Electron’s puzzles.
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: SR Exercise
Next: Prime Number Sums reveal both a 2D and 3D pattern when stepped by the golden ratio logarithm!
From: PD on 23 Apr 2010 09:58 On Apr 23, 12:48 am, socratus <isra...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Electron cannot be composite particle. > But it obeys a whole slew of physical laws, including: > * the electrostatic interaction > * the weak interaction > * the gravitational interaction > * the interaction with the Higgs field > * the law of conservation of momentum > * the law of conservation of angular momentum > * the law of conservation of energy > * the law of conservation of lepton number > * Fermi-Dirac statistics > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > And electron obeys more three Laws > a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass > b) The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law > c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law > And it has five (5) formulas: E=h*f , e= +ah*c , e= -ah*c., > +E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2. > > All these factors must say: > electron isnt as a simple elementary as we are thinking. I disagree. Simple, elementary does NOT mean "obeys one law" in physics. > ====================. > S > > On Apr 22, 4:00 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Apr 22, 3:11 am, socratus <isra...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > More than ten different models of the electron are presented here. > > > (!!!) > > > More than twenty models are discussed briefly. (!!!) > > > Thus, the book gives a complete picture of contemporary theoretical > > > thinking (traditional and new) about the physics of the electron. > > > / The book "What is the Electron?" > > > Volodimir Simulik. Montreal, Canada. 2005. /http://redshift..vif.com/BookBlurbs/Electron.htm > > > > All of them are problematical. > > > So, why we call an electron a simple elementary > > > particle if it looks not very simple ? > > > It is simple because it appears not to be composite, as far as we can > > tell. > > Other than that, it is like a bunch of other simple particles, in that > > it obeys a whole slew of physical laws, including: > > * the electrostatic interaction > > * the weak interaction > > * the gravitational interaction > > * the interaction with the Higgs field > > * the law of conservation of momentum > > * the law of conservation of angular momentum > > * the law of conservation of energy > > * the law of conservation of lepton number > > * Fermi-Dirac statistics > > > and so on. > > > > We can read hundreds books about philosophy of physics. > > > But how can we trust them if we dont have the real model of > > > Electron ? > > > It is real. Just because there is more than one law that pertains to > > electrons doesn't mean they are unbelievable. > > > > =====================. > > > S- Hide quoted text - > >
From: maxwell on 23 Apr 2010 11:28 On Apr 22, 6:00 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > ... > It is simple because it appears not to be composite, as far as we can > tell. > Other than that, it is like a bunch of other simple particles, in that > it obeys a whole slew of physical laws, including: > * the electrostatic interaction > * the weak interaction > * the gravitational interaction > ... Could you supply one reference (preferably online) which MEASURES the gravitational effects on a single electron? This effect seems very unlikely as the ratio of the EM to gravitational force on an electron is at least 10**40.
From: PD on 23 Apr 2010 11:40 On Apr 23, 10:28 am, maxwell <s...(a)shaw.ca> wrote: > On Apr 22, 6:00 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> ... > > It is simple because it appears not to be composite, as far as we can > > tell. > > Other than that, it is like a bunch of other simple particles, in that > > it obeys a whole slew of physical laws, including: > > * the electrostatic interaction > > * the weak interaction > > * the gravitational interaction > > ... > > Could you supply one reference (preferably online) which MEASURES the > gravitational effects on a single electron? This effect seems very > unlikely as the ratio of the EM to gravitational force on an electron > is at least 10**40. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1977RScI...48....1W
From: socratus on 22 Apr 2010 04:11 More than ten different models of the electron are presented here. (!!!) More than twenty models are discussed briefly. (!!!) Thus, the book gives a complete picture of contemporary theoretical thinking (traditional and new) about the physics of the electron. / The book "What is the Electron?" Volodimir Simulik. Montreal, Canada. 2005. / http://redshift.vif.com/BookBlurbs/Electron.htm All of them are problematical. So, why we call an electron a simple elementary particle if it looks not very simple ? We can read hundreds books about philosophy of physics. But how can we trust them if we dont have the real model of Electron ? =====================. S
From: PD on 22 Apr 2010 09:00
On Apr 22, 3:11 am, socratus <isra...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > More than ten different models of the electron are presented here. > (!!!) > More than twenty models are discussed briefly. (!!!) > Thus, the book gives a complete picture of contemporary theoretical > thinking (traditional and new) about the physics of the electron. > / The book "What is the Electron?" > Volodimir Simulik. Montreal, Canada. 2005. /http://redshift.vif..com/BookBlurbs/Electron.htm > > All of them are problematical. > So, why we call an electron a simple elementary > particle if it looks not very simple ? It is simple because it appears not to be composite, as far as we can tell. Other than that, it is like a bunch of other simple particles, in that it obeys a whole slew of physical laws, including: * the electrostatic interaction * the weak interaction * the gravitational interaction * the interaction with the Higgs field * the law of conservation of momentum * the law of conservation of angular momentum * the law of conservation of energy * the law of conservation of lepton number * Fermi-Dirac statistics and so on. > > We can read hundreds books about philosophy of physics. > But how can we trust them if we dont have the real model of > Electron ? It is real. Just because there is more than one law that pertains to electrons doesn't mean they are unbelievable. > > =====================. > S |