<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--></p>
<p><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<p class="MsoNormal">Albrecht:</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I have a tremendous aversion to believing
that the observer
(unless we are talking quantum effects where measurement
interferes with the
object measured ) can have any effect on the independent
“whatever it is” out
there. But physicists often confuse measurement results with
physical realities. <br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Regarding “<b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">The
relative velocity between charges does NOT determine the
magnetic field.”</b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jaxon Classical Electrodynamics p 136 states
the force
between two current segments is oin differential form</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-tab-count:1"> </span>d<b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">F12</b><span
style="mso-spacerun:yes">
</span>= - I1*I2 (<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">dl1</b>
● <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">dl2</b>)*<b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:
normal">X12</b> /(c<sup>2</sup> * |<b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">X12</b>|<sup>3</sup></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">now the current is charge q1*<b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:
normal">v1 = </b>I1*<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">dl1
</b>and q2*<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">v2 = </b>I1*<b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:
normal">dl1 </b>substituting means the magnetic force between
the two charges
is dependent on the dot product between the two velocities (<b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">v1</b> ● <b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:
normal">v2</b>). </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Furthermore Goldstien Classical Mechanics
talks about
velocity dependent potentials p19</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">And we all know the magnetic force is F =~ v1
x B12 while the
magnetic field is dependent on v! , so the force is dependent on
two
velocities.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Now your statement ‘<b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">But
the magnetic field depends on the relative velocity between
the observer and
the one charge and the observer and the other charge. Where
"observer" means the measuring tool.” </b>Is certainly true
because
one can always define one coordinate frame that moves with
velocity of the
first charge and a second coordinate frame that moves with the
velocity of the
second charge. So in these two coordinate frames each one would
say there is no
B field.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">However I see both charges in <b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:
normal">one coordinate frame</b> and that is how the
experiments leading to the
force equations were conducted. So I question whether your
assumption that
there are two coordinate frames and I assume you would like to
connected by the Lorenz
transforms reflects physical reality. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I reiterate the concept of fields even the
coulomb
field<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>is passed upon
the measured force
between a test charge <span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>Qt
and another
charge Qn. So that the total force on the test charge is</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-tab-count:3">
</span>F
=~<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>SUM over all n (<span
style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>Qt * Qn / Rtn<sup>2</sup>)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">And it is possible to introduce a field </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-tab-count:3">
</span>E
= SUM over all n (<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>Qn /
Rtn<sup>2</sup>)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As that <span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>F=
Qt * E</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Perfectly good mathematically. But to assume
that physically
E is a property of space rather than simply the sum of charge to
charge
interactions that would happen if a test charge were at that
space is a counter
factual. And not consistent with the quantum photon theory.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Which by the way I think is also wrong.
Photons are false interpretations
of charge to charge interactions. <br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">that is for another discussion</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">best wishes</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">wolf<br>
</p>
</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 2/26/2018 3:27 AM, Albrecht Giese
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:11f8cb71-1ee7-4a25-5a83-45a9eb68aa49@a-giese.de">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<p>Wolf,</p>
<p>my comments and explanations in the text below.<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><font size="-1">Am 25.02.2018 um
05:26 schrieb Wolfgang Baer:</font><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:52dd11be-779d-5b60-586c-75d49b237ba3@nascentinc.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<p>
<meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document">
</p>
<p>
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11">
<meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11">
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Albrecht:</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I think I understand your arguments since
this is what is generally taught, however I have always been
uncomfortable with the statements involving “observer”.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So I question your statement “<span
