Your questions are related to a rather narrow field in physics. I would describe in your post what is the problem and how could it be solved. Instead, you post the questions, which is difficult to understand. "The aim of the results... have not been understood." What do you mean? Each experiment has its own aim. If the aim is not understood, why experiments should be done.

You published the paper in the journal of low profile. The leading universities don't subscribe to this journal and your paper is not accessible. You need a publication in a good journal. RG is not a good platform to discuss your questions, too narrow field but extremely ambitious. Good luck.

Dear professor coming back to your answer to the other question I asked. You say What is wrong the current physics? What are "the electronic proton," "the proton of exotic hydrogen?" Yes indeed the value of the radius of the proton measured before 2010 I find very precise while indicating that I have a preference for the value 0.8758 fm. By the way, I think the majority of people think that the standard model is almost perfect and that's my opinion too. But for me the results of the experiments in muonic hydrogen and deuterium, especially those of Randolph Pohl's team started since 2010, prove that the Standard Model is limited in the sense that it does not explain the results obtained which are in fact these smaller radii. On the question "The aim of the results... have not been understood." I wanted to say what I think, i.e. I think they understood that they have established a more accurate measurement than 0.8758fm. CODATA has already taken the value 0.8414fm. My explanation for these small rays is very different. Indeed, I think that the smaller radii justify a new emerging physics beyond the standard model of physical particles.This physics is an extension of the Standard Model but does not reject it it takes small radii into consideration. The radius from the Standard Model finds its place in this new physics. As I said I prefer to use the 0.8758fm radius. The new radii are enigmatic I think they must be associated with new discoveries such as incorporating quantum gravity. On my side I took advantage of these smaller radii I have already written the equations that link them with the radius 0.8758fm. And I linked these new radii with the neutron radius and got an equation and a value of 0.8775fm and a value for the proton radius 0.87564fm. I also found a new equation for the hydrogen radius. Many thanks.

Dear Professor Yurii V Geletii would you tell me in which good journal I can publish my forthcoming articles, which as you say, can be accessible to major universities?