the speed of light varies based on photon frequency.
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Jeff Driscoll <jef...@gmail.com> wrote: > as the electron gets closer the the proton for stable fractional states: > at n = 1/135 it is going near the speed of light > at n = 1/136 it is going even closer to the speed of light > at n = 1/137 closer still > at n = 137.035999 (i.e. the find structure constant, alpha) it is exactly > the speed of light > > any closer and it would go faster than the speed of light which can't > happen > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 5:30 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com>wrote: > >> Jeff, sometimes the conclusions drawn are due to an error of an unknown >> type. I suspect that the FSC difference that you mention falls into that >> category. Reminds me of the announcement by CERN of the neutrino speed >> exceeding that of light which was retracted once a hardware problem was >> resolved. >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jeff Driscoll <jef...@gmail.com> >> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >> Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 5:16 pm >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory >> >> >> >> >> http://io9.com/5642233/ask-a-physicist-is-the-fine-structure-constant-really-constant >> >> excerpt: >> About a decade ago, the UNSW team found, much to everyone's >> surprise<http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9803165>, >> that billions of light years away, the FSC was slightly smaller than it is >> here on earth. The difference is pretty miniscule, however, only about 1 >> part in a hundred thousand. In other words, the physics at the other end of >> the physical universe would look nearly (but not exactly) like it does here >> on earth. That means that the diagram above shows an effect about 10,000 >> times larger than the group actually observed. The signal is small enough >> that people are right to be concerned about whether or not the UNSW team >> got their errorbars right. >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 5:06 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com>wrote: >> >>> I guess that is what it boils down to Eric. I would much rather have >>> the series continue indefinitely as I have been discussing. i.e. >>> (1/2,1/3,...1/137,1/138...1/infinity) which would blend nicely with the >>> other integer portion that we all assume is real. If the total series is >>> found to be valid, then there is no special consideration needed for the >>> 1/137 term. >>> >>> But, we must abide by natural laws and most times they do not care what >>> we prefer. :( >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> >>> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >>> Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 4:12 pm >>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:55 PM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>> The theory is a photon like zitterbewegung model describing states >>>> that retain locality in phase space with circular cycles of a trapped >>>> photon representing the usual eigenstates. The Maxwell quanta hbar(c) >>>> becomes a classical angular momentum quanta in phase space with quantum >>>> number 137 attached. >>>> >>> >>> Ah, gotcha. Thank you. Hence also the electron "becoming a photon" >>> as it approaches the lowest level. >>> >>> Now we have to decide whether we can live with a series { 1/2, 1/3, >>> 1/4, ..., 1/136, alpha(N) }. (Or something like that.) >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Jeff Driscoll >> 617-290-1998 >> > > > > -- > Jeff Driscoll > 617-290-1998 >