style="font-size:13.5pt">The different amount seen by the
observer can be calculated by the use of the force-related
Lorentz transformation - from the frame of the electrons to
the frame of the observer.”</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Now ancient experiments discovered that
there are two reciprocal forces between charges. The relative
distance R gives the Coulomb force F<sub>E</sub> and the
relative velocity gives the Magnetic force F<sub>B </sub></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-ignore:vglayout;
position:absolute;z-index:1;margin-left:161px;margin-top:17px;width:208px;
height:95px"><img
src="cid:part1.4EDD1391.DE6B248F@nascentinc.com" class=""
width="208" height="95"></span><span
style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Now if these are independent entities whose
existence does not depend upon any observation made by the
observer (until we get to quantum measurements) . <i
style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">This means the physics is
fixed </i>and so are the parameters. Any measurement made
by any coordinate frame when properly processed for its own
distortions will result in the same parameters, so R,V, F<sub>B</sub>,
F<sub>E</sub><sup> </sup>and yes the speed of light must be
constant. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-tab-count:1"> </span>If
the measurement results differ either we do not have objective
measurement independent reality or else there is an
unaccounted artifact in the measurement process.</p>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1">There is an error in your above arguments. The
relative velocity between charges does NOT determine the
magnetic field. But the magnetic field depends on the relative
velocity between the observer and the one charge and the
observer and the other charge. Where "observer" means the
measuring tool.<br>
<br>
The entities are not independent in so far as any observer will
see them in a different way. That is not a consequence of
quantum mechanics but very simply the consequence of the fact
that in a moving system the tools change (like rulers contract
and clocks are slowed down) and so their measurement results
differ from a tool measuring while being at rest. This is the
reason that we need a Lorentz transformation to compare physical
entities in one moving frame to entities in another moving
frame.<br>
</font>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:52dd11be-779d-5b60-586c-75d49b237ba3@nascentinc.com">
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I and QM claims there is no objective
measurement independent reality. </p>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1">That may be the case but has nothing to do with
our discussion here. </font><br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:52dd11be-779d-5b60-586c-75d49b237ba3@nascentinc.com">
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Lorenz assumed the coordinate frame dilates
and shrinks so that when raw measurements are made and no
correction is applied we may not<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">
</span>observe a magnetic field but instead a different
Coulomb field so that the actual result on the object measured
remains the same only the names of the causes have been
changed. </p>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1">You are permanently referring to coordinate
frames. But we are treating here physical facts and not
mathematical ones. So coordinates should be omitted as an
argument as I have proposed it earlier. </font><br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:52dd11be-779d-5b60-586c-75d49b237ba3@nascentinc.com">
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Now consider looking at the same two
charges from an arbitrary coordinate frame. then in that frame
the two charges will have wo velocities V1 and V2 but there
will always be a difference V </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-ignore:vglayout"> </span></p>
<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" align="left">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="89" height="16"><br>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><br>
</td>
<td><img src="cid:part2.38E5393E.29DE44F4@nascentinc.com"
class="" width="258" height="115"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"><sup> </sup></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><sup> </sup></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><sup> </sup></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><sup> </sup></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><sup> </sup></p>
<br style="mso-ignore:vglayout" clear="ALL">
<p class="MsoNormal">I contend that it does not matter what
frame you chose cannot get rid of the relative velocity. The
only way you can get rid of the magnetic field is if there was
no relative velocity in the first palace. And there never was
a magnetic field in the physics. </p>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1">As soon as the observer moves in the same frame,
i.e. with the same speed vector as one of the charges, he does
not see a magnetic field. In the deduction of the magnetic field
which I have attached (from a talk at a conference last year)
the magnetic force is defined by the equation:</font><br>
<img src="cid:part3.7976531B.FE67CCFF@nascentinc.com" alt=""
class=""><br>
<font size="-1">where v and u are the speeds of two charges, q1
and q2, , with respect to the observer. y is the distance and
gamma the Lorentz factor in the set up shown.</font><br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:52dd11be-779d-5b60-586c-75d49b237ba3@nascentinc.com">
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Therefore your further conclusion “<span
style="font-size: 13.5pt">As soon as an observer moves with
one charge, i.e. he is at rest with respect to the frame of
one of the charges, then there is no magnetic field for
him.” </span>Is only true if there was no magnetic field in
the first place, a very special case.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We must be very careful not to confuse the
