/PhysRev.21.483</a></p>
<p>Wolf<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/26/2017 9:34 AM, Albrecht Giese
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:3026404c-3131-6e9d-f768-00c39a72abd2@a-giese.de">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<p>Hi All,<br>
</p>
<p>attached I send you the English translation of de Broglie's PhD
thesis where he develops his idea of his special wave. The
translation is done by Al Kracklauer.</p>
<p> </p>
<div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: -moz-fixed;
font-size: 14px;" lang="x-unicode"><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>
<br>
<br>
</div>
The essential chapter for this topic is no. 1 "The Phase Wave".
<p>Best regards<br>
Albrecht<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 25.11.2017 um 21:49 schrieb André
Michaud:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:201711252049.vAPKntBp012174@mail69c0.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%">Hi Andrew,</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 been thinking on
your comment: "</span></span><i><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%">However, I have not
seen anything written on a possible connection
between intrinsic spin and the deBroglie
wavelength (or frequency).</span></span></i><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">"</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin: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%">Thinking about it,
frequency and wavelength describe the observed and
measurable "oscillating behavior" of energy,
frequency being the number of time a quantum will
complete its EM cycle per second, while the
wavelength is the distance the quantum can cover
during one such cycle at its natural velocity.</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%">Spin on its part has to
do with how EM particles relate to each other,
either parallel spin alignment or antiprallel spin
alignment. Parallel spin alignment is related to
repulsion between particles while antiparallel
spin alignment, which is associated to covalent
bounding and orbital pair filling, is related to
attraction.</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%">We know that this is not
due to electric charges, because 2 electrons (same
sign of electric charges by definition, thus
electrically repelling) can be joined in covalent
pairs by antiparallel spin alignemnt, so this
leaves only the magnetic aspect of the energy
making up the substance of the electron mass to be
related to spin.</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%">This is examplified by
this experiment carried out by Kotler et al. in
2014 with two electrons from two different atoms
forced to interact in parallel magnetic spin
alignment, which reveals the inverse cube
interaction involved, which is different from the
inverse square electric interacton:</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%"><a
href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature13403.epdf?referrer_access_token=yoC6RXrPyxwvQviChYrG0tRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0PdPJ4geER1fKVR1YXH8GThqECstdb6e48mZm0qQo2OMX_XYURkzBSUZCrxM8VipvnG8FofxB39P4lc-1UIKEO1"
style="color:blue; text-decoration:underline"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.nature.com/articles/nature13403.epdf?referrer_access_token=yoC6RXrPyxwvQviChYrG0tRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0PdPJ4geER1fKVR1YXH8GThqECstdb6e48mZm0qQo2OMX_XYURkzBSUZCrxM8VipvnG8FofxB39P4lc-1UIKEO1</a></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 my understanding,
magnetic spin and charges have to do with the
nature of the "substance" that electromagnetic
energy is, while frequency and wavelength have to
do with the nature of its "oscillating behavior".</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%">This would be my 2 cents
contribution to your other comment: "</span></span><i><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US"><span
style="line-height:115%">I hope that some others
in the group, who have more ease with
mathematics than I, will be able to contribute
to this development.</span></span></i><span
style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-CA"><span
style="line-height:115%">".</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="margin: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%">By the way, I don`t feel
particulary mathematically apt either. I think we
each become more familiar with what part of math
we needed to clarify issues we were interested in
in the past. </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>
<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/" 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></footer>
</footer>
<footer class="replyforwardcontainer"><br>
<br>
<span>On Sat, 25 Nov 2017 11:12:28 -0500, Andrew Meulenberg
<mules333@gmail.com> wrote:</mules333@gmail.com></span><br>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>Dear Chip and all,<br>
</div>
Thank you for the deBroglie paper. It surprised me in
several ways.
<ol>
<li>The biggest surprise was that the word <u>wavelength</u>
does not appear at all.
