[gisburnuk (OP)]

Please read this webpage. This website talks about a established relationship between two particles of one particle of a electron that could be explained for the behaviour of gravity, electromagnetism and electricity, waves, light, etc..
What is your conclusion?

M Theory for String Theory, stay focused....

[gisburnuk (OP)]

newbielink:http://www.binaryelectrons.co.uk [nonactive]

M Theory for String Theory, stay focused....

[gsmollin]

Researchers have tried for years to smash the electron. They have been accelerated to the limits of energy available in the largest accelerators, but still exhibit point-like properties when collided with targets. Protons, on the other hand, routinely show their three-quark behavior in the same kind of experiments. So there is no experimental evidence to support electronic structure.

On the other hand, that does not mean it can't be true, just that it can't be shown in particle accelerators at energy levels we can reach now. However, any theory of electronic inner structure must be able to show that the energy holding the electron together is to too powerful to show structure with current energies. It must also predict how we would discover the structure. I could not find these parts in this thesis. String theory does provide some of this kind of information, but I do not know of any string theories that require the electron to have a structure containing orbitals.

The author kept saying that electrons move at the speed of light. They do not. The electron drift velocity in an electrical conductor can be usually measured in millimeters per second. They do move at relativistic velocities when part of large, high voltage discharges, or when accelerated by particle accelerators, but they never reach c, because electrons have rest mass. It is the photons that accelerated electrons radiate that travel at c.