They say that spin is not angular momentum for quantum paticles. So
what is it that is spinning?

The c squared particle concntration of energy or its mass is a single
geometrical point incapable of spinning. The fields surrounding this
geometrical point are symmetrical. Therefor you cannot measure any
spin that way either.

The point particle and its symmetric surrounding fields rule out any
measurement of spin. Spin does not exist for the elementary particle.

This ruins quantum chemistry.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008

On Mar 28, 5:22*pm, wrote:
They say that spin is not angular momentum for quantum paticles. So
what is it that is spinning?

The c squared particle concntration of energy or its mass is a single
geometrical point incapable of spinning. The fields surrounding this
geometrical point are symmetrical. Therefor you cannot measure any
spin that way either.

The point particle and its symmetric surrounding fields rule out any
measurement of spin. Spin does not exist for the elementary particle.

This ruins quantum chemistry.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008

xxein: Think that galaxies are not all alike. Then think that stars
are not alike. How far into the realm of particles and energy would
you like to go?

Well, I can tell you. "Particles" are lumps of energy. We don't
understand how we do this yet, but we can certainly manage to extract
the energy from the 'particle' and thus transform it into another
particle to release its energy or almost completely obliterate it.

We transform matter into energy. What or how does a particle exist?
How do you think a particle is formed? What is a particle? What is
it composed of that contains energy? How does a particle exist?

Did particles and energy form separately from a genesis? I'd like to
hear that one.

Maybe gargoyles and the undead are immune to a physical reality. Why
not? We seem to believe anything we want. But in your limited
defense, there are things that we do not understand. We only pretend
we do.

How does that affect the physic?

On Mar 28, 4:49*pm, xxein wrote:
On Mar 28, 5:22*pm, wrote:

They say that spin is not angular momentum for quantum paticles. So
what is it that is spinning?

The c squared particle concntration of energy or its mass is a single
geometrical point incapable of spinning. The fields surrounding this
geometrical point are symmetrical. Therefor you cannot measure any
spin that way either.

The point particle and its symmetric surrounding fields rule out any
measurement of spin. Spin does not exist for the elementary particle.

This ruins quantum chemistry.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008

xxein: *Think that galaxies are not all alike. *Then think that stars
are not alike. *How far into the realm of particles and energy would
you like to go?

Well, I can tell you. *"Particles" *are lumps of energy. *We don't
understand how we do this yet, but we can certainly manage to extract
the energy from the 'particle' and thus transform it into another
particle to release its energy or almost completely obliterate it.

We transform matter into energy. *What or how does a particle exist?
How do you think a particle is formed? *What is a particle? *What is
it composed of that contains energy? *How does a particle exist?

Did particles and energy form separately from a genesis? *I'd like to
hear that one.

Maybe gargoyles and the undead are immune to a physical reality. *Why
not? *We seem to believe anything we want. *But in your limited
defense, there are things that we do not understand. *We only pretend
we do.

How does that affect the physic?

These lumps of energy of matter you talk about more precisely are C
squared energy concentrated to an infinitesimal point of mass.
Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008

On Mar 28, 4:22*pm, wrote:
They say that spin is not angular momentum for quantum paticles. So
what is it that is spinning?

Actually, it's not called spin because anything is spinning. It's
called that because:
1) It contributes to the total angular momentum, which in turn can be
treated as a conserved quantum number in successful quantum mechanical
predictions of behavior.
2) It behaves algebraically the way that angular momentum does, and so
is suggestive of something like angular momentum.

It could have been more appropriately named "the property that behaves
something like angular momentum but isn't quite the same thing." But
that's a lot harder to say than "spin".

I realize this is confusing for amateurs, who have somewhat different
expectations for what words should connote.


The c squared particle concntration of energy or its mass is a single
geometrical point incapable of spinning. The fields surrounding this
geometrical point are symmetrical. Therefor you cannot measure any
spin that way either.

The point particle and its symmetric surrounding fields rule out any
measurement of spin. Spin does not exist for the elementary particle.

This ruins quantum chemistry.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008