Hi Frank, OK, I see where we differ. I'm using this value for radius of electron.
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/ElectronRadius.html For the proton, using that capacity of sphere formula, I get... ~.9 x 10^-25 Farads using the proton radius here. http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Proton.html I guess talking about the "radius" of either of these two particles is a bit misleading, a sort of "lumped" analysis where a distributed one is in order. It is remarkable to me that the voltages there particles are at range from 1/2 to 2 million volts. Freds discussion about a (sort of) distributed model had too many hands for me to comment on *grin*. K. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 3:57 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [Vo]: 1.568 x 10 -25 Farads Keith Nagel writes C = 3.135*10^-25 F and we seem to differ by a factor of two. BTW, this is pretty well known, are you claiming the idea??? I've not got a reference at hand, but I'm sure a little searching would turn up something... K. ................................ Thank you for you comment Keith. No, I am not claiming to have discovered the value of capacitance of a proton. r=1.4 x 10-15m. It is well known. It is sort of one of those uninteresting facts that no one cares about, except perhaps me. The field of physics is divided into two camps; Quantum and classical. The quantum regime is considered to be preeminent. The classical world falls out as large numbers of quantum events occur. I disagree with this. I believe that the quantum regime is a subset of the classical universe. I believe that there is a minimum of stray capacitance that can be experienced by a particle. This minimum of stray capacitance is a classical phenomena. It is a property of the universe. The quantum regime falls out a consequence of this classical property. I started with 1.568 x 10 -25 Farads and developed the quantum regime from this first principle. I got the same answers, however, I employed an underlying classical premise. I did not come directly to Planck's constant from this approach. I came to 1.09 megahertz-meters as a fundamental quantum constant. With a little math 1.09 meters/sec can be converted to Planck's constant. I hope you understand Keith http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/index.html Frank Z
