A crazy thoughts about structure of Electron.

socratus

socratus

socratus
Dec 10, 2008
1,131
17
38
Israel
www.worldnpa.org
A crazy thoughts about structure of Electron.
=.
Electron isn’t a point.
Electron has a geometrical form.
Electron’s geometrical form isn’t static, isn’t firm.
Electron’s geometrical form can be changed by his own inner spin.
Electron’s own inner spin can be describe by three ( 3 ) formulas:
Plank: h=Et,
Einstein: h=kb,
Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck: h*=h/2pi.
The speed of photon is minimal : c=1.
The speed of electron is c>1
Quantum of light, photon and electron are one and the same
particle in different conditions.
=.
Question:
Where did electron come from?
Answer:
Electron came from the Kingdom of Coldness: T=0K.
=.
All the best.
Israel Socratus
===.
 
socratus

socratus

socratus
Dec 10, 2008
1,131
17
38
Israel
www.worldnpa.org
Electron’s fine structure constant.
=.
It is interesting to understand the Sommerfeld formula:
a= e^2 / h*c, where {a} is fine structure constant: 1/137
Feynman expressed (a ) quantity as
‘ by the god given damnation to all physicists ‘.
But the fine structure constant is not independent quantity,
it is only part of formula of an electron: e^2=h*ca .
The constant {a} is only one of three constants which
belong to the formula of electron: e^2=h*ca.
(a), (c), (h*) are three constants which created the electron.
And if we don’t know (a) then we don’t know what electron is.
Therefore in the internet is possible to find 100 different models
of electron. For example.
The book "What is the Electron?"
Volodimir Simulik
Montreal, Canada. 2005. /
In this book:
‘ 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.’

ftp://210.45.114.81/physics/%CA%E9%BC%AE/What%20Is%20the%20Electron%20by%20Volodimir%20Simulik%20.pdf

All of these models are problematical.
We can read hundreds books about philosophy of physics.
But how can we trust them if we don’t know what electron is.
And somebody wrote:
If I well remember Einstein once said about particle physics:
"why do we study some many particles?
Understand really what is an electron would be enough."
. . .
‘ Finding the structure of the electron will be the key
to finding the origin of the natural laws.’
=.
By my peasant logic at first it is better to understand
the closest and simplest particle photon /electron and
then to study the far away spaces and another particles.
=.
Best withes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus

==.
 
socratus

socratus

socratus
Dec 10, 2008
1,131
17
38
Israel
www.worldnpa.org
Matter and Form: when they are paradoxical.
=.
Wood is itself a matter.
Wood is itself a form, a geometrical form.
A cupboard made of wood is a real whole of form and matter.
Geometrical form and matter are 'grown together' in it.
No form exist without matter.
Nor can there be matter without form.
But in micro-physics, physicists took up another conception.
According to this doctrine matter does exist,
but the form is not a physical object.
The form is disappeared from the physical reality.
They works with a 'point'.
Question.
Isn’t physics a science of the matter, form, energy
and motion ? Aren’t all these subjects 'grown together' ?
Take away one subject and you have all modern paradoxes
in the physics.
=.
Israel Socratus.
=.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom