<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:16px"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12159">Mike and Arend, <br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_11820"><br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_11522">Thank you for your thoughtful remarks and descriptions.</div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_11530">I have three additional questions.</div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_11529"><br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_11528">1) When topological architecture reduces to zero-dimension, is there any way for 'information content' to remain, or does it simply vanish relative to all other parameters and dimensions?<br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_11124"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12209"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12208">2) Has anyone discussed or proposed entropy measures - strictly and solely in regard to distribution, rather than thermodynamics?<br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12160"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12164"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12163">3) When reviewing the complexity and partitioning of systems, can there be multiple 'entropy parameters', <br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12162"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12161"> or, is entropy evaluated only over the entire domain as a single factor~parameter net~sum?<br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12297"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12161"><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12296"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12161">James</span></div><div class="qtdSeparateBR" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_11125"><br><br></div><div class="yahoo_quoted" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_11526" style="display: block;"> <div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_11525"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_11524"> <div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_11523"> <font id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_11527" size="2" face="Arial"> <hr size="1"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> Arend Lammertink <lamare@gmail.com><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> General Physics and Natural Philosophy discussion list <physics@tuks.nl> <br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Monday, December 12, 2016 10:22 AM<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Physics] Discussion ‘new beginning’ in physics necessary'.<br> </font> </div> <div class="y_msg_container" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1481563141851_12210"><br>Thanks a lot for your paper, Mike.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Below the vortex ring consideration as being a "fundamental building<br clear="none">block", I see a more fundamental definition/consideration for "mass"<br clear="none">and "matter", as I replied to Thomas:<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><a shape="rect" href="http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/2016-December/000283.html" target="_blank">http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/2016-December/000283.html</a><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Fundamentally, "matter" should involve (by definition magnetic)<br clear="none">loops. The vortex ring is just the simplest example of such a loop,<br clear="none">which appears to probably describe the structure of a free electron.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Main point is that such structures can be described within the context<br clear="none">of a fluid-aether model, whereby the "loops" are described in<br clear="none">differential consideration as curl curl [v] at each point [x] in<br clear="none">Euclidean space.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Another key point is that in a vortex ring topology, there are two<br clear="none">axes of rotation, which are orthogonal with respect to one another.<br clear="none">Since the curl of one of these axes forms the other axis in a vortex<br clear="none">ring topology, this appears to be a key property any topology<br clear="none">considered as a candidate for particle models should have.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">This because of the problem defining/describing "+" and "-" charges in<br clear="none">relation to the Lorentz force described a few days ago in my<br clear="none">discussion with Zoltan.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">In other words: other "loop" topologies are certainly conceivable,<br clear="none">provided they are such that they resolve the problem just mentioned.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Best regards,<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Arend Lammertink, MScEE,<br clear="none">Goor, The Netherlands.<br clear="none">W: <a shape="rect" href="http://www.tuks.nl/" target="_blank">http://www.tuks.nl</a><br clear="none">T: +316 5425 6426<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 6:32 PM, <<a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:mike@mlawrence.co.uk" href="mailto:mike@mlawrence.co.uk">mike@mlawrence.co.uk</a>> wrote:<br clear="none">> Guys,<br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> You make it far too complex when considering vortex ring ideas. Just accept<br clear="none">> that rings can be made of numbers of fundamental particle/anti-particle<br clear="none">> pairs chasing/being chased and then all the properties like mass, spin and<br clear="none">> charge sizes drop out easily. I have given the hyperlink before, but the<br clear="none">> version pointed too is not the final proofed one and has some errors. So the<br clear="none">> correct version is attached.