You give an electron radius of 193 fm, and the electron is said to be rotating at the speed of light (slide 7). In this sense you seem to be envisioning the electron as an extensive body of some kind, rather than a field with a probability density. Is it the outer radius of the electron field that rotates at the speed of light, or is this the speed of the rotation of the center? Is there some kind of shearing that arises from different areas rotating at different speeds? Or something else?
Hi Eric, I was away for a while, I am now back.
The description of the electron I give is not mine, comes from the Dirac equation reformulated through Geometric Algebra (totally equivalent) and reinterpreted in geometrical terms. You can have a look at the publications of David Hestenes like these ones:
Essentially the electron appears to be a point charge (or very pointy) which has an intrinsic rotation movement at the speed of light, which by the way should not make sense for charge sources. Anyway these properties of the electron emerged in many different papers by many authors. In the CF arena Holmlid leverages on the theory of Hirsch for the interpretation of his experimental results, and that theory uses an equivalent description of the electron with the same radius of 193[fm]. Some researchers propose a radius of 386[fm], the double, but the discussion is more or less limited to that. So the electron seems to have a size, and the reduced Compton length is not just a useful tool, it actually is the measure of a geometrical structure. The electron seems to carry a clock. When we see electrons travel at relativistic speeds, we also see the radius shrink exactly as SR prescribes. Sort of automatically.
The probability density and all the rest remains as you know it from QM. No difference. For sure, the ZB geometrical interpretation naturally “suggests” the localization of the electron and Hidden Variables ... But that regards the INTERPRETATION of QM, and could be for another talk.
The size of the electron is intermediate between the size of the nucleus and that of atoms. The size and properties of electron orbitals is determined by the ZB “essence” of the electron. The reason for the ZB rotation is unknown, but the electron has a structure, despite the so called Copenhagen interpretation prescribes not to consider it. Here the talk could be long and we would need to enter into Hidden Variables …
You say that nuclei are attracted to one another through magnetic attraction, arising from the magnetism resulting from spinning of charges internal to the nucleons (slide 4). How are we to understand the approx. equal binding energy between two neutrons as between a neutron and a proton? (Because of Fermi statistics, two neutrons cannot form a triplet state and can only coexist in a singlet state, but the singlet state is unbound.)
Here you are going straight into the core of the description of the nuclear force through the magnetic attraction. Very acute (seriously). Describing nucleons with one single rotating charge necessary ends with the contradiction you mentioned. But if you use three charges as the quarks’, you actually get that n-n is unbound, as als p-p. There can be binding only for p-n pairs. In other words the magnetic attraction mechanism (real or not as it may be) tells you that identical systems of rotating multiple charges can not have a positive binding energy. I am discussing these subjects in these months with Dallacasa and Cook.
With the Hyd, the electron is doing a spirograph-like pattern around the much heavier proton (slide 12). What happens to the spherical harmonics needed by quantum mechanics, within which an electron is normally confined? You say that the binding energy of the Hyd is in the MeV (slide 14) and that beta decay of free neutrons has a small branch that yields Hyds (slide 14). The energy of a neutron beta decay is ~ 782 keV. Is the binding energy of Hyds variable? Or is the binding energy actually below but close to the order of MeV?
Spirograph-like, that’s the English compact description I was looking for! Thank you Eric! Davidson suggested me the expression “racetrack” for the proton inside the electron ZB and you this. Sometimes a single word/expression is better than lengthy explanations.
The electron is confined into orbitals, which have angular dependencies structured upon spherical harmonics, only when it is “trapped” inside an atom. The electron in the Hyd is not trapped inside an atom. The Hyd is a neutral nucleus, free to travel through structures of charged particles.
About the binding energy: WELL SPOTTED! My latest understanding is that the binding energies of the Hyds are in the hundreds of [keV] range. So slide 14 is not up to date. I checked on my working version of the presentation and it had been updated, but the web version is still old. Thank you again. I will update soon.
You mention that Hyds should be able to travel more freely in condensed matter than neutrons (slide 14). Note that as a hydrogen atom is drawn into a metal such as palladium, the electron is stripped off and becomes unbound, because of its large cross section for interacting with other electrons in the metal. What keeps the electron bound in the case of the Hyd as the Hyd travels through a material?
Here i don’t know if I understand your question right. The electron in the Hyd is bound to the p/d/t through the magnetic attraction, which should be the nuclear force, and the binding energy is some hundreds of [keV], plus the Hyd is a neutral nucleus (it is not a particle). Chemistry is at energies far below and there is no chemical way to break the Hyd apart.
Hyd should be quite difficult to detect because they are neutral and do not generate “spectacular” (energetic) emissions when they cause nuclear reactions.
I haven’t done my homeworks reading what you suggested me. I will do it soon.