Saturday, June 27, 2009 . Lecture: Neutrino Lesson for Dissidents.

/ by David de Hilster /

http://www.worldnpa.org/pdf/events/FriendlyLetter.pdf
/ World Science Database. /
================================= .

My opinion.
1.
Trying to save ‘ The law of conservation and transformation energy ‘
Wolfgang Pauli discover ( theorized) neutrino ‘on the end of his pen.’
2.
According to QED Electron has infinity energy in interaction
with vacuum: E= ∞.
But according to ‘ The law of conservation
and transformation energy ‘ it is impossible.
3.
So. How to understand this situation?
What does ’ The law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass’
mean according to one single electron or photon or neutrino ?
======= .
P.S.
#
Robert Milliken in his Nobel speech ( 1923) told, that he knew
nothing about the ‘last essence of electron ‘.
#
You know, it would be sufficient to really understand the electron.
/ Albert Einstein./
#
Tell me what an electron is and I'll then tell you everything.
/ From an article./
#
All these fifty years of conscious brooding have brought me
no nearer to the answer to the question, ' What are light quanta?'
Nowadays every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks he knows it,
but he is mistaken.
( Albert Einstein, 1954)

The same Einstein’s words is possible to say about electron.
#
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.

/ book ‘ What is the Electron? ‘
Volodimir Simulik
Montreal, Canada. 2005. /
http://redshift.vif.com/BookBlurbs/Electron.htm

And it is possible to find 100 more models of electron in the internet.
============== .
So. My conclusion.
1.
The neutrino problem was raised from the wish to keep (preserve !)
‘ The law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass’.
2.
We don’t know what electron and photon are and therefore
we don’t know what neutrino is.
3.
In my opinion the discussion about neutrino, photon, electron
and others micro particles must be connected with
‘ The law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass’.
Without this connection every dispute is tautology.
====== .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.

http://www.worldnpa.org/php2/i...tab1=Display&id=1372
===================== . .

The mixed Electron from Wikipedia .

Electron.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron

a)
The electron is a subatomic particle that . . . . . .
is believed to be a point particle . . (!!! ??? )
and belong to the first-generation of fundamental particles
b)
The classical electron radius is 2.8179 × 10 - 15 m . (!!!)
c)
The electron has no known substructure. (!!! )
d)
electrons can act as waves.
This is called the wave–particle duality (!!!)
e)
An isolated electron that is not undergoing acceleration is unable
to emit or absorb a real photon ( !!! ) ; doing so would violate
conservation of energy and momentum . ( !!!)
==== .
My conclusion:
#
Electron is the point particle with the
classical electron radius 2.8179 × 10 - 15 m,
( the radius shows that electron must have a form .)
which has no known substructure but can emit or absorb a real
photon ( where does electron hide the real photon? In its pocket ?),
and electron can be a corpuscular and can be a wave,
and belong to the first-generation of fundamental particles.
#
And according to SRT the point particle or classical electron radius
cannot all time keep firm form, the electron’s form must be elastic
. . . .variable.
#
When electrons and positrons collide, they annihilate each other . .
(!!! ???)
And when electron interact with vacuum its parameters became infinity .
(!!! What does it mean ??? )
The experimental lower bound for the electron's mean lifetime
is 4.6 × 10^ 26 years, . . . .
! !!
And trying to understand the birth of an electron
we search for his mother a ‘ Higgs boson ‘.
======= .
We have two possibilities:
To believe that electron looks like the Wikipedia says
or, maybe, to understand and agree that our intellect
looks a little strange.
====== . .
My opinion about
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron
#
Half truth can be falsehood.
Half answer can be not truthful answer.
========== .
S.

Socratus.
Yes, your response makes sense on me.
Now I can understand clearer , that physicists
don’t understand what they say about Physics.
====== .

Andy.
What is it that we don't understand about what we say?
Except, when we say we don't understand something completely?
Do you mean that YOU don't understand what we are saying?

For example, when I say that an electron is an electron –
I guess you think that I don't understand anything about an electron?

Imagine for a moment, that we find some furry little animal on Mars.
We might try to tell other earthlings what it 'is'.
We might say, well, it is sort of a cat, but also like a fox. But it isn't a cat,
it isn't a fox, it isn't anything we have on earth. It comes from Mars,
and is completely different from anything on earth. It is a furry little
animal from Mars. In all honesty, that is all we can say about it.
To say it has some characteristics of a cat, and some characteristics of a fox,
might convey some insight to other earthlings, but it is neither a cat nor a fox.

Would that mean that biologists don't understand anything they say
about biology? I don't think so.

Likewise, we can discuss the properties of an electron - it has a mass,
a charge, a magnetic moment, an angular momentum. But what it really IS,
I don't think we understand. We know some things about it, but not everything.
That doesn't mean we know everything, or even pretend to - I've NEVER heard
a physicist say he thinks we know everything; have you?
Nor does it mean we know nothing.

I await your answers to my questions.

Andy

Northern Arizona University
Physics-Astronomy Dept
United States
======== .

Interesting opinion about electron, isn’t it?
Our Electron as an animal from Mars. (!!!)
S.

This is only my idea about electron.

By this, I mean that I don't speak for ALL physicists;
that would certainly be presumptuous.
We have a Quantum Theorist in our department; I chatted
with him a bit - told him, my view is that an electron is like a box,
that you are told you can NEVER open, NEVER know what is inside.
But, coming through holes in the box, we sometimes see a tail wagging,
and sometimes a paw slapping around.
We can NEVER know there is a cat inside (I told you that, above).
So, we say sometimes there are paws in the box
(and sticking out), sometimes tails.
ANALOGY: electron, sometimes wave, sometimes particle.

He just shook his head and walked away. So, go figure.

Andy.