Surprising as it may sound, no one really knows what an electron is, and it is this fundamental question that has been driving much of modern physics and ultimately led to the development of quantum field theory.

To answer the question “What is an electron?” This problem, you would think the first step would be to observe it. But that’s easier said than done. Electrons are too small for us to see — the smallest thing we can see is an atom, even beyond the reach of a conventional microscope.

So, we can’t observe the electron, but we can observe its behavior, and more specifically, its energy. Currently, this is done using Penning traps. The Penning trap is a special device developed in the 1970s that aims to capture particles for long periods of time so that accurate measurements can be made.

The important thing to note is that when we make energy measurements, we are actually measuring a single ion, that is, an electron around a central nucleus rather than a single electron.

In fact, it was this energy measurement that led to JJ Thompson’s discovery of the electron in 1879 39bet-kết quả bóng đá-kết quả xổ số miền bắc-kèo bóng đá -soi cầu bóng đá-đặt cược. This discovery subsequently put an end to the idea that atoms were the smallest particles, and Thompson suggested that atoms were made up of surrounded electrons. Made from a positively charged soup. – Plum-pudding model.

However, Ernest Rutherford later concluded that this was incorrect when he carried out his famous gold leaf experiment with Geiger and Marsden, concluding that the mass of the atom was concentrated at its centre and thus proposing a model with a very central core. Negatively charged electrons.

The model was further developed with the help of Niels Bohr, but instead of randomly distributing electrons, he proposed that they exist in orbits-around the central positive core, similar to planets orbiting the central core/star.

Now, with any model, we should be able to explain what we’re looking at. Spectroscopic analysis of hydrogen reveals a discrete set of emission lines, which the Bohr model interprets as the transition of electrons between orbitals. However, the Bohr model can only explain the emission spectra of hydrogen or other single electron atoms, such as ionic helium.

For multi-electron atoms, the spectral analysis reveals more discrete emission lines, which the Bohr model cannot account for.

This is the receiver of the quantum model, where all known information about electrons exists not around precisely defined orbitals, but rather their possible distribution around the atom, often called the electron cloud. The electron cloud model, developed by ErwinSchrodinger and Werner Heisenberg in 1926, can be interpreted in terms of probabilistic waves (in particular the Schedinger wave equation), in which the states or “orbitals” that electrons can occupy in atoms are similar. A standing wave.

In a quantum model, these states or orbits depend on a set of quantum numbers, such as the principal quantum number N, the angular momentum number L, the magnetic number M, and the spin number S. It is these different quantum numbers in the form of probabilistic clouds that define the position and momentum of the electrons and describe the emission lines unexplained in the Bohr model.

An alternative view of electrons as probabilistic clouds rather than deterministic orbital states successfully describes the behavior of matter. But while it achieved what the Bohr model could not, it still failed to reveal the nature of the electron and where its mass came from.

To go further, we need a model that more accurately describes the properties and structure of the electron, which is exactly what the generalized holographic model proposed by Nassim Haramein provides.

This approach first defines the fundamental bits of energy as vibrational spherical units of the Planck scale – called Planck spherical units (Psus). Then, expanding on physicists David Bohm, Jacob Bekenstein, Stephen Hawking, Gerard’t Hooft and Leonard Susskind, and stated that the energy (or information) of any spherical system is proportional to the number of Psus in the spherical volume (volume entropy) and the number of Psus available on the spherical horizontal line (surface entropy).

This holographic relationship between exterior and interior defines the mass represented by the system at any given time, and vice versa defines the mass energy density of the system -or as David Bohm has stated, unfolding and folding, respectively.

The question is — can this approach be extended to electrons?

The first step in answering this question is to consider the spatial extent of the electron and the amount of information it surrounds. Thus, if we start with the premise that the electron cloud can be regarded as an “electronic” coherent field of information, then rather than treating the electron as a separate system, it is better to think of the electron as the radius of the electron cloud extending spatially from the proton outward to the one whose radius surrounds the hydrogen Bohr atom. When we use this approach, we find holographic mass to volume ratios (transfer potential) and electron mass solutions that are comparable to the experimentally measured electron masses. So now we have a model that not only predicts the correct mass of an electron, but also provides a physical understanding of its structure up to the Planck length scale.

The new atlas of the coherent collective behavior of electrons as particle structures on the space-time Planck scale gives us a deeper understanding of the properties of electrons.