Dear Friends,

Earlier today I submitted the paper below to the same journal as last
time:

http://jayryablon.files.wordpress.co...a-klein-10.pdf

As I mentioned, following the not-scathing rejection posted earlier that
mainly said there was "nothing original" in my first (lengthy)
submission, I extracted only those results which pertain directly to the
connection between the fourth, compactified spatial dimension of
Kaluza-Klein, and the intrinsic spin of the charge leptons. Though I
came upon this result for the charged leptons (which caveat I went out
of my way to articulate in the submitted draft above), it will be
important to extend this to other particles as well, to demonstrate the
general proposition which associates intrinsic spin with the compact
fourth space dimension.

I thought you may be interested in seeing what I have submitted, and I
will keep you apprised of what happens. I have not yet revealed which
journal I am sending this too, though may do so next time, depending on
the fairness of the review.

Until a few weeks ago, I was unconvinced that there was a fourth space
dimension (many of you know I thought there was a second time
dimension), and I was especially skeptical of compactification. I have
done a complete turnabout, and now feel quite certain that there is
indeed a fourth space dimension, that it is compact, and that when we
observe intrinsic spin, we are observing a direct manifestation of this
extra dimension.

Unless I am convinced that there is something fundamentally wrong in
this derivation, I will vigorously continue to pursue publication of
this work. And, trust me, I know how to be dogged!

Best regards,

Jay.
____________________________
Jay R. Yablon
Email:
co-moderator: sci.physics.foundations
Weblog: http://jayryablon.wordpress.com/
Web Site: http://home.nycap.rr.com/jry/FermionMass.htm

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 21:20:44 -0500, "Jay R. Yablon"
wrote:

Dear Friends,

Earlier today I submitted the paper below to the same journal as last
time:

http://jayryablon.files.wordpress.co...a-klein-10.pdf

As I mentioned, following the not-scathing rejection posted earlier that
mainly said there was "nothing original" in my first (lengthy)
submission, I extracted only those results which pertain directly to the
connection between the fourth, compactified spatial dimension of
Kaluza-Klein, and the intrinsic spin of the charge leptons. Though I
came upon this result for the charged leptons (which caveat I went out
of my way to articulate in the submitted draft above), it will be
important to extend this to other particles as well, to demonstrate the
general proposition which associates intrinsic spin with the compact
fourth space dimension.

I thought you may be interested in seeing what I have submitted, and I
will keep you apprised of what happens. I have not yet revealed which
journal I am sending this too, though may do so next time, depending on
the fairness of the review.

Until a few weeks ago, I was unconvinced that there was a fourth space
dimension (many of you know I thought there was a second time
dimension), and I was especially skeptical of compactification. I have
done a complete turnabout, and now feel quite certain that there is
indeed a fourth space dimension, that it is compact, and that when we
observe intrinsic spin, we are observing a direct manifestation of this
extra dimension.

Unless I am convinced that there is something fundamentally wrong in
this derivation, I will vigorously continue to pursue publication of
this work. And, trust me, I know how to be dogged!

Best regards,

Jay.
____________________________
Jay R. Yablon
Email:
co-moderator: sci.physics.foundations
Weblog: http://jayryablon.wordpress.com/
Web Site: http://home.nycap.rr.com/jry/FermionMass.htm


[Hammond]
Congratulations, they sure can't say that paper isn't
original!
Now we have to wait until we find out if the powers at be
think that the existence of spin proves that the extra
Kaluza-Klein dimension actually exists; a question which
must have haunted Einstein in his idle moments for many
years after he first saw Kaluza's paper.

[Hammond]
Congratulations, they sure can't say that paper isn't
original!
Now we have to wait until we find out if the powers at be
think that the existence of spin proves that the extra
Kaluza-Klein dimension actually exists; a question which
must have haunted Einstein in his idle moments for many
years after he first saw Kaluza's paper.

Thanks George.