actual physics in a situation with the way we look at it. </p>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1">I guess that you know the Coriolis force. This
force is somewhat similar to magnetism. It is in effect for one
observer but not for another one depending on the observer's
motion. And there is nothing mysterious about it, and also
quantum mechanics is not needed for an explanation.<br>
<br>
In your logic you would have to say: If there is no Coriolis
force then there is no inertial mass. But that is clearly not
the case.</font><br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:52dd11be-779d-5b60-586c-75d49b237ba3@nascentinc.com">
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">If we apply the same analysis to the
Michelson Morley experiment I think we will also find that
there never was a fringe shift in the physics. The physics
states charges interact with other charges, basta. Introducing
fields and then attributing what has always been a summation
of many charge effects on one test charge onto a property of
empty space is simply a convenient mathematical trick that
hides the physical reality.</p>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1">The MM experiment is easily explained by the fact
that there is contraction in the direction of motion. Nothing
more is needed to explain the null-result. In the view of
Einstein space contracts and in the view of Lorentz the
apparatus contracts as the internal fields contract. And the
latter is a known phenomenon in physics.<br>
</font>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:52dd11be-779d-5b60-586c-75d49b237ba3@nascentinc.com"><font
size="-1"> </font>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I further submit this as an argument that
mass and charge are fundamental physics and if there is to be
a CTF it is the tension that holds mass and charge together
when electro-magentic forces operating on charge densities and
gravito-inertial forces operating on mass densities are not
balanced and pulls mass and charge apart. I further submit the
the resulting fluctuations in the mass-charge densities leads
to CTF propagating patterns that are an ontologically
defensible interpretation of Schroedingers Wave function.<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1">An indication that mass is not fundamental is the
fact that mass can be converted into energy. On the other hand
charge cannot be converted into energy; this can be taken as an
argument that it is fundamental.<br>
</font>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:52dd11be-779d-5b60-586c-75d49b237ba3@nascentinc.com">
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="-1"> </font></p>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1">Anything still controversial? Then please explain.<br>
Albrecht</font><br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:52dd11be-779d-5b60-586c-75d49b237ba3@nascentinc.com">
<p class="MsoNormal">Tell me why I’m wrong</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Wolf </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" moz-do-not-send="true">wolf@NascentInc.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/23/2018 6:51 AM, Albrecht
Giese wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:cd0035cb-000b-d53c-4add-68bf5acc2f0d@a-giese.de">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<p><font size="+1">Chandra:</font></p>
<p><font size="+1">If two electrons move side by side, the
main force between them is of course the electrostatic
one. But there is an additional contribution to the force
which is measured in the frame of an observer at rest
(like the one of Millikan). In the frame of the moving
electrons (maybe they belong to the same frame) there is
only the electrostatic force, true. The different amount
seen by the observer can be calculated by the use of the
force-related Lorentz transformation - from the frame of
the electrons to the frame of the observer.<br>
</font></p>
<p><font size="+1">If the oil-drop chamber is in steady motion
this has primarily no influence. Important is the motion
state of the observer. If the observer is at rest with
respect to the moving oil-drops (and so of the electrons),
he will notice a contribution of magnetism. Any motion of
the chamber does not matter for this fact.<br>
</font></p>
<p><font size="+1">In general magnetism is visible for an
observer who is in motion with respect to both charges
under consideration. As soon as an observer moves with one
charge, i.e. he is at rest with respect to the frame of
one of the charges, then there is no magnetic field for
him. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font size="+1">Your example of two compass needles is a
more complex one even if it does not look so. To treat
this case correctly we have to take into account the cause
of the magnetism of the needle, that means of the circling
charges in the atoms (in Fe). If we would do this then -
seen from our own frame - both groups of charges are
moving, the charges in the conductor and also the charges
in the needle's atoms. So as both are moving with respect
to the observer, this is the cause for a magnetic field
between both objects. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font size="+1">Albrecht<br>
</font><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 22.02.2018 um 21:02 schrieb
Roychoudhuri, Chandra:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:BN6PR05MB32346522A179CDFD4D1D280F93CD0@BN6PR05MB3234.namprd05.prod.outlook.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]-->
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:210265128;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:1952207248 397949086 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-text:"\(%1\)";
mso-level-tab-stop:.75in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:.75in;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1027" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#0A2A92">Albrecht: Your
point is well taken. Not being expert in magnetism, I
need to spend more time on this issue. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#0A2A92">However, let me
