Of interest - wrt the “9 muon model” of the proton is an old paper by Harold
Aspen where he came up with the same conclusion.
http://www.aetherscience.org/www-aspden-org/books/Asp/1988c.pdf
Aspden missed the important detail about binding energy showing up as mass
deficit, but still it is more than coincidental to Stubb’s model.
One more point for John Berry about antimatter and matter coexisting in the
nucleus without annihilating. It turns out that the standard model of physics
has the quark and antiquark coexisting without annihilation, so there is an
exact precedent for this, already in place and no good reason the muon and
antimuon cannot do the same.
I haven’t had the time to review exactly how Don Hotson imagined the proton to
be constructed, but epo pairs are likely to be involved – so here too we have a
similar situation of bound matter and antimatter showing up as building blocks.
Stubbs mentions something like this in one of his papers but rejects electrons
in favor of muons, yet the muon itself could be imagined to be 103 epos plus an
electron .
Instead of “turtles all the way down”… it’s looking more and more like “leptons
all the way down”
For the turtle challenged:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
