Reply To: Site availability is poor

[ikanreed]

Steven Sesselmann wrote: Some things we take for granted, but when we consider it carefully, it may not be so obvious after all.

Everyone thinks they know the answer…

…oh that’s simple, if something has more electrons than protons, then it holds negative charge, and if something has less electrons than protons it holds a positive charge.

Then when we realize that the above expression makes no sense at all, because charge is relative, and there is no way to know how many electrons something has.

Ground potential means absolutely nothing, because a bird sitting on a 10,000V power line feels no charge, in fact we can put a scientist inside a metal cage, charge it to -10,000 volts, and ask him to find the extra electrons, and of course he won’t find them, because inside his cage everything is just fine and normal.

So it is generally accepted that negative ions have extra electrons.

Could there be another explanation (without upsetting the chemists)?

If charge was nothing more than electrical potential and the electrical potential alone represented the total energy of matter, then what we call ground potential, would be in the order of +930 Mev (the proton mass energy of the most stable element Ni62). Just like the bird on the wire, we would be sitting at a potential of almost 1 Gev. without even knowing it.

Electrons need not necessarily exist within the nucleus at all, they might simply be a means to transfer potential between one particle and another, ergo a quantum particle that transfers 511 Kev of electrical potential from A to B, and once the transfer has taken place, the particle no longer exists.

From this, a simple rule could be formulated, objects of higher electrical potential fall towards objects of lower electrical potential, just as water runs down hill.

The known forces including gravity may be replaced by one single parameter, being the difference in electrical potential.

The arrow of time points in the direction of lower potential, so we may say that the future is down and the past is up, and what we perceive as time, is the continuous drop in potential, resulting from the matter we and the Earth are made from, falling to lower and lower potential, by undergoing continuous fission/fusion/chemical reactions……we are (I think) imploding!

This implosion process gives us the illusion of an expanding Universe, which I agree is definitely a more palatable future, but sadly I think it might be wrong.

Steven

My only reply to this has to be the oil drop experiment. Your explanation does not fit with the quantized nature of electric charge. If your new theory can adequately explain the results of that experiment(it appears not to), I’d agree that there was cause to reexamine our notion of electrical charge. What’s your argument against the existence of quantization of charge?