MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117477510 · doi:10.4006/0836-1398-38.4.297

Re-engineering the electron: A composite model

2025· article· en· W7117477510 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Harry Ian Epstein

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Essays · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCold Fusion and Nuclear Reactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZitterbewegungElectronBohr modelMagnetic momentBohr magnetonMoment (physics)Anomalous magnetic dipole momentQuantumInverse

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The observed magnetic moment of an electron implies that it cannot be a point particle and, therefore, should have a substructure. This paper proposes that the electron consists of three hypothetical constituent particles: Two negatively charged ones orbiting around a positively charged particle. Our analysis encompasses the electron’s zitterbewegung and magnetic moment, leveraging the fundamental constants of Planck and Coulomb. We show that: (1) Coulombic interactions between constituents, multiplied by the inverse of the fine structure constant, link the zero-point energy to the electron’s zitterbewegung frequency, and (2) the electron’s magnetic moment results from the orbital motion of the constituents, leading to a unique derivation of the Bohr magneton. These insights into the quantum characteristics of electrons present new research opportunities in nuclear interactions and the physics of composite particles.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics EssaysSame topicCold Fusion and Nuclear ReactionsFrench-language works237,207