Renormalizing the Mass and the Electric Charge of the Electron (The Mystery of the Heavy Mass of the Muon)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article we will discuss the renormalization of the mass and the electric charge of the extended electron in the interaction of the electron with the external fields. Originally, the renormalization procedure was introduced in the decades 20’s and 30’s of 20th century as a mathematical process used to remove infinity terms in the calculations in quantum mechanics (Section 3). But now many contemporary physicists have used the term “ renormalization” in a simpler meaning: it simply means modification or adjustment of the original mass or electric charge of the electron by a dimensionless factor, called renormalizing factor (Section 4). The article contains 10 sections: Section 1: Old concept of mass and charge: the mass of the electron varies with velocity, while its electric charge is a fundamental constant of physics. Section 2: Contemporary concept: physicists maintain that the mass of the electron is invariant in all physical conditions, while its electric charge varies with velocity and external field. Section 3: Renormalization of mass is problematic. Section 4: Renormalization of electric charge is innovative. Section 5: Search for the renormalizing factor for the electric charge. Section 6: Renormalizing Lorentzian force (FL) and Newtonian force (FN). Section 7: A thought experiment to demonstrate the variability of the electric charge. Section 8: The mystery of the heavy mass of the muon. Section 9: The controversial concept of time dilation. Section 10: The field reaction does not exist physically.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".