[General] Velocity of the Coulomb Field

[Andrew Meulenberg]

Dear Martin;

I feel that 'conservation of spin' may not apply in a relativistic
bound-electron case (angular momentum yes, spin no). So, if that is the
only experimental basis, then I am not convinced.  I believe that the
neutron is a proton plus a deep-Dirac-level (DDL) electron that is
stabilized by the presence of another proton and the exchange forces
between them from the bound electron. [The DDLs are predicted by the
anomalous solution of the Dirac equations and, if they exist, then the
spin-spin coupling of the proton and DDL electron is so strong that the
hyperfine splitting of these levels may be in the MeV range.]

If this is the case, then the deepest (but highest-energy) DDL, if
populated, contains an electron that is orbiting within the proton and is
strongly interacting with the proton's quarks and their EM fields. This of
course leads to speculation of what quarks really are. As I said, this
concept of the photonic electron is the basis for "self-consistently
redefining the foundations of modern physics."

Andrew
________________________________
On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Mark, Martin van der <
martin.van.der.mark at philips.com> wrote:
Dear Andrew,
I have to point out that experimentally it is really so that the neutrino
is a fermion and the photon is a boson, it follows from the conservation if
spin.
I am telling you, but you have to put your own energy and work into it to
find out that it is realy true, that is the only way you will get the
insight.
Most of the physics people try to make you believe is actually true!



Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone

Op 13 mrt. 2015 om 17:56 heeft Andrew Meulenberg <mules333 at gmail.com> het
volgende geschreven:

   John D said: "We should "torque" about neutrinos more, because they are
more like photons than they're like electrons."

 I thought that I was the only one crazy enough to talk about neutrinos as
photons. Or photons as a subset of neutrinos. However, I suspect that this
group might have others with the same perception.

 I consider neutrinos to be photons from a relativistic bound electron.
They should have, in addition to the oscillating E & B fields, an
oscillating Mass field. I think that the argument that they must be
fermions (to 'conserve' the fermion number of the neutron, electron, and
proton) is bogus. They may be fermions and/or bosons, but the argument is
bogus. I think that photons can be either, or both, fermions and bosons.
Has anyone directly measured the spin of a neutrino (other than by
comparison of the number of fermions present)?

 If it *is* a photon from a relativistic electron, then the neutron is an
electron plus a proton and that is 'forbidden' speech. However, when the
concept of the neutron was 'defined' (set in concrete), there were no
charge-density profiles available to point to and defend the bound-electron
model. There are now.

 This group could be self-consistently redefining the foundations of modern
physics.

 Andrew
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20150314/c42a6a95/attachment.htm>