Proton = electron + 2 positronsNeutron = 2 electrons + 2 positronsTheir mass-energy comes from the relativistic speeds of the leptons, which interact only minimally using EM force, since the field lines undergo lorentz contraction.It's leptons all the way down.
>>16540201>Proton = electron + 2 positronsThe electron and positron annihilate each other leaving you with just one positron, which is too light to be a proton.
>>16540205You forgot about neutrinos.
>>16540211Their interactions are too weak to be relevant
>>16540205The electron and positron have to interact to annihilate each other. Their force of attraction is weak enough due to Lorentz contraction of the field lines that this wouldn't happen.
>>16540285If they had such high relative speeds, then they would get separated and be unable to act as a proton
>>16540201we already say the proton is composed of three leptons. those leptons are quarks. pseud.
>>16540305The EM force is just enough to hold them together without annihilating.
>>16540315Quarks have never, not once, been observed, retard.
>>16540201That doesn't explain how electrons and positrons could violate Pauli exclusion in the ways that bosons do.
>>16540201I though Neutron = 1 proton + 1 electron + 1 antineutrino
>>16540201The proton is 1836 times heavier than the electron or positron.At least say something less retarded such as "proton=1836 positron." That's still retarded, at least it's not psychotically stupid.
>>16540201because quarks exist>electron + 2 positronswrong masses. And there is a distinction between left and right handed electrons in the Standard Model>2 electrons + 2 positronswrong spin