<ul>
<li>even tho lambda appears in eq 1, it is not
defined. So,</li>
<li>while it may have been modesty or lost in
translation, wavelength was not important for
his story.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>deBroglie emphasized frequency and the, now
near-universal, use of deBrogle wavelength rather
than frequency was a convenience for
experimentalists.</li>
<li>deBroglie talks of the wave as being 'physical'
(unlike that of the wave function of QM), yet as
far as I could tell, he does not mention what is
'waving'.</li>
<li>The word <u>spin</u> does not appear in the
paper.
<ul>
<li>deBroglie's original work evolved at the
same time at the concept of spin and
therefore, as a thesis, would likely not
include such esoterica.</li>
<li>the fact that this present (1970) paper does
not include spin (as a potential source of the
frequency) in a relativity and QM-driven paper
appears inexcusable.</li>
<li>However, that apparent 'failure' is based on
my concept that the physical 'wave' is a
relativistic effect driving the precession of
the physical spin vector.</li>
<li>The nearly 50 years since 1970 has produced
many changes. However, I have not seen
anything written on a possible connection
between intrinsic spin and the deBroglie
wavelength (or frequency).</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ol>
</div>
The concept of an electron being a bound photon feeds
the information base on spin and its implications. I
hope that some others in the group, who have more ease
with mathematics than I, will be able to contribute to
this development.<br>
</div>
Andrew M.
<div>
<div>
<div>._________________</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov 24, 2017
at 6:36 PM, Chip Akins <span dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">chipakins@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div link="blue" vlink="purple"
lang="EN-US">
<div
class="m_-7043474106834704785WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Hi Andre</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">I don’t know
if you have read this, I suspect
you have.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Attached is de
Broglie’s “The Reinterpretation of
Wave Mechanics”.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Chip</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div
style="border:none;border-top:solid
#e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in
0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
General [mailto:<a
href="mailto:general-bounces%2Bchipakins"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">general-bounces+<wbr>chipakins</a>=<a
href="mailto:gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">gmail.com@lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>André
Michaud<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, November
24, 2017 4:54 PM<br>
<span><b>To:</b> <a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re:
[General] Compton and de
Broglie wavelengththe
"error"</span></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Hi
Albrecht,<br>
<br>
<span>It seems that you "assume"
that de Broglie deduced his
wave from considerations about
relativity.<br>
<br>
To my knowledge, this is not
the case.<br>
<br>
If you can substanciate your
claim by referring us to a
verifiable text from de
Broglie that explains his
deduction from SR, this would
be greatly appreciated. I am
still in learning mode.</span><br>
<br>
<span>Best Regards ---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal admin</span></span><br>
<a
href="http://www.gsjournal.net/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">http://www.gsjournal.net/</span></a><br>
<a href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">http://www.srpinc.org/</span></a><br>
<br>
<span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><span>On
Fri, 24 Nov 2017 23:25:09
+0100, Albrecht Giese wrote:</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="color:black">Hi André,
Chip, and all,</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="color:black">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.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="color:black">So, de
Broglie in original:</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="color:black"
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></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="color:black"
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></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="color:black"
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></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="color:black"
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></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="color:black"
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></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="color:black"
lang="EN-GB">Now I will be
wondering about objecting
arguments.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="color:black"
lang="EN-GB">Albrecht</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<span><span style="color:black"
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></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Am
24.11.2017 um 01:20 schrieb
Richard Gauthier:</span></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Hi
John,André, Chip and all, </span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">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.</span></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Richard</span></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">On Nov 23,
2017, at 12:19 PM,
John Williamson <</span><a
href="mailto:John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk</span></a><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><wbr>>
wrote:</span></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">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></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">Regards,
John. </span></p>
<div>
<div
class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:center" align="center">
<hr size="2"
align="center"
width="100%"></div>
<div
id="m_-7043474106834704785divRpF210496">
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">General
[</span><a
href="mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">general-bounces+john.<wbr>williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@<wbr>lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">]
on behalf of
Richard
Gauthier [</span><a
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">richgauthier@gmail.com</span></a><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">]<br>
<b>Sent:</b>Thursday,
November 23,
2017 6:36 PM<br>
<b>To:</b></span><a
href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">srp2@srpinc.org</span></a><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">;
Nature of
Light and
Particles -
General
Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b>Re:
[General]
Compton and de
Broglie
wavelengththe
"error"</span></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span><span
style="color:black">Hello André, Chip, John and all, </span></span></p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<h4
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:9.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span><span
