-----Original Message-----
From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 5:09 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Size of the electron
Hoyt,
> Regarding the size of the electron, Dewey B. Larson's Reciprocal System
> has a precise answer:
> Diameter = 320.54 Pico meters (same for the neutron).
That couldn't be right could it? The Bohr radius is generally said to be
...
Below is another thing I made in 1994. I also heard tat the Millikan
experiments were flawed. He had a preconceived value of the electron
charge that he tuned the experiments towards. A third strangeness is
that when I read plasma physics last year they did the opposite of
what is done below. They assumed the electron mass to be fixed and
they derived the permittivity and permeability from it. The subject
remains controversial.
You need a fixed font to read the text below. I hope Gmail won't
distort it. (When do we get the promised TeX extensions of HTML?)
David
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
---- ---- ----
The mass of the electron as an electromagnetic effect
by David Jonsson, Uppsala , Sweden
Take a look at the equation for the magnetic flux around a moving
electron in the
nonrelativistic case, the simple Biot-Savarts law
_ _
_ mu0 e v x r
B = ----- . ----- (1)
4 Pi 3
r
The energy-density of this field is according to eq. (2)
_ 2
B _2 _ _
u = ----- , (B = B * B) (2)
2 mu0
In order to calculate the magnetic energy of the moving electron we insert (1)
into (2) to get (3)
2 2 2
mu0 e v sin (theta)
u = ------ . ------------- (3)
2 4
32 Pi r
Lets integrate eq. (3) outside the electron to find out the entire energy of its
magnetic field.
2 2
mu0 e v
U = ------ . -- (4)
r
12 Pi e
Lets install the classical electron radius re,
2 2
e mu0 e
r = ------------------- = -------- (5)
e 2 4 Pi m
4 Pi epsilon0 c m e
e
in (4) to get
2
m v
e
U= -------
3
This reminds very much of the equation of the kinetic energy of the electron.
Only 1/6 of the kinetic energy is missing but remember that I havenÕt
included the
field inside the electron in the calculus. Can it be so simple that the inertia
of the electron is due to LenzÕ law only?
