It can be downloaded here... http://www.archive.org/details/serialuniverse032783mbpFolks on the list might really be provoked
and excited to read The Serial Universe
by J.W. Dunne.
Electricity
Re: J.W. Dunne
RMohan wrote:
J.W. Dunne
The Serial Universe is an excellent read.
Thin book. (But then again, so is "The Case Against the Nuclear Atom".)
Read slowly.
--- On Thu, 6/19/08, davelook (email removed) wrote:
Quote:
Thin book. (But then again, so is "The Case Against the Nuclear Atom".)
Read slowly.
--- On Thu, 6/19/08, davelook (email removed) wrote:
Quote:
From: davelook (email removed)
Subject: [RS2] Re: J.W. Dunne
To: (email removed)
Date: Thursday, June 19, 2008, 11:43 PM
RMohan wrote:
Quote:It can be downloaded here...Folks on the list might really be provoked
and excited to read The Serial Universe
by J.W. Dunne.
http://www.archive.org/details/serialuniverse032783mbp
-------------------- m2f --------------------
Original Post
http://forum.rs2theory.org/viewtopic.php?p=5526#5526
-------------------- m2f --------------------
Re: Fine Stucture Constant really IS 1/128!
davelook wrote:
Taking the SQRT of mp/me, you get 42.85, which is 128.55/3. Not sure what that means, but that's quite a coincidence.
From my post over at ISUS about Ionization Potentials, it looks like you need to take the SQRT of ratios to really compare them, at least for energy (or mass, freq, since there is always a linear conversion factor: c^2 for mass, h for freq.).Th following might be old news to you guys (the article is from 1997), but while I knew "high energy" experiments got values closer to 1/128, I hadn't ever read THIS!
From http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/pdfs/d ... 106-12.pdf...
From their data, the researchers obtained a value of the fine structure constant, a number
that characterizes the inherent strength of the electromagnetic force. As expected theoretically,
the newly obtained value of 1/128.5 is significantly larger than the 1/137 observed for a fully
screened electron.
“Ours is a clean measurement of the electromagnetic effect,” Koltick says. In higher-energy
experiments at other accelerators, the effect is swamped by additional factors, including the
strong force, which holds neutrons and protons together in an atomic nucleus and binds
quarks into protons and neutrons. Those factors make it difficult to distinguish the relative
contributions of the nuclear and electromagnetic forces.
Taking the SQRT of mp/me, you get 42.85, which is 128.55/3. Not sure what that means, but that's quite a coincidence.
Electricity
For awhile I thought that there was no way to get from Larson energy (as simply the reciprocal of c) to SI energy, without Larson's arbitrary "conversion" factor detailed in BPM.
We know that Planck's Constant over a "time period" gives energy, E=hf=h/t.
Since we also know that k*e2/r gives (potential) energy, how do we prove that k*e2 is a time period, which would make energy t/s?
Let's see what we get when we put it under Planck's Constant (h-bar, actually): 1.0545716 E-34 / 2.307077 E-28 = 4.571029 E-07
1/c = 3.335640952 E-09 (Larson's Natural energy unit)
3.335640952 E-09 / 4.571029 E-07 = 0.00729735253 (the fine structure constant!)
Now, this is really just a reformulation of the units which define the FSC, but it shows clearly that Larson was definitely right about energy being t/s!
It also shows that k*e2 is a real time period, much smaller than Larson time.
We know that Planck's Constant over a "time period" gives energy, E=hf=h/t.
Since we also know that k*e2/r gives (potential) energy, how do we prove that k*e2 is a time period, which would make energy t/s?
Let's see what we get when we put it under Planck's Constant (h-bar, actually): 1.0545716 E-34 / 2.307077 E-28 = 4.571029 E-07
1/c = 3.335640952 E-09 (Larson's Natural energy unit)
3.335640952 E-09 / 4.571029 E-07 = 0.00729735253 (the fine structure constant!)
Now, this is really just a reformulation of the units which define the FSC, but it shows clearly that Larson was definitely right about energy being t/s!
It also shows that k*e2 is a real time period, much smaller than Larson time.