mikke
Harmless
Posts: 1
Registered: 11-10-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Classical calculation of electron antineutrino mass
Classical calculation of electron antineutrino mass
Oct. 8, 2014
site: newcanadiansvideo.com
In my previous article " We came from light... (lite version) " I described the mechanism of proton formation from neutron based on considerations
zero angular momentum of the neutron. Indeed, emitted from neutron electron carries energy 2mcc (it is the rest mass energy + the maximum kinetic
energy of the electron) and torque (spin).
Opposite spin neutron "remnant" receives , which curls it. The curling goes up until the angular momentum of neutron "remnant" will not be equal
to the angular momentum, which took away an electron, of course.
From this equation of moments I got radius of the proton.
In other words, the neutron loses 2 electronic mass at electron emission by this mechanism. These considerations, it would be enough if the proton
has not been charged particle. In view electrostatic field is to be created the proton , the rest energy of neutron should be reduced by mcc/2
extra. . It is electrostatic electron energy (as charged sphere) . It is electrostatic proton energy as well. That is, the neutron, in transition to
a proton should lose 2.5 electron mass in total. But the electron can carry away only the 2mcc . Therefore, the energy balance need another
particle which carry away extra mcc/2
This is the electron anti neutrino, of course.
It has zero charge, zero spin and therefore 3 degrees of freedom for movement: it has no any "obligations" to its past. Electron anti neutrino
mass is m/8 .
As far as the quark model of neutron - it is nonsense . Because , there is no dipole moment of the neutron at all. Neutrino spin nobody has been
measured - neutrinos have no spin at all.
A neutron can not have magnetic moment - because the neutron is neutral even it consists of quarks , It's a logical fallacy. Far off these quarks
are not distinguishable from each other, agree? ?But in according to "theory", which was proved even in experiments it is not zero.
|
|
|
careysub
International Hazard
Posts: 1339
Registered: 4-8-2014
Location: Coastal Sage Scrub Biome
Member Is Offline
Mood: Lowest quantum state
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by mikke  | Classical calculation of electron antineutrino mass
Oct. 8, 2014
site: newcanadiansvideo.com
In my previous article " We came from light... (lite version) " I described the mechanism of proton formation from neutron based on considerations
zero angular momentum of the neutron. Indeed, emitted from neutron electron carries energy 2mcc (it is the rest mass energy + the maximum kinetic
energy of the electron) and torque (spin).
Opposite spin neutron "remnant" receives , which curls it. The curling goes up until the angular momentum of neutron "remnant" will not be equal
to the angular momentum, which took away an electron, of course.
From this equation of moments I got radius of the proton.
In other words, the neutron loses 2 electronic mass at electron emission by this mechanism. These considerations, it would be enough if the proton
has not been charged particle. In view electrostatic field is to be created the proton , the rest energy of neutron should be reduced by mcc/2
extra. . It is electrostatic electron energy (as charged sphere) . It is electrostatic proton energy as well. That is, the neutron, in transition to
a proton should lose 2.5 electron mass in total. But the electron can carry away only the 2mcc . Therefore, the energy balance need another
particle which carry away extra mcc/2
This is the electron anti neutrino, of course.
It has zero charge, zero spin and therefore 3 degrees of freedom for movement: it has no any "obligations" to its past. Electron anti neutrino
mass is m/8 .
As far as the quark model of neutron - it is nonsense . Because , there is no dipole moment of the neutron at all. Neutrino spin nobody has been
measured - neutrinos have no spin at all.
A neutron can not have magnetic moment - because the neutron is neutral even it consists of quarks , It's a logical fallacy. Far off these quarks
are not distinguishable from each other, agree? ?But in according to "theory", which was proved even in experiments it is not zero.
|
Ummm.... what?
Facts trump 'logic' - the neutron has a measured magnetic moment, it is precise to 7 decimal places:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_magnetic_moment
The quarks are distinguishable from each other given that there are two different types, with different fractional charges. It is this nonuniform
substructure of charged particles that give the neutron a non-zero magnetic moment.
|
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