pose a question to think.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#0A2A92"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#0A2A92">If two
electrons are trapped in two side by side but separate
Millikan oil drops, the two electrons feel each
other’s static E-field, but no magnetic field. If the
oil-drop chamber was given a steady velocity, could
Millikan have measured the presence of a magnetic
field due to the moving electrons (“current”), which
would have been dying out as the chamber moved further
away? This experiment can be conceived in many
different ways and can be executed. Hence, this is not
a pure “Gedanken” experiment. I am sure, some
equivalent experiment has been done by somebody. Send
me the reference, if you can find one. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#0A2A92"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#0A2A92">Are two
parallel current carrying conductors deflecting
magnetic needles (undergraduate experiment) different
from two independent electrons moving parallel to each
other?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#0A2A92"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#0A2A92">I have just
re-phrased Einstein’s example that you have given
below.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#0A2A92"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#0A2A92">Sincerely,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:#0A2A92">Chandra.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></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;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">
General [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]<b>On
Behalf Of </b>Albrecht Giese<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, February 22, 2018 2:26 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Foundational
questions Tension field stable particles<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Chandra,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="font-size:13.5pt">I like very much what
you have written here. Particularly what you say about
"time" which physically means oscillations. That is
what one should keep in mind when thinking about
relativity.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="font-size:13.5pt">However in one point I
have to object. That is your judgement of the
parameter</span> <span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:windowtext">µ</span>. <span
style="font-size:13.5pt"> I think that it is a result
from the historical fact that magnetism was detected
long time earlier than electricity. So magnetism plays
a great role in our view of physics which does not
reflect its role there. We know since about 100 years
that magnetism is not a primary phenomenon but an
apparent effect, a side effect of the electric field
which is caused by the finiteness of c. If c would be
infinite there would not be any magnetism. This is
given by the equation </span><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:windowtext">c<sup>2</sup>
= (1/ϵµ)</span><span style="font-size:13.5pt"> which
you have mentioned. This equation should be better
written as </span><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:windowtext">µ = (1/c<sup>2</sup>ϵ) </span><span
style="font-size:13.5pt"> to reflect this physical
fact, the dependency of the magnetism on c. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="font-size:13.5pt">The symmetry between
electricity and magnetism is suggested by Maxwell's
equation. These equations are mathematically very
elegant and well usable in practice. But they do not
reflect the physical reality. Easiest visible is the
fact that we have electrical monopoles but no magnetic
monopoles. Einstein has described this fact by saying:
Whenever an observer is in a magnetic field, he can
find a motion state so that the magnetic field
disappears. - This is as we know not possible for an
electric field.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="font-size:13.5pt">I think that we have
discussed this earlier. Do you remember?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:13.5pt">Albrecht</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Am 21.02.2018 um 00:00 schrieb
Roychoudhuri, Chandra:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><i>“We nee</i><i><span
style="font-size:14.0pt">d a geometry in which
both space and time are curved back on themselves
to provide a donut in which the forces Fem, Fgi,
Fcm,Fmc are self contained eigen states at each
action quanta. </span></i><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt">Does
any of this suggest a tension field you might be
thinking about??”</span></i><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:windowtext">Yes, Wolf,
we need to model mathematically the “twists and
turns” of different intrinsic potential gradients
embedded in CTF (Complex Tension Field) to create
stationary self-looped oscillations (<b><i>field-particles</i></b>).
Maxwell achieved that for the propagating linear
excitations using his brilliant observations of
using the double differentiation – giving us the EM
wave equation. We need to find non-propagating
(stationary – Newton’s first law) self-looped
oscillations – the in-phase ones will be stable,
others will “break apart” with different life-times
depending upon how far they are from the in-phase
closed-loop conditions. The successes of the
mathematical oscillatory dynamic model could be
judged by the number of predicted properties the
theory can find for the <b><i>field-particles,</i></b>
which we have measured so far. The physical CTF must
remain stationary holding 100% of the cosmic energy.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:windowtext"> However,
I would not attempt to keep the primacy of
Relativity by trying to keep the Space-Time 4-D
concept intact. If we want to capture the
ontological reality; we must imagine and visualize
the potential <b><i>foundational</i></b> physical
process and represent that with a set of algebraic
symbols and call them the primary parameters of
“different grades”. During constructing mathematical
theories, it is of prime importance to introduce
consciously this concept of “primary”, vs.
