It is easy to affirm that the atom of hydrogen is composed of proton and electron, seeing that it is easy to ionize it by using some low voltage electric fields in order to divide into its components.

It seems instead much less easy to affirm that neutron is a micro-atom of hydrogen, composed of a proton and an electron.

It should be this way since without applying energy it decomposes into proton and electron within few minutes from its expulsion from a nucleus.

Why is the hypothesis of a micro-atom hardly believable?

Because nobody has ever been able to create a model or a theory capable to justify birth, life and death of a neutron yet, according to the hypothesis considering it as the possible result of the proton-electron union.

Even Enrico Fermi with his Beta decay theory described only the phenomenon of decay. Nevertheless, he introduced a very firm methodology in quantum mechanics that we have been using since then for all types of decays we have discovered, but that seems not to be able to go beyond mere experiments.

Now, with the Wave Field Theory, we discover again the hypothesis of the micro atom, applying to it the wave description of masses and charges.

Firstly, we are obliged to justify the increase in mass in the electron-proton union.

We observe therefore in an ideal experiment a proton bound in a nucleus. 

• A photon of right energy invests the proton’s wave structure, splitting into two parts so that each of the two parts is diffracted by 360° creating two resonance orbits and producing an electron-positron pair.

• Let us imagine that the positron, which is electrically repelled by distant protons arranged in the nucleus, releases itself, and it is removed by the nucleus.

(This fact has a precise experimental evidence in the phenomena of interaction between gamma rays and nuclei.)

• The resonance orbit of an electron is 1836 times greater than that of a proton: therefore, the electron’s spherical Involute structure, at its appearence "contains" the resonance orbit and the proton’s wave structure.

In fact : l_e = 2,42621^.10^-12 m  >>  l_p = 1,32140.10^-15 m.

• Could it be able to contain two, three, or many protons given its greatness?

• In order to find a plausible answer, let us suppose that the electron’s wave structure, that is much bigger than the proton’s, wraps "two" protons which are by chance close to each other in the nucleus.

• At this moment a structure called deuteron arises, and it has the same charge as a proton, since the second proton’s charge is counterbalanced by the electron wrapping both of them.

The composition of the spins of the three wave entities forming the deuteron, justifies the various states of existence of the deuteron’s wave organization.

Seeing that we have never recognized the existence of the electron associated with deuteron so far, we used to say that a deuteron was composed of a neutral particle called neutron and of a proton.

Such a conclusion was certainly plausible because, when a deuteron was subjected to a photodisintegration through its interaction with a gamma ray of right energy, two particles emerged: proton with positive charge, and neutron with a greater mass and no electric charge.

According to wave theory it is evident that, during the separation of the two protons, the wavefront moving in the resonance orbit constituting the electron’s wave field, can follow and wrap round the center of its resonance orbit one of the two protons which is closer to it.

That very instant neutron forms.

Why is its mass greater than the sum of the masses of its constituents?

In order to understand that, we must reconsider the wave model of deuteron, and establish how the electron’s resonance orbit can be conditioned by the doubly spherical wave field of the two protons which are inside it.

The resonance orbit should be an ellipse with the two protons centered on the foci.

If the two protons moved about a common center of mass, there would be an accumulation of the waves emitted by each proton toward the center of the system.

The relative symmetry principle reacts to this variation in wavelenght with the CENTRIFUGAL FORCE which pushes the waves away from the center.

And this force is entirely consistent with the wave model of inertia we have previously examined.

This should be the second force acting in the nucleus of a deuteron and which opposes to the attractive force; the conflict of these two forces maintains the two deuteron components in a condition of equilibrium by keeping them at a constant distance.

The wavefront producing the electron Involute would rotate about the ellipse of the resonance orbit, running after the two protons so that the ellipse would be forced to have a precession.

The wavefront circulates on the resonance orbit at the velocity of light while the two protons rotate about their center of mass at a slower velocity.

Their radius of rotation is more than a thousand times smaller than the radius of the electron’s resonance orbit; therefore if their velocity had a right value, the angle of precession of the ellipse could be 120° for every turn.

If it were possible, all the conditions necessary for the existence of a wave model of neutron would take place.

In such a case, we should obtain a retrograde variation in the wave coming from the deuteron system, that would rotate in the direction opposite to the rotation of dipole and of resonance front. All of this may justify the anomalous spin orientation.

Now, if we eliminate the conditional tense, we can say that this wave variation produces a wave which is a modulation of the carrier resonance wave that is a characteristic of the electron mass.

This is the mass added to the sum of the deuteron elementary components that we globally define as “mass characteristic of a deuteron ”.

When the two protons split owing to photodisintegration and a neutron forms, the resulting retrograde variation remains constant so that its mass contribution increases the sum of the electron and proton masses, producing the mass characteristic of a neutron.

But now there is no reason for the existence of the retrograde wave, and there are no longer two wave sources inside the electron’s resonance orbit which therefore is no longer elliptical.

Now we can describe a consistent wave model of neutron which justifies the possibility of its birth, existence, mass and decay.

In order to reach a consistent theory of the neutron wave model we should describe its characteristics besides its spin, and justify, with the help of wave theory, the existence of the most mysterious product of its final decomposition: the antineutrino. (The same goes for the neutrino associated with the antineutron)

In order to understand the antineutrino, we must observe the orientations of proton spin which is correlated to the electron spin orientation and to the spin of the retrograde rotation of the electron's wave variation.

First of all, we must be guided by the “chirality” property of the electron and proton spins, realizing that, regardless the variation in wavelenght, the one is the mirror image of the other, and we have to distinguish the reality of our world from the reality reflected in the mirror.