From Osher Doctorow

The keyword "Kerr" yields 522 papers on arXiv, including one the most
recent papers, "Kerry's gravity as a quantum gravity on the Compton
level," Alexander Burinskii gr-qc/0612187 (Gravity Research Group,
Russian Academy of Sciences Russia), 3 pages.

Burinskii has a fascinating argument beginning with the observation
that the Dirac theory of the electron and QED neglect the gravitational
field while the Kerr-Newman gravitational field has a very strong
influence on Compton distances while relating to electrons. The latter
polarizes spacetime, deforms Coulomb fields, changes topology.

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
large number are actually on Kerr-Newman and so closely relate to the
papers cited in the last few threads. There are also a few papers from
a Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
some really backward researchers in several departments) who is opposed
to the whole thing so to speak.

Burinskii argues that the Kerr geometry is actually implicitly assumed
and/or hidden (behind) in the Quantum Theory, and provides some rather
convincing indications of this. He describes the Kerr geometry as
representing a complimentary spacetime description.

The spin of quantum particles is very high compared to the masses, and
in particular for the electron spin S = 1/2 while mass m is of the
order of 10^(-22) in units G = h-bar = c = 1, so to estimate the
gravitational field of a spinning particle one has to use the Kerr or
Kerr-Newman solutions, contrary to ordinary estimates based on
spherically symmetric solutions.

Anyway, Burinskii like Oldershaw (see last few Sections of this thread)
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
"microgeon" model where e_spin and e_mass are related (e is electron
here, spin and mass are subscripts in my notation). Burinskii also
relates things to string theory, to which he is partial so to speak.
He has rather interesting explanations for why things look pointlike
rather than stringlike, for example complex representations of the Kerr
sources and recentlyobtained multiparticle Kerr-Schild solutions which
indicate that the theory of the electron is a multiparticle one.

Osher Doctorow

From Osher Doctorow

Burinskii has quite a few publications including in Sov. Phys. 1974,
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
of which have corresponding arXiv papers by him (sometimes several per
previously mentioned paper).

Readers can get more precise references from his Reference list.

Osher Doctorow

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
"KOsherD" wrote in message
ups.com...
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
From KOsher Doctorow
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
Anyway, Burinskii like Oldershaw (see last few Sections of this thread)
Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
"microgeon" model where e_spin and e_mass are related (e is electron
here, spin and mass are subscripts in my notation). Burinskii also
Burinskii has quite a few publications including in Sov. Phys. 1974,
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
of which have corresponding arXiv papers by him (sometimes several per
previously mentioned paper).

Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
Readers can get more precise references from his Reference list.

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
KOsher Doctorow

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
Burinskii has quite a few publications including in Sov. Phys. 1974,
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
of which have corresponding arXiv papers by him (sometimes several per
previously mentioned paper).
Burinskii has quite a few publications including in Sov. Phys. 1974,
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
of which have corresponding arXiv papers by him (sometimes several per
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
Burinskii has a fascinating argument beginning with the observation
that the Dirac theory of the electron and QED neglect the gravitational
Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
field while the Kerr-Newman gravitational field has a very strong
influence on Compton distances while relating to electrons. The latter
polarizes spacetime, deforms Coulomb fields, changes topology.

large number are actually on Kerr-Newman and so closely relate to the
papers cited in the last few threads. There are also a few papers from
asome really backward researchers in several departments) who is opposed
to the whole thing so to speak.

Burinskii argues that the Kerr geometry is actually implicitly assumed
and/or hidden (behind) in the Quantum Theory, and provides some rather
convincing indications of this. He describes the Kerr geometry as
representing a complimentary spacetime description.

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
The spin of quantum particles is very high compared to the masses, and
Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
in particular for the electron spin S = 1/2 while mass m is of the
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
order of 10^(-22) in units G = h-bar = c = 1, so to estimate the
gravitational field of a spinning particle one has to use the Kerr or
Kerr-Newman solutions, contrary to ordinary estimates based on
spherically symmetric solutions.

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
Anyway, Burinskii like Oldershaw (see last few Sections of this thread)
Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
"microgeon" model where e_spin and e_mass are related (e is electron
here, spin and mass are subscripts in my notation). Burinskii also
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
relates things to string theory, to which he is partial so to speak.
He has rather interesting explanations for why things look pointlike
rather than stringlike, for example complex representations of the Kerr
sources and recentlyobtained multiparticle Kerr-Schild solutions which
indicate that the theory of the electron is a multiparticle one.
previously mentioned paper).
It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
"KOsherD" wrote in message
ups.com...
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
From KOsher Doctorow
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
Anyway, Burinskii like Oldershaw (see last few Sections of this thread)
Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
"microgeon" model where e_spin and e_mass are related (e is electron
here, spin and mass are subscripts in my notation). Burinskii also
Burinskii has quite a few publications including in Sov. Phys. 1974,
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
of which have corresponding arXiv papers by him (sometimes several per
previously mentioned paper).

Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
Readers can get more precise references from his Reference list.

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
KOsher Doctorow

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
Burinskii has quite a few publications including in Sov. Phys. 1974,
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
of which have corresponding arXiv papers by him (sometimes several per
previously mentioned paper).
Burinskii has quite a few publications including in Sov. Phys. 1974,
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
of which have corresponding arXiv papers by him (sometimes several per
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
Burinskii has a fascinating argument beginning with the observation
that the Dirac theory of the electron and QED neglect the gravitational
Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
field while the Kerr-Newman gravitational field has a very strong
influence on Compton distances while relating to electrons. The latter
polarizes spacetime, deforms Coulomb fields, changes topology.

large number are actually on Kerr-Newman and so closely relate to the
papers cited in the last few threads. There are also a few papers from
asome really backward researchers in several departments) who is opposed
to the whole thing so to speak.

Burinskii argues that the Kerr geometry is actually implicitly assumed
and/or hidden (behind) in the Quantum Theory, and provides some rather
convincing indications of this. He describes the Kerr geometry as
representing a complimentary spacetime description.

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
The spin of quantum particles is very high compared to the masses, and
Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
in particular for the electron spin S = 1/2 while mass m is of the
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
order of 10^(-22) in units G = h-bar = c = 1, so to estimate the
gravitational field of a spinning particle one has to use the Kerr or
Kerr-Newman solutions, contrary to ordinary estimates based on
spherically symmetric solutions.

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
Anyway, Burinskii like Oldershaw (see last few Sections of this thread)
Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
"microgeon" model where e_spin and e_mass are related (e is electron
here, spin and mass are subscripts in my notation). Burinskii also
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
relates things to string theory, to which he is partial so to speak.
He has rather interesting explanations for why things look pointlike
rather than stringlike, for example complex representations of the Kerr
sources and recentlyobtained multiparticle Kerr-Schild solutions which
indicate that the theory of the electron is a multiparticle one.
previously mentioned paper).

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
"KOsherD" wrote in message
ups.com...
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
From KOsher Doctorow
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
Anyway, Burinskii like Oldershaw (see last few Sections of this thread)
Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
"microgeon" model where e_spin and e_mass are related (e is electron
here, spin and mass are subscripts in my notation). Burinskii also
Burinskii has quite a few publications including in Sov. Phys. 1974,
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
of which have corresponding arXiv papers by him (sometimes several per
previously mentioned paper).

Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
Readers can get more precise references from his Reference list.

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
KOsher Doctorow

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
Burinskii has quite a few publications including in Sov. Phys. 1974,
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
of which have corresponding arXiv papers by him (sometimes several per
previously mentioned paper).
Burinskii has quite a few publications including in Sov. Phys. 1974,
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
of which have corresponding arXiv papers by him (sometimes several per
Phys. Rev. D 2004, Grav. & Cosmol. (2004), J. Phys. A (2006), Grav. &
Cosmol. (2006), Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2007 - to appear), most
It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
Burinskii has a fascinating argument beginning with the observation
that the Dirac theory of the electron and QED neglect the gravitational
Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
field while the Kerr-Newman gravitational field has a very strong
influence on Compton distances while relating to electrons. The latter
polarizes spacetime, deforms Coulomb fields, changes topology.

large number are actually on Kerr-Newman and so closely relate to the
papers cited in the last few threads. There are also a few papers from
asome really backward researchers in several departments) who is opposed
to the whole thing so to speak.

Burinskii argues that the Kerr geometry is actually implicitly assumed
and/or hidden (behind) in the Quantum Theory, and provides some rather
convincing indications of this. He describes the Kerr geometry as
representing a complimentary spacetime description.

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
The spin of quantum particles is very high compared to the masses, and
Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
in particular for the electron spin S = 1/2 while mass m is of the
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
order of 10^(-22) in units G = h-bar = c = 1, so to estimate the
gravitational field of a spinning particle one has to use the Kerr or
Kerr-Newman solutions, contrary to ordinary estimates based on
spherically symmetric solutions.

It should be noted that of the 522 papers under "Kerr" in arXiv, a
Anyway, Burinskii like Oldershaw (see last few Sections of this thread)
Baylor U. researcher in Waco Texas (formerly of U. Tenn., which has
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
"microgeon" model where e_spin and e_mass are related (e is electron
here, spin and mass are subscripts in my notation). Burinskii also
relates macroscopic black holes to microscopic particles and in turn to
the old conjecture on Kerr spinning as model of electrons, a
relates things to string theory, to which he is partial so to speak.
He has rather interesting explanations for why things look pointlike
rather than stringlike, for example complex representations of the Kerr
sources and recentlyobtained multiparticle Kerr-Schild solutions which
indicate that the theory of the electron is a multiparticle one.
previously mentioned paper).