Inertia of EM Field

Reference: Disturbance Theory


In my opinion, quantum physics lacks a basic explanation because it has no definition for “physical substance” or inertia.

A definition of physical substance cannot be arrived at in the absence of the fundamental postulate of EMPTINESS (no substance, no space, no time).

The awareness of substance comes from its property of inertia. The theoretical concept of EMPTINESS is a state of zero inertia.

A substance more basic than matter is the electromagnetic field. For this field the inertia may be defined as,

Inertia = momentum x frequency

This means that if there is a frequency, then there is also inertia. Therefore, light has a finite amount of inertia.

Einstein assumed the inertia of light to be zero. This assumption works when dealing with matter, or material systems, because the inertia of matter is very high and the inertia of light can be ignored.

However, that assumption does not work for quantum particles because in that case the inertia of light cannot be ignored.

Thus, inertia provides a sense of physical substance, and a precise mathematical definition.

This concept of inertia or “substance” is lacking in quantum physics. Please see

The Problem of Inertia


Addition (1/10/2018)

Inertia is “innate force” per Newton. The unit of inertia is more like the unit of force. Since, Force = Energy/distance, we may write inertia for the EM field as

Inertia = energy / wavelength = hf/λ

Its unit will be something like electron volt per angstrom.

Therefore, inertia increases as
… Energy increases
… Wavelength decreases
… Momentum increases
… Frequency increases

Inertia goes to zero as frequency goes to zero. Therefore, we can express inertia in absolute terms.


Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
%d bloggers like this: