## Space, Inertia, Mass and Gravity (Part 3)

### Reference: Space, Inertia, Mass and Gravity (Part 2)

Comment 02/17/2023:

Here is how I see it now:

1. It is the equilibrium, like “uniform motion” that appears to be absolute.
2. The “uniform motion” is absolute in terms of zero acceleration and force.
3. But “uniform motion” itself possesses inertia as consistency or mass.
4. But inertia appears only as a reaction to change.
5. Cycles are consistently producing a change.
6. The presence of cycles makes that inertia persistent.
7. Increase in cycles increases that inertia.

.

13. #### Here may lie the secret not only of gravity, but also of electric charge. This area needs to be observed more carefully.

.

• vinaire  On September 10, 2013 at 6:00 AM

Point #12 contains a conjecture. Point #13 is a call to investigate this conjecture.

.

Like

• vinaire  On September 10, 2013 at 12:55 PM

A wave is generated when some null status is disturbed. The disturbed status is of two kinds, which, together, is equivalent to the null status. For example, in case of a sound wave the null status is atmospheric pressure. When this null status is disturbed there are alternating areas of high and low pressures. These high and low pressures, when averaged out, will be equal to the atmospheric pressure. But these two states of disturbance follow each other rather than combine.

Similarly, the two states of disturbance in space are electrical and magnetic fields. These two states may average out as the null state of space, but they follow each other rather than combine.

.

Like

• Chris Thompson  On September 11, 2013 at 10:15 AM

This might be supportive of the “elastic” quality of space.

Like

• Chris Thompson  On September 13, 2013 at 12:14 AM

The Voyager space crafts have left the Solar System and have been travelling in interstellar plasma for about a year. It has taken the scientists this long to evaluate their raw data and to come to the conclusion that the craft has been travelling outside the solar “bubble.” None of this reporting means very much to me except to say that man continues to probe his environment in hopes of leveling the inconsistencies of his understanding and this is a nice movement toward that goal. Maybe being “outside” stellar space will provide more understanding of intrastellar space. It is very exciting to ponder.

Like

• vinaire  On September 13, 2013 at 4:56 AM

Yes, it is very exciting indeed.

.

Like

• Chris Thompson  On September 13, 2013 at 9:52 PM

Because interstellar space is mostly void of the well formed atoms that we find within intrastellar space, I am so very curious about that space, its make up, its quality. It seems there is very little mass out there, hence, according to our conjectures, little or no acceleration or deceleration. I think it has been quite a while since Voyagers have experienced any sense of motion from their frame of reference. This even though they have approached and passed many objects on their “travel.” From their point of view, Jupiter has appeared to have come and gone as though it were in motion near to them and after approaching passed away to recede into the past and distance. They seem to be travelling quite slowly as plasma ejected from the Sun is able to catch up to them and overtake them very quickly causing disturbances within their space that they detect and interpret like sound.

Like

• vinaire  On September 14, 2013 at 4:58 AM

I am curious about the make up of plasma.

.

Like

• Chris Thompson  On September 14, 2013 at 6:07 PM

Me too. I like to think about it because it helps allow me to reduce my expectation of perceiving usual things and wonder at what is there. If matter were removed and all that were left were space-time, what would that mean? As we have seen, helped by your very able breakdowns, there is something there yet nothing we usually think of as “something.” I like to imagine Voyagers as they sail along, perfectly still, and wrapped snugly in their “cocoon of space” and wonder whether they are forcing their way through something, or possibly is that something simply passing smoothly through them? Or neither? Or something else?

Like

• vinaire  On September 14, 2013 at 8:23 PM

Point #6 in the OP provides the conjecture that spacetime itself is the product of relativity.

(1) When one is totally alone in space, there is no concept of distance. Only when another object goes floating by at a uniform speed that we get the idea of diminishing and expanding distance.

(2) When one is totally alone in space, there is no concept of duration. Only when another object appears in the distance, goes floating by, and vanishes again in the distance that we get the idea of the duration of that object.

(3) We get the concept of uniform motion itself only when another object goes floating by.

(4) Put yourself on that Voyager spacecraft. You’ll have no idea of spacetime unless there are other objects around.

(5) Everything seems to start with having the perception of another object. Until there is no idea of oneself either.

(6) It eventually comes down to the duality of manifestation-perception.

.

Like

• vinaire  On September 14, 2013 at 8:33 PM

The whole universe, on average, seems to be in perfect uniform motion. Therefore, when there is a deviation from uniform motion at one place, then there must be an equal and opposite deviation from that uniform motion at another place.

So, if there is a light traveling in one direction at some place in the universe then there must be an ‘equal’ light traveling in the opposite direction at another place.

If there seem to be a start of the universe at one place then there must be a seeming end of the universe at another place.

