Re: The densities of a subatomic particle

"Phil Gardner" <pej_dg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1144149353.641908.197920@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| Rejected by spr moderator. Instead of the usual "overly
| speculative" he wrote "inappropriate for the newsgroup. This
| message appears to be rant about quantum mechanics, a large part of
| which is incorrect"
|
| I read his "incorrect" as "conflicts with what most physicists
| today assume to be true because no better alternative has yet been
| found". Which seems to too many to be sufficient reason for trying
| to ensure that dissenting views are not discussed within spr. As an
| experiment I progressively cut my post until the surviving remnant -
| the first two paragraphs only - was accepted.
|
| I would welcome criticism of my original post.
| ___________
|
| On Mon, Mar 20 2006 Arnold Neumaier <Arnold.Neuma...@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
| wrote:
|
| > Phil Gardner wrote:
|
| >> .........................
| >> For a Schrodinger stationary state psi(x) of a simple system in its
| >> rest frame |psi(x)|^2 is time independent.
|
| > Only for the equation i hbar psidot = H psi,
| > which describes an isolated single particle. In practice, particles
| > are not isolated, .....................
|
| How do you define isolated? You surely accept the physical existence
| of an isolated pair of interacting particles (eg proton + electron).
| In the far field limit for a positive energy state each of them is in
| every practical sense "isolated" - in a state of uniform motion.
|
| The problem with the Schrodinger equation is that it then defines only
| a set of possible plane waves which can tell us only the magnitude of
| the particle's momentum, nothing more. This is still contained in
| |psi|^2 but this function tells us nothing at all about the structure
| and the densities of the particle.

Isn't it true that there are more than just plane wave solutions? But
true that the S. equation does not tell us about the "structure" of the
particles but will tell us something about composite structures such as
the hydrogen atom. I think you need something more like the Dirac
equation plus interactions for some "structure".

| The only Schrodinger state functions that have much in common with a
| single particle are those for bound systems, most of all the ones that
| are spherically symmetric, eg that of the ground state of the hydrogen
| atom. An isolated particle somehow holds itself together so it is in
| some sense a bound system. If it has a non-zero mass it has a rest
| frame in which we can fairly assume that |psi|^2 is time independent.
| By including in the time independent Schrodinger equation a "self
| potential" we can define a "wave function" that has all the
| attributes of a stationary three dimensional soliton (as viewed in a
| reference frame that travels with it).
|
| Given that there is no evidence of anything periodic in space or time
| about a single particle (the only periodicities ever observed with an
| interferometer are with a beam of monoenergetic particles and are
| periodic in space alone) I cannot understand why physicists are so
| committed to wave functions that are periodic in time and so unwilling
| to look at those that are aperiodic. All that we need is to stay
with
| the time independent Schrodinger equation and revise the
| time dependent Schrodinger equation. One candidate for a suitable
| Schrodinger soliton equation (valid only for an isolated particle in
| uniform motion (momentum p, inertial mass M, M^2 = m^2 + (p/c)^2) is:
| (K del^2 - ^2 D^2) (log (psi)), where D(psi) = psi.dot (the partial
| time derivative), K = (1/3)(p/Mc)^2. This has the simple solution:
| psi = exp (-u), where u = (x-X)^2 + (y -Y)^2 + (z-Z)^2 and the
| position of the centroid of the soliton (and the particle) is defined
| by the coordinates, X(t), Y(t), Z(t).
|
| Solitons such as the above, like all solitons in macroscopic fluids,
| have no singularities and all particles constructed from them with
| density potentials that are simple functions of |psi|^2 have no
| infinities and require no renormalization. Dirac wrote of this
| procedure, "This is just not sensible mathematics. Sensible
| mathematics involves neglecting a quantity because it turns out to be
| small, not neglecting it because it is infinitely large and you do not
| want it! Of course the inference is that the basic equations are wrong
| and radical changes need to be made." He was clearly saying that we
| should look for something better than the Dirac wave equation, one
with
| no singularities, no infinities. But, sadly, the successes of QED
| persuaded almost everyone to ignore his words.
| Phil Gardner Submitted 12.19 29/03/06
| Rejected by Khavkine - Try deleting last two paragraphs

Perhaps you might be interested in "The Nature of the Electron" thread
and paper,

http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0512265

;-)

Igor rejected my response about this also on spr.

FrediFizzx
http://www.vacuum-physics.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The densities of a subatomic particle
    ... which describes an isolated single particle. ... The problem with the Schrodinger equation is that it then defines only ... frame in which we can fairly assume that |psi|^2 is time independent. ... Schrodinger soliton equation (valid only for an isolated particle in ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • Re: The densities of a subatomic particle
    ... rest frame |psi|^2 is time independent. ... which describes an isolated single particle. ... particle interacting with a system of n particles. ...
    (sci.physics.research)