style="color:black;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></span></h4>
<h4
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:9.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black;font-weight:normal">This idea is not fully developed
but is hinted
at in “</span><span
style="color:#232323;font-weight:normal">Transluminal Energy Quantum
Model of a
Spin-½ Charged
Photon
Composing an
Electron”,<span
style="background:white">“Electrons Are Spin</span>-½<span
style="background:white">Charged
Photons
Generating the
de Broglie
Wavelength”,</span></span><span
style="color:black;font-weight:normal">“</span><span
style="color:#1a1a1a;font-weight:normal">The
Charged-Photon
Model of the
Electron Fits
the
Schrödinger
Equation</span><span
style="color:black;font-weight:normal">”and “</span><span
style="color:#1a1a1a;font-weight:normal">The
Charged-Photon
Model of the
Electron, the
de Broglie
Wavelength,
and a New
Interpretation
of Quantum
Mechanics" at</span><a
href="https://richardgauthier.academia.edu/research%23papers"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="font-weight:normal">https://richardgauthier.<wbr>academia.edu/research#papers</span></a><span
style="color:#1a1a1a;font-weight:normal">. What I called a charged
photon in
theses
articles I am
now calling a
charged
half-photon.</span></h4>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:#1a1a1a">Richard</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div
class="h5">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">On Nov 23, 2017, at 8:52 AM, André Michaud <</span><a
href="mailto:srp2@srpinc.org" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">srp2@srpinc.org</a><span
style="color:black">> wrote:</span></p>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div
class="h5">
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">Hi Chip, and all</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">You write: "</span><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"
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><span
style="color:black">"</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">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.</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">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.</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">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.</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">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.</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">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.</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">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.</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">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:</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><a
href="https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/gravitation-quantum-mechanics-and-the-least-action-electromagneticequilibrium-states-2329-6542-1000152.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">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
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">Even though it involves an entirely new paradigm
that may feel
very
unfamiliar at
first, I hope
it
nevertheless
makes some
sense to you.</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="color:black">Best Regards</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal
admin</span><br>
<a
href="http://www.gsjournal.net/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:purple">http://www.gsjournal.net/</span></a><br>
<a
href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:purple">http://www.srpinc.org/</span></a><br>
<br>
<span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">On
Thu, 23 Nov
2017 05:16:52
-0600, "Chip
Akins"wrote:</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div
class="h5">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Hi All</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">But in all this, regarding de Broglie’s wavelength
and the
electron
orbitals,
there is still
something
missing.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">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.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">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></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">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.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Chip</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div
style="border:none;border-top:solid
windowtext
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt
0in 0in
0in;border-top-color:rgb(225,225,225)">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">General
[</span><a
href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:purple">mailto:general-bounces+<wbr>chipakins=gmail.com@lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">]<b><wbr>On
Behalf Of</b>André
Michaud</span></p>
<div>
<div
class="h5"><br>
<b>Sent:</b>Wednesday,
November 22,
2017 10:52 PM<br>
<b>To:</b></div>
</div>
<a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:purple">general@lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a>
<div>
<div
class="h5"><br>
<span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><b>Subject:</b>Re:
[General]
Compton and de
Broglie
wavelengththe
"error"</span></div>
</div>
<p> </p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div
class="h5">
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Hello John,</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">You are absolutely right.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><br>
<span
style="color:black">In
fact de
Broglie
derived this
relation with
respect to the
values of the
Bohr ground
state orbit
energy
parameters.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><br>
<span
style="color:black">Heisenberg
did the same,
except that he
formulated the
relation so
that it could
account for a
precision
drift of the
chosen
velocity on
either side of
the selected
velocity value
about the
ground orbit
of the Bohr
atom.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><br>
<span
style="color:black">In
1923, he
himself
expressed his
uncertainty
principle as
delta_x
delta_p
equal-or-larger-than
h, which is
the same as
delta_x
approx_equal
to h / (m
delta_v_x),
which is
fundamentally
de Broglie's
single valued
h/mv for the
Bohr ground
state orbit.</span><br>
<br>
<span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">This
is at the
origin of
Heisenberg's
statistical
solution.</span></p>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
<span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Best
Regards ---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal
admin</span><br>
<a
href="http://www.gsjournal.net/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:purple">http://www.gsjournal.net/</span></a><br>
<a
href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:purple">http://www.srpinc.org/</span></a><br>
<br>
<span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">On
Thu, 23 Nov
2017 03:17:31
+0000, John
Williamson
wrote:</span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">Dear
Albrecht,<br>
<br>
Your error is
more
fundamental
than you know.
