🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 25 May 1999 00:54:47 GMT, Robert@ina.net (Robert Sturm) wrote:

> Seeing an Electron
>                                 Milo Wolff
>
>                              Technotran Press
>                1124 Third Street, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
>                         mwolff@beachnet.gen.ca.us
>
>I want to show you a very interesting web animation of an electron.
>But first let me explain something about the structure of the
>electron. Then when you are finished reading, observe the animation
>below. 
>
>What is an electron?  Never in history has anyone been able to even
>imagine the structure of an electron. Until very recently, the
>electron was thought to be a 'point' made of an unknown, undefineable
>substance called 'charge'. Since a point has no
>dimensions, there is no structure and nothing to see. 
>
>The electron is a wave structure. Recently this structure was found
>(see: A Wave Structure for the Electron) to be two concentric
>spherical moving quantum waves.
>One wave moves inward and one wave moves outward.

Vergon:

You are right about the spherical wave structure of the electron
(all fermions for that matter)but you are in error that there 
are only two waves.

The frequncy of the electron is 1.235 x 10^20/sec.

That means there are that many waves (matter waves) comprising the
electron.

Each oscillation is an exapanding and contracting sphere of *very*
tenuous matter that moves at c to a maximum diameter of 1 light 
second, and contracts to *essentially* a point.

The energy of expansion is 6.626 x 10^-27 erg (the energy of
Planck's constant).

The mass of the unit (I call it *the* quantum) is 
7.372038 x 10^-48 gr.

The energy x frequency = mc^2.  The momentum of the expansion  of
one quantum is 7.372\-48 gr x c = 2.21\-37 gr cm  -- and the
momentum of the single quantum times the frequency = mc of the
electron.

The density of the electron diminishes as the fourth power of the
distance from the center. There is no surface as this diminution
carries to the maximum radius of 1/2 light second -- at which
point the density is so little it can have no interaction.

therefore, we assume an *effective* radius which is the distance
from the center which contains the density that will intereact
with its surroundings.

This turns out to be 1.213\-10 cm.

This agrees quite well with the radius of the resonant frequency 
in an electromagnetic cavity.

There are two quantities of quanta that form a stable standing
wave, one is the frequency of the electron, the other, the
proton. All others are not resonant and decay quickly to the
next stable quantity below -- or to radiation.(The exception is the
neutron which is a combination electron/proton -- and stable in
a nucleus but unstable when isolated.)

These are the so-called sub atomic particles -- which are not
elemental particles but just shards of stable particles smashed
asunder.

All this is part of my thesis entitled The Quantum as a Physical
entity which I completed 5 years ago after 15 years work.

One of the things it produced -- which I have displayed recently on 
this NG -- is the reason the charges on the electron and the proton
are equal despite a great disparity in their masses.
****

V.V.

 This spherical wave
>pair has the familiar properties of an electron which we call mass and
>charge, as well as all other properties. When you look  below, for
>this first time in history you can see the radial amplitude of these
>electron waves moving on your  screen. You will see three diagrams. 
>
>These diagrams are mathematical plots of the IN and OUT waves and the
>SUM of
>both waves. The plots are the 
>amplitudes of the waves drawn along a radius out from the electron
>center (at the
>left side). (Be patient  -  the mathematical program doesn't start
>instantly).  You will
>see that the farther from the center, the smaller the amplitudes
>become. This is like
>familiar sound or light waves or even water waves which become weaker
>as they
>move outward. Quantum waves are very tiny. In this diagram they are
>amplified a
>hundred, million, million times (1014).  You have to imagine them
>smaller  - but that
>is not difficult. 
>
>                                                   
>
>In the TOP DIAGRAM,  observe the wave moving OUTward. On the left,
>where
>the radius is zero, the amplitude becomes + infinite (runs to the top
>of the screen). 
>
>In the MIDDLE DIAGRAM, observe the wave moving INward. Where the
>radius
>is zero the amplitude is - infinite (runs to the bottom of the
>screen). 
>
>The blue BOTTOM DIAGRAM is the SUM of the two waves.  That is, the two
>amplitudes are added together, as always happens when two waves are at
>the same
>place. The sum of the waves is the radial amplitude of the real
>electron.  Watch
>carefully how the sum wave moves. The wave does not move inward or
>outward,
>it goes up and down. That is, it becomes a standing wave. Standing
>waves also
>occur for light and sound waves; for example on a violin string. The
>waves on the
>string can go up and down but not run along the string because of the
>posts. The
>electron, and other charged particles, are structured of standing
>spherical quantum
>waves. 
>
>Notice the behavior of the sum wave when the radius is near zero.  The
>amplitude
>of the  wave is not  infinite at zero radius. Instead you notice it
>reaches a size of
>about + or - one inch on the screen. This is an important difference
>between the
>wave structure theory compared to the old point theory of the
>electron. In the point
>theory, electric amplitudes became infinite at zero radius. This is
>wrong because
>laboratory measurements show finite amplitudes. The wave structure, as
>shown
>here, gives the right result. 
>
>Where are the orbits?  For many (too many) years people imagined atoms
>as
>point electrons orbiting around a nucleus. This myth, obviously
>imitating our
>planetary system, was shown wrong by quantum theory more than sixty
>years ago.
>For example in the hydrogen atom, quantum theory predicts the electron
>presence
>as a symmetrical spherical cloud around the proton.  Some physicists
>concluded
>that the point bits of matter were still there, even though quantum
>theory contains
>no notion of point particles. The old myth dies hard! 
>      Actually, in the H atom both the electron wave-structure and the
>proton have
>the same center. The electron's structure can be imagined like an
>onion  -  spherical
>layers of waves around a center. The amplitude of the waves decreases
>like the
>blue standing wave in the bottom diagram. There are no point masses  -
>no orbits,
>just waves. 
>
> Animated Particles. This diagram is the first  animation of a basic
>particle for
>viewers on the web. Is this Important? Or just a neat gimmick to make
>fuzzy
>physics come to life?  Yes! It illustrates a newly recognized
>essential property of a
>particle - communication. In order for particles to interact with each
>other, it is
>essential they communicate their position, direction, and presence to
>each other.
>The dynamic wave-structured electron can do this. The old static point
>particle
>cannot. It is wrong. Understanding properties of the particles by
>animation will have
>a high priority in the future. 
>
>This animation was produced by my son Winston. You can see that his
>work
>making Star Wars video games like "Dark Forces" of recent best-seller
>fame,  has
>scientific application. Thus I am  doubly proud that he was able to
>program it and
>put it on this web page. It required a lot of planning and skill.  I
>am very grateful for
>his innovative help in making this science page for you. 
>
>Return to the home page. 
>  
>