<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Cheers<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Mike<br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> On Dec 12 2016, Arend Lammertink wrote:<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> ,Hello James,<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 2:32 AM, James Rose wrote:<br clear="none">>> Gentlemen,<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> Where do biology, ecology, economics, information theory, etc coordinate<br clear="none">>> with each of your interesting proposals?<br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> *) Information theory;<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Hans wrote in his book:<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> "History shows that the course of development of science not always<br clear="none">> follows a logical route. The<br clear="none">> discoverers of the structure that acts as a candidate for physical<br clear="none">> reality were searching for reasons<br clear="none">> why one of the known topological spaces could be used as a base for<br clear="none">> modelling quantum physical<br clear="none">> theories. They discovered that the set of closed subspaces of a<br clear="none">> separable Hilbert space has the<br clear="none">> relational structure of what they called quantum logic and what<br clear="none">> mathematicians later called an<br clear="none">> orthomodular lattice."<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Since a Hilbert space is a generalizations of Euclidian space and the<br clear="none">> vortex ring topology has been suggested to be a fundamental structural<br clear="none">> base for a particle and/or structural model, it should be possible to<br clear="none">> define a dynamic "orthomodular lattice' as a generalization of the<br clear="none">> vortex ring topology.<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> The vortex ring topology can be defined using a number of parameters:<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> 1. The parameters describing the medium (density, specific modulus)<br clear="none">> 2. the Euclidian spatial parameters defining the toroidal ring vortex<br clear="none">> topology (r, R);<br clear="none">> 3. since the two rotational axes of this topology have a 90 degree<br clear="none">> angle with respect to one another and can each be defined by an<br clear="none">> (angular) frequency parameter, we get two spectral / Fourier /<br clear="none">> chronological parameters (f1, f2), with f = 1/(2 * pi) * omega, the<br clear="none">> angular velocity;<br clear="none">> 4 from the above parameters, the pressure distribution within and<br clear="none">> around the vortex ring is also determined, we get two dependent<br clear="none">> parameters, the pressure at each point within the ring vortex,<br clear="none">> naturally expressed in toroidal coordinates ( σ , Ï„ , Ï• ) {( \sigma<br clear="none">> ,\tau ,\phi )} .<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> These parameters define a fundamental structure in 2 + 2 + 2 + 2(*) =<br clear="none">> 8 parameters / dimensions, which can all be considered constant in<br clear="none">> differential equations, when r and R are taking in the limit to zero.<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> (*) According to Stowe ( <a shape="rect" href="http://vixra.org/abs/1310.0237" target="_blank">http://vixra.org/abs/1310.0237 </a>, eq 13 - 19),<br clear="none">> a vortex ring toroidal structure has a number of parameters and<br clear="none">> eigenvalues and can be represented by 2 parameters, since A and S are<br clear="none">> related for specific stable "resonating" "eigenvalue" "frequencies":<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" href="http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Main/OnSpaceTimeAndTheFabricOfNatureCharge#StowesChargeConcept" target="_blank">http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Main/OnSpaceTimeAndTheFabricOfNatureCharge#StowesChargeConcept</a><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> "A=4Ï€2Rr and S=2Ï€2Rr2 {R is the large toroidal radius and r the<br clear="none">> poloidal axis} and represents an intrinsic fluctuation of the<br clear="none">> quantized particulate momentum in the limiting volume element.<br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Since the structure has a number of stable solutions, in which<br clear="none">> "resonance" occurs (the "eigenvalues" of the sysem), it is possible to<br clear="none">> define these 8 dimensional solutions for this structure by 4 phasors (<br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor </a>). Re "real" part of these<br clear="none">> phasors then subsequently define the amplitude of the conjugated<br clear="none">> parameters, while the complex angles define their phase.<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Now our definition for the electric and magnetic fields are defined by<br clear="none">> application of the Laplacian and the Helmholtaz decomposition, which<br clear="none">> means that our definition for these fields can be shown to be<br clear="none">> orthogonal in differential consideration:<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" href="http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Main/AnExceptionallyElegantTheoryOfEverything#OrthogonalFieldDefinition" target="_blank">http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Main/AnExceptionallyElegantTheoryOfEverything#OrthogonalFieldDefinition</a><br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Since the vortex ring is defined using 4 orthonormal complex<br clear="none">> dimensions and it occupies a limited volume of space, a single vortex<br clear="none">> ring, fully defines a normed vector space within and in the area<br clear="none">> around the volume it occupies in 3D cartesian + 1 time coordinate.