gio06 Verified User
  • Member since Oct 10th 2014

Posts by gio06

    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.

    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."

    External Content
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    A new preprint on electron structure

    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.

    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 = mpc2 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?

    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

    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

    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

    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.

    Three-vector and scalar field identities and uniqueness theorems in Euclidean and Minkowski spaces
    Euclidean three-space and Minkowski four-space identities and uniqueness theorems are reviewed and extended. A Helmholtz identity is used to prove two three-vec

    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/re 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/re that is proportional to the relativistic mass and inversely proportional to the Zitterbewegung radius re. 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.