“secondary”, vs. “tertiary”, etc., physical
parameters related to any observable physical
phenomenon. The physical parameter that dictates the
core existence of an entity in nature should be
considered as primary. However, it is not going to
be easy because of the complexities in the different
interaction processes – different parameters take
key role in transferring the energy in different
interactions. Besides, our ignorance is still
significantly broad compared to the “validated”
knowledge we have gathered about our universe. Here
is a glaring example. νλ = c = (1/ϵµ). If I am doing
atomic physics, ν is of primary importance because
of the quantum resonance with ν and the QM energy
exchange rule is “hν”. “λ” changes from medium to
medium. If I am doing Astrophysics, ϵ and µ for free
space, are of primary significance; even though
people tend to use “c”, while missing out the
fundamental roles of ϵ and µ as some of the core
building blocks of the universe. Funny thing is that
the ϵ and µ of free space were recognized well
before Maxwell synthesized Electromagnetism.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:windowtext"> With
this background, I want underscore that the “running
time, “t” is of critical importance in our
formulation of the dynamic universe. And, yet “t’ is
not a directly measurable physical parameter of any
object in this universe. What we measure is really
the frequency, or its inverse, the oscillation
periods of different physical oscillators in this
universe. So, frequency can be dilated or contracted
by controlling the ambient physical parameter of the
environment that surrounds and INFLUENCES the
oscillator. The running time cannot be dilated or
contracted; even though Minkowsky introduced this
“dilation” concept. This is the reason why I have
been pushing for the introduction in physics
thinking the Interaction Process Mapping
Epistemology (IPM-E). </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:windowtext"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;color:windowtext">Chandra.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></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;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">
General [<a
href="mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>]<b>On
Behalf Of </b>Wolfgang Baer<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, February 19, 2018 10:56 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Foundational
questions Tension field stable particles</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Candra:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:.5in"> Let’s
consider your tension filed is a medium underlying the
experience of space composed of charge and mass
density spread out in the cross-section of a time
loop.. Coordinate frame cells of <i>small enough</i>
sizes can be described by constant enough mass and
charge densities in each cell. For small enough cells
the mass and charge values concentrated at their
centers may be used in stead of the densities. The
resulting field of center values can take any pattern
that satisfies the extended dAlambert principle.
Besides the classic electro-magnetic Fem and
gravito-inertial force Fgi I postulate forces tat hold
charge and mass together Fcm, Fmc. This condition
assures mass charge centers in each cell appear at
locations of balanced forces. Each pattern which
satisfies this condition represents a static state of
the loop in which the patterns are fixed for the
lifetime of the loop.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b> </b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>The Charge-Mass Separation
Vector and Equilibrium States</b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:.5in">The
physical size of the space is its volume. The volume
(Vol) of space is the sum of the infinitesimal volumes
dVol of each of the cells composing that space “Vol =
∫<sub>all space</sub> dVol”. These infinitesimal
volumes are calculated from the mass-charge density
extensions in each cell when viewed externally as
shown in figure 4.3-3a . The physical volume depends
upon the mass charge separation pattern of the
equilibrium state the system being modeled exists in.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> In CAT the extension of
a cell can be calculated as follows. In each cell the
distance between the center of charge and mass is a
vector d<b>ζ.</b> The projection of this vector onto
the degrees of freedom directions available for the
charge and mass to move in the generalized coordinate
space allows us to expansion this vector as, <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Eq. 4.3-1 <b>dζ
=</b> dζ<sub>t</sub><b>∙u<sub>t</sub></b> + dζ<sub>x</sub><b>∙u<sub>x</sub>
</b>+ dζ<sub>y</sub><b>∙u<sub>y</sub> </b>+ dζ<sub>z</sub><b>∙u<sub>z</sub>
+…</b> dζ<sub>f</sub><b>∙u<sub>f</sub> +…,</b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b> </b>where the <b>u<sub>f</sub></b>’s
are the unit vectors. A space limited to Cartesian
3-space is characterized by three x,y,z directions,
but CAT models a generalized space that encompasses
all sensor modalities not only the optical ones. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> The volume of a cell
calculated from the diagonal expansion vector “<b>dζ”</b>
by multiplying all non zero coefficients,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Eq. 4.3-2 dVol
= dζ<sub>t</sub><b>∙</b>dζ<sub>x</sub><b>∙</b>dζ<sub>y</sub><b>∙</b>dζ<sub>z</sub><b>∙…∙</b>dζ<sub>f</sub><b>∙…
.</b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> The shape of this
volume is determined by the direction of the expansion
vector which in turn is determined by the direction
and strength of forces pulling the charge and mass
apart. The direction of pull depends upon the number
of dimensions available in the generalized coordinates
