Hi Eric,
I think Hotson suggests that epos have 0 mass. As I understand it, only
positive energy charges have mass. According to Hotson, protons and
neutrons are comprised of electron and positron lattices - perhaps in a
stabilized positronium-like cluster. Each of the electron and positron has
mass because every charge has mass. Epos loose their mass by becoming a
quasi-neutral particle due to orbiting at the Planck scale. However, due
to the counter-rotation, epos do appear to have an elementary magnetic
dipole, and also have a freely rotate-able electric dipole at right angle
to the magnetic axis. I find it fascinating that the most elementary
construct of the ether would have magnetic and electric fields constrained
at right angles!

## Advertising

The epo's electric dipole does not count as a charge termination, hence no
mass. Thus, in the vacuum, there are no monopolar charges and no magnetic
monopoles. Even the electron in positive energy space (according to
Hotson) is not really a monopolar charge. I think he thinks of the
electron as a dipolar charge with the positive portion pointing into
imaginary space. Think of it as a ball floating on the surface of water.
The air-water boundary being the real/imaginary (or real/other-dimension)
boundary. The negative charge points into the air and the positive charge
points into the water. In the spinor solution of Dirac's equation for the
epo, as the electron and positron orbit, they get rotated across this
dimensional boundary and switch between being electrons and positrons in
synchronism.
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hotson says that only positive energy charges have mass and the epos are
>> part of the negative energy sea.
>>
>
> Assume with Hotson that there is a negative energy sea with negative
> energy charges. I wonder whether, contrary to Hotson's wishes, a positive
> mass would nevertheless fall out of general relativity for such negative
> energy charges. Even weirder would be a negative mass. The weirdest of
> all, though, would be *no* mass.
>
> Eric
>
>