Re: Electron size, shape and spin.Confusion and conflicts with Einstein's 1905 SR.

On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 17:49:53 +0000, rhertz wrote:

Historical facts:
>
- 1897: Thomson discovered the electron as a particle and proposed a
"plum pudding" model of the atom.
>
- 1899: Thomson (and others) measured the charge/mass ratio of the
electron (using Lorentz force): 6.33E+17  esu/g
>
- 1900: Planck calculated the charge of the electron, hence its mass
(using Avogrado): e = 4.69E-10 esu ( g^1/2 cm^3/2 s^-1).
>
- 1900: Wilhem Wien theorized that the Hydrogen ion contained a
fundamental positive charge (named proton in 1917 by Rutherford), when
experimenting with canal rays. His work was the basis for the discovery
of the proton by Rutherford in 1917, after he came in 1911 with his
"solar system structure" of atoms, mostly composed of void.
>
- 1913: Millikan measured again the charge of the electron, being
similar to the value calculated by Planck in 1900.
>
- 1917: Rutherford confirmed the existence of the proton (he named it)
and verified early calculations about being 1,836 times more massive
than the electron.
>
- 1917-1918: Many scientists estimated the radius of the proton being
1,000 larger than that of the electron, using charge/mass relationships.
The radius of the proton was estimated as being about 10^-13 cm, from
which it was derived that the radius of the electron was about 10^-16
cm. The classic formula R = e^2/E was used AGAIN, where E is the energy
of the electric field. This formula STILL IS VALID TODAY, only that it's
used with MKS units instead of esu units.
>
- Around 1920: The use of E=mc^2 was introduced to calculate the rest
energy of the electron as being 0.511 MeV. So R = e^2/(mc^2) FORCED
PHYSICISTS TO ADOPT/BELIEVE that the radius of the electron was about
2.8E-13cm, which is now known as the CLASSICAL ELECTRON RADIUS
(normalized by NIST and many other bodies worldwide).
>
This proposal CONTRADICTED what experiments show (by then and in decades
to come) that the radius of the electron IS AT LEAST about 10^-18 m. The
formula suited well with the radius of the proton being about 10^-15 m,
which was used until early 1960s, when the Standard Model of Elementary
Particles (SMEP) demanded that only the electron was a fundamental
particle. All the data about radius of protons and neutrons WERE
ELIMINATED from databases worldwide. Only the Classical Electron Radius
still remain, but only for some calculations, as it's not proposed as
THE REAL RADIUS.
>
- 1919-1924: It was widely accepted that the electron rotated itself,
creating a magnetic momentum that explained phenomena like the Zeeman
effect (splitting of spectral lines in a magnetic field). Kronig,
Uhlenbeck, and Goudsmit realized that the classical model of a spinning
electron was UNTENABLE because it implied velocities FASTER THAN LIGHT,
CONTRADICTING RELATIVITY.
>
- 1924-1925: The physical units of the electron's spin that created the
magnetic momentum WERE DISCARDED by physicists like Heisenberg and
Pauli, because IT WAS AGAINST RELATIVITY. Instead, they proposed that
SPIN was a quantum quantity with no equivalence with classic physics.
Hence, the idea of rotation was dismissed, and fractional values of +1/2
and -1/2 were INVENTED to quantify the magnetic momentum of the
electron. This idea was extended to any other particle in the next
decades.
>
In 1925, Pauli INVENTED the Exclusion Principle, which states that no
two electrons in an atom can have the same set of quantum numbers. He
received a Nobel Prize for this proposal.
>
- 1928: Dirac introduced his relativistic theory, by which the electron
spin was incorporated as an intrinsic property, without requiring it to
be a spinning sphere. Hence, the spin describes behaviors in magnetic
fields and interactions, not being a physical motion.
>
- 1930-1960: QFT and QED adopted the model of the electron being A
POINT-LIKE PARTICLE, with NO PHYSICAL SIZE.
>
- 1960-2025: The radius of about 10^-18 m for the electron EMERGED AGAIN
by measurements of its electric dipole moment (EDM). An electric dipole
moment (EDM) is a measure of the separation of positive and negative
charges within a particle. If an electron had an EDM, it would imply
that its charge distribution is not perfectly symmetric, meaning it
would have a "shape" that deviates from a perfect sphere.
>
2025: The current best upper limit for the electron's EDM is on the
order of 10^-29 electron centimeters (e cm), corresponding to A PERFECT
SPHERE with a radius of 10^-18 m. But physicists INSISTS in that this IS
NOT a real radius, and is valid ONLY to explain the EDM measurements.
>
AS OF TODAY, RADIUS, SHAPE AND SPIN OF ELECTRONS IS UNDETERMINED
(UNKNOWN). Each theory (QM, QFT, QED,...) adopt values that are useful
to validate each theory, but the numbers used ARE IN CONFLICT, when the
different theories are compared.
>
AS IT CAN BE SEEN FOR THE LAST 130 YEARS, PHYSICS IS MOSTLY A FARCE.

Yep, as proof radio, atomic bombs, hydrogen bombs, transistors,
computers,
COVID 19 could not possibly exist.  This just shows that Ancient Aliens
have been advancing our technology in spite of ourselves.  They crash a
few of their ships and we take 'em to Area 51 and reverse engineer them.
Just ask Bob Lazar. https://www.unitednuclear.com/
Got element number 115?