See below in
green.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div
class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:center" align="center">
<hr size="2"
align="center"
width="100%"></div>
<div
id="m_-7043474106834704785divRpF178154">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">General
[</span><a
href="mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:purple">general-bounces+john.<wbr>williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@<wbr>lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org</span></a><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">]
on behalf of
Viv Robinson [</span><a
href="mailto:viv@universephysics.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:purple">viv@universephysics.com</span></a><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">]<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></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div
id="m_-7043474106834704785bloop_customfont">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Dear
Albrecht,</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div
id="m_-7043474106834704785bloop_customfont">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
<div
id="m_-7043474106834704785bloop_customfont">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">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></p>
</div>
</div>
<div
id="m_-7043474106834704785bloop_customfont">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
<div
id="m_-7043474106834704785bloop_customfont">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Sincerely</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div
id="m_-7043474106834704785bloop_customfont">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
<div
id="m_-7043474106834704785bloop_customfont">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Vivian
Robinson</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div
id="m_-7043474106834704785bloop_sign_1511389963683457792">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">On 23 November 2017 at 8:24:21 AM, Albrecht Giese (</span><a
href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:purple">phys@a-giese.de</span></a><span style="color:black">)
wrote:</span></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Dear André,</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">the "error" which I see for de Broglie is his
assumed
relation
lambda = h /
momentum .</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><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></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">This relation fails at any linear transformation.
Take as an
example the
scattering of
electrons at a
multi-slit. If
you look at it
from the rest
frame of the
multi-slit
then de
Broglie's
wavelength
describes
correctly the
generated
interference
pattern.
However, if
this situation
is observed by
someone moving
at the side of
the electron
the result is
completely
wrong. Assume
as an extreme
situation that
the observer
moves together
with the
electron. Then
in the frame
of the
observer the
electron has
the momentum =
0 and so the
wavelength is
infinite. This
means: no
interference!
But the
pattern does
of course not
disappear and
will be
visible to the
observer. This
shows that de
Broglie does
not even
fulfil
Galileo's
physical rule
of relativity
believed and
proven since
600 years.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Regarding the particle mass: My equation is simple:
m = h(bar) /
(c*R) , where
R is the
radius of the
particle. And
R can be
easily
determined by
use of the
known magnetic
momentum of
the particle.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">The mag. momentum of a circling elementary charge is
classically:
mm = (1/2)*c*e<sub>0</sub>*R</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">The mag. moment of particles is known. So, R can be
determined.
This R
inserted into
the equation
above yields
the particle
mass with an
accuracy of
about 10<sup>-3</sup>.
- This is now
based only on
the strong
force. If the
result is
corrected by
the influence
of the
electrical
charge, this
yields the
Landé factor
in case of the
electron. This
applied yields
the mass with
an accuracy of
2*10<sup>-6</sup>.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">References for this are:</span><a
href="http://www.ag-physics.org/rmass"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:purple">www.ag-physics.org/rmass</span></a><span
style="color:black">an<wbr>d</span><a
href="http://www.ag-physics.org/electron"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:purple">www.ag-physics.org/electron</span></a><span
style="color:black">.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Hope this explains it. Otherwise please ask.<br>
<br>
Albrecht</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><a
href="http://airmail.calendar/2017-11-18%2022:54:00%20AEST"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:purple">Am 18.11.2017 um 22:54</span></a><span
style="color:black">schrieb André Michaud:</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-CA">Dear
Albrecht,</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"
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
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-CA">The
same for de
Broglie in my
opinion, he
worked with
the knowledge
available a
the time.</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"
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
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0in"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"
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>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">---<br>
André Michaud<br>
GSJournal
admin</span><br>
<a
href="http://www.gsjournal.net/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:purple">http://www.gsjournal.net/</span></a><br>
<a
href="http://www.srpinc.org/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:purple">http://www.srpinc.org/</span></a><br>
<br>
<a
href="http://airmail.calendar/2017-11-19%2006:56:34%20AEST"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><i><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:purple">On
Sat, 18 Nov
2017 21:56:34
+0100</span></i></a><i><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">, Albrecht
Giese wrote:</span></i></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Dear André,</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">there is no
doubt that de
Broglie has
made great
contributions
to the
development of
physics. So,
if there is an
anniversary in
honour of him
and even the
Nobel price,
then as many
as possible of
his
achievements
are of course
presented.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">My concern,
however,
refers to a
specific
result of his
early
activities.
