[General] HA: HA: Arxiv paper: Something is wrong in the state of QED

Mon Oct 18 10:59:53 PDT 2021

Dear Oliver,

You disappointed me. This is  ordinary quantum mysticism.

Kerr geometry gives physical model.

Alex
________________________________
От: oliver consa [oliver.consa at gmail.com]
Отправлено: 18 октября 2021 г. 19:48
Кому: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion; models-of-particles at googlegroups.com
Тема: Re: [General] HA: Arxiv paper: Something is wrong in the state of QED

Dear Jarek

I postulate that the electron is a point-particle ("in the case of the Helical Electron Model, the geometric static ring is replaced by a dynamic point-like electron. In this dynamic model, the electron’s ring has no substance or physical properties. It need not physically exist. It is simply the path of the CC around the CM.")

A point-particle cannot be divided, then it is natural for a point-particle to be a quantum of charge. If you postulate an extended-particle, then you have to responde two important questions: (1) Why can't the particle divide? And what force holds the different parts of the extende-particle together? poincare stress forces?  These questions have a obvious answer in the case of point-particles, but they have a very difficult explanation in the case of extended-particles.

On the other hand, point-particles have their own problems. Mainly infinit-mass-density and infinit-charge-density.

Infinit-mass-density is not a problem in a dynamic-point-particle model because "The CC has no mass, so it can have an infinitesimal size without collapsing into a black hole, and it can move at the speed of light without violating the theory of relativity. The electron’s mass is not a single point. Instead, it is distributed throughout the electromagnetic field. The electron’s mass corresponds to the sum of the electron’s kinetic and potential energy. By symmetry, the CM corresponds to the center of the electron’s ring.".

The infinit-charge-density is a more complex problem, because it imply an infinit electromagnetic energy at that point. This is just the problem with infinits that QED try to resolve using illegitime renormalizacion.

My hypothesis is that there is a weak in the Maxwell's laws. Maxwell discovered its laws before he knew that electric charge was quantized. There is an alternative to Maxwell's laws proposed by Weber that allow electromagnetic point-particles without singularities (http://www.weberelectrodynamics.com/  or https://arxiv.org/pdf/1806.10082.pdf). Weber's Electrodynamics have their own problems but it shows the way in which an improved version of Maxwell's laws should be sought.

Best wishes
Oliver Consa

El sáb, 16 oct 2021 a las 20:25, Jarek Duda (<dudajar at gmail.com<mailto:dudajar at gmail.com>>) escribió:

Dear Oliver,

Thank you for the interesting article, great motivation - I didn't know about it.

I see you emphasize Gouanère"A Search for the de Broglie Particle Internal Clock by Means of Electron Channeling" electron clock confirmation paper - I also believe is extremely important.

Regarding your electron model as toroidal, the g-factor agreement is indeed spectacular - I will think about it. I am just working on electron ansatz and it seems to require some spin precession/nutation.

The main initial remarks:

- shouldn't such solenoid have mass density per length? Electron has very concrete 511keV mass, couldn't yours have various? (I rather reserve such shape e.g. for 3 neutrinos),

- the most basic interaction for electron is Coulomb - how would you like to get it? Why charge is quantized - e.g. no half-electron?

- there is very strong experimental confidence that electron is nearly point-like (some gathered: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/397022/experimental-boundaries-for-size-of-electron ) - yours is much more complex, what might be crucial objection.

Best wishes,

Jarek

W dniu 16.10.2021 o 19:40, oliver consa pisze:
Dear Alexander,

Thank you very much for your interest in this paper.

In my paper "Helical Solenoid Model of the Electron" (http://www.ptep-online.com/2018/PP-53-06.PDF),  I proposed an electron model in which the g-factor appeared as a direct consequence  from its geometry. As a result I got a g-factor value of g = sqrt (1+ alpha / pi) = 1.0011607. This result is consistent with the Schwinger factor, and it offers a value much closer to the experimental value.

One criticism I received, is that it was invalid because the QED predicted a much more accurate result. From there I tried to understand how the calculation was carried out in the QED to transfer the ideas to my model. But to my surprise I found out that all the QED calculations are bullshit. I kept investigating and everything I found continued to confirm my suspicions. In the end I was encouraged to publish this article.

My conclusion is that the quantization of the electromagnetic field is an incorrect hypothesis that only leads to infinite results.

Best wishes,
Oliver Consa

El vie, 15 oct 2021 a las 9:55, Burinskii A.Ya. (<bur at ibrae.ac.ru<mailto:bur at ibrae.ac.ru>>) escribió:
Dear Oliver,

Thank you very much for new version of your article.
It is very interesting, and I expect to cite it in my further publication.
I am working now for a stringy version of the Dirac electron as a  Kerr-Newman black hole.
What is your opinion about the point that anomalous magnetic momentum
is result of interaction of the electron with external  em field, and thus,
it is not proper electron's magnetic momentum.

Best regards, Alexander

________________________________
От: oliver consa [oliver.consa at gmail.com<mailto:oliver.consa at gmail.com>]
Отправлено: 10 октября 2021 г. 13:06
Кому: oliver consa
Тема: [General] Arxiv paper: Something is wrong in the state of QED

Dear colleague,

I am sending you this paper because I am convinced will be of interest to you:

Something is wrong in the state of QED

https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.02078

“Quantum electrodynamics (QED) is considered the most accurate theory in the history of science. However, this precision is based on a single experimental value: the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron (g-factor). An examination of the history of QED reveals that this value was obtained in a very suspicious way. These suspicions include the case of Karplus & Kroll, who admitted to having lied in their presentation of the most relevant calculation in the history of QED. As we will demonstrate in this paper, the Karplus & Kroll affair was not an isolated case, but one in a long series of errors, suspicious coincidences, mathematical inconsistencies and renormalized infinities swept under the rug.”

This paper raises important questions about the validity and legitimacy of the QED. I believe that it is a topic that deserves a greater diffusion and a public debate.

It is an improved and corrected version of a popular previous paper published by me on Vixra. The information has been expanded and corrected, much more respectful language has been used, and most subjective interpretations of the facts have been eliminated.

I hope you enjoy it

Best Wishes,

Oliver Consa

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at oliver.consa at gmail.com<mailto:oliver.consa at gmail.com>
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/oliver.consa%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at dudajar at gmail.com<mailto:dudajar at gmail.com>
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/dudajar%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"<http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/dudajar%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>>
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>

--
dr Jarosław Duda
Institute of Computer Science and Computer Mathematics,
Jagiellonian University, Cracow, Poland
http://th.if.uj.edu.pl/~dudaj/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Models of particles" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to models-of-particles+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com<mailto:models-of-particles+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com>.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/models-of-particles/c4c25e4b-66c5-4da5-a84f-1e4127eaa1c9%40gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/models-of-particles/c4c25e4b-66c5-4da5-a84f-1e4127eaa1c9%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.