of the media. The forces must be in equilibrium but
exact equilibrium pattern depends upon which global
loop equilibrium state “Ζ” the event being modeled is
in. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> In the simplest
equilibrium state the masses and charges are
collocated. This implies the internal forward
propagating in time forces F<sub>cm</sub>,F<sub>mc</sub>,
and backward propagating in time force F<sub>mc</sub>*,F<sub>cm</sub>*
are zero, and if there are no internal force pulling
the charges and masses together then sum of the
remaining exterior gravito-electric forces pulling the
charge and mass apart must separately be zero
precisely at the collocation point. A trivial
condition that satisfies these equations is when all
forces are zero. In this case there is no action in
the media and no action for expanding the coordinate
frame defining a volume of space. We are back to a
formless blob of zero volume, where all charges and
masses are at the same point. This is the absolute
ground state of material, one level of something above
nothing. The big bang before the energy of action
flow is added. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:.5in"><!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shapetype id="_x0000_t75" coordsize="21600,21600" o:spt="75" o:preferrelative="t" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" filled="f" stroked="f">
<v:stroke joinstyle="miter" />
<v:formulas>
<v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0" />
<v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0" />
<v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1" />
<v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2" />
<v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth" />
<v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight" />
<v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1" />
<v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2" />
<v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth" />
<v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0" />
<v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight" />
<v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0" />
</v:formulas>
<v:path o:extrusionok="f" gradientshapeok="t" o:connecttype="rect" />
<o:lock v:ext="edit" aspectratio="t" />
</v:shapetype><v:shape id="_x0000_s1026" type="#_x0000_t75" alt="" style='position:absolute;left:0;text-align:left;margin-left:0;margin-top:0;width:190.5pt;height:187.5pt;z-index:251658240;mso-wrap-distance-left:0;mso-wrap-distance-top:0;mso-wrap-distance-right:0;mso-wrap-distance-bottom:0;mso-position-horizontal:left;mso-position-horizontal-relative:text;mso-position-vertical-relative:line' o:allowoverlap="f">
<v:imagedata src="mailbox:///C:/Users/AL/AppData/Roaming/Thunderbird/Profiles/lthhzma2.default/Mail/pop3.strato-12.de/Inbox?number=6035&header=quotebody&part=1.1.2&filename=image001.gif" o:title="part1.89B7AF17.E7420CB4@a-giese" />
<w:wrap type="square"/>
</v:shape><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><img
style="width:2.6458in;height:2.6041in"
src="cid:part9.50D8E204.161EA5DB@nascentinc.com"
v:shapes="_x0000_s1026" class="" align="left"
width="254" height="250"><!--[endif]-->To exemplify
the methods we consider an equilibrium state of a
single isolated cell whose only degree of freedom is
the time direction. This means the volume in all space
directions are infinitesimally small and the volume
can be considered a single line of extension “ΔVol =
ΔT<sub>w</sub> = ∫dζ<sub><span
style="font-size:14.0pt">t</span></sub><span
style="font-size:14.0pt"> “ </span>along the time
direction as shown in the god’s eye perspective of
figure 4.3-6. In this situation we can consider
charges and masses to be point particles. Forces as
well as action can only propagate along the material
length of the line time line represented in space as
“Qw”. We now list the sequence of changes that can
propagate through around the equilibrium positions
indicated by numbers in parenthesis.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:.75in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0
level1 lfo2">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-list:Ignore">(1)<span
style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span><!--[endif]-->The
upper charge is pushed from its equilibrium position
(filled icon) forward along the time line<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:.75in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0
level1 lfo2">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-list:Ignore">(2)<span
style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span><!--[endif]-->It
exerts a force “Fem” on the left charge pushing it
forward while feeling a reaction force “Fem*” that
retards it back to its equilibrium position<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:.75in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0
level1 lfo2">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-list:Ignore">(3)<span
style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span><!--[endif]-->While
the left charge is moved from equilibrium it exerts an
internal “Fcm” force on the bottom mass while feeling
a reaction force “Fcm*” which returns it to
equilibrium.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:.75in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0
level1 lfo2">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-list:Ignore">(4)<span
style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span><!--[endif]-->While
the bottom mass is moved from equilibrium it exerts a
force “Fgi” on the right mass while feeling a reaction
force “Fgi*” which returns it to equilibrium.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:.75in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0
level1 lfo2">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-list:Ignore">(5)<span
