Why the Electron Is Too Perfectly Round
Sleep On Physics
22,399 views
The electron is the most perfectly round object ever measured. If you scaled one up to the size of the entire solar system, any lopsidedness in its charge would be smaller than a human hair. But here's the problem, according to almost every theory trying to explain the biggest mysteries in physics, the electron shouldn't be this round. Supersymmetry, extra dimensions, new Higgs particles, they all predict a tiny distortion that experiments should have already found. And yet, measurement after measurement finds the same impossible answer: perfect roundness.
This isn't just a quirky fact about a subatomic particle. The electron's shape is one of the most powerful tests of new physics ever devised. A single tabletop experiment measuring the electron electric dipole moment can probe energy scales far beyond what the Large Hadron Collider will ever reach. And right now, that measurement is quietly destroying some of the most celebrated ideas in theoretical physics.
In this video, we explain what physicists actually mean by the electron's "shape" (it's not what you think), why the Standard Model predicts near-perfect roundness, why almost every proposed fix to the Standard Model predicts something measurably different, and how scientists use heavy molecules like thorium monoxide and hafnium fluoride ions to hunt for a wobble smaller than anything ever measured before.
The electron knows something about the deepest laws of nature. The question is whether we can build instruments precise enough to read the answer.
Sources:
Roussy, T.S., Caldwell, L., Wright, T., Cairncross, W.B., Shagam, Y., Ng, K.B., Schlossberger, N., Park, S.Y., Wang, A., Ye, J. & Cornell, E.A. (2023). "An improved bound on the electron's electric dipole moment." Science, 381(6653), 46-50. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg4084
Andreev, V. et al. (ACME Collaboration). (2018). "Improved limit on the electric dipole moment of the electron." Nature, 562(7727), 355-360. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-05...
Pospelov, M. & Ritz, A. (2005). "Electric dipole moments as probes of new physics." Annals of Physics, 318(1), 119-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2005.04...
Hudson, J.J., Kara, D.M., Smallman, I.J., Sauer, B.E., Tarbutt, M.R. & Hinds, E.A. (2011). "Improved measurement of the shape of the electron." Nature, 473, 493-496. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10104
#electron #particlephysics #standardmodel #newphysics #electrondipole #sciencedocumentary #physics
12 Comments
waow... !
Why would there be more than one repository for mass. I point out that humanity has failed to look for the simple and obvious answer to what constitutes mass. Try out this observation or watch my posts: For the proton, if you take the known radius of a proton and calculate a frequency of oscillation assuming a circumference of two wavelengths, you very accurately find the equation: E=mc2=2hF. This also works for the neutron. However the neutron is slightly smaller but slightly more massive, further substantiating mass frequency equivalence. So, rest mass is merely the rest frequency of oscillation of that particle. Accelerate that particle and its requency of oscillation increases. That particle's mass has increased purely due to time dilation. That's where inertial mass comes from. So here I have described the mechanics of length contraction and increased mass with velocity. What about the electron? Sadly again humanity has missed the obvious. The Pauli Exclusion Principle: Two electrons in the same shell cannot occupy the same state. I point out that two electrons in the same shell are not two separate entities. They are the same entity. The entire electron shell is the electron oscillation and the Pauli Exclusion Principle substantiates this. So the hydrogen electron shell goes by the equation: E=hF=mc2. It is a very unbalanced oscillation, hence unstable. No measured RMS radius has been measured. Only distance between the nucleons which is not an accurate radius. We go to the helium electron shell. It goes by the equation: E=mc2=2hF. A very balanced oscillation and very stable. If we actually understood particle physics we would better understand the ties to chemistry. At this point I point out that the energy in quarks is detected in the electromagnetic spectrum. They are not stable. They are not particles. So what are they. Again this only requires a logical progression of thoughts. Why does mass shape space and time? Mass utilises space and time to maintain its oscillations. Light curves to the shape of space and time. Light is an electromagnetic wave. Space and time is the electromagnetic field. So particles are electromagnetic oscillations. Quarks actually substantiate this. If one cares to look at the results of current experiments without regard to support the current theory we would have interpreted the following: The proton: A horizontally polarised oscillation of two wavelengths. The up quarks are the sheared magnetic components and the down quark is the broken girth of the voltage component. Accounting for the difference in mass. The neutron: A vertically polarised oscillation of two wavelengths. The down quarks are the sheared voltage components and the up quarks is the broken girth of the magnetic component. What are the sharp objects you mention, It is the rotating girth of the proton. So I am saying that QFT is nothing more than a field composed of mathematical abstractions based on a fundamentally flawed model of the atom. If we care to go further we find that gravitational time dilation and a particle that is an oscillation is responsible for gravity. We actually find that through the application of time dilation that:
1/2mv2=2hDeltaF. From here we can easily derive a formula for Quantum Gravity without the gravitational constant. So the postulate above can do what QFT cannot. I also point out that it is becoming increasingly obvious to me that Plank Length is actually the wavelength of space and time. Space and time therefore oscillates at 1.8exp43. 43 is the answer to, 'Life the universe and everything?'.
