You are not logged in.
This topic is offered for NewMars members who might wish to help to build up a collection of links, images and text about electrons.
The title can be changed as the topic evolves. What I'm hoping we can assemble is information a future resident of Mars might like to know.
There are a vast number of resources available in 2025.
I did not know this bit of history, and hope that someone else (reader or member) might find the details interesting.
The item was delivered by Quora. I don't know how I got on Quora's mailing list and I normally delete their offerings, but this one caught my eye.
Icon for Extremely interesting facts
Extremely interesting facts
·
Follow
Posted by
Alessandro13Mar 5, 2025
In 1883, Thomas Edison stumbled upon a strange clue: he noticed that a black dot would sometimes appear on the inside surface of one of the light bulbs he was examining, near the filament
This was strange, because the glass was always free of stains when it was sealed around the filament. The dot couldn’t have been a scratch (the filament never touched the glass), and it couldn’t have been soot or dust (there was almost no air in the bulb to carry the dust). The dot puzzled him, the problem intrigued him so much that it kept him awake at night. He wanted to investigate further, but his assistants were reluctant to do so. So, without outside help and with a taximeter that regulated his existence by leading him to solve more immediately billable problems, Edison eventually gave up. “I was working on so many things at that time,” he once said, many years later, “that I didn’t have time to do more.” It was the biggest mistake of his life.
Over the next ten years, a few other researchers began to take this and other phenomena into consideration. The most tenacious was a man a few years younger than Edison, Joseph John Thomson. He was the polar opposite, he had no practical sense, his hands could not tie a tie with dignity, he was not exactly what you would call a laboratory wizard, if even his friends - who called him J.J. - were embarrassed by his difficulty in building the experimental devices that he was able to easily design. But his capacity for abstraction soared higher than any researcher. He managed to build enlarged versions of Edison's light bulbs, and used magnets to act inside them and "pilot" whatever was emitted by the filaments. Then he weighed the particles in flight.
Thus, in 1897, he discovered the electron.
Atoms were not compact spheres; instead, pieces could be torn off, and the torn fragments could leap and slide forward, like balls, along any channel that opened before them. It was these fragments torn from atoms—electrons—that ran in a wire, generating an electric current. It was the collisions of these unruly bodies inside the filament of a light bulb that made the filament hot enough to emit light. And it was the impact of these unruly schoolchildren on the walls of the light bulb that left traces—that dark, unexpected dot that intrigued Edison and robbed him of sleep. Thomson won the Nobel. Edison became rich doing other things.
272.1K views
View 2,308 upvotes
View 19 shares
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
This post is reserved for an index to posts that may be contributed by NewMars members over time.
Index:
Post #3: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 59#p232159
Research on "g" factor (gyromagnetic) property
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
The article at the link below reports on research about the electron:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo … -expected/
The sense I get of the article is that the research team has been attempting to learn more about the electron, and that it has come up with theories that might be tested as electrons interact with magnetic fields.
It seems to me that trying to understand the electron (and other leptons) is a worthwhile undertaking.
Whether all the work reported leads to anything is not clear.
Understanding and refining the gyromagnetic factor, or “g factor,” is more than a theoretical pursuit-it directly impacts how we improve real-world tools like MRI machines, atomic clocks, and quantum sensors. These technologies depend on precisely measuring how tiny particles interact with magnetic fields, and even slight improvements in that understanding can lead to sharper images, more accurate timekeeping, and better sensors.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
The article at the link below is about investigation of behavior of electrons in various isotopes of Calcium. Very tiny differences were observed from theoretical predictions, so I'm guessing a lot more research lies in the future for physicists working in this part of physics. The hint is that there might a chance to refine the Standard Model of particle physics.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo … ff60&ei=24
The transition of electrons in different calcium isotopes is hinting at something unexplained going on. - Image Credit: nobeastsofierce/Shutterstock.com
The transition of electrons in different calcium isotopes is hinting at something unexplained going on. - Image Credit: nobeastsofierce/Shutterstock.com
© IFL ScienceScientists have found an intriguing discrepancy in the way electrons behave in different calcium atoms. The difference between the observations and actual theoretical calculation is subtle; however, the team believes the peculiar effect comes down to a single factor. Whether this factor is something known and missed, or something new, is yet to be determined, but researchers suggest it as tentative evidence for a fifth force of nature.
There are four known canonical forces in the universe: gravity, electromagnetism, strong, and weak nuclear forces. The Standard Model of particle physics doesn’t include gravity (it is much weaker than the other three at a particle level), and it also doesn’t include dark matter and dark energy, which are hypothetical but strongly believed to exist thanks to extensive evidence. It has its limits, so people look for where those limits might break to reveal new physics.
Ideas related to a fifth force have been around for a long time in different aspects of physics and solving different problems. In this case, the force might be hiding right at the center of atoms… which was, for a while, the hiding place of the two nuclear forces.
