Electron’s puzzles.
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Stardust in the Solar Wind
Next: Perhaps added rest mass keeps photons moving at c and only c.
From: Y.Porat on 26 May 2010 12:24 On Apr 21, 1:50 pm, socratus <isra...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Electrons puzzles. > > The electron is not a point. > The electron cannot be hard as a steel, it must be elastic. > The electron doesn't have really orbit . . . > It is a reason of a standing wave of fantastically high frequency. > It can be a corpuscular and a wave at the same time. > From one hand, in interaction with aether all its parameters > becomes infinite, but from the other hand, it is the reason > of electromagnetic waves and a density in the aether. > # > 1900, 1905 > Planck and Einstein found the energy of electron: E=h*f. > 1916 > Sommerfeld found the formula of electron : e^2=ah*c, > it means: e= +ah*c and e= -ah*c. > 1928 > Dirac found two more formulas of electrons energy: > +E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2. > Questions. > Why does electron have five ( 5 ) formulas ? > Why does electron obey three Laws ? > a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass > b) The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law > c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law > # > What is an electron ? > ========. > Socratus. -------------- since it is not a point it is subdivided to smaller components !! because a point has no specific direction specific directions and spin can be done only by a conglomeration of sub particles WITH A GEOMETRIC STRUCTURE !! (IT MIGHT BE EVEN A FEW FLEXIBLE GEOMETRIC STRUCTURES- I SUGGESTED THE ''EEL'' MODEL) ATB Y.Porat ----------------------------- FOR IT !
From: Y.Porat on 27 May 2010 03:42 On May 27, 11:32 am, "GBaars" <g.baar...(a)Chello.nl> wrote: > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:36b0af0f-611c-4ae7-acac-accc74d20a5d(a)y12g2000vbr.googlegroups.com... > On Apr 21, 1:50 pm, socratus <isra...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > Electrons puzzles. > > > The electron is not a point. > > The electron cannot be hard as a steel, it must be elastic. > > The electron doesn't have really orbit . . . > > It is a reason of a standing wave of fantastically high frequency. > > It can be a corpuscular and a wave at the same time. > > From one hand, in interaction with aether all its parameters > > becomes infinite, but from the other hand, it is the reason > > of electromagnetic waves and a density in the aether. > > # > > 1900, 1905 > > Planck and Einstein found the energy of electron: E=h*f. > > 1916 > > Sommerfeld found the formula of electron : e^2=ah*c, > > it means: e= +ah*c and e= -ah*c. > > 1928 > > Dirac found two more formulas of electrons energy: > > +E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2. > > Questions. > > Why does electron have five ( 5 ) formulas ? > > Why does electron obey three Laws ? > > a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass > > b) The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law > > c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law > > # > > What is an electron ? > > ========. > > Socratus. > > -------------- > > since it is not a point > it is subdivided to smaller components !! > > because a point has no specific direction > specific directions and spin > can be done only by > a conglomeration of sub particles > WITH A GEOMETRIC STRUCTURE !! > > (IT MIGHT BE EVEN A FEW FLEXIBLE > GEOMETRIC STRUCTURES- > I SUGGESTED THE ''EEL'' MODEL) > > ATB > Y.Porat > ----------------------------- > FOR IT ! > > Alright, but what is it made of? --------------- made of sub-particles as for now 'unbelievable surprise' for you .... NO ONE -AS FOR NOW-- KNOWS IT !!!! EVEN NOT FUCKEN CRIPPLED -QM !!! if you ask my private idea? it is made of 'Circlons' :: or conglomerations of those 'Circlons ' (a very basic particle that moves naturally in closed circles and is able to make 'chains of orbitals' see my abstract: http://sites.google.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract yet that Circlon s a guess of mine (therefore it is only in my appendix )-- unlike the rest of the model that is much much more than a guess.... ATB Y.Porat --------------------------
From: spudnik on 27 May 2010 22:17 dood, is it OK if I call you, Th'orbert -- Dorb for short?... wel, you have a knack for short neologisms (gloss contains both "density" and "dinsity," as well as words that seem new, whether entymologically related to any thing. however, apart from one equation on the glide-through, didn't see no predictions xor hypotheses; just a *lot* of verbiage. also, some of what appeared to be 'Sixtiesisms, like, if that's a word, beside of Wow. I mean, REALLY, wow. thusNso: you are relying on rationals, that are decimals (in the base of ten, although some authors will call rationals "decimals," in any integral base, which is one class of solutions (what ever it's called, in what ever we're talking about)). in any case, it is almost a standard, that one use the base that is associated with the prime exponent ... which is really the meaning of some of Fermat's theorems & challenges [*]. and that makes me very happy, then very sad ... because you're probably trying to find some guru/god/guy or some goddess, who already wrote this up in the hither & yon of Vedic psychorama ... which reminds me of A.C.Clarke and the Satellevator Daytrippers, ba-doom/yeah. thusNso: Shell is about half British, but Netherlands is the big port o'call (also, the place to call when the windmill feathers, inapproprietly). why should I believe in your kind of free energy, and how could I measure it (sik) ??... maybe, it really is "free trade." > Then introduce free energy technology [ellipsis]. ------- * anyway, for those of you/us/them in need of "skills," I want to suggest Fermat's "reconstruction of Euclid's porisms;" they seem rather a r b i t r a r y , but that's just me, "you, idiota!" --Light: A History! http://wlym.com
