Nuclear and Atomic Physics


Classical Justification of the Wave-Like Behavior of Electron Beams

Authors: Hamid V. Ansari

Relying on this fact that not only role of the medium (intermediate gas) cannot be ignored in the electric discharge between cathode and anode, but also it is very important, the diffraction and interference phenomena which an electron beam can reveal are justified. This act is done after analyzing the manner in which stroke propagates via the gas valence electrons. In this respect an experiment is proposed as a test. We conclude that the cathodic ray does not carry charge, ie is not a ray of electrons being shot but is a longitudinal wave arising from the vibration of the valence electrons of the molecules of the carrying-wave medium. In this way the mechanism of production of and the difference between the longitudinal and transverse waves and that our longitudinal wave is only due to compression (not expansion) impacts are explained.
Our ability for complete deflecting and making away the electron beam (behind the anode), existence of sharp shadow of anode in the electric discharge tube, existence of dark-bright striated columns in this tube (similar to Kundt tube in acoustics), and the action mechanism of image intensifying in the image intensifier tubes are all described as witnesses to confirm the wave-like motion for electron beam proposed in this paper and reject the shooting motion for it.
Deflection of the trajectory of electron beams in electric and magnetic fields is justified in wave-like motion of "going" and "backing" for evaluation of which an experiment has been proposed. It is shown that how for transferring of momentum there is no necessity to suppose shooting motion for electron in the cathodic ray.
Two separate parallel cathodic rays repel each other. This will be contrary to what the electromagnetism predicts if a cathodic ray is to carry charge. This phenomenon is justified by the model presented here.

Comments: 17 pages

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 10 Aug 2009

Unique-IP document downloads: 206 times

Articles available on are pre-prints that may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should therefore be treated as preliminary and speculative. Nothing stated should be treated as sound unless confirmed and endorsed by a concensus of independent qualified experts. In particular anything that appears to include financial or legal information or proposed medical treatments should not be taken as such. will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus