The HOAX of E=mc². Documented history since 1898.

[rhertz]

That there was a relationship between energy and mass was suspected
since the last years of XIX century.

By 1899, Poincaré derived such a relationship by using a thought
experiment with a "light cannon" and its recoil, once it shot a pulse of
light. By equating the energy of the light pulse and the recoil of such
a cannon, it lead him to attribute to electromagnetic radiation a mass
equal to E/c² where E is the total energy of the radiation.

https://www.bjp-bg.com/papers/bjp2019_2_081-093.pdf

But Thomson, Lorentz, Heaviside and many others were closing the
approach to this concept by using measurements of the recently
discovered electron.

This was known by 1900 (values in c.g.s. system):

1. (Lorentz and others): Energy of an electron at rest E = e²/R

2. Charge e (Planck 1900): e = 4.69E-10 esu (g^1/2 cm^3/2 s^-1)

3. Ratio e/m (Thomson 1900): e/m = 6.32766E+17 esu/g

OR m/e = 1.58036E-18 g/esu

4. Mass of electron (1900): m = (m/e) e = 7.4119E-28 g

5. Radius of an electron (1907, Rutherford, others): R = 1.11E-14 cm

6. Energy stored in an electron (1907): E = 1.976E-05 erg or g.cm²/s²

1 erg = 6.2400E+11 eV

So, E = 12.329 MeV, by 1907.

******** ENTER RELATIVITY AND E = mc² ******************

Now, the history IS BEING RE-WRITTEN, because E = 0.511 MeV

IN WHAT WAY HISTORY IS RE-WRITTEN BY RELATIVISTS (SINCE WWII)?

They INVENTED the "classic radius of an electron",

Rc = 2.8179403227E-15 m (NIST and other agencies),

IN ORDER TO EQUATE NON-RELATIVISTIC ENERGY WITH E = mc².

In this FRAUDULENT WAY, AND ONLY BY CONSENSUS BETWEEN RELATIVISTS, IT
WAS POSSIBLE TO ACHIEVE WHAT WAS INCREDIBLE:

PRE-RELATIVITY VALUES = POST-RELATIVITY VALUES.

So, with electrons, for the last 80 years WAS FIXED THAT

E = e²/R = mc² (c.g.s. system).


And this HOAX was completed by ERASING FROM NIST the radius of protons
(also neutrons). That presence COMPLICATED THE HOAX, so they censured
it. You can check at NIST.


EVEN WORSE: the actual radius of electrons have been measured recently
as being about 10E-18 m, but THIS put the pre-relativistic energy of an
electron about 1,000 times HIGHER than what E = mc² gives.


And other experiments, in the last 50 years, have "measured" the
electron's radius as low as 10E-21 m OR LOWER.

Actually, besides this primary HOAX in relativity, modern physicists
don't have a fucking idea of what the radius is.

What is certain is that, in QED and since 1946, Feynman and many others
solved the problem of INFINITIES (as radius of charged particles got
lower and lower) by RENORMALIZATION, which is more or less to replace
the points in QED that diverge to infinity by a given number (ad-hoc).

As Feynman said: IT WORKS. NOW SHUT UP AND CALCULATE!

This is what physics has become: A DISGUSTING FARCE.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by rhertz
That there was a relationship between energy and mass was suspected
since the last years of XIX century.
By 1899, Poincaré derived such a relationship by using a thought
experiment with a "light cannon" and its recoil, once it shot a pulse of
light. By equating the energy of the light pulse and the recoil of such
a cannon, it lead him to attribute to electromagnetic radiation a mass
equal to E/c? where E is the total energy of the radiation.
https://www.bjp-bg.com/papers/bjp2019_2_081-093.pdf
But Thomson, Lorentz, Heaviside and many others were closing the
approach to this concept by using measurements of the recently
discovered electron.
1. (Lorentz and others): Energy of an electron at rest E = e?/R
2. Charge e (Planck 1900): e = 4.69E-10 esu (g^1/2 cm^3/2 s^-1)
3. Ratio e/m (Thomson 1900): e/m = 6.32766E+17 esu/g
OR m/e = 1.58036E-18 g/esu
4. Mass of electron (1900): m = (m/e) e = 7.4119E-28 g
5. Radius of an electron (1907, Rutherford, others): R = 1.11E-14 cm
6. Energy stored in an electron (1907): E = 1.976E-05 erg or g.cm?/s?

[snip nonsense about relativity based on your misconceptions]

Your complete cluelessness wrt physics and the history of it
is coming through again.
In 1900, Lorentz, Thomson, and friends didn't have an idea
of what the electron mass or charge might be.
All they had, from Thomson's measurements of 1897,
was the e/m ratio.
The electron mass was completey unknown until Millikan, (in 1909)
measured the electron charge.
The smallness of the electron mass came as a complete surprise.

