# Charge of down, up , electron; (-1/3, 2/3, -1)*3 more natural?

Gold Member
Let us define the charge of the down-quark, up-quark, and electron as

(-1/3, 2/3, -1)*3 or -1, 2, -3.

Let momentum in some closed one dimensional space be equated with electric charge. If momentum goes as n/wavelength where n = 1,2,3,..., the down quark has a charge of -1, wavelength equal the the "length", L, of the closed space. The up quark has two units of charge, twice as much momentum as the down quark, wavelength equal to L/2. The electron has three units of charge, wavelength equal to L/3.

Electron charge defined as -3 more natural?

Thank you for any thoughts.

mathman
Let us define the charge of the down-quark, up-quark, and electron as

(-1/3, 2/3, -1)*3 or -1, 2, -3.

Let momentum in some closed one dimensional space be equated with electric charge. If momentum goes as n/wavelength where n = 1,2,3,..., the down quark has a charge of -1, wavelength equal the the "length", L, of the closed space. The up quark has two units of charge, twice as much momentum as the down quark, wavelength equal to L/2. The electron has three units of charge, wavelength equal to L/3.

Electron charge defined as -3 more natural?

Thank you for any thoughts.
If we could start from scratch your idea would probably prevail, but it is far too late to change.

On a completely different subject, look at the layout of the letters on your keyboard (QWERTY). It was designed originally (to be inefficient) to prevent typist from jamming mechanical typewriters. Many have advovated a more efficient modern design. It won't happen.

alxm
An electron charge of 1 is easily the most convenient for the most people. There are a lot more people dealing with protons and electrons, atoms and molecules than there are dealing with quarks directly. All of chemistry, to begin with...

Let us define the charge of the down-quark, up-quark, and electron as

(-1/3, 2/3, -1)*3 or -1, 2, -3.

Let momentum in some closed one dimensional space be equated with electric charge. If momentum goes as n/wavelength where n = 1,2,3,..., the down quark has a charge of -1, wavelength equal the the "length", L, of the closed space. .

What makes you believe that charge has anything to do with momentum?

In addition, in QM, momentum has a commutator where as charge does not.

ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
What makes you believe that charge has anything to do with momentum?

Something I thought a friend told me who was interested in 5-D relativity.

See:

http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND+carey+briggs/0/1/0/all/0/1

This is not a valid way of citing a reference. Please cite the EXACT paper. And since this is still QM and not particle physics/string, we strongly prefer peer-reviewed publication and not just a preprint on ArXiv.

Zz.