Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2024 00:42:30 +0000
Subject: Re: What composes the mass of an electron?
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <a3b70d34ff5188e99c00b2cf098e783a@www.novabbs.com>
 <VtGcncnTF4lU6bj6nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 17:42:39 -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: <VtGcncnTF4lU6bj6nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <VtGcncjTF4nr6Lj6nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com>
Lines: 78
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-tD9VFL0c2TDeybtdZEPGFHSj6HosnwyWPUM+22PECHLLYoTV/bwwcLMRvJbLsjUyAiz9pZfwFfwIFhI!k7qVtPr0Lnz7zKEw7L6b+crMIyjZ/vJIu/zdy1Wo2+JpD67fBA8/rmPYjDI7g5YQc03ju59sMLB7
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: 4298

On 11/01/2024 05:39 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On 11/01/2024 11:13 AM, rhertz 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."
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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?
>>
>> After all, modern civilization is based on what electrons can do, isn't
>> it?
>>
>>
>> THEY KNOW NOTHING, AS IN RELATIVISM!.
>
>
> You got there a deconstructive, elementary account, into
> what's called the trans-Planckian regime, from what's
> called the Democritan regime, where Democritus or
> Demokrites is who championed "atomism" the theory
> while Aristotle or Aristoteles while outlining either
> the "infinitely-divisible" or "infinitely-divided",
> picked "not atomism because no vacuums", as with regards
> to that electrons, protons, neutrons are elementary matter
> while photon is still the usual particle in terms of
> the quanta of energy, as to how energy is quantized,
> at the atomic scale, or as with regards to Avogadro.
>
> For some people, charge is primary, others, matter.
>
> Others, it's neutron lifetime and light speed.
>
> Thusly, the theory, as about the invariants of relation,
> may be of the primary elements, variously, a sort of heno-theory,
> that usually it's matter and then background energy as heat,
> as what boils down to second-law thermo entropy, all quite
> usual, then as with regards to usually electron-holes and current.
>
> Then, as with regards to whether "mechanical reduction",
> kinetics and kinematics, can define the physics, it's mostly so,
> while, most matters of the electrical are related only as
> eventually as about the electromagnetic, and piezoelectric,
> and Peltier and Seebeck and so on, "electrical reduction".
>
> Tweedle-dee and Tweedle-dum.
>
>
>

(Physicists and mathematicians too tend to frame things
in terms of small things that go to zero instead of
large things that go to infinity, then though as
with regards to that usual notions of space inversions
and point inversions leave them rather queasy,
with regards to the hyper-geometric and its
regular singular points: 0, 1, and INFINITY.)