Subsequent to learning that Mills realised that the electron had negative mass I have been revisiting a post I wrote a year ago. I have copied the relevant part below.
========================================================= Iterative Hierarchical Strain and the atom. Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 ...As far as hierarchical strain is concerned the atom is conveniently divided into two quite distinct regions, the nucleus and the electronic cloud. It is not difficult to see which must be the region in relative tension and which must be the region in relative compression. One can visualise the Gamma atmosphere being torn apart with the nucleus under enormous relative compression and the cloud under enormous tension relative to the Gamma atmosphere pressure. Electrons therefore would seem to be holes opening up in the Gamma atmosphere. Interestingly enough there is an artefact which models this situation rather nicely. When I was a boy I had a habit of taking things apart. I rarely managed to get them back together again but I did have the satisfaction of seeing how they worked. One of the things I cut open was a golf ball. I found it consisted of a great length of elastic wound tightly around a hard rubber core - in effect a archetypal model of the prestressed atom. ========================================================= So in effect the electron can be seen as having negative strain energy and the proton as having positive strain energy. The beauty of looking at energy in terms of strain rather than in terms of mass is that it is immediately obvious how negative mass arises. Strain can be positive or negative, minus epsilon (-e) or plus epsilon +(e). Now strain energy which entails strain squared has the same positive sign whether it is derived from -e or +e. Of course, strictly speaking it is not mass, as such, which is positive or negative, it is wot underlies mass that is positive or negative, i.e. velocity if one is taking the dynamic view, or strain if one is taking the static view. In terms of mass energy then, the electron has a tensile mass energy, a specific mass energy below that of the surrounding neutral mass aether and the positron has a compressive mass energy above that of the surrounding neutral mass aether. Now we don't have the problem of being able to visualize a neutral state in the case of charge since we already see charge as negative and positive. This suggests that charge is a direct measure of some scale of velocity and not a indirect (squared) measure as in the case of mass. At present, of course, positive and negative charges are assumed to be entirely symmetrical, but clearly this is nonsense. If the positron and electron were completely symmetrical to each other then anti- hydrogen (negatively charged proton surrounded by a positron) would be just as common as normal hydrogen. If charge is seen as source and sink at the bottom of some real ocean then the asymmetry is plain. A source in a real ocean has to be at a higher pressure than a sink and therefor the absolute strain energy at the relevant scale has to be greater for the source than for the sink. One would imagine that this necessary asymmetry between electron and positron would show up in the properties of positronium but I can find no evidence of it - except of course, that of the energy given out as both mass and charge revert to the ambient aether values of neutral mass and neutral charge. It would seem that mass and charge are complementary hierarchical properties like pressure and compreture (reciprocal of temperature) at a higher level of structure. Increasing the pressure of a gas decreases the compreture and vice versa. Cheers Frank Grimer
