🚀 go-pugleaf

On Aug 1, 10:32 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 1, 10:02 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 1, 4:10 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 1, 6:00 am, Loui...@edu.herlufsholm.dk wrote:
>
> > > > On 1 Aug., 06:14, Mitch Raemsch <mitch.nicolas.raem...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Electron is fundamental point particle.
>
> > > > Real electrons are NOT ‘point-particles’ if the word ‘point’ has the
> > > > same meaning as in the pure mathematics.
> > > > It is only in the, maybe wrong, mathematical model of ‘fundamental’
> > > > particles that it is assumed that electrons are ‘point-particles’.
>
> > > > If electrons are real matter-/energy ‘particles’ then they MUST have
> > > > some, maybe oscillating, mean geometrical extension!
>
> > > That's simply incorrect. You are making a fundamental assumption that
> > > everything that has mass also has volume. You are simply making an
> > > extrapolation to an absolute status of a statement that is only known
> > > to be true of *composite* materials, as I explained in an earlier post
> > > in this thread. And for composite materials, the property of volume is
> > > *not* associated with mass; it is associated with the *interactions*
> > > between the constituents.
>
> > ---------------------
> > it is very nice that you are blubbing  (impressive  (:-)
>
> >  words !!
>
> > so
> > if it is 'interaction between the constituents'
>
> > may be tell us please - what are those 'constituents'  ??
>
> The constituents in an ionic crystal are the ions. The volume of the
> crystal lattice unit is not driven by the size of the ions.
>
> The constituents of an atom are the nucleus and the electrons. The
> volume of the atom is not driven by the size of the electron or the
> size of the nucleus.
-----------------------------------

thtats nice
but wasnot my question

we are dealing    now  with the ELECTRON
anmd the question about
is it a point particle or not ??!!

if you say that the eelctron is a point particle
i say
a point is not natures invention
it is a human artifact
a point has    no volue at all  BY DEFINITION !!
in order that an interaction will take place
there is need of space
it is INTER    action
in a point there is no INTER  whatsoever
an INTER  can be only between different entities !!
a point is just one zero entity !!
and different entitis   cannot live together  in a point
2
there must be a distinction between the mass of a particle

and  THE ORBIT IT MAKES
(i think that is more of less what you intended to say )
sometimes  (or too many times)
there is a confusion  between a particle and the orbit it makes !

2
we now try to zoom into the electron
and decide whether  it i s   a 'final entity
or subdivided   to smaller entities   ??
so
we had a few questions:

how can the amthematical concept 'point'
be a physical   entity??
if you say
well it i snot exacly he mathematical point but]
some very little but more than zero volume
it could only start be a logical claim
but then
if bigger than flat  zero
than  how much more than a flat zero??

and even if something gigger than flat zero
waht makes its vely long **orbital movement**
as we know from atomic structure
it is about 1 Angstrom  !!
so why    should your should your point electron
move to a distance of  just exactly    one A  and  not more
or less ??
ifyou say
it is 'governed by a mysterious electric field
what are those  mysterious agents that keep it
exactly in that distance ??
is it again  messengers tha tmove
in straight lines ??
if so
they have a vector of momentum
that is directed outwards
so why should they not** push the electron outside**
and not hold it in a certain distance as we know from experiment ??
(ie attract it ??)

and why just in that specific  direction

and that was jsut a smaple of the many questions that rise up
from your
**POINT PARTICLE**   THE ELECTRON !!
 now i guess
you willtell me
'go learn qm   ' ??  (:-)
then i will tell you
if i go to QM
i will   be able to keep and ask  those
unanswered   !!  questions
because QM does not answer it !!
it is deeper than  existing  QM !!!
(QM cannot for instance handle a very heavy Atom !!
it is  much more compliated  and specific  to be solved by those
 existing   abstract equations )

it  belongs to   further advance to   people
that are   not just    parrots ( or crooks )
and has some INTELLECTUAL INTEGRITY !!
to say
'we have as for now    -  no actual answers to that '!!
and it needs some further advance
TIA
Y.Porat
-----------------------------








>
> The constituents of a nucleus are (primarily) the protons and
> neutrons. The volume of the nucleus is not driven by the size of the
> protons and neutrons.
>
> The constituents of a proton are quarks and gluons. The volume of the
> proton is not driven by the size of the quarks and gluons.
>
> PD
>
>
>
> > TIA
> > Y.Porat
> > --------------------------
>
> > > If you have this automatic association between mass and volume in your
> > > head, then you must clear it out as an unjustified assumption. You are
> > > overgeneralizing, and for the wrong reasons.
>
> > > > - Electrons are without doubt composed of more fundamental
> > > > ‘particles’.
>
> > > > - It is time to explore the real ‘true’ nature of the electrons!
>
> > > > Best regards
> > > > Louis Nielsen
> > > > Denmark