Is There an End to the Quantization of Mass in Fundamental Particles?

  • Thread starter Thread starter einstein_vishnu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mass Quantization
AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the concept of quantization of mass in fundamental particles, questioning the existence of an ultimate elementary particle. It highlights the analogy between mass and the quantization of electromagnetic radiation, suggesting that dividing particles further leads to complications, particularly with point particles lacking spatial extension. The conversation touches on the implications of singularities in physics, noting that when spacetime reaches zero, physical laws become meaningless. Additionally, it proposes a model of quantizing one-dimensional space to reconcile forces of gravity and antigravity. The ideas presented challenge traditional views on mass and spacetime, indicating a need for further exploration in theoretical physics.
einstein_vishnu
i have drawn an analogy with the quantization of radiation(EM).the motivation behind this thought was "what is the most elemetary particle?"u may say quarks but i can divide it further if i have high energy particles,so then where is ending for this?i thought it's better not end up in point particle,where it does not have any spatial extension.
rest energy+kinetic energy=hf,where h=planck's
f=matter wave frequency.
i have undergone so many crazy thoughts about this one such is there is advatage here in overcoming singularity,beacuase ther is no zero energy particle(atleast ground state of vibrational energy and rest energy).
it may look very prematured thought but let me know the wrong thinking inthis
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your thinking is along the same track that I have been doing. I did have problem with point mass (mass without extension).

Newton used the point-mass model for his laws. Maxwell used point-charge for his theory of electromagnetism. One of the infinite number of solution of Einstein field equations is the singularity (point-spacetime). But when spacetime is exactly zero, all physical laws become meaningless including Einstein's general relativity.

Penrose and Hawking both believe that true naked singularity cannot be seen in order to avoid theoretical complications.

My proposal is to quantized one dimensional space with local acceleration conserved for a timelike force and a spacelike force giving rise to gravity and antigravity force.
 
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
163
Views
26K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Back
Top