On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 2:20 AM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > Harry, > > I have not given much thought about free electrons. The example that we > were discussing was of an electron trapped in orbit around a nucleus which > then would have the positive charge of the nucleus to keep it together. > > I think that Mills offers incite into how this type of electron > configuration would exist. Quantum mechanics offers an alternate model. I > have not convinced myself of exactly what is happening but perhaps one day I > can reach an acceptable understanding. > > It seems that there is about as much reason for a point charge to tear > itself apart as there would be for a distributed one to do so.
I disagree. A point is a geometric entity without extension, which means a point cannot be subdivided into parts. Therefore an ideal point charge has no parts which can blow part. > The fact > that the spin can be worked with independent of the charge suggests that > there is a volume of some type being occupied by the electron pieces. Maybe > it is just an entangled group of components that looks like one particle > when measured. > > Dave Harry
