Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Futility is persistent.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                       

tails for electrons

 momentum differentiation
 
(0) 		  [vote for,
against]

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.

—wjt, Mar 30 2017

one-electron universe postulate https://en.wikipedi...e-electron_universe
[Loris, Mar 31 2017]

Please log in.
If you're not logged in, you can see what this page looks like, but you will not be able to add anything.
Short name, e.g., Bob's Coffee
Destination URL. E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)






       With its new tail, could it swim like a sperm and fertilise provocative protons?
—xenzag, Mar 30 2017
   

       // 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.
—notexactly, Mar 30 2017
   

       Does that matter to anything other than the electron ?
—8th of 7, Mar 30 2017
   

       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?
—normzone, Mar 30 2017
   

       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.
—wjt, Mar 31 2017
   

       //...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).
—Loris, Mar 31 2017
   

       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.
—not_morrison_rm, Mar 31 2017
   

       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.
—wjt, Apr 01 2017
   

       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.
—beanangel, Apr 01 2017
   

       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.
—wjt, Apr 01 2017
   


 

back: main index
business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle