It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by OccamAssassin
According to my year 12 physics book....
The mass of a proton at rest is 1.6726 x 10^-27 Kg
The mass of an electron at rest is 9.11 x 10^-31 Kg
So a mainstream text is saying that the difference in mass is roughly 1000:1
BTW mainstream science also recognises that more than 94% of the universes matter is dark(which basically means "unaccounted for").
Where is the conspiracy?edit on 27/10/2012 by OccamAssassin because: (no reason given)
Fundamental properties: The invariant mass of an electron is approximately 9.109×10−31 kilograms,[66] or 5.489×10−4 atomic mass units. On the basis of Einstein's principle of mass–energy equivalence, this mass corresponds to a rest energy of 0.511 MeV. The ratio between the mass of a proton and that of an electron is about 1836.[9][67] Astronomical measurements show that the proton-to-electron mass ratio has held the same value for at least half the age of the universe, as is predicted by the Standard Model.[68]
The electron has no known substructure.[2][72] Hence, it is defined or assumed to be a point particle with a point charge and no spatial extent.[10] Observation of a single electron in a Penning trap shows the upper limit of the particle's radius is 10−22 meters.[73] There is a physical constant called the "classical electron radius", with the much larger value of 2.8179×10−15 m. However, the terminology comes from a simplistic calculation that ignores the effects of quantum mechanics; in reality, the so-called classical electron radius has little to do with the true fundamental structure of the electron.[74][note 5]
Effects: A naked singularity could allow scientists to observe an infinitely dense material, which would under normal circumstances be impossible by the cosmic censorship hypothesis. Without an event horizon of any kind, some speculate that naked singularities could actually emit light.[8]
Originally posted by FreedomCommander
And if what you say is true, then the current science on particles is wrong, it should be in the thousands, if not millions. In order to balance out it's charge it needs a lot of electrons for one proton.
In general we look for a new law by the following process. First we guess it. Then we compute the consequences of the guess to see what would be implied if this law that we guessed is right. Then we compare the result of the computation to nature, with experiment or experience, compare it directly with observation, to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is. It does not make any difference how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is – if it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. That is all there is to it.
And if what you say is true, then the current science on particles is wrong, it should be in the thousands, if not millions. In order to balance out it's charge it needs a lot of electrons for one proton.
Originally posted by CLPrime
reply to post by PurpleChiten
eV? Or e?
edit on 27-10-2012 by CLPrime because: (no reason given)
And if there are that many electrons just to cover one nucleus, then there must be at least 1836 times what we are told. So on average, there is one electron every proton, right? Well, what if I say there is 1836 electrons every proton? That will stir a hornets nest.