The assumed
necessity to
introduce the
"harmony of
waves" and to
deduce the "de
Broglie"
wavelength are
based on a
logical error
and on a
misunderstanding
of SR.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">It is a
quite funny
situation that
in spite of
this error his
result seems
usable to
explain
certain
physical
processes. It
is one goal of
my physical
activities to
understand
this. In one
fundamental
case I have
found an
explanation.
That is the
scattering of
electrons at a
double /
multiple slit.
If such
experiment is
viewed from a
specific
inertial frame
(the one
normally
used), de
Brolgie's
calculation
conforms to
the
measurement.
However in any
other frame it
fails. - I can
explain why
the de Broglie
wave seems to
work even
though it is
erroneous.
(Not here but
I can give you
a reference if
you want it.)</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Regarding
Hönl I do not
understand
what you say.
Hönl did NOT
get a correct
mass by
assuming only
the electrical
force in the
electron. He
was wrong by a
factor of
about 300 as I
wrote earlier.
But the
calculation
which I did is
correct with
high precision
and the
formula does
not have any
free
parameters,
only the
standard ones.
I do not know
any other
model which
has this. Do
you? Then
please give me
a reference.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Best
regards<br>
Albrecht</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">______________________________<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:srp2@srpinc.org" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;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"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:purple">Click
here to
unsubscribe</span></a></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div
class="h5">
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">______________________________<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" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:purple">richgauthier@gmail.com</span></a><br>
<span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><a
href="</span><a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;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:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">"><br>
Click here to
unsubscribe<br>
</a></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">______________________________<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" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">richgauthier@gmail.com</span></a><br>
<span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><a
href="</span><a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;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:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">"><br>
Click here to
unsubscribe<br>
</a></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<pre><span style="color:black">______________________________<wbr>_________________</span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at </span><a href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">phys@a-giese.de</a></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"><a href=</span><a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org/<wbr>options.cgi/general-<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org/<wbr>phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&<wbr>unsubconfirm=1"</a><span style="color:black">></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">Click here to unsubscribe</span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"></a></span></pre>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div
id="m_-7043474106834704785DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2">
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:center"
align="center">
<hr style="color:#909090"
noshade="noshade" size="1"
align="center" width="99%"></div>
<table
class="m_-7043474106834704785MsoNormalTable"
style="border-collapse:collapse" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"
border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="padding:0in
11.25pt 0in 6.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="text-decoration:none"><img alt="Avast logo"
id="m_-7043474106834704785_x0000_i1028"
src="http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png"
moz-do-not-send="true"
height="32"
width="32"
border="0"></span></a></p>
</td>
<td style="padding:.75pt
.75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#3d4d5a">Diese
E-Mail wurde von
Avast
Antivirus-Software
auf Viren geprüft.</span><br>
<a
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">www.avast.com</span></a></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">______________________________<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:srp2@srpinc.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">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"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Click here to
unsubscribe</span></a></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive
communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at <a
href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">mules333@gmail.com</a><br>
<a href="<a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org/<wbr>options.cgi/general-<wbr>natureoflightandparticles.org/<wbr>mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&<wbr>unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</footer>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" 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>
</blockquote>
<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:Wolf@nascentinc.com">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a>
<a href=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>