<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Subsequently, such a vortex ring:<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> * Has a defined momentum (p),<br clear="none">> * occupies space of volume (s),<br clear="none">> * and obeys Newton basic laws of motion<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> And since superposition holds for [E] + [B], it is possible to define<br clear="none">> two possible Sobelev spaces:<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sobolev_space" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sobolev_space</a><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Intuitively, a Sobolev space is a space of functions with sufficiently<br clear="none">> many derivatives for some application domain, such as partial<br clear="none">> differential equations, and equipped with a norm that measures both<br clear="none">> the size and regularity of a function.<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> I see two possible options to describe the distribution of such vortex<br clear="none">> rings across space:<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> 1. We assume that N such vortex rings are distributed randomly or<br clear="none">> according to a defined statistical distribution across space;<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> 2. we assume that N such vortex rings are distributed along a certain<br clear="none">> structure (for example: platonic solids) across space.<br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> For both of these distributions, we can define "bulk" or "average"<br clear="none">> parameter distributions using the continuum hypothesis, and thus<br clear="none">> fundamentally define a Hilbert space which intuitively describes a<br clear="none">> continuous medium consisting of "vortex ring" "molecules":<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" href="http://community.dur.ac.uk/suzanne.fielding/teaching/BLT/sec1.pdf" target="_blank">http://community.dur.ac.uk/suzanne.fielding/teaching/BLT/sec1.pdf</a><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> "At a microscopic scale, fluid comprises individual molecules and its<br clear="none">> physical properties (density, velocity, etc.) are violently<br clear="none">> non-uniform. However, the phenomena studied in fluid dynamics are<br clear="none">> macroscopic, so we do not usually take this molecular detail into<br clear="none">> account. Instead, we treat the fluid as a continuum by viewing it at a<br clear="none">> coarse enough scale that any “small†fluid element actually still<br clear="none">> contains very many molecules. One can then assign a local bulk flow<br clear="none">> velocity v(x,t) to the element at point x, by averaging over the much<br clear="none">> faster, violently fluctuating Brownian molecular velocities. Similarly<br clear="none">> one defines a locally averaged density Ï (x,t), etc. These locally<br clear="none">> averaged quantities then vary smoothly with x on the macroscopic scale<br clear="none">> of the flow."<br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Now we also proposed a possible definition for gravity along the<br clear="none">> Laplacian for [E]. However, when we take the Laplacian for [E] + [B]<br clear="none">> instead, we obtain a principle whereby the continuum hypothesis is<br clear="none">> described c.q. defined by the application of the Laplacian to the real<br clear="none">> part of our Sobolev c.q. Hilbert space at a given "resolution".<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> By re-apllication of the Laplacian to the gravitational aether, we<br clear="none">> obtain a new Hilbert space definition at at an increasing scale and<br clear="none">> thus decreasing "resolution".<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Theoretically, when we can define the inverse of the Laplacian, we can<br clear="none">> apply this inverse to our "Maxwell equation" resolution and obtain a<br clear="none">> decreasing scale and thus an increasing "resolution".<br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Further, Eric Verlinde published a very interesting paper called "On<br clear="none">> the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton":<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1001.0785" target="_blank">https://arxiv.org/abs/1001.0785</a><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> In this paper, he argues that information theory can be connected to<br clear="none">> "entropy" within a holographic model of the structure of physical<br clear="none">> reality, whereby the concept of "force" is shown to be directly<br clear="none">> associated with "entropy" and "information":<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> "Gravity is explained as an entropic force caused by changes in the<br clear="none">> information associated with the positions of material bodies"<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Since the basis of our aether model is the definition of a fluid-like<br clear="none">> medium consisting of discrete entities, called "momenta" by Paul, our<br clear="none">> vortex ring aether Hilbert space models have a defined entropy, which<br clear="none">> has a relation to, amongst others, "temperature" but also, more<br clear="none">> importantly to "information" and thus "information theory".<br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> *) Biology:<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Since our vortex ring aether Hilbert space models are defined as the<br clear="none">> superposition of discrete vortex rings at different "resolutions", the<br clear="none">> DNA molecule can be described in terms of "information theory" entropy<br clear="none">> parameters, within a Hilbert space with a suitable chosen<br clear="none">> "resolution".<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> This way, it can (eventually) be shown that the DNA molecule "encodes"<br clear="none">> c.q. represents a certain amount of information, within a Verlindian /<br clear="none">> Hilbertian holographic, orthogonal model of the structure of<br clear="none">> "spacetime" and thus further fundamental insight into biology can be<br clear="none">> obtained.<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> *) Ecoolgy:<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> While not directly connected to the proposal discussed now, Prof.