There has to be a perfect balance that is imitated in the Newton’s Third Law of Motion.

.

Like

• vinaire  On September 12, 2013 at 7:11 AM

1. The speed of light acts as an absolute for the theory of relativity. This leads to the concept of spacetime. But then we seem to come to a standstill.

2. Per Contemplation point #2, either some relevant information is missing, or false data is being added. There are assumptions in play.

3. Electrical and magnetic fields seem to be two changes in spacetime that are of opposite kind.

4. We need to understand the nature of electrical and magnetic fields better to understand the nature of spacetime.

5. Looking from the viewpoint of how our body senses its surroundings, spacetime seems to have the neutral feel of uniform motion.

6. Body seems to feel changes only in terms of accelerations and decelerations. This is what we also call force.

7. Body is an electromechanical phenomenon. The body seems to sense changes in terms of changes in electrical and magnetic fields.

8. Thus, the sense of acceleration and deceleration seems to come from changes in electrical and magnetic fields, or vice versa.

.

Like

• Rizwan  On September 15, 2013 at 9:48 PM

Vinay, I understand and agree with 1 to 9 above. I probably didn’t understand 10 to 13 in a way that it makes sense.
10 – Why would acceleration or deceleration greater than the speed of light cause something to precipitate as a mass particle. And acceleration of what are we talking about here?

Like

• vinaire  On September 16, 2013 at 5:00 AM

Rizwan, welcome to my blog.

What we have here are thought experiments that are producing conjectures to resolve inconsistencies. As I wrote on Facebook to answer your same questions there:

“In the beginning, when there is no mass, it is difficult to formulate the idea of speed and acceleration. Electromagnetic wave seems to appear as a disturbance in space that travels in the “fabric” of space. It is speed of travel of this disturbance that we find to be constant and absolute. This makes “space” and “time” to be phenomena that needs to be understood. Mathematical insight then showed space and time to be aspects of a single phenomenon called spacetime.

“The OP shows that “space” and “time” are perceived as varying distances and durations when relative motions are perceived, otherwise there is no sense of either space or time. Here we see observation and phenomenon depending on each other at cosmic scale, just as we find them to be depending on each other at quantum scales. Here we are looking at the interface of Physics with Metaphysics.

“We are using physical instruments to perceive. Eye is a physical instrument too. This makes it more interesting. Where does physics ends and metaphysics begins? That is an interesting question for me.”

.

Like

• vinaire  On September 16, 2013 at 5:19 AM

What we have here is a puzzle that is made up of elements, such as, perception and phenomenon. We are trying to understand this puzzle by breaking the phenomenon down into matter, energy, space and time. We are also trying to understand this puzzle by breaking perception down into patterns of abstraction and considerations. Is that the only way to break it all down? May be not. But that is the traditional way since Aristotle came up with terms like ‘energy’ and ‘motive’.

So, we are back at the same puzzle that has existed from a time even before the vocabulary to describe the puzzle were invented. But we have made great strides toward understanding this puzzle. The only caution is that we cannot take anything for granted. Ha ha! That is a great consolation.

.

Like

• Rizwan  On September 19, 2013 at 11:31 PM

Thanks Vinay, now I understand that this is hypothesis (may I call that hypothesis?). It is interesting that so much of it makes sense right away.

In 10, C is the velocity of light, and that is being compared with acceleration/deceleration which is a different unit. Or probably you meant, “Instantaneous acceleration or deceleration to reach the speed greater than the speed of light may precipitate as a mass particle.”

Now I understand it this way based on your last reply: The acceleration of the electromagnetic wave to reach beyond C may cause it to precipitate as a mass particle. And the following statements talk about the properties of such particles.

At first it still didn’t make sense to me, but suddenly 10 reminded me of the big bang theory. It sounds like this is in agreement with the big bang theory. Or rather this explains the cause behind big bang theory if true.
——-

Like

• vinaire  On September 20, 2013 at 4:23 AM

My point is as follows:

(1) Uniform speed is just that. It could be 0 or ‘c’ but there is no basis from which to confirm it when there is no mass.

(2) But an increase or decrease of velocity from the state of uniformity may be measured. If the uniform velocity is considered to be zero, then the velocity differential would be (v – 0) or equal to the velocity.

(3) So, here we are looking at the velocity differential of ‘c’. Instantaneous acceleration or deceleration greater than the speed of light means that the instantaneous change in velocity from the uniform velocity (0) is ‘c’.

(4) I think that “Big Bang” is happening all the time. It was not a one time thing. There is a lot more to be understood here.

.

Like

• vinaire  On September 30, 2013 at 4:17 PM

Spacetime essentially exist due to the perception of relativity. It is indexing of all things relative to one other. Spacetime is the sense of how things relate to each other. It is the means by which we think about real things.

.

Like