🚀 go-pugleaf

                                          11-20-92
Dear Mr. Snyder

You wrote:


>Mr Abian:

>You have also stated that the only way to test this is to use a cosmic
>energy-meter coupled to part of the universe.  
 
  I don't remember saying "The only way" , I hope not !
  
>I have designed a simpler experiment with which to test your theory   

Mr. Snyder, if you are serious, I am extremely interested in your
project of building a "Local Cosmic Energymeter".  I would be very
grateful to you, since it will confirm my theory.


>Suppose I very accurately measure the energy levels of single
>electrons in a collection of identical systems here on earth.

>Now suppose, *100 years* later (during which time, according to your
>theory, ALL MATTER has been exponentially losing energy), I very
>accurately measure the energy levels of single electrons in an
>identical collection of identical systems here on earth.  (These
>collections being identical to that earlier collection.)

>We then compare the latter measurements to the former measurements.
>If the energy of all matter in the universe is exponentially
>decaying, surely we should be able to observe it in my electrons,
>should we not?  And such experimental confirmation would surely 
>win the Nobel Prize for you (the originator of the theory).

     However, there are at least 2 points that I would like very much
if you would elucidate, elaborate and comment on:

 (1)   100 years to wait, is too long !  I wish you required not
       more than a year.

 (2)   Also, you have to keep the original collection of single electrons
       for your second time measurement.
       You cannot have "identical" collection (nevermind after 100 year)
       but even after  2 hours. You have to keep the original collection.
       TIME affects everything, it leaves its depleting-energy stamp on
       everything. There is no "identical two things" - You should keep the 
       original collection (superbly insulated).

     Also, I would think that it would be advisable to consider the con-
tribution of energy to moving time FORWARD BY A MUCH, MUCH LARGER MASS 
THAN an electron (I know the fantastic measurements that you people per-
form).  However,I do not think that you will have sensitive enough instru-
ments and methods to measure the contribution of the energy on the part of
an electron for moving time FORWARD (I know you will disagree with me
on this point). Your results at an electron level will indicate 0 loss of
energy which would be utterly misleading.      


     With best wishes and regards,    
-- 
   The tendency of maintaining the status-quo, Reaction to provocation and
                The tendency of maintaining again a status-quo.  
    TIME HAS INERTIA  and some energy is lost to move Time forward  
  E = mcc  (Einstein)    must be replaced by    E = m(0) exp(-At) (Abian)