You know, your earlier comments about the Bohr atom are right on the
money, and I expect to run with that. The compactified dimension may in
fact be like a Bohr orbit, and migrate with better understanding, in a
similar way, into the wavefunctions that we now give to electrons that
used to be conceived in these planetary orbits. I will have more to say
about that later, but from one "amateur" to another, you have very good
physical insight.

Not ready to jump into your "God stuff," but when you stick to straight
up physics, you do hit the target.

(I will share a thought, though, that I had about your God stuff: There
is an old saying that you don't talk about sex in mixed company. Well,
I think a corollary to this is that you don't talk about God in front of
other physicists. ;-) A big part of your problem is that you brazenly
violate this unspoken but very clear rule of physics etiquette. My view
is that the very fact that there are clear and crisp equations which
govern the physical universe with absolute and unbending precision, is
in and of itself a sure sign of the intelligence of higher being that we
can only glimpse meekly through the fog of our human senses and all the
instruments we devise to extend our senses. I don't see what further
proof is needed.)

Jay.

"Jay R. Yablon" wrote in message
...
[Hammond]
Congratulations, they sure can't say that paper isn't
original!
Now we have to wait until we find out if the powers at be
think that the existence of spin proves that the extra
Kaluza-Klein dimension actually exists; a question which
must have haunted Einstein in his idle moments for many
years after he first saw Kaluza's paper.

Thanks George.

You know, your earlier comments about the Bohr atom are right on the
money, and I expect to run with that. The compactified dimension may in
fact be like a Bohr orbit, and migrate with better understanding, in a
similar way, into the wavefunctions that we now give to electrons that
used to be conceived in these planetary orbits. I will have more to say
about that later, but from one "amateur" to another, you have very good
physical insight.

Not ready to jump into your "God stuff," but when you stick to straight up
physics, you do hit the target.

(I will share a thought, though, that I had about your God stuff: There
is an old saying that you don't talk about sex in mixed company. Well, I
think a corollary to this is that you don't talk about God in front of
other physicists. ;-) A big part of your problem is that you brazenly
violate this unspoken but very clear rule of physics etiquette. My view
is that the very fact that there are clear and crisp equations which
govern the physical universe with absolute and unbending precision, is in
and of itself a sure sign of the intelligence of higher being that we can
only glimpse meekly through the fog of our human senses and all the
instruments we devise to extend our senses. I don't see what further
proof is needed.)

Pathetic.

On Mar 4, 12:09*am, "Jay R. Yablon" wrote:
[...]

(I will share a thought, though, that I had about your God stuff: *There
is an old saying that you don't talk about sex in mixed company.

You are just determined to be disagreeable about everything
aren't cha? )

Seriously... Kudos for your efforts and the best of luck
for a fair review on your paper.

If any revisions or future work includes some calulations
for these experiment:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern%E...ach_experiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeeman_effect

it would make for easier reading for those of us less
less informed about all the things that can curl up
in higher dimensions.

Kind regards,

Sue...


[...]

Jay.

Not ready to jump into your "God stuff," but when you stick to straight
up physics, you do hit the target.

(I will share a thought, though, that I had about your God stuff: There
is an old saying that you don't talk about sex in mixed company. Well, I
think a corollary to this is that you don't talk about God in front of
other physicists. ;-) A big part of your problem is that you brazenly
violate this unspoken but very clear rule of physics etiquette.

Its a very strange misbehavior to tell everybody about his own religious
believes. It christian fundamentalism, what is quite unusal here in germany.
Its simply impolite to bother people with that. You may- of cause- have your
believes. But missionary without the proper audiance is just strange. It is
possible to meet people, that react with physical violance if you start to
tell them about their believes are beeing wrong.

TH

On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 00:09:42 -0500, "Jay R. Yablon"
wrote:

[Hammond]
Congratulations, they sure can't say that paper isn't
original!
Now we have to wait until we find out if the powers at be
think that the existence of spin proves that the extra
Kaluza-Klein dimension actually exists; a question which
must have haunted Einstein in his idle moments for many
years after he first saw Kaluza's paper.

