What creates the charge of an electron?
Sujet : What creates the charge of an electron?
De : hertz778 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (rhertz)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativityDate : 08. Nov 2024, 01:27:36
Autres entêtes
Organisation : novaBBS
Message-ID : <bef3c603e17483239bd22ce330dd7508@www.novabbs.com>
User-Agent : Rocksolid Light
It seems that such question shows much more ignorance in the physics
community than questioning what composes the electron's mass.
At least, modern theories about electron's mass constitution are based
on the proposed existence of preons, which also form quarks.
Any standard search in Google and alike shows this definition:
"Charge is just a physical property of matter that causes it to
experience a specific force (aka interact with a specific field). That’s
all."
So, the definition of charge at quantum level is axiomatic: It exists.
Fractional charges that (allegedly), quarks have, are impossible to
detect and measure, because quarks don't exist freely, because they are
tightly coupled to the gluon soup. Big difference with electrons, which
can travel freely in space (i.e.: cosmic radiation).
Another explanation is that, at atomic and quantum level, charge exist
BECAUSE it manifests when suffer forces due to electromagnetic
radiation, and then moves in rectilinear or spiral pathways. But this
definition opens the door to explanations about that charges MIGHT NOT
EXIST if the carrier of the charge is left alone and undisturbed.
As with mass, what is charge at elementary level (electrons) IS UNKNOWN,
ABSOLUTELY UNKNOWN.
There are no answers coming from Quantum Field Theory or others, except
what was proposed within the String Theory, which was abandoned.
So, summarizing the state of physics in 2024:
- Mass? We don't know what it is. It seems a property of matter.
- Charge? We don't know what it is. It seems a property of matter.
- Magnetism? We don't know what it is. It seems related to charges.
- Energy? We don't know what it is. We stick with classic definitions.
- Size of electrons and quarks? WE DON'T KNOW. It could be ZERO.
- Gravity? We don't know what it is, but it seems that violates the
Noether Teorem for symmetry, as antigravity hasn't been observed.
- Origin and size of the universe: WE DON'T KNOW. The BBT is fatally
flawed, but Fred Hoyle's pseudo-static universe was abandoned decades
ago.
- Astrophysics/Astronomy? The more is being found or proposed, the less
is known.
- Relativity? It's a mathematically beautiful theory, but worthless.
WHAT REMAINS? Only what Engineering, Technology, Chemistry and Medical
Sciences can provide, being the driving forces for the last 140 years of
advancement in civilization.
We should CANCEL PHYSICS as a career. It doesn't worth it.
We can't measure things under 1 picometer or above 30 AU (solar system).
Why pretend to propose waste money analyzing things beyond our
capabilities, which provide not a single practical value to mankind?
For instance, and in other level of reasoning: We WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO
LIVE IN MARS, BECAUSE WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RETURN TO EARTH AFTER A
LONG STAY. OUR BODY WOULD BE DESTROYED.
And so many other issues, like long space travels, living at the bottom
of the seas, or in caves 1 Km deep. If the Sun farts an X.50 flare in
our direction, most of the species are done.
Fuck unregulated science research. We have to put limits on everything,
LIKE RESEARCH AND OPERATIONS ON HUMAN GENDER CHANGES.
AS I ALWAYS SAY: THEY KNOW NOTHING, BUT THESE PARASITES PROFIT FROM OUR
IGNORANCE.
LONG LIFE TO INVENTORS, THE REAL SUPPORT OF CIVILIZATION SINCE DAY ZERO.
Haut de la page
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.
NewsPortal