Mass is assumed to be one of the three major physical properties of fundamental particles.

Mass is a property of matter that was first described in mathematical form by Isaac Newton in the year 1687. Mass is attributed to the phenomenon of a physical body that determines the body’s resistance to being accelerated by a force and its mutual gravitational attraction with other bodies.

With Einstein’s extension of the properties of mass with the notion of them also being relativistic towards a transformation into energy, it was necessary to redefine this physical property. That was done by introducing the terms invariant mass and relativistic mass, which this picture highlights:



The two interpretations of what “mass” means. The first (in green) is that mass is something that does not change with speed — often called “invariant mass” or “rest mass”, it is used by particle physicists. The other, “relativistic mass”, is just energy divided by c-squared, and grows with speed. Note the two are almost identical at small velocities, and so are usually equal in daily life. ref. Matt Strassler

Although this is clear among physicists, its logic is not entirely consistent.
There is a hidden assumption in this thinking: that the invariant mass is not “energy in disguise”, but is instead a separate, identifiable, physical property of matter. It is possible to imagine that within a particle with a so-called invariant mass, there is still only energy, but in a form, that cannot be distorted by us anymore by a further “mechanical” reduction. Therefore it is identified as a fundamental particle and consequently we attribute invariant mass to such a fundamental particle as a separate physical property. It is indicative that we use its energy equivalent, eV/c² as a measure for invariant mass.

In the Standard Model, we have fundamental particles within the group of Fermions that are assumed to have mass.


This phenomenon can be studied in isolation for Leptons, in naked form, but not so for Quarks. Quarks can only be studied as part of constructs like the proton and neutron. Both proton and neutron show a substantial mass phenomenon, and therefore, it is assumed that Quarks have a comparable mass manifestation.

Fermions are identified as matter and anti-matter particles and basic for the mass behavior of atoms.

In the chapter on the beginning of the universe, the statement is made that within The Dutch Paradigm, there are only two types of fundamental particles declared, being the photon and neutrino.

An animation was made available:



Such an animation can be helpful as a didactic tool, in so far as it supports a better understanding of an idea. For this stage of the explanation of the ideas as in The Dutch Paradigm, it is sufficient to highlight that only two fundamental particles – the photon and the neutrino – are required to eventually construct the world as we experience with our sensorial perceptions. With The Dutch Paradigm, it is a first principle that only photons and neutrinos were released at the occasion of the Big Bang.

Within this first principle, it is also accepted that a neutrino in naked form has a tiny mass manifestation. Therefore, it is postulated that all particles that exhibit mass like behavior, have at least one neutrino in it. Either naked and at different levels of frequency or in a construct with a photon.

The mere fact that we are not able yet to reduce “heavy” particles like the proton triggers the continuation of a hidden assumption that invariant mass is a physical reality that can be attributed to an origin.

It is entirely possible that we are searching for a microscopic non-existing physical property.

Therefore, if (some of) the fundamental particles, as defined in the Standard Model, are constructs, it could be that what we indicate as invariant mass is also “energy in disguise.” The fact that we call these fermions and bosons fundamental is because we have not been able yet to reduce them in possible constituents. It could also be possible that we will never be able to do so, due to some currently unknown laws of nature. But, the fact of our own inability to further split these particles is not enough to accept these particles as ultimate fundamental particles.

When the invariant mass is also “energy in disguise”, then gravitation and inertia are phenomena for which the origin must be found in energy as well.

I will highlight in a separate chapter why there are valid and logical coherent reasons to rethink this concept of invariant mass.

Because of this first principle of the existence of photons and neutrinos only, it is required to clarify how an electron is constructed based on these two fundamental particles.