Eric, Here are a few other brief points leading to the conclusion that hydrogen mass is not quantized-at least not “in practice”. (to be explained)
First off – it would be most unusual for only one isotope of one element in
the entire periodic table to be quantized. That would be the case if the
proton were to be found quantized in practice.
Secondly, and most importantly for moving ahead with this hypothesis - it is
possible (if not encouraged) to have a bifurcation between the theoretical
and the actual – such that there is a theoretical “ideal” – the so-called
Bohr atom - which exists only on paper, and which is quantized. In the
pursuit of experimental physics, however, there is variation and there is
leeway, and there is a range of masses with an average which corresponds to
an ideal value, with populations on either side of the average that exist
“in practice”.
Third, the proton consists of three quarks which represent less than one
half of its mass, combined with other bosons which are essentially “glue” -
but most of them are said to be massless. It simply does not add up when you
do the numbers. Also quark mass cannot be measured easily and there is NO
firm value - and QCD teaches that quark mass is subject to color change
(with consequences to mass-energy release) so quark mass itself cannot be
constant. If quark mass is not quantized, then it goes without saying that
proton mass cannot be quantized. Again – we can define an “ideal” value –
but do not expect to see it in practice.
Fourth. A so-called massless particle is integral to the standard model and
is a particle whose invariant mass is zero. A major category of massless
particles is gauge bosons – like the gluon (carrier of the strong force).
However, gluons are never observed as free particles, since they are
confined within hadrons BUT they cannot be massless to the extent the strong
force is dynamic. Thus the entire structure of matter in the standard model
is “built on a lie” – which is the massless particle. We know the “real
mass” is actually a significant fraction of proton mass.
Fifthly, electrons in hydrogen display a spectrum which tells us their
energy levels- given by the Rydberg equation. Electrons are quantized, but
even so, these lines are a bit fuzzy and imprecise, and their levels are
also built on another sandy foundation – the FCC (fine structure constant).
The FCC “ought to be” an integer value but is not since each frequency must
correspond to an energy (hν) by Einstein’s equation. This photon energy must
be the difference between two energy levels, since that is the amount of
energy released by the electron moving from one level to the other but that
does not depend on the mass of proton. The energy of a state can be
characterized by an integer quantum number, n = 1, 2, 3, ... which
determines its energy. The end number however is close to 137 – given by the
fine structure constant but it is not exact and non-integer, so we suspect
that every value in between is also not exact. Moreover, it is likely that
this variation is tied to permitted mass variation in the proton mass. IOW
there are fudge factors everywhere which are based primarily on the “real”
proton having a variable mass (variable but within a narrow range).
Even when you must conclude that the energies of electrons in atoms are
"quantized," that is, restricted to certain values – the slight variation in
these lines indicates that the same conclusion does not apply to the
underlying proton.
This essentially is the best argument for quantization: if the electron is
quantized – then why not the proton? But it is a false expectation. Can
anyone think of any good theoretical argument which demand quantization in
actual protons (as opposed to the Bohr atom, which is the ideal version)?
From: Eric Walker
I wrote:
What is it that is causing the proton in this model to vary
in mass, and is the range of possible masses discrete or continuous?
I should anticipate one possible answer, which seems like a
good explanation -- a proton is not a point particle, like a photon, and it
does not travel at the speed of light. It has mass and it has a speed that
is less than c. So the mass will vary with its speed; when it is stationary
it will have a rest mass, and when it is travelling at relativistic
velocities, it has a larger mass.
Assuming the above is true, and assuming your model of a
proton having an average mass is true, the question for me now becomes, is
the (rest) mass a continuous value or discrete across a range?
Eric
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