As for the electron it is therefore the largest particle but naturally has least mass. Also being and electromagnetic oscillation the simple answer is spin is the direction of the non polarised field. Being the one entity then it should be obvious to anyone who understands basic physics that certainly 2 electrons in the same shell cannot have the same spin. Why do we only look at current research with the view to support the current theory.
Quantum Mechanics:
In the world of the very very small quantum weirdness prevails. Somehow that Quantum weirdness averages out giving rise to the be emergence of our reality.
Quantum Physics: With the correct definition of a particle combined with the properties of this universe our reality is simply compelled to emerge.
As it turns out, a particle that is an oscillation combined with time dilation very simply compels the emergence of our reality. That being: Rest mass, inertial mass, gravity, 'relativistic mass' and length contraction.
Best regards,
Dale Main
Why the Electron Is Too Perfectly Round
Sleep On Physics
22,399 views
The electron is the most perfectly round object ever measured. If you scaled one up to the size of the entire solar system, any lopsidedness in its charge would be smaller than a human hair. But here's the problem, according to almost every theory trying to explain the biggest mysteries in physics, the electron shouldn't be this round. Supersymmetry, extra dimensions, new Higgs particles, they all predict a tiny distortion that experiments should have already found. And yet, measurement after measurement finds the same impossible answer: perfect roundness.
This isn't just a quirky fact about a subatomic particle. The electron's shape is one of the most powerful tests of new physics ever devised. A single tabletop experiment measuring the electron electric dipole moment can probe energy scales far beyond what the Large Hadron Collider will ever reach. And right now, that measurement is quietly destroying some of the most celebrated ideas in theoretical physics.
In this video, we explain what physicists actually mean by the electron's "shape" (it's not what you think), why the Standard Model predicts near-perfect roundness, why almost every proposed fix to the Standard Model predicts something measurably different, and how scientists use heavy molecules like thorium monoxide and hafnium fluoride ions to hunt for a wobble smaller than anything ever measured before.
The electron knows something about the deepest laws of nature. The question is whether we can build instruments precise enough to read the answer.
Sources:
Roussy, T.S., Caldwell, L., Wright, T., Cairncross, W.B., Shagam, Y., Ng, K.B., Schlossberger, N., Park, S.Y., Wang, A., Ye, J. & Cornell, E.A. (2023). "An improved bound on the electron's electric dipole moment." Science, 381(6653), 46-50. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg4084
Andreev, V. et al. (ACME Collaboration). (2018). "Improved limit on the electric dipole moment of the electron." Nature, 562(7727), 355-360. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-05...
Pospelov, M. & Ritz, A. (2005). "Electric dipole moments as probes of new physics." Annals of Physics, 318(1), 119-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2005.04...
Hudson, J.J., Kara, D.M., Smallman, I.J., Sauer, B.E., Tarbutt, M.R. & Hinds, E.A. (2011). "Improved measurement of the shape of the electron." Nature, 473, 493-496. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10104
#electron #particlephysics #standardmodel #newphysics #electrondipole #sciencedocumentary #physics