Re: Positrons

J. J. Lodder wrote:

Aether Regained <AetherRegaind@somewhere.in.the.aether> wrote:
 

Bertietaylor:> On Sat, 5 Jul 2025 19:43:23 +0000, Stefan Ram wrote:

>

Aether Regained <AetherRegaind@somewhere.in.the.aether> wrote or quoted:
|                                                              The
|evidence for the positron is a lot stronger than the evidence for say
|quarks.

>
There is plenty of evidence for Harry Potter and his broomstick.

>
Physical evidence is of course primary, and the evidence from cloud
chamber tracks (under magnetic fields) is solid.
>
Still I like this philosophical argument probably due to Dirac or
Feynman (paraphrased):
>
It is extremely remarkable that the electron and the proton are so
unlike each other, and yet have EXACTLY EQUAL (and opposite) charge. The
positron on the other hand, having the same mass as the electron, is not
as much of a miracle as the proton. It would not be very surprising if
the exactly equal charge of the proton is really derived from an
embedded positron.

 Nonsense.
The quarks and electrons get their charges
from a common underlying gauge symmetry,

Yes, but the above quote, if it is accurate, is probably a reflection of Wheeler's 1930s attempts to show that all particles are some combination of electrons, positrons, and photons.  From his biography I get the impression that he regarded the idea as somewhat whimsical, but worth a try.
Wheeler liked to try out extreme positions.  In the 1930s he hoped to describe the universe as a group of particles without fields, later as a group of fields without particles.
As you know well, but others may not, the brief summaries I give of Wheeler's ideas above are at best a vast oversimplification.
William Hyde