<br clear="none">> Claus Turtur has shown that it is possible to convert "zero point"<br clear="none">> energy into directly usable "mechanical" energy, using the "static"<br clear="none">> electric and magnetic fields. Based on this theory, and the analysis<br clear="none">> of some devices claimed to provide "free energy", I proposed that<br clear="none">> "electrolytic capacitors" can *theoretically* be used as devices with<br clear="none">> which practical, clean and environmentally friendly "free energy"<br clear="none">> devices can be built:<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" href="https://steemit.com/science/@lamare/let-me-als-supply-this-to-the-public-domain-free-energy" target="_blank">https://steemit.com/science/@lamare/let-me-als-supply-this-to-the-public-domain-free-energy</a><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> At his moment, I do not have conclusive experimental data to either<br clear="none">> confirm or reject my proposal on that subject. However, I'm working on<br clear="none">> obtaining exactly such data experimentally. So, time will have to tell<br clear="none">> whether my proposal on this one is correct or not.<br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> *) Economics<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Sorry, this model is limited to physics. For economics, please study<br clear="none">> "Austrian economics" and buy some physical silver coins, while you<br clear="none">> still can. At the moment, silver coins are *still* readily available<br clear="none">> in Europe and the US in exchange for a totally worthless piece of<br clear="none">> paper with some nice pictures and the number "20" printed upon it. See<br clear="none">> for example:<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" href="https://www.milesfranklin.com/blog/articles/" target="_blank">https://www.milesfranklin.com/blog/articles/ </a>(in English)<br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" href="http://blog.thesilvermountain.nl/" target="_blank">http://blog.thesilvermountain.nl/ </a>(in Dutch)<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Such an *incredible* bargain won't last forever!<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Best regards,<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Arend.<br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> James Rose<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> ________________________________<br clear="none">>> From: Arend Lammertink<br clear="none">>> To: Hans van Leunen ; General Physics and Natural<br clear="none">>> Philosophy discussion list<br clear="none">>> Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2016 5:14 PM<br clear="none">>> Subject: Re: [Physics] Discussion ‘new beginning’ in physics<br clear="none">>> necessary'.<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> Hi Hans,<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> Thanks for the link. I'm going to study your book. Quickly took a<br clear="none">>> look, and I liked what I saw, especially:<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> "Some scientists start a research project that has as target to<br clear="none">>> develop a theory of everything. This is an implausible enterprise<br clear="none">>> because the target is far too complicated to be comprehended by a<br clear="none">>> human being. In fact, what these scientists pursue is the discovery of<br clear="none">>> a foundation, whose extension automatically leads to a theory that in<br clear="none">>> principle can cover all aspects of physical reality. I never had the<br clear="none">>> intention to develop a theory of everything. Instead I am interested<br clear="none">>> in the structure and the functioning of the lower levels of physical<br clear="none">>> reality. "<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> "what these scientists pursue is the discovery of a foundation, whose<br clear="none">>> extension automatically leads to a theory that in principle can cover<br clear="none">>> all aspects of physical reality. "<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> That's what I claim to have found. My equations, as I have now can be<br clear="none">>> found here:<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> Some very good criticism has been given by Zoltan, in the thread :<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> <a shape="rect" href="http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/2016-December/thread.html" target="_blank">http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/2016-December/thread.html</a><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> Basically, all the comments in the thread should be read by all whom<br clear="none">>> are interested in discovering such a "theory of everything".<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> I think I found the principle. But that's IT!<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> You state: "This is an implausible enterprise because the target is<br clear="none">>> far too complicated to be comprehended by a human being."<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> What if it is actually much simpler than we had ever could have imagined?<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> So, contrary to what you claim to be impossible, I claim it_is_<br clear="none">>> possible, because we simply think waaay to complicated and illogical.<br clear="none">>> Now I have convinced myself I found a fundamental error in Maxwell's<br clear="none">>> equations.<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> So, the question I would like an answer to is: Am I right?<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> Could physics be so simple and elegant, yet capable of displaying such<br clear="none">>> incredible views, images, movies right in front of our own to eyes?<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> Please consider reading all the threads this month, and the previous<br clear="none">>> months as well. I will read up opon them one day, and reply.<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> I think Nanian's proposal is worth listening to. That's basically the<br clear="none">>> model we use as the basis for our aether theory.