Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: "base-mass" rather than rest-mass and standardized ratio of 1876 for
Electron 0.5 MeV Chapt13.409 Pair Production has to equal Pair Annihilation
#1051 New Physics #1171 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Replies: 2   Last Post: Dec 3, 2012 3:48 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com

Posts: 8,758
Registered: 3/31/08
"base-mass" rather than rest-mass and standardized ratio of 1876 for
Electron 0.5 MeV Chapt13.409 Pair Production has to equal Pair Annihilation
#1051 New Physics #1171 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Posted: Dec 3, 2012 12:08 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Alright, I need to standardize the numbers, for if I use 0.51 MeV for
electron or 0.5 for electron I get different ratio numbers. So what I
want to do is standardize the ratio.

I am going to use 0.5 MeV for electron and 938 MeV for proton and so
the standard ratio of proton rest mass per electron rest mass is then
938/0.5 = 1876.

Now I have a huge problem here on my hands. Not the problem of making
Pair Production equal to Pair Annihilation, but the problem of what a
lowest base-mass
brings to physics. The lowest base-mass is that of a electron at 0.5
MeV. I cannot think of any other particle that has a lower base-mass.
Of course, Old Physics has the fakery of a neutrino having a base-mass
(rest-mass) but Old Physics was too dumb to even have a Double
Transverse Wave that allows all photons to have the very same constant
speed of c. So no-one can trust, nor should they trust Old Physics of
a neutrino rest-mass when they could not even understand or realize
that light waves are double transverse waves.

So my problem is, the electron is the lowest base-mass particle at 0.5
MeV. Raises the important question of what is the lowest base-kinetic-
energy particle? Is it the photon of radio waves or is it the electron-
neutrino?

If I were required to answer that question right now, I would say the
radio wave is the lowest base-kinetic-energy, but I would run into
conflict with the idea that either the electron-neutrino or the radio
photon is this:

1M- 1M+

and not this:

1M-
1M- 1M+
1M+

So which has more energy overall, a electron-neutrino wave or a radio
wave?

Now I do know that all light waves are polarizable, and I do not know
whether there is a gradation of polarizability of photons. What I am
trying to say here is that whether radio waves are odd and different
and peculiar in being polarized from visible light or gamma waves.

Can we have a light-wave as this:


1M-
1M- 1M+
1M+

rather than this:


1E-
1M- 1M+
1E+

Can we have a light wave as this:

1M-
1M+

where it is just two charged magnetic monopoles with no E field
involved?


So all of a sudden this has become immensely complicated. But if I
stick to sound logic, I should drag myself through it and be rewarded
with new understanding.

Google's New-Newsgroups censors AP posts and halted a proper archiving
of author, but Drexel's Math Forum does not and my posts?in archive
form is seen here:

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.