"No entity so fundamental as an electron could be described by saying that it is something else more familiar, such as a particle, or a train of waves.

An electron must be defined and described in terms of its own properties, and in terms of its behaviour under various conditions.

The principle properties may be listed as the electron mass, the electron charge, the electron spin and the electron wave length."

-- Terry Giblin, Snr

Let there be light.

Kind Regards

Terry Giblin, Jnr

Maybe the OP wants the rest of us to spend time searching for the book for him from which the quote is taken.

Then he can ignore the results; like the last time.

Fiat lux.

__________________
Ach, mein Sinn, wo willst du endlich hin, wo soll ich mich erquicken? Bleib' ich hier, oder wünsch' ich mir Berg und Hügel auf den Rücken?
Bei der Welt ist gar kein Rat, und im Herzen steh'n die Schmerzen meiner Missetat, weil der Knecht den Herrn verleugnet hat.

Sorry, I should have been explicit--before I moved this post to OTB, the OP PMed me to inform me where the quote was from, and I added the attribution to the original post.

I like electrons. What came first the atom or the electron?

__________________
We'll have to outwit the fiend with our superior intelligence.
Yukon Cornelius

quark

If I remember my history of the universe correctly, electrons. Neutral atoms formed much later.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

Yes, the electron can venture out on its own.

The quark, however, is part of the nucleus, protons and neutrons, they have never been observed. They are too tightly packed.

__________________
We'll have to outwit the fiend with our superior intelligence.
Yukon Cornelius

Seems to be a common theme...

__________________
*

That's really not true, we've observed them very well. Some of us even made a brief career about detailing exactly what they did when we looked very closely at them.

Mass, charge, spin, magnetic moment and momentum is probably more correct. Wavelength isnt a fundamental quantity

I wrote a paper about Quarks, many years ago.

"Six flavours of Quarks", long before the Top Quark was ever discovered, they thought I was wrong then, but theory was too beautiful to be ignored.

How many Top Quarks will be observed at CERN?

Can I watch?

Let there be light.

Kind Regards

Terry Giblin

I thought that quarks can't be observed, but the quark theory provides an explanation for protons and neutrons and their interactions. I have to admit it's been a long time and I have no doubt a lot has changed.

__________________
We'll have to outwit the fiend with our superior intelligence.
Yukon Cornelius

The Atom is about 3 years older than the Electron!

__________________
I offer a complete and utter retraction. The imputation was totally without basis in fact, was in no way fair comment and was motivated purely by malice. I deeply regret any distress that my comments may have caused you or your family, and I hereby undertake not to repeat any such slander at any time in the future.

Where was it published?

__________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

At temps that we can produce, you're absolutely right. At Big Bang temps, however, they too, were too hot to pack, and so existed alone.

Here's a very interesting read on what formed when during the early stages of our universe (assuming the Big Bang theory is correct).

__________________
If I set the budget, we'd have Ares and more. Unfortunately, I don't set the budget, and Ares is just too expensive and too far out for us to accomplish our goals within the budget we were given.

If we halt the ISS, all versions of Ares, and transport Orion and Altair aboard DIRECTv3's Jupiter family of Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles, we just might make it back to the Moon by 2020.

Dear Mugaliens,

We have to be careful, I do not want this thread to be moved into the ATM.

Can I assume that everyone agrees with my Dad's definition of an electron?

After over 3 years I still cannot understand, what everyone was arguing about.

As korjik said, - The wave length is inversely proportional to the supposed speed of the electrons. - "Classical observable properties." - Its the bit in the middle I am interested in.

Let there be light.

Kind Regards

Terry Giblin

Considering that momentum is far easier to observe than wavelength, I dont see why you include it.

I'd be interested in seeing a paper on free quarks. I don't think I've ever seen one of those. I did listen to a lecture by a Professor from New Haven College on free quark-catalyzed fusion, but he made no claims to any experimental data. Just romping around the physics free-thinking room. (Wellesley College, AAPT joint APS, 1992).
NorthernBoy, perhaps you could provide a few links? Thanks. pete

__________________
A third rate theory forbids.
A second rate theory explains after the fact.
A first rate theory predicts.
A. Lomonosov

Thought that you were choking for a minute there!

__________________
Later . . .

we don't see them as truly free, but we do see them as asymptotically free at high energies.

It's a bit like me looking at the fish in my aquarium, I suppose. I can observe them just fine swimming around in there, but take them out, and before you know it the cat's eaten them and they are no longer observable.

Similarly, in the colliders, we are looking inside the baryons, and do see the quarks, we just can't take them out.

Dear NorthernBoy,

I can start another thread on quarks, I have a wonderful diagram that explains quarks beautifully.

On this thread I would appreciate your comments on the electron?

How well do you think you know electrons?

Kind Regards

Terry Giblin

Call me confused.. what did this thread mean then? Single Top Quark is Produced. Is this a different interpretation of "free"?

__________________
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" -- Charles Darwin
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
Meet the OOONG TOE.

If the above statement is true, what are the properties and behaviour of the electrons, [?][?][?][?], in the new version of the 'double slit experiment'




Let there be light.

Kind Regards

Terry Giblin

__________________
Brett
Peters Creek, Alaska
─────────────────────────────────────────────
My moderation comments will appear in this color.
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄ Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄ Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

How about completing/answering the already-started ones first?

__________________
*

Dear PetersCreek,

I am simply making a statement and asking a question.

I thought the purpose of science was to ask questions and to challenge what we think we know and understand.

Since no one has objected to the statement and no one has objected to the validity of the diagram.

I really don't understand why it is so difficult to try and begin a conversation on this forum, nothing I have said or displayed is against accepted physics theory.

All I am asking, is for you to ask yourself, what are the properties and behaviour of the electrons, [?][?][?][?].

Let there be light.

Kind Regards

Terry Giblin

Do you wish to contribute something constructive or simply answer a question with a question.

If you are going to say something why don't you answer the question.

Kind Regards

Terry Giblin

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.