# Inertia and Relativity

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by hansda, Dec 22, 2017.

1. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
It is better, not to daydream but from my equations, this correlation can be observed.

3. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
See, our earth is spinning on its axis. This angular speed can be increased. But this angular speed has a limit. This limit,(like speed limit c) can be considered as $w_c$

Through math all hidden truth or invisible truth can be known.

5. ### arfa branecall me arfValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,685
The electron has a mass, what's the radius? What about an electron in a hydrogen atom (i.e. bound to a proton)? Does it have a moment of inertia?

Or is the moment of inertia restricted to classical rigid objects with a known geometry? (I think so)

7. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
8,988
And I'm saying, seriously, if you have managed to reconcile relativity and quantum mechanics, you have accomplished what the entire scientific community has been unable to accomplish in a half century.

Sci-fo is peanuts. Take your work to a university. They will shower accolades upon you and introduce you to Hawking. Why are you wasting your time here?

8. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424

Every massive, spinning particle should have a moment of Inertia.

Conservation of angular momentum is also true for quantum particles. It is universal. http://www.idc-online.com/technical...eering/Quantum_Mechanics_Angular_Momentum.pdf

Last edited: Jan 31, 2018

Messages:
2,424

10. ### arfa branecall me arfValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,685
In which case, every massive spinning particle should have a geometry.
But "should have" and "does have" aren't the same thing.

What experimental evidence is there for electron geometry?

11. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
8,988
Did you read that before posting?

"The classical electron radius is a combination of fundamental physical quantities that define a length scale for problems involving electrons interacting with electromagnetic radiation. According to modern understanding, the electron is a point particle with a point charge and no spatial extent. Attempts to model the electron as a non-point particle are considered ill-conceived and counter-pedagogic."

i.e. its charge can be used to produce a usable radius when interacting electromagnetically, but the electron is a point particle.

Messages:
2,424
13. ### arfa branecall me arfValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,685
Here's a question: if the electron has a fixed radius but is also rotating, it must be that it has a fixed axis of rotation.
Then why is the electric field of an electron not rotating about a fixed axis, since if it were, a collection of lots of electrons, say in a metal plate, would not have a definite electric field perpendicular to the plate--the field lines would point in all directions and also rotate in space. Why isn't that observed? IOW, why does a charged plate have the field lines all aligned in the same direction if all the electrons are rotating about an axis?

P.S. I note the first link you have in the previous post is from alternativephysics.org, there the author repeats the mistake of equating $mc^2$ and $hf$, with no explanation.

Another question: if the electron does have a radius and is like a small sphere, why does it also have a wavelength?

Last edited: Feb 4, 2018
14. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
Detail structure of an electron is not yet known. In my understanding, it must be hollow at the center, because spinning electron has a magnetic moment. Do you think, the Sun is static or spinning. Electrical field of electrons are spherical like the Sun.

15. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
8,988
It is known.
They have no internal structure, no extra or hidden properties. They can't, or they would not behave as observed.

Messages:
2,424

17. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
8,988
It is part of The Standard Model of Particle Physics. So, essentially, my source is the scientific community.

18. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
Does the Standard Model say electron has zero radius?

19. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
8,988
Don't you think - considering the prolificity of your ideas on physics - that's something you should already know? (There's a teachable moment here.)

20. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
Electron has a non zero mass. If it is having zero radius; that means it will have a zero volume. In that case, it would have been a case of singularity.

21. ### arfa branecall me arfValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,685
One way to overcome that is to consider the mass of the electron as being "somewhere" in a wavepacket. Which is to say, electrons (their charge, mass and spin) have the same probability of being anywhere within a localised region Δx, which defines the boundaries of wavepackets.

The boundaries depend on Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, of course (although that wasn't well understood at first).

22. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
Your $\Delta x$ symbolises non-zero space. This implies that electron has a non-zero radius.

Further, if you consider my equation of mass at post #14; it can be observed that as mass increases, its radius decreases. It can be checked that radius of electron is more than radius of proton.

Last edited: Feb 19, 2018

Messages:
1,431