To my second challenge, Burinskii’s answer is indistinguishable from chickenshit. I responded. “Sorry, but I extreme busy at my job.”
‘Then I shall continure to ridicule the DKS fields.’
EITHER I AM ABOUT TO LEARN SUBTLETIES OF THE KERR-NEWMAN METRIC, OR THEY DON’T MATTER IN THESE ANALYSES. I have been thru the Reissner-Nordstrom metric solution, and it seems the Kerr-Newman is a combination. Burinskii is not very helpful:::
I fail to see what a classical energy radius has to do here !!
“It makes the same as in the old classical electron model — the cut off the external electromagnetic energy \integral from r_e to \infty. It is divergent if integrate from r=0. The classical spherical electron is a charged bubble of size r_e. Similar, the Kerr-Newman (Lopez model) electron is a disc-like bubble — integral of electromagnetic energy from r_e to \infty. (I wrote that in almost every my paper.) go further and form a the bag model (!), which is disk-like bubble filled by the Higgs field which forms inside the bubble pseudo-vacuum state (in fact cut-off). Read my recent papers. Here he does include two recent papers. HIS SECOND ANSWER IS NOT USEFUL.
ON THE TABLE THERE ARE TWO SETS OF POSSIBLE ELECTRON NEAR-FIELDS. My agent is not surprised, and we both recall MAX PLANCK who started it all about 116 years ago !!
“A new theory is not accepted because its opponents are persuaded and see the light. It is accepted because they die out. and a new generation grows, who is familiar with it.”