An electron is a posit?

Which metaphor? Is there a metaphor?

No wonder. You no longer can even recognize metaphors.

No wonder. You no longer can even recognize metaphors.

And you apparently can't point them out, after recommending a blocking of them.

Can't we all just get along?...

I for one saw the metaphor and the lack of the metaphor, making myself a contradiction *head explodes*

Yes, because information can not travel faster than light, according to general relativity, nothing can. I am not in conflict with information because with my theory the electron is stretched over space so while one part of the electron is at one end, it's other parts are at the other end completely connected and not requiring any information gab or even transfer of information. It does not even need any information so it doesn't violate any known principals.

(emphasis added)

I think you are in trouble here, because I do not believe that an electron has parts. Although I will defer to anyone who can prove I am wrong.

(emphasis added)

I think you are in trouble here, because I do not believe that an electron has parts. Although I will defer to anyone who can prove I am wrong.

I think you're right. I'm not saying Wiki is God, but I would think a mistake on such an issue would have been caught by now.

The electron is a subatomic particle that carries a negative electric charge. It has no known components or substructure, and therefore is believed to be an elementary particle.[2]

With science one has to know the boundaries to research before knowing where to place a line as far as what "would have been caught by now". With further ability to observe particles has come new understanding. So since the boundary has recently been moved back with the Large Hadron Collider, hopefully we will be able to see smaller subatomic particles if there are any others.

I think it a good idea to remain skeptical.

I am starting to wonder if we are not looking immaterial realities right in the face, and refusing to believe what we are seeing.

I am starting to wonder if we are not looking immaterial realities right in the face, and refusing to believe what we are seeing.

(emphasis added)

I think you are in trouble here, because I do not believe that an electron has parts. Although I will defer to anyone who can prove I am wrong.

Are you serious? Did you even read what was written? I would call you a moron but that might get my post deleted so I won't. I am not talking about the electron having parts, I am saying "part of it" is in one location while the other "part of it" is in another location. I was not referring to multiple parts, only one thing but spread out over space. How could you have got that wrong by reading?

You're one to talk Krumple. Look back to my post on page 8. You would do well to look up the difference between where a particle is and the superposition of that particle before it is observed.

(I use the word particle for simplicity's sake, but if you look up superposition hopefully you'll understand why I took the time to correct myself in these parentheses)

Are you serious? Did you even read what was written? I would call you a moron but that might get my post deleted so I won't. I am not talking about the electron having parts, I am saying "part of it" is in one location while the other "part of it" is in another location. I was not referring to multiple parts, only one thing but spread out over space. How could you have got that wrong by reading?

I should probably mention, that this is really not my idea at all. There are many who have this same basic theory in the works and it has been theorized long ago as being a possibility. It isn't something new, so maybe look it up?

Yeah I am aware of the ability to pin point the electron, but do you even know the method that is used to do this? Do you also know the problems with it? You can determine where it is but you can't determine where it is going or how fast. You can find out where it is going or how fast but not where it is. You can't know both an electron's position and direction or speed at the same time. Why is that? Surely a particle can't just jump around. People like to say that the electron phases in and out of our universe and that is why you can't always locate it. I say that is making thing more complicated than necessary, there must be another reason.

I answered your question on page twelve. I guess you missed it?

"The wave nature of the electron means that in a double slit experiment even a single electron is capable of interfering with itself. Double slit experiments with photoionized hydrogen molecules at first showed only the self-interference patterns of the fast electrons, their waves bouncing off both protons, with little action from the slow electrons."

Interfering with itself. Hmm the only way this can happen is if they were like bubbles. What happens is the bubble gets distorted bending back and connecting with itself causing kinetic exchange or a snap back. Sort of like if you punch yourself in your own face.

It's called Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, and I am more than aware of it, I've done the proof in my physics class.

It is not making things too complicated, this is not a lightbulb that went on inside some theoretical physicist's head, particles have been observed to pop in and out of existence in vacuums, can you explain that with your bubble?

I've also done the math for this experiment, and calculated the interference pattern for my own setup. Once again, look up quantum superposition, it interferes between the states it could be in, but this is as a wave, not as some "bubble".

I guess you assume that I never have?



[/COLOR]Yep.



Define the wave for me then. Is it a wave of the space? What makes up the wave? When I say bubble, you are too fixed on the word bubble to see any relation because you want to use what you know about bubbles but I am only using it as an observation. I've done the math too, and when you get the part where it confirms wave, you stopped right? You just conclude it's obviously a wave. But what actually makes it a wave?

When you see ripples on water or examine the spectrum frequency of light it is only a pattern within the medium. But what is the medium for an electron to be a wave?

I was learned that an electron had a mass of O and a charge the opposite of a positron. Positrons en neutrons form the core of an atom.

Another use of the word electron refers to to (forgotten) mixture of gold/silver used in ancient times. Rember Eureka!:Glasses: