X-Message-Number: 21066 Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 02:57:28 -0800 From: James Swayze <> Subject: This about electrons that I wrote must have gotten missed References: <> > > Message #21060 > Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 06:25:13 -0500 > From: Thomas Donaldson <> > Subject: CryoNet #21051 - #21057 > > for Michael Price: > When I said that electrons may differ on some occasions by a > trait I called "hyperspin", I meant ELECTRONS. Our instruments > can only perform measurements to a certain accuracy. Say that at > present we have no instruments accurate enough to measure the > different energies of electrons caused by their hyperspin. > So we decide that necessarily such traits aren't present? Nor > would hyperspin create different particles, if every electron > could on one occasion or another have different hyperspins. > Just as the energies of electrons do not make many particles > with different energies, hyperspin would not make many particles > with different hyperspins. > > Fundamentally my arguments here bear on your claim that we will > NEVER find any trait which causes us to decide that electrons > differ. <snip> I suppose I should resubmit the long post that got sent to the archive without being allowed here because it seems only a very few read it. In it I already pointed to a now available technology that apparently, unless I am simply fundamentally wrong, already shows us that electrons differ. Please read the article at the following URL and make your own conclusions. http://www.eetuk.com/tech/news/OEG20010607S0020 Or simply trust mine which are that if this technology is not a hoax, chiefly that a laser can encode enough information to house even the entire library of Congress on the wave function of a single electron, then obviously an electron can be changed from its original form. I would then assume this means different from its peers. I assume so because if it meant that what actually happened, owing to the equality or in fact singleness of electrons-that only one exist everywhere at once--if that were true, then the gentlemen doing the experiment would not even attempt it except for proof of theory but certainly not for practical use. This is so because if indeed only one electron exists or that all are identical then a change to one would mean a change to all. This would negate the usefulness of using them for information storage because even across the galaxy, nay the whole universe, someone could read your data simply by checking one of their local electrons. Since they have stored information on the wave form of a single electron and are serious about such a storage devise I must assume it is therefore viable or else they simply have checked any other electrons and found their data already encoded there. What are the odds they would not have checked? James -- Cryonics Institute of Michigan Member! The Immortalist Society Member! The Society for Venturism Member! MY WEBSITE: http://www.geocities.com/~davidpascal/swayze/ While there follow the links to photos of me and some of my artwork and a radio interview on Dr. J's ChangeSurfer Radio program with me and the father of cryonics Prof. Robert Ettinger, author of "The Prospect of Immortality". A RELIGION I actually recommend: http://www.venturist.org A FAVORITE quote: Last lines of the first Star Trek the Next Generation movie. Capt. Picard: "What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived, after all Number One, we're only mortal." Will Ryker: "Speak for yourself captain, I intend to live forever!" Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=21066