New proton radius

[elas]

1) A new value for proton radius found by experiment is given on:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7303/full/nature09250.html

 

2) Previous submissions (on ‘Speculations’) showed that mr = c where c is a constant. Further developments lead to mr = G/2 where G is the gravitational constant.

 

I now use mr = c to show that the new experimental result for proton radius is open to question.

 

 

In the tables above Codata values for classical electron radius and proton radius are underlined.

 

Mass multiplied by radius values are shown in the extreme right column.

 

As the Proton contains three elementary particles which according to mr = G/2 have the same content (in different compactions); the proton mass is divided by 3 to give a single elementary particle value.

 

By mathematical experiment (i.e. speculation) it was found that ((P/3)/e)/((P/e)*3) is equal to (em*er)/(Pm*Pr) using the proton radius given by Codata, but the result given using the new radius does not agree (as shown in the lower table).

[vuquta]

1) A new value for proton radius found by experiment is given on:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7303/full/nature09250.html

 

2) Previous submissions (on ‘Speculations’) showed that mr = c where c is a constant. Further developments lead to mr = G/2 where G is the gravitational constant.

 

I now use mr = c to show that the new experimental result for proton radius is open to question.

 

 

In the tables above Codata values for classical electron radius and proton radius are underlined.

 

Mass multiplied by radius values are shown in the extreme right column.

 

As the Proton contains three elementary particles which according to mr = G/2 have the same content (in different compactions); the proton mass is divided by 3 to give a single elementary particle value.

 

By mathematical experiment (i.e. speculation) it was found that ((P/3)/e)/((P/e)*3) is equal to (em*er)/(Pm*Pr) using the proton radius given by Codata, but the result given using the new radius does not agree (as shown in the lower table).

 

May I ask what you are trying to show?

[elas]

May I ask what you are trying to show?

 

The key point made earlier is contained in the following table:

 

 

This show that mass multiplied by Quantum Mechanical Compton radius produces a constant (Col. E) that is close to the Gravitational constant divided by 2. (Using G/2 as a constant produces the radii shown in Col. G).

 

The table submitted to this forum uses the equation mr = constant (M*R[QMC] = constant) to show that the proposed new value for proton radius does not fit into this scheme, but the old (or current) value does; therefore the new value should not be accepted until it is explained why different experiments produce different values.

 

Since writing the above I found:

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/50520-quantum-electrodynamics-a-chink-in-the-armour/page__p__553536__fromsearch__1#entry553536

which gives the 'non-speculative' case.