Dear Mr.Guynn,

I don't know how you read that"Your first view was correct in that labeling the complex characteristics of particles as "intrinsic" is not a scientific explanation".I'd never said that!

Well, I'm not totally against qed,just think it's a little bit of a problem in solving the magnetic moment anomaly.On other issues, I agree with it!

The inconsistent between QED and my understanding is I think "the electron family is transformed from point structure to meson or positronium structure by neutrino decay,and change the mass of the electrons,then affect the value of magnetic moment".But qed don't care about the effects of decay.so I challenged it and gave my own calculation.

I had read your paper,but I didn't see what I wanted.

Thank you for your reply!

Yours sincerely,

Zhengdong Huang

Dear Zhengdong Huang,

Mr. Olaussen is well known to disagree with any unorthodox view.

Maybe you may find pertinent information for your research in this paper, that proposes a solution to the electron magnetic moment anomaly grounded on a possible inner electron electromagnetic structure, coupled with an also electromagnetic inner structure of its carrying energy, grounded on an important discovery made by Paul Marmet in 2003 about the magnetic field of a moving electron.

The paper is titled "On The Electron Magnetic Moment Anomaly":

http://ijerd.com/paper/vol7-issue3/E0703021025.pdf

Thanks to Marmet's discovery, the electron carrying energy can now be separated from the electron rest mass energy, this allows, on top of being able to calculate any relativistic velocity of the electron from this separation: v=sqrt(λc(4λ+λc))/( 2λ+λc), it also allows calculating the electron g-factor with the same value that Schwinger derived by other means in 1948:

sqrt(λc(4λ+λc))/2π( 2λ+λc) = α/2π=1.161386535E-3

...if the exact carrying energy induced at mean ground orbital distance in the hydrogen atom λ= 4.556335256E-8 m is used.

Best Regards, André

Dear André Michaud,

At first,Our opinions should be based on facts,Otherwise it's a pipe dream.The electron are point particles in experiment,where is the“inner electron electromagnetic structure"？Could you provide experimental evidence for its existence?

Dear Zhengdong Huang,

You wrote: "At first, Our opinions should be based on facts,Otherwise it's a pipe dream."

I absolutely agree.

You wrote: "The electron are point particles in experiment".

Definitely.

You wrote: "where is the“inner electron electromagnetic structure?"

Since the energy making up the rest mass of the electron is electromagnetic in nature, it can only have an inner electromagnetic oscillating structure, which is impossible to understand from the Lorenz interpretation perspective, but which is easy to understand from the Maxwell interpretation.

Maxwell's interpretation is that both E and B fields have to mutually induce each other by being dephased by 180 degrees, but the Lorenz interpretation is that both E and B have to peak at maximum synchronously, which is the interpretation on which electrodynamics is grounded. The Lorenz interpretation does not allow reconciling electromgnetism with the concept of localized point-like behaving rest mass, but Maxwell's does.

The whole concept grounded on Maxwell's interpretation is summarized in this paper, that refers to all supporting other papers:

https://doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2018.95067

You wrote: "Could you provide experimental evidence for its existence?"

Yes. if you have the patience of reading and integrating the analysis carried out in this paper, you will then understand how and why the two following experiments confirm the conclusions of the analysis:

This experimental account was published in 2013

http://www.ijerd.com/paper/vol7-issue5/H0705050066.pdf

One year later, this direct confirmation of the inverse cube magnetic relation between two electrons interacting as two timewise magnetic monopoles was published:

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature13403.epdf?referrer_access_token=yoC6RXrPyxwvQviChYrG0tRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0PdPJ4geER1fKVR1YXH8GThqECstdb6e48mZm0qQo2OMX_XYURkzBSUZCrxM8VipvnG8FofxB39P4lc-1UIKEO1

Best Regards, André

Dear André Michaud ，

I had read your reply ,I have two questions to ask you.

1.If you also agree with " the electron are point particles in experiment ",how do you creat Another structure“ inner electron electromagnetic structure ”？how do these two structures coexist？

2.I have read the links you provided.Two of them are your own articles，Another is“ Measurement of the magnetic interaction between two bound electrons of two separate ions ”，I don't think they have anything to do with the "experimental evidence" .Well,if you don't have enough experimental evidence to prove your" inner electron electromagnetic structure "is the fact,I think our discussion is not meaningful!

Dear Zhengdong Huang,

You ask: "1. If you also agree with " the electron are point particles in experiment ",how do you creat Another structure“ inner electron electromagnetic structure ”？how do these two structures coexist?"

There are no "two structures". From the electromagnetic perspective, the energy making up the mass of the electron simply oscillates about its point-like center at the frequency of this energy.

Point-like behavior of elementary particles is no different than treating the whole mass of the Earth and Moon as if they were point-like to calculate their trajectories. This does not prevent us from knowing that the Earth and the Moon are not points with no dimensions.

You write: "2.I have read the links you provided.Two of them are your own articles, Another is“ Measurement of the magnetic interaction between two bound electrons of two separate ions ”，I don't think they have anything to do with the "experimental evidence" .Well, if you don't have enough experimental evidence to prove your" inner electron electromagnetic structure "is the fact,I think our discussion is not meaningful!"

Fine with me. I just thought you might be interested in an electromagnetic perspective on the magnetic moment anomaly from the Maxwell interpretation of electric and magnetic interaction.

Best Regards, André