>Electrons are thought to spin, even though they are pure point particles with no surface that can possibly rotate. for an article related to theoretical physi

>Electrons are thought to spin, even though they are pure point particles with no surface that can possibly rotate. for an article related to theoretical physics and QM this opening is as bald as e2-e4. "Surface", "spin" [as in spinning wheel], "rotate" ? Reading further: >Space is usually considered infinitely divisible — given any two positions, there is always a position halfway between. considered by whom? >If the electron had a radius, the implied surface would have to be moving faster than the speed of light, violating the theory of relativity. well, it wouldn't be the first time a QM effect wouldn't fit the SR. The SR is applicable only between medium macro scale and medium micro scale [ and only to the speeds equal or below "c" ] . Large macro scale is outside SR - during last 13B years the Universe has expanded to the size much larger than 26B of light years. And the "electron surface speed" [or whatever there may be instead of the "surface", "speed", etc...] is well below the scale where SR is still applicable. The SR is about movement [and its "speed" as in "space"/"time" ] relative to local space in the local time with both modeled as _mathematically_ continuous. At the very large macro scales - Universe and its time - the space itself expands [ please don't mistake it for "observed" by SR "observer" expansion/contraction of the fixed local space] . At the very micro scale - the SR's models of the space and time aren't accurate enough to be used as a foundation for any conclusions about that scale.