Thanks George.

You know, your earlier comments about the Bohr atom are right on the
money, and I expect to run with that. The compactified dimension may in
fact be like a Bohr orbit, and migrate with better understanding, in a
similar way, into the wavefunctions that we now give to electrons that
used to be conceived in these planetary orbits. I will have more to say
about that later, but from one "amateur" to another, you have very good
physical insight.

Not ready to jump into your "God stuff," but when you stick to straight
up physics, you do hit the target.

(I will share a thought, though, that I had about your God stuff: There
is an old saying that you don't talk about sex in mixed company. Well,
I think a corollary to this is that you don't talk about God in front of
other physicists. ;-) A big part of your problem is that you brazenly
violate this unspoken but very clear rule of physics etiquette. My view
is that the very fact that there are clear and crisp equations which
govern the physical universe with absolute and unbending precision, is
in and of itself a sure sign of the intelligence of higher being that we
can only glimpse meekly through the fog of our human senses and all the
instruments we devise to extend our senses. I don't see what further
proof is needed.)

Jay.

[Hammond]
Thanks for the advice.
When I publish my book:
THE
SCIENTIFIC
PROOF OF GOD
I'll send you a copy.
George

Jay R. Yablon wrote of George Hammond:
(I will share a thought, though, that I had about your God stuff: There
is an old saying that you don't talk about sex in mixed company. Well,
I think a corollary to this is that you don't talk about God in front of
other physicists. ;-) A big part of your problem is that you brazenly
violate this unspoken but very clear rule of physics etiquette.

Plus the one: Don't give your Nobel speech unless you've won a
Nobel prize.


--
--Bryan

George Hammond wrote:
[Hammond]
Thanks for the advice.
When I publish my book:
THE
SCIENTIFIC
PROOF OF GOD
I'll send you a copy.

Wild guess... going out on a limb here... correct me if I'm wrong...

Self-published?


--
--Bryan

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 21:20:44 -0500, "Jay R. Yablon"
wrote:

Dear Friends,

Earlier today I submitted the paper below to the same journal as last
time:

http://jayryablon.files.wordpress.co...a-klein-10.pdf

As I mentioned, following the not-scathing rejection posted earlier
that
mainly said there was "nothing original" in my first (lengthy)
submission, I extracted only those results which pertain directly to
the
connection between the fourth, compactified spatial dimension of
Kaluza-Klein, and the intrinsic spin of the charge leptons. Though I
came upon this result for the charged leptons (which caveat I went out
of my way to articulate in the submitted draft above), it will be
important to extend this to other particles as well, to demonstrate
the
general proposition which associates intrinsic spin with the compact
fourth space dimension.

I thought you may be interested in seeing what I have submitted, and I
will keep you apprised of what happens. I have not yet revealed which
journal I am sending this too, though may do so next time, depending
on
the fairness of the review.

Until a few weeks ago, I was unconvinced that there was a fourth space
dimension (many of you know I thought there was a second time
dimension), and I was especially skeptical of compactification. I
have
done a complete turnabout, and now feel quite certain that there is
indeed a fourth space dimension, that it is compact, and that when we
observe intrinsic spin, we are observing a direct manifestation of
this
extra dimension.

Unless I am convinced that there is something fundamentally wrong in
this derivation, I will vigorously continue to pursue publication of
this work. And, trust me, I know how to be dogged!

Best regards,

Jay.
____________________________
Jay R. Yablon
Email:
co-moderator: sci.physics.foundations
Weblog: http://jayryablon.wordpress.com/
Web Site: http://home.nycap.rr.com/jry/FermionMass.htm


[Hammond]
Congratulations, they sure can't say that paper isn't
original!
Now we have to wait until we find out if the powers at be
think that the existence of spin proves that the extra
Kaluza-Klein dimension actually exists; a question which
must have haunted Einstein in his idle moments for many
years after he first saw Kaluza's paper.

George,

Can you please send me your email address? I suspect it is not
.

Jay.