The team looked at calcium isotopes. These are calcium atoms, so they have the same number of protons in the nucleus and electrons swarming around, but they might have a different number of neutrons. The most common calcium is Calcium-40, made of 20 protons and 20 neutrons, but there are stable versions. Calcium-42 with 22 neutrons, Calcium-44 with 24, and Calcium-46 with 26. You get the picture.
Related video: The Four Fundamental Forces That Shape Our Universe (Aperture)
Electrons are organized in orbitals around the core. These are not linear orbits like a planet around a star, but regions where the electron is likely to be. By providing a bit of energy, the electron can be kicked onto a higher orbital, though it will emit that energy after a while and go back to its original state.
This process, known as transition, depends on the properties of the nucleus, and it is different for these different isotopes because the presence of extra neutrons shifts the charge distribution in the nucleus. The team plotted the transition shift between the Ca, Ca, Ca, and Ca and the standard calcium-40. If everything were taken into account, the shift would follow a linear relation. But there is a small discrepancy.
The origin of the discrepancy is unknown. It is possible that there are some Standard Model effects and that the calculations have not included them. A similar challenge to the Standard Model was solved just like that after years of data collection. Or it might be the first hint of a fifth force.
If it is a fifth force, it is very weak. It is also mediated by a boson particle that could be lighter than a neutrino or much heavier than a top quark. While that range is huge for a particle, it is the most stringent limit yet for such a hypothetical interaction.
A paper describing the measurements is published in the journal Physical Review Letters.
Support Science Journalism. Subscribe Today!
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
This topic opened with discovery of the electron.
The electron was first observed by Thomas Edison and then actually discovered by Thompson, who won the Nobel Prize.
This topic does NOT have a post about how electrons are made.
The subject is of interest due to posts by Void in late 2025, about possible use of electrons for spacecraft propulsion.
Previously acceleration of spacecraft by ions deficient in electrons has been applied by NASA and other space agencies for long distance travel in the Solar System. The information reported by Void is about the use of electrons for the same purpose, despite their much smaller mass.
Conversation with Gemini
How are electrons created - Hi Gemini! This question will really test your skills and resources. Electrons were observed (indirectly) by Edison, and discovered by Thompson. This request is for information about how electrons are created. I expect that all electrons are created in Suns, but there may be another mechanism that created electrons in earliest moments of the Universe. I'd like offer a report about the creation of electrons for a small international forum that uses BBCode to display information. If you need guidance on how to write with BBCode, I'd be happy to provide a list of commands. Please note that our forum is older, and it does not support modern commands such as center. The header command 'h' stands alone, and has no parameters. size is not recognized.Hello! That is a fascinating question that touches on fundamental physics. I can certainly help you draft a report on the creation of electrons, formatted for your BBCode-enabled forum.
Electrons are elementary particles, meaning they are not composed of smaller units like protons and neutrons are. They can be created and destroyed, provided certain conservation laws are maintained, such as the conservation of charge and lepton number.
Here is the report, formatted with your requested BBCode:
The Creation of Electrons
Electrons, fundamental particles with a negative charge, can be created through several mechanisms in the universe, particularly in the earliest moments of the Big Bang and in ongoing nuclear processes.
1. Electrons in the Early Universe
The majority of electrons (and matter in general) are believed to have originated in the incredibly high-energy environment immediately following the Big Bang.
Pair Production
In the very early, extremely hot universe (the Lepton Era), high-energy photons (light particles) had enough energy to spontaneously transform into an electron-positron pair (electron and its antimatter twin, the positron).
This process is known as pair production. The reverse process, where an electron and a positron annihilate each other to produce photons, was also happening simultaneously, maintaining a balance.
As the universe expanded and cooled, the photons eventually lacked the necessary energy to continue this pair production process, leaving behind a slight excess of matter (electrons) over antimatter (positrons), which ultimately formed the atoms we see today.
2. Ongoing Electron Creation
Electrons continue to be created throughout the universe through various nuclear and high-energy processes.
Beta Decay
This is a type of radioactive decay where an unstable atomic nucleus transforms a neutron into a proton.
In the process, an electron (often referred to as a beta particle, β − ) and an electron antineutrino ( ν e ) are emitted. This is a common way electrons are generated in nature.
n \rightarrow p + e^- + \bar{\nu}_eHigh-Energy Collisions
Electrons can also be generated in high-energy interactions, such as when cosmic rays (extremely energetic particles) collide with particles in Earth's atmosphere or in interstellar space. These collisions can result in cascades of new particles, including electrons, often through pair production with the incoming particle's energy.
While stars like our Sun primarily fuse hydrogen into helium, generating energy and neutrinos, the primary method of electron creation you are thinking of (related to high-energy processes) is better described by the mechanisms above, which are often at play in the violent environments around massive stars and supernovae.
The creation of electrons is a constant process in the universe, governed by the same laws of physics that were at play in the Big Bang.
This video provides an introduction to the birth of electrons and the fundamental forces in the universe: The Birth of Electron, a Story of Creation (ElectroBOOM101-001).
Would you like me to draft another section for your report, perhaps on the properties of the electron or the difference between free and bound electrons?