From: spudnik on 27 May 2010 22:26 .... and, one only needs to do prime exponents/bases, "because of the easy lemma for composite bases, except for n=4, where Fermatttt said, 'Oops, c'ette une case especially -- need an other proof!'" heh-heh; not in my book. thusNso: dood, is it OK if I call you, Th'orbert -- Dorb for short?... wel, you have a knack for short neologisms (gloss contains both "density" and "dinsity," as well as words that seem new, whether entymologically related to any thing. however, apart from one equation on the glide-through, didn't see no predictions xor hypotheses; just a *lot* of verbiage. also, some of what appeared to be 'Sixtiesisms, like, if that's a word, beside of Wow. I mean, REALLY, wow. thusNso: you are relying on rationals, that are decimals (in the base of ten, although some authors will call rationals "decimals," in any integral base, which is one class of solutions (what ever it's called, in what ever we're talking about)). in any case, it is almost a standard, that one use the base that is associated with the prime exponent ... which is really the meaning of some of Fermat's theorems & challenges [*]. and that makes me very happy, then very sad ... because you're probably trying to find some guru/god/guy or some goddess, who already wrote this up in the hither & yon of Vedic psychorama ... which reminds me of A.C.Clarke and the Satellevator Daytrippers, ba-doom/yeah. thusNso: Shell is about half British, but Netherlands is the big port o'call (also, the place to call when the windmill feathers, inapproprietly). why should I believe in your kind of free energy, and how could I measure it (sik) ??... maybe, it really is "free trade." > Then introduce free energy technology [ellipsis]. ------- * anyway, for those of you/us/them in need of "skills," I want to suggest Fermat's "reconstruction of Euclid's porisms;" they seem rather a r b i t r a r y , but that's just me, "you, idiota!" --Light: A History! http://wlym.com
From: BURT on 28 May 2010 20:05
On May 27, 12:42 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 27, 11:32 am, "GBaars" <g.baar...(a)Chello.nl> wrote: > > > > > > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >news:36b0af0f-611c-4ae7-acac-accc74d20a5d(a)y12g2000vbr.googlegroups.com.... > > On Apr 21, 1:50 pm, socratus <isra...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > Electrons puzzles. > > > > The electron is not a point. > > > The electron cannot be hard as a steel, it must be elastic. > > > The electron doesn't have really orbit . . . > > > It is a reason of a standing wave of fantastically high frequency. > > > It can be a corpuscular and a wave at the same time. > > > From one hand, in interaction with aether all its parameters > > > becomes infinite, but from the other hand, it is the reason > > > of electromagnetic waves and a density in the aether. > > > # > > > 1900, 1905 > > > Planck and Einstein found the energy of electron: E=h*f. > > > 1916 > > > Sommerfeld found the formula of electron : e^2=ah*c, > > > it means: e= +ah*c and e= -ah*c. > > > 1928 > > > Dirac found two more formulas of electrons energy: > > > +E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2. > > > Questions. > > > Why does electron have five ( 5 ) formulas ? > > > Why does electron obey three Laws ? > > > a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass > > > b) The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law > > > c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law > > > # > > > What is an electron ? > > > ========. > > > Socratus. > > > -------------- > > > since it is not a point > > it is subdivided to smaller components !! > > > because a point has no specific direction > > specific directions and spin > > can be done only by > > a conglomeration of sub particles > > WITH A GEOMETRIC STRUCTURE !! > > > (IT MIGHT BE EVEN A FEW FLEXIBLE > > GEOMETRIC STRUCTURES- > > I SUGGESTED THE ''EEL'' MODEL) > > > ATB > > Y.Porat > > ----------------------------- > > FOR IT ! > > > Alright, but what is it made of? > > --------------- > made of sub-particles > > as for now > 'unbelievable surprise' for you .... > NO ONE -AS FOR NOW-- > KNOWS IT !!!! > EVEN NOT FUCKEN CRIPPLED -QM !!! > > if you ask my private idea? > it is made of 'Circlons' :: > or conglomerations of those 'Circlons ' > (a very basic particle that moves naturally > in closed circles > and is able to make 'chains of orbitals' > > see my abstract: > > http://sites.google.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract > > yet > that Circlon s a guess of mine > (therefore it is only in my appendix )-- > > unlike the rest of the model > that is much much more than a guess.... > > ATB > Y.Porat > --------------------------- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - All particles are point. The electron is one but the proton and neutron are three points of energy called quarks. All particles are infinitely small. Mitch Raemsch |