Mass energy conversion and absurdities of modern science
It is accepted that mass at elementary level is not an additive unit and mass can be converted in energy and reciprocal at this level.
As example, the binding energy of an electron to atom or the binding energy of a nucleon to nucleus is a consequence of a mass defect due to a mass energy conversion.
The text analyses the case of a Bi atom, where there are electron ionization energies starting from few eV for the outer electrons up to 0,1 MeV for the most inner electrons.
According to special theory of relativity, up to 20% of electron mass might be converted into energy for an inner electron rotating around nucleus.
But in this case, what is the meaning of electrostatic interaction between electron and nucleus?
Practically, there are two contradictory explanations for the same experimental unit, i.e. ionization energy.
Further the idea of mass quantification (looking from the point of view of relativity) is analysed.
Of course, the model of proton made by few quarks becomes a general accepted one by actual mainstream physics. I'm sorry to say, but this oversimplified model must be abandoned, if the equivalence mass energy is right.
It can be demonstrated that according to relativity an electron can have millions of elementary particles (let’s invent a name for them!) and of course for a proton or neutron there must be more chunks.
The link:
http://elkadot.com/index.php/en/books/nuclear/mass-energy-equivalencehttp://elkadot.com/index.php/ro/carti/nucleara/conversia-masa-energieThe present message is only un update of a meterial from 2011.
Best regards,
Sorin Cosofret