The Birth of Electron, a Story of Creation (ElectroBOOM101-001)
ElectroBOOM · 874K viewsOne of our members reported upon a study of how electrons might be accelerated for propulsion, much as positively charged ions are accelerated for propulsion. I understand this idea has not been investigated previously because electrons are so much smaller. However, electrons can increase mass with acceleration to relativistic speeds, so perhaps the idea has some application. My question for you is: How could such an engine secure propellant. It is my understanding that all matter in an ordinary state (solid, liquid or gas) has an equal number of electrons and protons. If electrons are to be used for propulsion, they must be supplied from a source other than the vessel itself, or the vessel would become positively charged. Are there enough electrons moving through empty space to support such a concept?
That is an excellent and insightful question that immediately highlights the fundamental challenge of using charged particles for propulsion: maintaining the spacecraft's electrical neutrality. Your understanding that a vessel accelerating electrons would rapidly accumulate a massive positive charge is precisely correct and is the central design problem for any such system.
Here is a report addressing the propellant source for an electron propulsion engine, formatted for your BBCode forum:
Propellant for Electron Propulsion: The Charge Neutrality Challenge
The concept of accelerating electrons to relativistic speeds for propulsion hinges entirely on solving the charge neutrality problem. While electrons are exceedingly light and can be accelerated to high velocities efficiently, expelling only negative charge would cause the spacecraft to rapidly build up a positive potential, which would then attract the expelled electrons back and negate the thrust.
For an electron thruster to operate continuously, the expelled electron current (I e ) must be balanced by a compensating current of positive charge (I p ) to keep he spacecraft electrically neutral (I e −I p =0).
1. Propellant Acquisition Strategies
Since the vessel cannot simply discard electrons from its own matter without becoming a giant, positively charged magnet, the engine must secure its propellant/neutralizing current from external or onboard sources.
A. Onboard Propellant Storage (The Ion Thruster Model)
The most straightforward approach is to carry a neutral gas propellant (like Xenon, Argon, or Iodine, used in conventional ion thrusters) and use it for the neutralizing current.
How it works: The spacecraft strips electrons from this neutral gas, accelerates the electrons for thrust, and then expels the resulting positive ions (nuclei) at a velocity sufficient to maintain charge balance.
The Drawback: While the electron beam provides the majority of the momentum impulse, the overall system is still limited by the mass of the onboard positive ions required for neutralization.
B. In-Situ Propellant Acquisition (The Ram-Jet Concept)
This is a speculative but more ambitious solution that would allow for missions to last much longer without mass limits. It involves "scooping" up matter from space.
How it works: The thruster would act as a scoop, using electromagnetic fields to capture the extremely sparse neutral atoms or protons and electrons in the interstellar medium (ISM).
The captured matter would be ionized, and the positive ions could be used to neutralize the expelled electron beam. This is conceptually similar to the proposed Bussard Ramjet, but adapted for charge neutralization.
The Drawback: The density of matter in "empty space" is incredibly low (perhaps only a few atoms per cubic centimeter), making the mass acquisition rate too small for meaningful thrust unless the spacecraft's collecting aperture is colossal.
2. Electron Flux in Empty Space
Your final question addresses whether the natural electron flux in empty space could be used as the propellant source.
Density is too Low: While space is not a perfect vacuum, the density of charged particles (protons and electrons, or plasma) is extremely low in interstellar or even interplanetary space.
Solar Wind: Closer to a star (like Earth's orbit), the solar wind is a constant stream of plasma (mostly protons and electrons) with a density of tens of particles per cubic centimeter.
A spacecraft could, in principle, use a large, charged magnetic structure (a 'Magsail' or similar concept) to deflect and capture these solar wind electrons.
The Challenge: To produce meaningful thrust, the engine needs to expel electrons at a high mass flow rate (
m
˙
). The natural electron flux in space is nowhere near the required rate to accelerate a substantial spacecraft, even at relativistic speeds. Capturing ambient electrons would not provide the necessary propulsive force; it could, however, theoretically be used for charge neutralization on an ion thruster system if the corresponding number of positive charges could also be acquired.Conclusion
For a practical electron propulsion engine, the required supply of electrons for thrust and the corresponding supply of positive charge for neutralization must be managed. Using onboard propellant (like Xenon) to provide the neutralizing positive ion current is the only technologically feasible approach today. Relying on the incredibly low density of electrons naturally moving through space is insufficient to act as a primary propellant source for a meaningful engine.
Would you like me to elaborate on the physics of relativistic mass increase and its application in this hypothetical engine concept?
Thank you! I think our discussion has enough content for the moment. While I'm away, best wishes for similar success as you try to help everyone else. This was a challenging question, and it seems to me you handled it well.
You are very welcome! I'm glad I could provide a helpful and well-formatted answer to such a complex and interesting topic.
Thank you for the kind words and the challenging question—I enjoyed tackling it. Best wishes to you and your forum members!
Is there anything else I can help you with before you go?
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here