There is no electric field in nature, and there is no electrostatic charge on the proton and electron.
To understand this, I had to go a long way ... How did it start? After the death of the great and outstanding physicist of our time, honored inventor and designer of Russia - Afanasyev Vladimir Stepanovich, I rushed to seek support from the Russian authorities and scientists so that all the gigantic work of this man on the creation of "hydro wave technology" would not "flow into the sand". .. Analyzing the physics of processes in his "hydro-wave" installations, I came to the conclusion that there was no Coulomb barrier in these processes ... Then I came across the site of FM Kanarev. - https://www.micro-world.su/
Here are his articles in English - ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF MODERN PHYSICS, 1993-2020 - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/43mg/5i64hswxz
ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF MODERN PHYSICS, 1993-2020 - https://drive.google.com/file/…krPt51mE/view?usp=sharing
The main thing in this physics turned out to be that electrons have no orbital motion around the nucleus of an atom -
«The binding energy E1 of an electron of a hydrogen atom with a proton at the moment of its stay at the first energy level is equal to the ionization energy Ei, that is, E1 = Ei = 13.60 eV. When an electron absorbs a photon with an energy of 10.20 eV and passes to the second energy level, its binding energy with the nucleus decreases and becomes equal to 3.40 eV. This means that when the energies of 13.60 eV and 10.20 eV are added, the result should be obtained
13.60 + 10.20 = 3.40
but, it is absurd. How did Niels Bohr get out of this situation? He did it very simply. Arbitrarily rewrote the specified formula as follows
-13.60 + 10.20 = -3.40 (1)
and explained his actions by the fact that the minuses that appeared are the result of the negative charge of the electron.
Clever, isn't it?
And what is the real reason for the appearance of minuses in formula (1)? The real reason is that all the energies presented in formula (1) are only parts of the total energy of the electron, which had to be subtracted from its total energy Ee and formula (1) becomes
Ee - 13.60 + 10.20 = Ee - 3.40 (2)
Now it is clearly seen that the energy of an electron in an atom is a positive value, and equation (2) reflects the change only in the binding energies of an electron during its energy transitions, and the minuses before the values of 13.60 and 3.40 mean not the negative energy, but the process of energy subtraction, spent on the bond of an electron with a proton. Comprehend THIS ...
Let us write down similar relations for the transition of an electron from the first to the third and fourth energy levels.
Ee - 13.60 + 12.09 = Ee - 1.51 (3)
Ee - 13.60 + 12.75 = Ee - 0.85 (4)
From relations (2), (3) and (4) follows the law of formation of the spectrum of the hydrogen atom -
Ee - Ei + Ef = Ee - E1 / n2 → Ef = Ei - E1 / n2, (5)
where: Ef = hvf is the energy of the absorbed or emitted photon; Ei is the ionization energy equal to the energy of such a photon, after absorption of which the electron loses its bond with the nucleus and becomes free; E1 - the binding energy of the electron with the atomic nucleus, corresponding to the first energy level is also equal to the photon energy.
For a hydrogen atom, E1 = Ei = hv1 = hvf. Taking this into account, the mathematical model (5) can be written as follows
hvf = hvi - hv1 / n2 → vf = vi - v1 / n2 (6)
We have obtained a mathematical model of the law of formation of the spectrum of the hydrogen atom, which includes only the frequencies of absorbed or emitted photons, that is, the frequency of rotation of photons relative to their axes. And where is the frequency of rotation of an electron around the nucleus of an atom? There is no it. There is no rotational motion of the electron around the atomic nucleus!»
This is exactly this that allows us today to look at the microcosm with completely meaningful eyes and not with the eyes of madmen who are shocked by the uncertainty of the rotation of electrons around nuclei and who are forced to bear complete nonsense when you ask them an elementary question - “Describe, explain how two electrons make a connection between each other in the well-known "electron-electronic bond" in molecules, while one of them "dangles" in an indefinite way in the orbit of the nucleus of one molecule, and the other in the same indefinite way "dangles" in the orbit of the nucleus of another molecule? "
After this question comes a complete stupor ... And we calmly answer this question, since we know that electrons do not have any rotational motion around the nuclei of atoms - they rotate around their axes and are linearly related to the protons of the nucleus, since they sit on the axes of rotation protons, i.e. their axes of rotation are aligned ...
The Schrödinger equation contains statistical information about the position of an electron in a hydrogen atom and represents this position in the form of the probability density of an electron in an atom, which is depicted graphically as a sphere ... The biggest nonsense in this physics is the statistical information of the Schrödinger equation, which represents a hydrogen molecule in the form of two interacting spheres, imitating the probability of the arrangement of electrons in a molecule ... Well, how can one sphere symbolizing the disorderly rotation of electrons around the nucleus of an atom can provide an electron-electron bond with another sphere symbolizing the disorderly rotation of electrons around the nucleus of another atom? But in no way ... All these are fairy tales of relativists ... and this is the physics of vanity ...
I wrote an article - The use of the hydro wave method for the purification of aqueous solutions and thermonuclear reactions, December 7, 2017 - https://drive.google.com/file/…12BxqdNU/view?usp=sharing
The use of the hydro wave method for the purification of aqueous solutions and thermonuclear reactions, December 7, 2017 - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/27Ad/4bDGJ92rH