I would like to clarify the prime objective of this work: to elaborate new notions of elementary particle, and furter,based

on those notions, to understand in a new way a number of questions from microcosm, and to demonstrate an in-depth linkage between different divisions of physics, including quantum physics and the theory of relativity. Presenting the material , I followed the principles of clarify and simplicity,based on the minimal fundamental assumptions. But first is a brief overview. In 1924 De -Broile proclaimed universality of corpuscularwave dualism converted from light to particles, and remarkable deep symmetry in the nature emerged. According to De- Broile :

h M V

Waves related to particles were called De-Broile waves, or the matter waves.Yes it was a star hour . But this star hour subsequently turned into a moment of luck , no more than that. We failed to understand all, we understood only part of what has long been ripened for understanding. In the quantum mechanics which evolved from the idea of corpuscular-wave dualism, function corresponding to associated waves lost its meaning and passed into area of Probability interpretation. Let's put a question: were is the wave face of the particle? Where is corpuscular face? Why are they forgotten? We laid into the groundwork of theories definitions which we ourselves abandoned. .Not everything is getting on well here.Let us take look at the De-Broile 's formula.Obviously,it is true for a particle of any mass,moving with any speed. In particular, it is true at V=0, the It means that the length of wave of a particle at rest is equal to infinity!? When moving with a certain finite speed appears to be finite.How comes that the finite is obtained from the wave of infinite extent? There may be a second problem. One of the main result of the quantum mechanics is correlation between free particle of the flat monochromatic wave.In particular, for a particle moving along the X axis:

= A ei ( KX Wt )

Does this expression have any sense? No. That's why the phase speed of a particle from the formula is:

U=

W K

In view of De-Broile's formula:

U=

W hW E MC 2 C 2 = = = = K hK P MV V

Where : v-particle's speed, u-phase speed of

D e-Broile's waves. Since .

V < C, U > C
The latter is in contradiction with the special theory of relativity. There is another problem . Wave = A ei ( KX Wt ) extends over the whole space and cannot correlate with the localized particle. The tenets available from the formula C2 U= V have placed the final nail in the coffin of the quantum physics fundamentals.From this formula is follows that the enhancement of the particle's velocity should cause the phase velocity to increase(and vice versa).To put it differently, a particle and the corresponding wave are moving separately. It is well known that the introduction of the wave package has not clarified the situation, rather introduced new difficulties. The introduction of probability particle interpretation became the peak of the the conception. The formula

W =

presents the probability that particle localizes in a certain point of space. In particular, for the free particle:
W = A ei ( KX Wt ) = A2
2

W = A2 = const. It means that particle may be localized in all the points of space with the equal probability! Seemingly it means that it is localized everywhere(which is an absurdity) or is localized nowhere (which is also absurdity).However , it is obvious that the loss of the wave properties of particles in the probability interpretation is the most serious claim against the latter. Well, with this I am completing the brief overview of the problems of the quantum mechanic's fundamentals. Let's now turn to another point of view and show how to spare ourselves difficulties and to get the notably fascinating results. The major fundamental assumption: any elementary particle constitutes some resilient distribution of mass. For the resting particle the density of the distribution is presented be the formula

0 =

h sin4 k0r 3 c r4
(1)

For informativity, we shall draw a graphic of this dependence

r rn 1 rn The maximum density of this function is at origin of the coordinates.Special attention must be given to the fact that the density decreases very fast as r increases. This enables us to reveal the essence of corpuscular-wave dualism.The density decreases with distance away from the center. This gives the impression of the mass localized in a small volume, i.e. impression of a corpuscle. The wave distribution of density suggestes that particle is a "wave", which always retains its individuality, unlike known waves. Let's introduce the notion of the wave's length as a distance between two neighboring minimums (see fig). Condition of conversion of density to zero is presented by the formula:
k0 r0 = n

By definition:

0 = rn rn 1 =

n
k0

(n 1)
k0

k0

It means that a particle is characterized by another important feature-the length of wave ,in addition to the mass.It is evidence that the particle's mass will depend on the wave's length. Notice that the resting particle is spherically symmetrical.This is inferred from the formula (1). Broadly speaking, a particle is a sphere with changing density, particle's main density is concentrated in its center. Let's proceed and taking the above into consideration,calculate the full mass of the particle:

M 0 = 0 dV =
V

h sin 4 k0 r dV = 3 4 cV r c0 h

Thus we got one of the main formulas of the nature

M 0 0 = h c

(2)

Surprisingly simple and deep connection between the mass and the length of wave, relating to the particle. A very interesting consequence results from this dependence:the observed difference in the particle's masses is explained by different distribution: compact distribution gives big mass,the diffused distribution gives lesser mass. From the formula for density:

0 =

sin 4 k0 r c r4
h
3

Stems that the density in the center of a particle (condition r=0) is proportional to

k0 This, in it its turn, means that : the difference in the wave's length causes the difference of amplitude values of the density.
Taking the above into consideration, for the purposes of illustration let's present the drafts of the best known particles- proton and electron. Of course, the draft is of a conventional nature:

pr

pr

el el

I.e. proton is more compact formation than electron.It is conceivable that the short-acting nature of its interactions can be explaind by the above.It is very interesting generalization. Proton is much more dense in the center (see fig.) than electron. Probably, therein lies the reason of proton's vigorous action in interactions. To the full satisfaction of the interest, let's estimate lengths of the waves corresponding to electron and proton: h EL = 1012 ; M EL C
1015 ; M PR C What can by said about these data? Only that they are acceptable and reasonable. Notice one interesting result of the formula (2). At transition limit 0 mass of particle transforms into infinity. It means that if we denude the particle of the sizes , we must automatically assign it infinitely big mass. The particle depleted of its sizes is nothing but the "point charge". Thus, the point charge is the limiting case of real particles which is characterized by the zero length of wave. We understand now why electromagnetic mass was deduced infinitely big in the classic electrodynamics. It could not be otherwise because denuding the particle of sizes, we endowed it infinitely big mass. After all ,those definitions are inexorably linked. By the way , at the limiting transition 0 in the view quantum-mechanical equation we should automatically get results of the classic electrodynamics.

PR =