Path: ...!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-3.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2024 23:45:55 +0000
Subject: Re: What composes the mass of an electron?
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <a3b70d34ff5188e99c00b2cf098e783a@www.novabbs.com>
 <6726a8ee$0$28084$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2024 16:45:55 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6726a8ee$0$28084$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <BVKdnY-GMLcuJLv6nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 87
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-hACkWIAPToWMpgsaSK0uzsS8eACWaCF99gIMzytJ02L4E1qsPU4H3tmZijY8XFOG8sfM3PVqZdlPgSC!d22+03pMoW6QlmmY1BjKhIJhjCgOY/R3Eoh4FWUc2H+XpaFTV4ofbmeQl/zwnhKPbum+QR3P81WG
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 4875

On 11/02/2024 03:34 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> A definition of mass, as found in Google:
>>
>> "Mass is a measurement of the amount of matter or substance in an
>> object.
>> It's the total amount of protons, neutrons, and electrons in an object."
>
> So you have that wrong too. (can't you get anything right?)
> You must add the kinetic energy (positive)
> and subtract the binding energy, by E=mc^2.
>
>> It's "accepted" since the 60s that protons and neutrons are not
>> elementary particles anymore. As stated in the Standard Model of
>> Elementary Particles, protons and neutrons are composed of quarks, with
>> different flavors.
>
> I know you are going to hate this,
> but most of the mass of the proton is kinetic energy.
> Being confined in a small volume the quarks
> (and gluons) have large zero point energies.
> In fact they are highly relativistic.
> Quark rest mass is only a small part of the proton mass.
>
>> <https://www.quantumdiaries.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/2000px-Standard_Model_of_Elementary_Particles.svg_.jpg>
>> But electrons are thought as elementary particles, so they can't be
>> formed by a collection of other elementary particles. Even quarks are
>> currently thought as working together with elementary gluons (QCD, Gauge
>> Bossons).
>>
>> So, what is THE MATTER that electrons contain?
>>
>> This is one of many FAILS of the current SMEP.
>>
>> Is that the electron's mass is composed of unknown matter? Maybe of
>> electromagnetic nature?
>
> Nope, the electrons do not 'contain' mass,
> they are massive.
> For an explanation you need to wait for the theory of everything,
>
> Jan
>

In "Technicolour" QCD it's quarks and quarks and quarks again,
all the way down, as to the scale of superstrings/supercordes,
about twice as much small as atoms than atoms, us. (In mass.)

It's a continuum mechanics, ....

The "field number formalism" of "field occupation numbers"
generally refers to that point-like yet extended bodies,
the solitons and instantons, have in field theory, that
all the real fields inhabit space-time and thus result
one vector field of tuples of field numbers, though that
is yet a quantum/quantized concession, to what after the
"re-normalization", it a field theory and a continuum mechanics.

The "asymptotic freedom" within nucleons (neutrons, protons)
is a great thing and makes for uniting strong nuclear force
and a fall gravity, uniting in the sense of having the same
mechanism, not as the "uniting in the sense of symmetry-breaking",
it's a great thing to help explain otherwise that alternating
molecular moments, and unipolar nuclear force, have electrons
as a force carrier of charge and atoms as a force carrier of
massy interactions to do with inertia, then though that most
theories leave out neutron lifetime and photon speed, as
with regards to e/m and measured e/m the charge/mass ratio
of "an electron" as with regards to "a unit of charge" and
"a unit of mass".

It's a continuous manifold, .... It's a gauge theory.

SR'ians and GR'ian's arrive at "e = mc^2" in altogether
different ways, and SR's even amount is merely GR's
first standard term in an infinitary expression.
(Einstein has GR first, with SR "merely" "local".)

Then, that "m - m' = e/c^2", Einstein's "second" mass-energy
equivalency relation, this is after the momentum goes around
the bend of both the electromagnetic and into the kinetic,
the kinematic, in case don't-you-know Einstein's "half-way"
account of the centrally symmetric contra the linear.