I would probably like to reconsider and reformulate this in hindsight On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 9:20 PM bobcook39...@hotmail.com < bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Only 2 POINTS ON A SPHERICAL SURFACE CAN HAVE THE SAME VECTOR DIRECTION > AND HENCE THE SAME VELLOICTRY, 0 velocity is not considered. One would > assume the same corrodent system for velocity defines the spherical surface > and its points. The 2 points would lie on a line that runs through the > center of the spherical surface at the surface. > > > > > > The statement assumes that the tenants of solid geometry apply to real > spcce > > > > Bob cook > > ----------------------------------------- > > > > *From: *Jürg Wyttenbach <ju...@datamart.ch> > *Sent: *Saturday, May 6, 2023 11:00 AM > *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Link between em and qm > > > > Stefan > > There is no such thing as a common velocity for 3 different points on a > sphere except for one axes angular motion (w instead of v) > > > J.W. > > On 06.05.2023 15:33, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote: > > I think the following paper illustrate an avenue to find the > > connection between EM and QM now take this link and explain Aspects > > experiment... How come we can define a normal 2000 century model and > > end up with no determinism and whatnot strangities. > > > > > https://drive.google.com/file/d/14G9U_Iee4jsppn0Rcp4A5BBrGDRkR5tC/view?usp=drivesdk > > > > I will blog in easier to understand format later. But really it's not > > a difficult stude, which is a good thing in my mind. > > -- > Jürg Wyttenbach > Bifangstr. 22 > 8910 Affoltern am Albis > > +41 44 760 14 18 > +41 79 246 36 06 > > >
