Charge conservation (split from Magnetic Vector Potential)

[dhimokritis]

•  
• 
• Senior Members
• 3150
• 18748 posts
• Location: 珈琲店

• Report post
•  

Posted 19 hours ago

20 hours ago, dhimokritis said:

Don’t play the role of an attorney for moderators of forum that have shown kindness to answer on questions of folk participants like me in this speculation forum.

I’m not doing any such thing. I’m just giving you my opinion on your posturing. 

And I don’t know why you keep going on about “moderators” answering you. Swansont is answering you as a physicist and member of the forum, not as a moderator. 

Strange.

You have not answered on my post to you. That sorry - because I appreciate your "erudition" especially for the theme of "sub particles". You have urged my curiosity. Can you show shortly for me, some of their works? I want to see how simpleton are my ideas.

[Strange]

20 hours ago, dhimokritis said:

1 - Electron and positron particles have electric charges. Photons that are by - product of their collision have not. Don’t you see a breach in the law of “Conservation of charges”?

Of course not. 

+1 + -1 = 0

But maybe that simple arithmetic is too advanced for you.

20 hours ago, dhimokritis said:

2 – Electron is a point particle. If so it has zero volume. How much is “specific mass” of electron particle?

What is a "specific mass" and why should an electron have one?

21 hours ago, dhimokritis said:

If my claims of Hypothetical “sub particles “ give a satisfactory answer for both questions?

You would need to present a mathematical model and show that it produces quantitative results that match what we observe. I don't think you have done that yet.

 

And, can you please learn to use the Quote function. 

[studiot]

2 hours ago, dhimokritis said:

•  

 

 

Studiot

Thanks for the replay, your gentile soled with mild irony. And you have not why be sorry.

Any way:

About my ill used English of word "shadowed". Let say for kind of joke: the light is white, the absence is black, together they gave gray.

Have you explained why the atom is neutral? No. The gray neutrality of atom "i think" is its magnetic moment, which is the " gray shadow" of electric charges out side atom, of their interaction inside of atom". Let you see it as a non happy figure by me.

About " mass charge".

I repeat the formula of mass energy of electron particle :

Ee = me * c^2 = G * M^2 / Rc = ((Rpl * c^2 / Mpl) * (Mpl^2 / Rc),      Rc Compton radius

I have suggested that Mpl * skrt alpha "must be the charge of sub particles" that create Common mass of particles ( electron, proton, neutron).

This my hypothesis. It is your will to throw out of your consideration.

 

Perhaps you should post in the poetry section ?

We could then get the resident poetry specialist to dechipher it.

 

Let us start with this one.

On 15/09/2018 at 4:20 PM, dhimokritis said:

where are gone two electric charge of "electron" and "positron" when they are annihilated. Are they really annihilated? And by the way ---- even their mass.

Looking back I have to say that I made a mistake because you specified a positron and I wrote about a proton.

My apologies.

On 15/09/2018 at 4:48 PM, studiot said:

So in your isolation box you have one elctron and one proton, net system charge zero.

So I now see why you keep asking about "in an atom".

An isolation box is not an atom.

Of course there are no positrons in an atom.

An isolation box is just a theoretical way or device for including one positive and one negative charge to say that the net charge is zero.

When I asked you to state the Law of conservation of charge I wanted you to understand that the Law does not say simply charge is conserved.

That is not good enough.

The Law also includes a description of the place where the charge is conserved - the isolation box.

Otherwise you could simply say that charge in one place (or within one 'box') is not conserved because

the charge moves outside the box

or

because you include a charge that was somewhere else when the process took place.

So when we talk about the conservation charge for an electron - positron annihilation on Earth we start (before the annihilation) with one electron and on positron - net charge zero - in the box (Earth)

After the annihilation we must still keep the same box (Earth)
We cannot suddenly include a positron on the Sun.

Since we now have no charges in our box the net charge is still zero.

If we had one electron, one positron and one proton (to start) then the net charge would be +1+1-1 = +1

After the annihilation the net charge would be 0+1 = +1

Again charge would be preserved.

Remember also that there is no requirement for the charges listed to be connected in any aprticular atom or even to remain in that atom or molecule if they are.
The Law is not about atoms.

For instance consider the ionisation of common salt - sodium chloride.

Yo start off with one neutral molecule of sodium chloride.
The net charge is zero.

Following ionisation you have two ions one positive sodium ion and one negative chloride ion.
The net charge is still zero.

 

 

If this is this any better we can move on to 'mass charge' and 'shadow stuff'.

 

Edited September 25, 2018 by studiot

[Strange]

22 hours ago, dhimokritis said:

1 - Electron and positron particles have electric charges. Photons that are by - product of their collision have not. Don’t you see a breach in the law of “Conservation of charges”?

You seem to be under the misapprehension that the charge of the electron is conserved and, separately, the charge of the proton is conserved. This is incorrect. It is the TOTAL charge that is conserved.

The initial total is zero.

The final total is zero.

Zero = zero, therefore charge is conserved. 

Are you able to understand that?

Edited September 25, 2018 by Strange

[swansont]

23 hours ago, dhimokritis said:

 1 - Electron and positron particles have electric charges. Photons that are by - product of their collision have not. Don’t you see a breach in the law of “Conservation of charges”?

The net charge of a positron + electron system is zero. The charge of a photon is zero. Where is the violation?

Quote

2 – Electron is a point particle. If so it has zero volume. How much is “specific mass” of electron particle?

The mass of an electron has been determined to decent accuracy and precision.

9.10938356 × 10^-31 kilograms is the value given by wikipedia. "Specific mass" has no meaning here

 

3 hours ago, dhimokritis said:

•   

 Have you explained why the atom is neutral? No. The gray neutrality of atom "i think" is its magnetic moment, which is the " gray shadow" of electric charges out side atom, of their interaction inside of atom". Let you see it as a non happy figure by me.

Atoms are neutral because they have an equal number of positive and negative charges present. It's not any more complicated than that.

3 hours ago, dhimokritis said:

About " mass charge".

I repeat the formula of mass energy of electron particle :

Ee = me * c^2 = G * M^2 / Rc = ((Rpl * c^2 / Mpl) * (Mpl^2 / Rc),      Rc Compton radius

I have suggested that Mpl * skrt alpha "must be the charge of sub particles" that create Common mass of particles ( electron, proton, neutron).

This my hypothesis. It is your will to throw out of your consideration.

 

What are Rpl and Mpl?

 

And what do you get if you actually calculate  G * M^2 /Rc?