Please prove me right or wrong.
I have recently published a paper [1] in which I conclusively prove that the Stoney Mass invented by George Stoney in 1881 and covered by the shroud of mystery for over 150 years does not represent any physical mass, but has a one-to-one correspondence with the electron charge. The rationale of this rather unusual claim, is the effect of the deliberate choice in establishing SI base units of mass (kg) and the electric charge derived unit (coulomb: C = As). They are inherently incommensurable in the SI, as well as in CGS units.
The commensurability of physical quantities may however depends on the definition of base units in a given system. The experimental “Rationalized Metric System (RMS) developed in [1] eliminates the SI mass and charge units (kg and As, respectively), which both become derived units with dimensions of [m3 s-2]. The RMS ratio of the electron charge to the electron mass became non-dimensional and equal to 2.04098×1021, that is the square root of the electric to gravitational force ratio for the electron.
As much as the proof is quite simple and straightforward I start meeting persons disagreeing with my claim but they cannot come up with a rational argument.
I would like your opinion and arguments pro or against. This could be the most rewarding scientific discussion given the importance of this claim for the history of science and beyond.
The short proof is in the attached pdf and the full context in my paper
[1] https://doi.org/10.1088/2399-6528/ad0090
Dear Andrew Wutke 1st, What is electron? Electron never been observed to this date. To my understanding, prediction of 1885 knowledge to bring it to 2023 is not science to follow.
Javad Fardaei
General Remarks
Thank you for making the first entry in my discussion. Your feedback does not support my finding. This is good because disagreement is a differential input that fuels the progress of science, the consensus is just the maintenance of the status quo and inertia to keep the scientific process stable. Just like in a PID controller.
Javad Fardaei
Seeing is Believing?
There are/were many things you cannot see yet they appear to exist.
No one can see the space yet few deny it. We could not see viruses until the invention of the electron microscope yet the first vaccine was invented and applied against rabies on July 6, 1885 by Louis Pasteur.
It is different with the physicist's time. No one can see it and no one will, because this is an abstraction that does not control the state of anything. It is a useful abstraction providing reference to man made synchronised clocks which can show their own state in a useful manner following Einstein's break through in 1905.
Javad Fardaei
The Electron and progress of science
Questioning the existence of the electron is new to me, but after further reflection if is consistent with Ernst Mach belief that atoms do not exist hence this must include electrons.The distinguished physicists, philosopher and engineer and inspiration to Einstein could not convince many. Then photoelectric effect open the path to quantum theory with electron having prominent role. I certainly see the effects of electrons in every electronic device and I saw atomic spectra.
Javad Fardaei
What your answer means to the Stoney Mass.
Since I conclusively proven that the Stoney mass does not exist because it reduces to the electron charge which no one have ever seen, hence apparently we are in agreement??
Seriously, even the Stoney Mass can retire after 152 years, we still have the Stoney Length which seems to have physical significance adopted to represent electron charge by Weyl as "gravitational radius of the electric charge"
In conclusion:
"prediction of 1885 knowledge to bring it to 2023" has proven to be unreasonably useful and successful.
Continuing the discussion with myself without more people willing to question my conclusion (thank you Javad Fardaei for opening it) I can say the following:
"The Stoney mass and the electron charge are the same physical quantity (more widely known as the electron charge), which both are interpreted using different systems of units of measure hence because the electron charge is real, then the Stoney mass is real, but dressed up in a different type of clothing.
Fixed a typo in the Stoney mass formula in the attached file, where the electron charge e was incorrectly under the square root. The e should always positive in the Stoney mass definition. The original formula had e2 under the square root which then could be either positive or negative. It is clearly positive now.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Analytical Chemistry
- Extraction