h a l f b a k e r yResident parking only.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
I went to a talk. One point that was said is that the
electron
going forwards is mathematically the same as an electron
going backwards in time.
I was thinking any momentum forward is going to affect
an
entity by morphing the object. It's parts being affected
by the
motion momentum
differently. This would give an
electron
and it's form, a change in constructional
geometry while in motion. An electron would have a
head and
tail.
De tail would have time symmetry collapsed.
one-electron universe postulate
https://en.wikipedi...e-electron_universe
[Loris, Mar 31 2017]
[link]
|
| |
With its new tail, could it swim like a sperm and fertilise provocative protons? |
|
| |
// I was thinking any momentum forward is going to
affect an entity by morphing the object. // |
|
| |
And why were you thinking that? Maybe you need to
read up on inertial frames. |
|
| |
Also, even if an object is not in an inertial frame, I
don't
know if that principle would work. |
|
| |
Also, electrons don't have shape. They are elementary
particles, not composed of quarks. |
|
| |
But if this worked, it would be very useful if one
wanted to determine which way through time an
electron was going. |
|
| |
Does that matter to anything other than the electron ? |
|
| |
Well, it may matter to [wjt]. |
|
| |
But what matters to me, is ... is there an idea that would pass the rudimentary requirements of the help file somewhere in there? |
|
| |
Why I gave electrons quarks is beyond me but in my mind
the idea stands. Why can't electrons have mathematical
tails. |
|
| |
Changing the charge around an electron, puts pressure on
the electron to move therefore there is an environmental
differential the electron sits in. All the electrons
attributes are facing varying strengths of field. So
wouldn't the electron have a lead change and a the tail
drag of last change. |
|
| |
Admittedly, if the field was part of the mathematical
calculation -T would have the electron moving away from
the positive. |
|
| |
//...the electron going forwards is mathematically the same as an electron going backwards in time.// |
|
| |
You mean positron.
A positron "is like an electron going back in time" (see link). |
|
| |
Blimey, there's so few electrons that they have to be shuffled around to keep the past working? What a slipshod universe we live in. |
|
| |
If there's only one then it's the fabric stuff. |
|
| |
I think, I'll start imagining electrons as inverse Lagrange
points in the EM field, spinning and moving around the
nucleus. |
|
| |
I would imagine the area of a Lagrange point would have
a shape because of masses motion in 3D space. |
|
| |
Bonding would be the meshing of atoms' EM Lagrange
menagerie. All completely under the rules of the
Schrödinger equation and the standard model's orbitals,
of course. |
|
| |
although I am epically clueless, this reminds me of they way weyl fermions exist at crystal lattices. So do the crystal lattices distort to have bulges or tails when the weyl fermions travel? they might even though the 1 dimensional points presumably wouldn't. |
|
| |
Note this is supposed to be different than those squishy orbital images. |
|
| |
Of course, a 1 dimensional point is currently a mathematical
abstraction, whether the future will show it as a physical
truism will remain to be seen. |
|
| |