Wyttenbach, I gave you the example of electron capture in 40K, which shows that an electron must be transiting the nucleus, and I explained why this must be happening, giving the short reach of the weak interaction. There has never been a claim that an electron must stay inside a proton, and this is not what Mills says is impossible. Mills writes: "The Schrödinger equation permits the electron to exist in the nucleus, a state that is physically nonsensical with infinite potential energy and infinite negative kinetic energy." Electron capture shows that Mills is wrong.

@Eric Walker : I believe you mixup QM and QED we only talk of QM - orbits no other effects. My argument is simple. As the orbital probabilities (charge density, E,V) of the Schrödinger equction (e.g of Hydrogen) are based on the Rydberg constant (Radius). You would have to reevaluate the base in the moment charge is below Rydberg level. If charge is inside the nucleus, all orbits feel less charge than used to calculate the base radius.

I know that the integral over the charge density provided by the Schrödiger equation is correct in relation to the electron and Rydberg constant. But the equation does not reflect the (changed) charge distribution of the nucleus as a consequence of added electron charge (which would change both E and V of the Schrödiger Equation given based on constant e^{2 --> }finally goes to a_{0}).

For larger Z the added charge might be negligible, certainly not for Hydrogen.

I do not object that for mathematical reasons the electron must stay inside the nucleus, because otherwise the model would become awfully complex. I also like the simple explanation of tunneling probabilities, but the theory is not at all compelling and I would very much welcome amore logical model.