Electrons

Like this NNA theory, DRP (nee Meta Model) does have some objections to the more mainstream models of atoms and the various sub atomic particles. But I guess we could easily agree with NNA that electrons are not atomic, since we see them as sub atomic.

We do in fact postulate a central mass that we refer to as the nucleus (so there seems to be not much overlap between the NNA theory and the DRP theory).

In DRP electrons do not orbit the nucleus. If they did they would be continuously accelerating and therefore continuously radiating EM waves. This is not observed in nature.

So what do electrons do, you ask? They hover. Unless disturbed (which means some energy is added to them). They then begin to move around the nucleus in what could be called short term orbits. While doing so they are of course accelerating and radiating energy. Soon they will have radiated all the new energy away, and they then go back to quietly hovering.

***

Note - I have not read "The Case ...", nor have I been to any of the sites you mention. Now that I am aware of them, I may do so at some time in the future.

the two models for electrons within atoms have angular momentum problems. If the electrons orbit the nucleus even at 6 billion rpms only a tiny angular momentum can be calculated due to very slow orbital speed. In the static orbit no angular momentum can be calculated.

That's an interesting observation. It's too bad we can't actually see these things. Then we would have a much better chance of understanding what is actually happening physically.

I suspect (based on intuition, not evidence) that angular momentum, as we understand it at human scale, is not involved in sub atomic interactions.

It gets us to your classic lament. We can only do indirect observation of these things, so we don't really know. We collect lots of data, process that data through several dozen models, and then make a few guesses.

But until we can actually see stuff that small, we have no other way to work toward understanding the world. (Sort of like we won't really know what is on Mars until we go there.) But while we wait for boots on the ground and for sub-diffraction microscopes this crappy data/model/guess process has allowed us to do some seemingly magical things.

Our understanding of the parts of the universe we can see with some detail is pretty good. Our understanding of the parts of the universe we cannot yet see with any detail is questionable in many cases, and because of that we make mistakes as we try to interpret what we can see.

Compare how easy it is to design and build fission reactors with how difficult it is to design and build fusion reactors.

Even though the models we use in each case are similar, some even the same, the slight differences seem to be hiding something from us.

***

There is something odd going on down there. If we could just see ...

Math, science and technology are not merely on a search for the truth.

More importantly, they are on a search for the useful. And often we get close enough to the truth that some useful stuff can be done. Later we find that part or even all of what we thought we understood is actually wrong. But it still helped us.

***

A classic example of this is the Ptolemaic model of the universe. It was so far off base that we laugh at it now. But one could (and still can) use it to accurately point a telescope at any desired celestial object.

This model was not even close to the truth. But it was very useful. And it eventually led us to other models that each seem to be a little closer to the truth than the prior model.

***

Models are pretty cool, as long as we understand them and their limitations. If we begin to think of them as anything more than a helpful tool we are drifting away from real science or engineering.

LB, I agree that models are useful although way too often misused to promote private or public interests having more to due with ecconomics than science. Anyway, about the electron model we have a mass which to me is totally baffling. Where did that mass come from? If a particle or rather many particles are orbiting a nucleus(or several in the case of molecules)what rules are in effect to direct all that traffic?