An interesting idea that I recently pursued might offer some insight into this discussion. A few weeks ago I spoke of my thoughts that the mass of an electron might be distributed throughout the field in the form of field energy. This would be established by using Einstein's equation that E=M*C^2 at each differential volume of space.
It is well understood in classical fields theory that energy is contained at every location where an electric field is present. I took the equation for the volume of a sphere and obtained a differential model only depending upon radius since the field is symmetrical in the other spherical angular dimensions. This formula was then multiplied by the volume energy density found in the wikipedia(I know...) to obtain a total differential energy density per volume element that could then be integrated over the entire volume rather easily. The results of the integration showed that all of the mass of an electron could be distributed within an electric field that existed from a radius of 2.8179 fm to infinity. This also is described within the wikipedia article on electrons as the classical electron radius. In their case, the energy was determined by assuming that you forced the charge into that volume instead of from my perspective. I found it interesting that both approaches yeilded the same result. They also pointed out that the assumed radius of a proton is .8775 fm which is about 1/3 the radius of the classical electron. I have been seeking an explanation as to why a field has an immediate impact upon the momentum of a charged body entering into that region when it takes significant time for the particle originating that field to become aware of the new intruder. If as I suspect, the field contains local mass then the question would be answered in a reasonable manner. IIRC quantum mechanics assumes that a photon or many of them act as the carrier of this momentum exchange between the two particles. When the particles are far removed it is difficult to understand how this contact is so well directed by that method. I find it easier to believe that a local reaction can handle the momentum and energy balances instead. That was what initiated my search and is now placed on hold. Consider this input as just an alternate way of looking at an unusual problem. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Tue, Feb 10, 2015 11:35 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:New study confirms the presence of dark matter in the inner part of the Milky Way FromJones: >Oops typo… should be: ”Therefore, a logical conclusion isthat dark matter >is most likely a degenerate from of light matter, meaning that it is mostly >hydrogen in a different and denser form.” >BTW - This would be the same species as seen in the many Holmlid/Miley papers, >which is called ”IRH” or inverted Rydberg hydrogen. >Holmlid: ”A much denser state exists for hydrogen ... and the bonddistance is >very small, equal to 2.3 pm. Its density is extremely large >130 kg /cm3” >here is one paper: >http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/244/3/032036/pdf/1742-6596_244_3_032036 Frommy layman's POV these explanations sound VERY similar to Dr. Mills' hydrino modelwhich allegedly consists of smaller more sense hydrogen atoms that apparentlyexist in great abundance below the officially accepted ground state. Cansomeone lay out some of the basic differences that might exist between the Rydberghydrogen model vs Dr. Mills' hydrino model? Feel free to clarify any misinterpretationsI may have made in my previous wording. Itmight be a good idea to point out what the most significant theoretical differencemight be between competing models of Dark Matter that apparently involve thehydrogen atom. I'mcurious. Regards, StevenVincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
