Mass energy conversion and absurdities of modern science It is accepted that mass at elementary level is not an additive unit and mass can be converted in energy and reciprocal at this level. As example, the binding energy of an electron

[sorin]

Mass energy conversion and absurdities of modern science

It is accepted that mass at elementary level is not an additive unit
and mass can be converted in energy and reciprocal at this level.
As example, the binding energy of an electron to atom or the binding
energy of a nucleon to nucleus is a consequence of a mass defect due
to a mass energy conversion in case of such elementary particle.
The text analyses the case of a Bi atom, where there are electron
ionization energies starting from few eV for the outer electrons up to
0,1 MeV for the inner electrons.
According to special theory of relativity, up to 20% of electron mass
might be converted into energy for an inner electron rotating around
nucleus.
But in this case, what is the meaning of electrostatic interaction
between electron and nucleus?
Practically, there are two contradictory explanations for the same
experimental unit (ionization energy).
Further the idea of mass quantification (looking from the point of
view of relativity) is analysed.
Of course, the model of proton made by few quarks becomes a general
accepted one by actual mainstream physics.. I'm sorry to say, but this
oversimplified model must be abandoned, if the equivalence mass energy
is right.
It can be demonstrated that according to relativity an electron can
have millions of elementary particles (let’s invent a name for them!)
and of course for a proton or neutron there must be more chunks.
The link:
http://www.elkadot.com/ro/nuclear/Energie_1.htm

Best regards,
Sorin Cosofret