🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jul 27, 7:40 pm, "hhc...@yahoo.com" <hhc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 25, 5:10 am, Loui...@edu.herlufsholm.dk wrote:
>
>
>
> > ARE ELECTRONS PHYSICAL ENTITIES?
> > If an electron is a physical matter-/energy ‘particle’ then it MUST
> > have a maybe not definite mean geometrical extension.
>
> > THE STANDARD-MODEL IS NOT ULTIMATE, MAYBE WRONG?
> > It is in the not ultimate standard-model of ‘elementary-particles’
> > that an electron is described without a physical geometrical
> > extension.
> > In the standard-model of ‘elementary-particles’ the electron is
> > described as a ‘point-particle’ that have been given AD HOC physical
> > properties as mass, electric charge, spin, magnetic moment etc.
>
> > It must be time experimentally to discover the ‘true’ nature of the
> > electron!
>
> > Best regards
> > Louis Nielsen
> > Denmark
>
> Louis, what is that you don't yet get?
>
> Realize that the electron is merely an intellectual abstraction, which
> serves a useful purpose in modeling interactions with other particles
> and fields.  While an electron is conceptually modeled and visualized
> at a particle, and that model works to date rather well, scinece yet
> has no idea what an electron actually is. Is it a particle, a diffuse
> quantity of something, or even an electromagnetic wave phenomena. The
> fact is, nobody knows.
>
> The conventional conceptualization of an electron as a particle is
> convenient.  We can accelerate those little buggers, deflect their
> paths, and measure their mass.  We can use them to charge batteries,
> and operate our television sets and cell phones.  We can see their
> flight paths using cloud chambers and bubble chambers, or spark
> chambers.  Still, we cannot capture even one of these little buggers
> for close examination.
>
> So we know how an electron acts, but have no idea what it actually
> is.
>
> Do I hear any arguments?
>
> Harry C.

--------------------
i like that 'we dont know' of yours  (:-)

Y.P
------------------------