style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span><!--[endif]-->While
the right mass is moved from equilibrium it exerts a
force “Fmc” on the upper charge while feeling a
reaction force “Fmc*” which returns it to
equilibrium. We are now back to (1).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:.5in">If the
system is isolated there is no dissipation into other
degrees of freedom and the oscillation continues to
move as a compression wave around the “Qw” time line
circumference forever. The graph however is static and
shows a fixed amount of action indicated by the shaded
arrows around the time line. Motion in “block” models
is produced by the velocity of the observer or model
operator as he moves around the time line. From our
god’s eye perspective an action density is permanently
painted on the clock dial and thereby describes an
total event. The last degree of freedom events are
rather trivial <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> We need a geometry in
which both space and time are curved back on
themselves to provide a donut in which the forces Fem,
Fgi, Fcm,Fmc are self contained eigen states at each
action quanta. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Does any of this suggest a tension
field you might be thinking about??<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>Dr. Wolfgang Baer<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Research Director<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Nascent Systems Inc.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>E-mail <a href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com" moz-do-not-send="true">wolf@NascentInc.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 1/24/2018 7:20 PM,
Roychoudhuri, Chandra wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">1. Yes, I have submitted an
essay. FQXi has not sent the approval link yet. <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">2. Replacement of our SPIE
conf. Without a supporting infrastructure to
replace SPIE-like support, it is very difficult to
manage. I will try NSF during the last week of
May. Do you want to start negotiating with some
out-of-box European groups? <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">3. Re-starting afresh from the
bottom up is the only way to start re-building a
unified field theory. It is futile to force-fit
whole bunch of different theories that were
structured differently at different states of
human cultural epoch.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div id="AppleMailSignature">
<p class="MsoNormal">Sent from my iPhone<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
On Jan 24, 2018, at 6:08 PM, Wolfgang Baer <<a
href="mailto:wolf@nascentinc.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">wolf@nascentinc.com</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p>Chandra:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Just rereading your 2015 paper "Urgency of
evolution..."<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>I love the sentiment " This is a good time to
start iteratively re-evaluating and
restructuring all the foundational postulates
behind all the working theories"<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Did you write a paper for FQXi?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>I sent one in <a
href="https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3043"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3043</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<pre><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Is there any chance to get a replacement for the SPIE conference, one that would expand the questions </span><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><span style="font-size:13.5pt">beyond the nature of light?</span><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><span style="font-size:13.5pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Wolf</span><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre> <o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>-- <o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Dr. Wolfgang Baer<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Research Director<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Nascent Systems Inc.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>E-mail <a href="mailto:wolf@NascentInc.com" moz-do-not-send="true">wolf@NascentInc.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication
from the Nature of Light and Particles General
Discussion List at <a
href="mailto:chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu"
moz-do-not-send="true">chandra.roychoudhuri@uconn.edu</a><br>
<a href="<a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/chandra.roychoudhuri%40uconn.edu?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/chandra.roychoudhuri%40uconn.edu?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:Wolf@nascentinc.com" moz-do-not-send="true">Wolf@nascentinc.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href=<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" moz-do-not-send="true">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre></a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>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" moz-do-not-send="true">phys@a-giese.de</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href=<a 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>><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre></a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</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" moz-do-not-send="true">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" moz-do-not-send="true">"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>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>