That has nothing to do with the OP's question which was what would it be made out of?
Note: The spin of an electron has no relationship to the electrons energy.
What is an electron made out of
- Thread starter Number 9 Bus Shelter
- Start date
That has nothing to do with the OP's question which was what would it be made out of?
Note: The spin of an electron has no relationship to the electrons energy.
Why do you believe people are giving you a snow job?.....What you have been told is as is according to the data we have in this day and age.
It's a sub atomic fundamental negatively charged particle, that appears to have quantum properties and is the carrier of what we call electricity......
You religious people [or at least some of you] amaze me......You call on and use science when it suits you, and ignore it when it doesn't quite fit into your divine deity hallucinations.
The way you spoke of it confused me. Let me be precise here - When an electron is in a magnetic field there is an energy associated with the orientation of the electrons spin with the direction of the magnetic field. Is that what you were talking about? I had forgotten about that aspect for a moment since it only happens when the electron is in a magnetic field. You made it sound like something it always had with or without a magnetic field present.
If you saw a proton (I think it was), it's shape was actually more like a disk (I will need to look this up again).
Anyway, an electron has what is called mass. Mass is a deep subject and I won't get into that. But today the general consensus is that an electron is actually a point like particle, meaning it doesn't have any dimensions to it. So if you enlarge an electron to a macroscopic size, you wouldn't be looking at what is defined as an electron. It would be something completely new.
Doesn't saying a particle having a point like structure and mass, infer infinite density?
I prefer to accept that it has no defined shape, and has a quantum like nature.
And isn't that exactly how mainstream particle physicist picture it now?......more a cloud like structure with positional probability.
If you could enlarge an electron, it wouldn't be pointlike then would it? As I said, what you would be looking at wouldn't be an electron.
Fraggle Rocker
Staff member
Indeed! To "enlarge" something means to increase its spatial dimensions proportionally: length, width and height. A point has no spatial dimensions, so it cannot be enlarged.
I suppose we might say that the length, width and height of an electron are zero, and therefore if we could somehow "enlarge" it those dimensions would still be zero. But I suspect that if there's a real scientist on this thread, he would walk away slapping his forehead in disgust.
Electricity.
Quantum field theory [the Standard Model] predicts particles are point like. The Fermalab link provides a discussion on how elementary particles are defined in the Standard Model of particle physics. So the most basic prediction of string theory is that elementary particle are actually tiny strings with physical extent. One consequence of that prediction is the minimum string length is > the Planck length. Since they use 'Quantum Foam' in the article let's use it here [coined by a great physicist and teacher John A. Wheeler]. The physical extent and a minimum string length allow quantization of the Quantum Foam [fields].
What's the point?
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/today/archive/archive_2013/today13-02-15_NutshellReadMore.html
Great link....
The following extracts say it all.......
" Although we know that the quantum realm differs from the familiar world"
" In summary, extended particles have a fixed size, although they may have a fuzzy edge; point-like particles are mathematical abstractions with zero size. But even zero-size particles have an extended effect, due to the effect of the field surrounding them."