Home Page


All Posts



Research in Physics

Research in Metaphysics

Research in Education

BOOK: A Scientific Approach to Meditation

BOOK: A Logical Approach to Theoretical Physics


The Observer of Einstein

If an event is localized and the observer is also considered to be localized then it will take time to perceive the event. This is the scenario assumed by Einstein in his theory of relativity. If either the event or the observer is universal then this limitation does not exist.

It takes time to perceive an event only when the event and the observer are localized.

An event is universal if it is the same all over the universe. This is the case with the universal properties, such as, the substance, its extents (space) and duration (time), and with the universal laws, such as, the law of gravity.

A universal event consists of universal properties and laws.

An observer is universal if it is not bounded by assumptions and fixed ideas. It views things and changes just as they are without any filters.

A universal observer is unbounded in its view of things as they are.

As science is objective it may be identified with the universal observer. We may look at Einstein’s theory of relativity from the viewpoint of this universal scientific observer. When we do that we notice that Einstein’s observer is attached to the inertial frame of reference. It is, therefore, subject to the properties of that frame. The most mysterious property of that frame is INERTIA.

Einstein’s observer is viewing speed through the filter of inertia and not aware of it.

To understand Einstein’s theory of relativity completely one needs to observe how inertia of objects influences their speed.

When two cosmic objects are revolving around each other, they are rotating with the same angular velocity around their common center of mass. According to the law of lever, the more massive object is closer to the center of mass and moving more slowly. Thus, Earth’s speed is slower than the speed of the moon but faster than the speed of the sun. The object at the center of a galaxy is expected to have the least speed and the greatest mass or inertia.

The greater is the inertia of a cosmic object, the lesser is its speed.

From the perspective of “continuum of substance” an object is a quantized pulse traveling in the sea of electromagnetic substance. The propagation of this pulse is balanced by its inertia. The resulting motion appears as the speed of the pulse. Therefore, this speed is an inherent property of the object.

This speed is inherent to the object.

We may thereby assume that an object with infinite inertia will be at absolute rest. As inertia decreases speed increasingly manifests itself in its absolute value

This speed is also absolute in value.

Thus the mystery of Einstein’s observer may be resolved in terms of the inherent inertia and inhernt speed of the inertial frame of reference.

Speed may not be assigned arbitrarily to an inertial frame without taking its inertia into account.


Substance, Space, Time and the Void

A scientist holding “particles in void” perspective believes that particles of matter exist in a void. He thinks that space is the void because space is empty of matter. But he is aware that space is something that exists, and the actual void must transcend the concept of space. Lacking explanation he treats space mathematically.

A person holding the broader “continuum of substance” perspective sees substance getting quantized in the electromagnetic spectrum. The ultimate quantization of this substance appears as matter at the upper end of the spectrum. The lower end extends toward void. He sees substance thinning out toward the void as follows.

  1. Matter
  2. Quantum particles
  3. Gamma radiation
  4. X-ray radiation
  5. Ultraviolet radiation
  6. Visible radiation
  7. Infrared radiation
  8. Terahertz radiation
  9. Microwave radiation
  10. Radio waves
  11. Space
  12. Void

From matter to quantum particles there is a rapid thinning out of substance. After that the substance appears as really thin radiation. As we look down the electromagnetic spectrum we see the thinning out of radiation. In the other direction we see quantization of substance.

The substance is not just matter. It extends beyond matter as electromagnetic radiation.

The extents of material objects and electromagnetic quanta are described by the dimensions of space. As substance thins out its extents (space) become increasingly diffused.

Space describes the extents of substance.

The duration of material objects and electromagnetic quanta are described by the dimensions of time. As substance thins out its duration (time) become increasingly ephemeral.

Time describes the duration of substance.

Ultimately, as the substance disappears into the void, so do space and time. The void has neither extent nor duration because these properties belong to substance only. The void is, therefore, difficult to visualize. Science has yet to grapple fully with the concept of void.

Space and time do not exist in the void. The void has neither extent nor duration.

The “empty space” is empty of material substance, but it is not empty of electromagnetic substance. It actually represents the extents of electromagnetic substance.

The material objects are described in terms of their mass. The electromagnetic substance is described in terms of its quanta, or frequency. Matter at the upper end is made up of very high frequency. Space at the lower end denotes very low frequency. As frequency approaches zero we approach the void.

A reinterpretation of scientific observations without the filter of the “particles in void” perspective quickly shows that substance is more than just matter.

The “continuum of substance” perspective presents a more real and logical view of substance, space, time, and void.


Reference: A Logical Approach to Theoretical Physics


The Logical Basis of Physics

The word science comes from the Latin scire “to know”. Science simply means “knowledge” acquired through inquiry. The word physics comes ultimately from Greek phusis ‘nature’.

The science of physics is the knowledge acquired through objective inquiry into the nature of the universe.

The logical perspective used in physics has been described as follows.1

From the earliest recorded thoughts about physics and philosophy, beginning in ancient times, theories about the constitution of nature have been divided into two opposing conceptual frameworks, one based on the idea of a continuum of substance permeating all space, and the other based on the idea of isolated entities moving through a void of empty space.

In the “continuum of substance” perspective we have a gradient at the boundary between matter and space. Here the substance gradually thins out from matter and ultimately becomes space. Faraday2 described this gradient as made up of “lines of force”. These lines were concentrated in atoms, and from there they extended out making the fabric of space. Therefore, there was a gradient scale of substance from matter to space.

In the “particles in void” perspective we have a sharp divide at the boundary between matter and space. Here matter ends abruptly and space starts. It is a much simpler black and white view of substance. It is either present as “matter”, or absent as “space”. There is no gradient in between. It is simple to represent this view with mathematics.

There are two logical perspectives that have been used in physics: (a) “particles in void”, and (b) “continuum of substance”.

The “particles in void” perspective found its biggest success in Newtonian Mechanics, where matter and space were treated clearly as separate entities. Since space is viewed as “nothingness”, it is addressed mathematically through the use of Geometry in explaining mechanics.

Newton was also successful in discovering the universal phenomenon of Gravity. He provided the mathematics for assessing the gravitational attraction between two objects. But it raised more questions. Space was “nothingness” and had no properties, so how could two objects attract each other across a distance? Newton was mystified by this “action at a distance”, but he had no answers.

The “particles in void” perspective has been extremely successful but it has been unable to explain the mystery of “action at a distance”.

More questions arose in 18th century in the context of light, heat, electricity and magnetism where the separation between matter and space was not so clear. Mathematics has helped to a large degree but it seems to be substituting increasingly for some unknown reality.

There have been attempts to apply the “continuum of substance” perspective to the mystery of “action at a distance” and other problems; but, for some reason, this perspective has not caught on.

The “continuum of substance” perpective  may solve the problem of “action at a distance”, but it has not been applied diligently.

Modern physics is still focused on the “particles in void” perspective supported by mathematics. This perspective is visible in quantum mechanics, which conceives that atom and its nucleus are made up of particles. The subject of Particle Physics is at the forefront of current physical research.

The scientific mindset is currently dominated by the “particles in void” perspective supported by mathematics.

The “continuum of substance” perspective has yet to be applied diligently to the fundamental problems in physics that have long been considered but still unresolved.

The book looks at the unresolved problems in Physics from the “continuum of substance” perspective.


1Why Maxwell Couldn’t Explain Gravity” by Kevin Brown
2Thoughts on Ray Vibrations”, Lecture by Michael Faraday (1846),  Experimental Researches in Electricity, Vol III, M. Faraday, p447-452.


Reference: A Logical Approach to Theoretical Physics


A Logical Approach to Theoretical Physics

Reference: Research in Physics


BOOK: A Logical Approach to Theoretical Physics

Preface: Physics & Objective Reality

Chapter 1: The Logical Basis of Physics

Chapter 2: Substance, Space, Time and the Void

Chapter 3: Einstein’s View of Space and Time

Chapter 4: The Observer of Einstein


On these materials, I would love to have the following feedback from you.

Email: vinaire@yahoo.com

1. Can you follow what I am saying?

2. Are there some portions that are boring?

3. Are there places where the language is a bit unrealistic?

4. Which passages you had to read twice?

5. Which sections do you remember best?

6. Which parts could be eliminated when necessary?

Thank you.

Physics & Objective Reality

The “reality” of this universe is fascinating indeed. We perceive it directly through our physical perceptions of sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell. We also perceive it more deeply through our mental perception, which is referred to as common sense based on generations of experience, or wisdom.

The science of Physics investigates and builds up on the objective reality of the universe.

The objective reality is that which has been tested and verified, and cannot be argued with. The word objective is derived from object that has the sense of “something perceived”. Objective reality is not only made tangible through the physical perceptions, but also made consistent by the mental perception of logic. The objective reality is the same for all people.

Objective reality is that from which all known inconsistencies have been resolved.

The subjective reality is different for different people and it may be argued with. The word subjective is derived from subject that has the sense of “open to inspection”. Subjective reality depends on individual viewpoint. It is recognized by inconsistencies present in the view of reality.

Subjective reality is characterized by inconsistencies that still need to be resolved.

As inconsistencies are resolved the subjective reality becomes increasingly objective. We may compare realities by the degree of their subjectivity or objectivity. It is not just black and white.

There is, however, a misconception that everything processed through the mind is subjective. Wisdom that has been refined and verified over generations is still subjective because it is based on mental perception. Even the physical perceptions are subjective because they are interpreted by the mind. Since reality cannot be perceived except through the mind the objective reality is unattainable. Such a viewpoint is impractical.

Reality does not become subjective just because it is processed through the mind.

The science of physics continually examines the physical phenomena by observing it more deeply through experiments. It comes up with theories and concepts to explain the phenomena under examination. Newton came up with fundamental concepts, such as, mass and inertia, along with theories to explain motion, mechanics and gravity. Such theories and concepts are then continually examined for inconsistencies. Physics does so by the use of mathematics, which is a rigorous form of logic. But this does not exclude other forms of logic.

The criterion of objectivity is physical, mathematical and logical consistency.

It is increasingly becoming difficult to directly examine and verify the phenomena in modern scientific investigations. Mathematics is being used increasingly to substitute for direct observations. Mathematics has even substituted the theories in quantum mechanics. Although the mathematics of quantum mechanics predicts remarkably verifiable results; but its interpretation conflicts with the common logic. There are unresolved inconsistencies when the theories of relativity, quantum mechanics, and Newtonian mechanics are considered together.

This book is written on the premise that when there is a physical, mathematical or logical inconsistency some truth is missing and it needs to be discovered.


Reference: A Logical Approach to Theoretical Physics