<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> Best regards,<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> Arend Lammertink, MScEE,<br clear="none">>> Goor, The Netherlands.<br clear="none">>> W: <a shape="rect" href="http://www.tuks.nl/" target="_blank">http://www.tuks.nl</a><br clear="none">>> T: +316 5425 6426<br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Hans van Leunen<br clear="none">>> wrote:<br clear="none">>>> Nainan,<br clear="none">>>> Try TheHilbertBookTestModel by Hans van Leunen <a shape="rect" href="https://doc.co/WmxXCB" target="_blank">https://doc.co/WmxXCB</a><br clear="none">>>> Hans van Leunen<br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>>> ----Origineel Bericht----<br clear="none">>>> Van : <a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:matterdoc@gmail.com" href="mailto:matterdoc@gmail.com">matterdoc@gmail.com</a><br clear="none">>>> Datum : 11/12/2016 13:23<br clear="none">>>> Aan : <a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:physics@tuks.nl" href="mailto:physics@tuks.nl">physics@tuks.nl</a><br clear="none">>>> Onderwerp : [Physics] Discussion ‘new beginning’ in physics<br clear="none">>>> necessary'.<br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>>> Contemporary physics has far too many assumptions, virtual particles and<br clear="none">>>> imaginary forces. These lead to circular reasoning and often result in<br clear="none">>>> absurd theories.<br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>>> To be logical, in physics, there should be only one fundamental<br clear="none">>>> assumption<br clear="none">>>> and all physical theories should be based on this single assumption. In<br clear="none">>>> material world, existence of matter is nearest to absolute truth. Hence,<br clear="none">>>> existence of matter can be chosen as the fundamental assumption on which<br clear="none">>>> all<br clear="none">>>> physical theories should be based.<br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>>> ‘Action at a distance through empty space’ is the most illogical<br clear="none">>>> assumption<br clear="none">>>> used in physics. Various media were suggested / are used to overcome<br clear="none">>>> this.<br clear="none">>>> However, all alternatives are imaginary entities which are worse than the<br clear="none">>>> problem. Therefore, a ‘new beginning’ in physics is necessary.<br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>>> See: <a shape="rect" href="http://vixra.org/abs/1206.0048" target="_blank">http://vixra.org/abs/1206.0048</a><br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>>> Nainan<br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>>> --<br clear="none">>>> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *<br clear="none">>>> *<br clear="none">>>> * * * * * *<br clear="none">>>> All physical phenomena, related to matter, are logically explained by<br clear="none">>>> alternative concept, presented in 'MATTER (Re-examined)'.<br clear="none">>>> <a shape="rect" href="http://www.matterdoc.info/" target="_blank">http://www.matterdoc.info</a><br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>>> _______________________________________________<br clear="none">>>> Physics mailing list<br clear="none">>>> <a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl" href="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl">Physics@tuks.nl</a><br clear="none">>>> <a shape="rect" href="http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics" target="_blank">http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics</a><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>>><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> _______________________________________________<br clear="none">>> Physics mailing list<br clear="none">>> <a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl" href="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl">Physics@tuks.nl</a><br clear="none">>> <a shape="rect" href="http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics" target="_blank">http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics</a><div class="yqt9440992888" id="yqtfd82153"><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">>> _______________________________________________<br clear="none">>> Physics mailing list<br clear="none">>> <a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl" href="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl">Physics@tuks.nl</a><br clear="none">>> <a shape="rect" href="http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics" target="_blank">http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics</a><br clear="none">>><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> _______________________________________________<br clear="none">> Physics mailing list<br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl" href="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl">Physics@tuks.nl</a><br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" href="http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics" target="_blank">http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics</a><br clear="none">><br clear="none">><br clear="none">> _______________________________________________<br clear="none">> Physics mailing list<br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl" href="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl">Physics@tuks.nl</a><br clear="none">> <a shape="rect" href="http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics" target="_blank">http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics</a><br clear="none">><br clear="none"><br clear="none">_______________________________________________<br clear="none">Physics mailing list<br clear="none"><a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl" href="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl">Physics@tuks.nl</a><br clear="none"><a shape="rect" href="http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics" target="_blank">http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics</a><br clear="none"></div><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div></div></body></html>