Jones, On your first point -
"Electron Capture" events [energy+p+e --> n+v] occur in the nucleus and respect conservation laws. Are we sure they cannot also occur in extremely energetic complex plasmons? On your second point - Energy must come from somewhere. The formulas in the two papers I referenced show that conduction electrons in nano-circuits can acquire far more momentum, inertial mass and potential magnetic energy than in macro-circuits. This is why I suggested that the electroweak barrier might be surmounted by direct conversion of magnetic potential energy by an ampere "pinching" together of an e-p pair - bypassing conversion of magnetic-to-kinetic energy. After all, exchanging electrostatic potential energy with gravitional potential energy at slow speeds is easy. The ampere force on an e-p plasmon pair is exerted by magnetic coupling to millions of electrons. Maybe an good analogy would be an arrow. Only the tip's electrostatic coupling to the rest of the arrow gives it piercing power. BTW, I am not sure of any of the above. Just speculating. I welcome corrections. Thanks for the reply, Lou Pagnucco Jones Beene wrote on Mon, 20 Feb 2012: > -----Original Message----- > From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com > >> I don't understand Jones Beene's point. >> If correct - how do neutrons decay into e-, p+ and neutrino? > > Yes, that is correct - and spin is conserved on neutron decay. Since you > are going from a more massive neutron to a less massive proton, the energy > released is also conserved. > > BUT - there is a basic asymmetry here in that in addition to the large > mass deficit, when you try to go the other way (P + e), there is > NO neutrino with which to conserve spin, so it cannot happen in that > direction - get it? > Neutrinos are ubiquitous but cannot be captured to retain symmetry. > Plus - even if spin were not an issue, you cannot go from low mass to > higher mass without adding LOTS of energy from somewhere. Speed of light > squared cannot be easily bypassed to suddenly create the deficit mass - > as W-L apparently wish to do. As David mentioned, in QM - the deficit > could potentially be "borrowed" in advance, but only IF it could be > "repaid" immediately (sub-pico-sec). However, there is too much time > delay for that since the neutron is not immediately absorbed following >formation.