Lorentz' 'electrons' like in his 'Theory of electrons'
have nothing to do with actual electrons.
That's why Lorentz and Einstein couldn't and didn't discuss
the electron mass at all.
They were not predicting the mass,
they were predicting (correctly of course)
how the mass should vary with velocity,
(in the terms of 1900)

Jan

[rhertz]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by rhertz
That there was a relationship between energy and mass was suspected
since the last years of XIX century.
By 1899, Poincaré derived such a relationship by using a thought
experiment with a "light cannon" and its recoil, once it shot a pulse of
light. By equating the energy of the light pulse and the recoil of such
a cannon, it lead him to attribute to electromagnetic radiation a mass
equal to E/c? where E is the total energy of the radiation.
https://www.bjp-bg.com/papers/bjp2019_2_081-093.pdf
But Thomson, Lorentz, Heaviside and many others were closing the
approach to this concept by using measurements of the recently
discovered electron.
1. (Lorentz and others): Energy of an electron at rest E = e?/R
2. Charge e (Planck 1900): e = 4.69E-10 esu (g^1/2 cm^3/2 s^-1)
3. Ratio e/m (Thomson 1900): e/m = 6.32766E+17 esu/g
OR m/e = 1.58036E-18 g/esu
4. Mass of electron (1900): m = (m/e) e = 7.4119E-28 g
5. Radius of an electron (1907, Rutherford, others): R = 1.11E-14 cm
6. Energy stored in an electron (1907): E = 1.976E-05 erg or g.cm?/s?

[snip nonsense about relativity based on your misconceptions]
Your complete cluelessness wrt physics and the history of it
is coming through again.
In 1900, Lorentz, Thomson, and friends didn't have an idea
of what the electron mass or charge might be.
All they had, from Thomson's measurements of 1897,
was the e/m ratio.
The electron mass was completey unknown until Millikan, (in 1909)
measured the electron charge.
The smallness of the electron mass came as a complete surprise.
Lorentz' 'electrons' like in his 'Theory of electrons'
have nothing to do with actual electrons.
That's why Lorentz and Einstein couldn't and didn't discuss
the electron mass at all.
They were not predicting the mass,
they were predicting (correctly of course)
how the mass should vary with velocity,
(in the terms of 1900)
Jan

Jan, as you are an imbecile ignorant, I prefer to forgive your profound
lack of knowledge of the history of physics.

Me, I invested many years researching about how classic physicists and
chemists opened the door to new findings that, cumulatively, brought us
to the know-how from the 1500s to the end of the XX Century.

And I did it with pleasure, finding that history of physics is EQUALLY
IMPORTANT as physics itself (sometimes MORE).

When I wrote that Planck had derived the charge of the electron by 1900,
I meant it. But you are too stupid to assimilate history of science. You
are stuck with the information of one or two High School books, and
repeat things like a fucking relativistic parrot.

LEARN ABOUT OTHER WORKS OF PLANCK, IMBECILE, AND READ THE ATTACHED
TABLE.

And regarding the highly promoted Millikan (that you idealized), he ONLY
GOT A REASONABLE VALUE BY 1913, being prior experiments A FAILURE.

Read and LEARN, IDIOT!





https://www.scielo.br/j/rbef/a/XMkjKHvTWdsTF9k5HF6Vzwv/?lang=en&format=pdf

Max Planck’s Determination of the Avogadro Constant

[rhertz]

Stupid Jan:

I forgot to REMARK that, by the year 1900, the charge of the electron
WAS CALCULATED BY PLANCK, with an error lower than 0.5% with respect to
current values.

So, by knowing (in the year 1900) the relationship (e/m) (or m/e), due
to Thomson, AMY PHYSICIST KNEW THE MASS OF THE ELECTRON by 1900. In this
way:

(m/e) x e = m

Do you understand this, Jan?

I think that you are a delusional negationist, who will REJECT these
absolutely true historical facts.

Through Rutherford's team, by 1907, the radius of Beta radiation
particles (AKA electrons) was also ESTIMATED.

So, what I wrote IS TRUE in terms of historical facts. What you wrote
came from a HS textbook for imbecile relativists. So, what you have into
your head as facts are pure bullshit, ignorant.

Here it goes, again:

***********************************************

This was known by 1900 (values in c.g.s. system):

1. (Lorentz and others): Energy of an electron at rest E = e²/R

2. Charge e (Planck 1900): e = 4.69E-10 esu (g^1/2 cm^3/2 s^-1)

3. Ratio e/m (Thomson 1900): e/m = 6.32766E+17 esu/g

OR m/e = 1.58036E-18 g/esu

4. Mass of electron (1900): m = (m/e) e = 7.4119E-28 g

5. Radius of an electron (1907, Rutherford, others): R = 1.11E-14 cm

6. Energy stored in an electron (1907): E = 1.976E-05 erg or g.cm²/s²

1 erg = 6.2400E+11 eV

So, E = 12.329 MeV, by 1907.

*********************************************



Jan = IGNORANT IDIOT + LIAR + DECEIVER + RELATIVIST + CHARLATAN