The charge of the electron is "really round" not the electron.

"Electrons are really, really round.

A new measurement confirms the subatomic particle’s spherical shape to a record level of exactness, physicists report in the July 7 Science.

That near-perfect roundness deepens the mystery behind how the universe came to be filled with matter as opposed to its counterpart, antimatter. Any asymmetry in the electron’s shape, namely the distribution of the particle’s electric charge, would point to a related asymmetry in the laws of nature, one that could explain this feature of the cosmos."

Electrons are extremely round, a new measurement confirms

The near-perfect roundness deepens the mystery behind how the universe came to be filled with matter as opposed to antimatter.

www.sciencenews.org

Quote from fabrice DAVID

Has anyone seen my razor?

Ockham's razor and the interpretations of quantum mechanics

Quote from Wyttenbach

Here you can use the classic magnetic mass formula with the contribution of the three wave parts.

(10) M_p (eV) = µ_p²*µ₀/(α* π* r_pr ³*e*(3FC*2FC*1FC)³ *(1-(α/(π*16)))²)

What is the definition of FC (Flux Compression) ?

Could you write an equation that exactly defines FC ?

"The standard model is a mad house that ignores real physics."

Indeed the title of the video was "21 Reasons Protons Cannot Contain Quarks"

21 Reasons Protons Cannot Contain Quarks

"My name is Ray Fleming and I have been conducting research in quantum field theory for 30 years. We known from scattering experiments that the proton has a shell of quantum fluctuations at its charge radius. It turns out that the protons charge magnitude, spin, magnetic moment, radius and mass can all be accounted for as quantum field properties that emerge from this spherical shell structure. The bare proton in the middle only has to polarize with respect to electric charge and matter-antimatter."

Quote from Wyttenbach

This has been done with the strong force equation.

ok, but an an equation is worth more than thousand words.

I meant something like

m_p = ...

where on the right hand side we have only geometric and/or electromagnetic parameters (radii, magnetic fluxes, electromagnetic potentials e etc...)

Quote from Wyttenbach

I did it for the proton.

so, please, write an equation that relates proton mass, charge and magnetic flux, using only geometric and electromagnetic concepts

Webinar: 30 June 2023 (7:00 am CEST): Towards Clifford Algebra, Geometry, and Information Science Foundations of Theoretical Physics, including Social Aspects

Mathematics

Mathematics, an international, peer-reviewed Open Access journal.

www.mdpi.com

Quote from Wyttenbach

Only problem: What force does bend the flux (charge..)

In the real world one has to show how an eternal B/E field combination topologically looks like. Just using induce charge not the axiom charge...

so please write an equation that relates electron mass, charge and magnetic flux

Sabine Hossenfelder

"In this video I explain why building a next larger particle collider will most likely not tell us anything about dark matter and why, therefore, claims by prominent particle physicists that dark matter would be a "guaranteed result" are misleading."

Particle Physicists Continue Empty Promises

A new preprint on electron structure

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371909768_The_Structure_of_the_Electron_Revealed_by_the_Schwinger_Limits

ABSTRACT: This work suggests that the electron charge has a toroidal structure. An electromagnetic field defined by the Schwinger limits attends the Maxwell’s equations demonstrating that the energy of a free electron at rest is determined by the electromagnetic wave with energy within the cosmic ray spectrum. The electron spin taking the Schwinger anomalous magnetic moment into account is naturally found. The model shows that the electron charge travels at the speed of light in helical paths when orbiting the Bohr atom. The results also show that the kinetic energy of the electron mass is splitted from the energy of the electron charge.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Please once try to show us how the "alleged" strong force is generated in your model not just somehow use it...

The electromagnetic nature of strong force is an interesting argument, however I was asking about Newton's law for an electron. An electron in a uniform electric field E is subjected to an acceleration a = F/m = eE/m. Is there an electron model that explains it?

Quote from Wyttenbach

You mix up macroscopic physics (bulk mass) with the origin of mass.

F=ma is valid for microscopic objects (as electrons) and macroscopic objects, isn't it?

A realistic electron electromagnetic-Zitterbewegung model should explain it

Quote from Wyttenbach

The only exchangeable & quantifiable form of energy is photons = EM radiation. For this physics works as known. Restmass can only be given as equivalence relation to charge and photon energy (eV). You cannot (never= convert a proton in the energy = m_pc² without first adding extra energy. Thus this is not a universal physical equation that you can include in other equations like Dirac's failed approach.

does all this mean that for mass there is no equation that can define it?

How do you explain the origin of Newton's equation F=ma?

Quote from Alan Smith

I am loving this. Please carry on.

Some Wyttenbach posts are useful in highlighting some mainstream deeply rooted cognitive bias that have hindered a serious progress in theoretical physics:

Charge cannot move at speed of light

Vector potential is just a mathematical tool

Planck equation E=hv is valid only for photons

mass/charge ratio is not related to charge's vector potential

Energy-mass is not related to a geometric parameter (Zitterbewegung radius)

Aharonov-Bohm equations are not related to the particle structure

elementary charge and its magnetic flux are not strictly related by a very simple equation 𐌘=h/e

you can add extra spatial dimensions if your theory needs it

Quote from Wyttenbach

What you say is not clear. Restmass is not equal EM mass. This was Einsteins error multiplied by Dirac.

So please, write down your formal definition of energy and restmass

Quote from Wyttenbach

The electron is an excitation of the proton as we can exactly derive (SO(4) physics) all electron properties from the proton properties.

Same for E=mc². Known and proven for particles since Poincaré is only dm = E/c². The Einstein guess only is an equivalence relation "=" not a physical equation.

Separating the concepts of mass, energy and frequency is just an example of Occam's razor rule violation

Quote from Wyttenbach

An electron positron pair decays into 3 photons. .

Exactly, this indeed suggests that electron, positron and photon share a common electromagnetic origin i.e. gaugeless Maxwell's Equations.

Quote from Wyttenbach

This is an equivalence relation not a physical reality. You cannot convert mass 1:1 into a photon.

Why is not a physical reality? This is just another "mainstream" cognitive bias. Electron is not a photon however they share the same universal energy-frequency relation in a Zitterbewegung model.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Really? Then the electron mass should decrease!

The real problem is that we don't know how the relativistic extra mass is added.

No, mc²=ћω=eAc and ω=c/r_e consequently mass is exactly inversely proportional to the Zitterbewegung radius and directly proportional to the charge's vector potential A. This explains inertia (without Higgs boson!) and how the relativistic extra mass is added

"Einstein simply has forgotten that all stable matter rotates and if this rotation is related to "c" the whole relativistic field theory breaks down."

Using an appropriate Zitterbewegung model the electron's charge moves always at speed of light in all inertial frames. The internal rotation has a precise clock c/r_e that is proportional to the relativistic mass and inversely proportional to the Zitterbewegung radius r_e. As a consequence of the invariance of charge's light speed c this radius decreases with increasing electron speed. The radius of the charge helicoidal trajectory decreases as the radius of an extended spring.