edd said:
In short: what ctamblyn said. Put longer, I'm happy to admit to having read your post in a way you may not have intended...
Apology accepted.
edd said:
...in which case you must explain why you have chosen 1.0 m2.5s-1.5, or alternatively the fundamental physics significance of 1/10,000,000 the distance from the North Pole to the Equator via Dunkerque, and the fundamental physics significance of 1/86,400 of a mean solar day. I think you will find that challenging, as the electron mass was apparently fixed long before any human settlement in that bit of France, or indeed the creation of the solar system.
Sigh. What underlies this is that the motion of light defines our time and distance. Imagine you're looking up at the sky watching a beam of light traversing past the moon. You watch it for a while, and then you say:
"Right. While that light beam moved from there to there the reading in my parallel-mirror light-clock went up to 299,792,458, and we'll call that "the time". In fact we'll call that one second. And we'll say that the metre is 1/299,792,458th of "the distance" moved by light in one second. So we'll say the speed of light c is 299,792,458 metres per second".
It doesn't matter how fast the light moves, you will always say the speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s. On top of that photon energy is E=hf. The h relates to distance because action is momentum x distance which relates to that guitar-string pluck displacement*, distance being defined by the motion of light c. Momentum is just energy divided by c, mass is just momentum divided by c, and frequency is just the reciprocal of time which is again defined by the motion of light c. For a stable spin-half Dirac's belt "resonance" the light has to sweep round an h-bar-diameter path at c AND go round orthogonally at half that rate, and this can only occur there's a harmonic between the two motions. It's like you have to pluck the guitar string into a "closed string" loop. Only space is three-dimensional and the electron has a spherical electric field, so you know it isn't sweeping round a moebius-strip loop, it's sweeping a 4π sphere like that over-inflated twisted torus. Meanwhile, everything is pointing you back to the motion of light.
Read my post
#1198 again. Try to understand it. Make sure you look at that Watt balance stuff. Note where I said
the elastic properties of the wire are analogous to ε0 and μ0. The permittivity is like
how easy is it to displace space, and permeability is like
how well does it push back. Make sure you read Maxwell's treatise where he talked about "stress in a medium". Also make sure you check out Percy Hammond where he talked about electromagnetism in terms of curvature. And since you're a cosmologist**, see
http://arxiv.org/abs/0912.2678 where on page 5 you can read this:
"We see that the modification of GR entailed by MOND does not enter here by modifying the ‘elasticity’ of spacetime (except perhaps its strength), as is done in f(R) theories and the like."
I'm no MOND fan, that's just a little clue. As is
waves run through it. As is the shear stress term in the stress-energy tensor. Shear stress! That tells you in an instant that it's bleedin' elastic. Did I ever tell you that my mate Qiu Hong Hu was at ABB50/25 talking to Michael Atiyah about the trivial-knot electron and the trefoil proton? That's the best-kept secret in contemporary physics. Despite Witten's contribution, there ain't no TQFT in the standard model. The standing-wave electron has been excommunicated.
* Take a look at some pictures of the electromagnetic spectrum. Note how the depicted wave height is constant. That's what underlies your h. There's only one wavelength that will do to get the wave to displace itself into a closed standing-wave path.
** See how ctamblyn fell flat on his face? He got steamrollered. Don't let particle-physics
fairy-tale quacks
bankrupt cosmology too.
Right, that's enough of that. If you don't accept what I'm telling you we'll just go round in circles. Ask me about some problems in cosmology instead, and I'll try to give you some kind of answer that makes sense from my fundamental physics viewpoint.
!