Category Archives: KHTK Physics

Universe, the Beginning

Reference: The Creation Hymn of Rig Veda


Here we have the Ancient Creation Hymn along with a modern scientific rendition.


There was neither non-existence nor existence then.
There was neither the realm of space nor the sky which is beyond.
What stirred?
In whose protection?
Was there water, bottomlessly deep?

Prior to the universe there was no idea of existence or non-existence.

There was no awareness of matter, energy, space or time.

The universe seems to arise from some disturbance 

Of what? We do not know.

There was neither death nor immortality then.
There was no distinguishing sign of night nor of day.
That One breathed, windless, by its own impulse.
Other than that there was nothing beyond.

There was no idea of death or immortality then.

There was neither day nor night.

There was only the slightest awareness

Of motion appearing by itself

Darkness was hidden by darkness in the beginning,
with no distinguishing sign, all this was water.
The life force that was covered with emptiness,
that One arose through the power of heat.

Lack of motion was hidden by lack of awareness

Nothing was distinguishable, everything was the same

The motion that arose was surrounded by no motion

There alone was the power of awareness.

Desire came upon that One in the beginning,
that was the first seed of mind.
Poets seeking in their heart with wisdom
found the bond of existence and non-existence.

It was the desire that was the disturbance

It was the beginning of the mind

There was then the awareness of existence

That also brought the awareness of non-existence.

Their cord was extended across.
Was there below?
Was there above?
There were seed-placers, there were powers.
There was impulse beneath, there was giving forth above.

Scale was formed from physical motion to metaphysical awareness, 

All opposites, such as below and above, had a scale as well.

There was concrete reality, and the abstraction underlying it

There was desire below,  and there was change above.

Who really knows?
Who will here proclaim it?
Whence was it produced?
Whence is this creation?
The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe.
Who then knows whence it has arisen?

Before the beginning of awareness

There was non-awareness

Before the beginning of motion

Who would know what was there?

Any knower came afterwards with the creation

Who then knows how disturbance came to be?

Whence this creation has arisen
– perhaps it formed itself, or perhaps it did not –
the One who looks down on it,
in the highest heaven, only He knows
or perhaps He does not know.

The beginning of the universe is there

Perhaps it formed itself, or perhaps it did not

Maybe the broadest viewpoint of it

Could reveal the secret of the beginning

Or, perhaps, it may not.



  1. We do not know what was there prior to the beginning of the universe. So, we shall call that state BRAHMAN as referred to in the ancient Vedas. This is also the “noumenon” of Kant.

  2. The universe seems to arise from the disturbance of this earlier state of BRAHMAN, or absolute zero. This beginning is characterized by motion and awareness. This is also the “phenomenon” of Kant.

  3. When there is motion there is also awareness. When there is no motion there is no awareness. Thus, motion and awareness present two different aspects of disturbance.

  4. The dimension of disturbance may be represented by a ‘concrete-to-abstract’ scale with concrete motion at one end also appearing as abstract awareness at the other end.

  5. This scale may be formalized as physical motion that is getting increasingly abstracted as metaphysical awareness.

  6. Thus there is a gradient of abstraction from PHYSICAL to METAPHYSICAL just like there is a gradient of temperature from HOT to COLD.


COMMENTS: Einstein’s 1905 Paper on Relativity (Part 1)


Reference: Disturbance Theory


This examination of Einstein’s 1905 paper on relativity (see the link below) is being carried out to see if Einstein’s original postulates can be modified to bring better consistency among the Theory of Relativity and Newtonian Mechanics.

Einstein’s 1905 paper:

Please note that the indented text below is from Einstein’s paper.



“It is known that Maxwell’s electrodynamics—as usually understood at the present time—when applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries which do not appear to be inherent in the phenomena. Take, for example, the reciprocal electrodynamic action of a magnet and a conductor. The observable phenomenon here depends only on the relative motion of the conductor and the magnet, whereas the customary view draws a sharp distinction between the two cases in which either the one or the other of these bodies is in motion. For if the magnet is in motion and the conductor at rest, there arises in the neighbourhood of the magnet an electric field with a certain definite energy, producing a current at the places where parts of the conductor are situated. But if the magnet is stationary and the conductor in motion, no electric field arises in the neighbourhood of the magnet. In the conductor, however, we find an electromotive force, to which in itself there is no corresponding energy, but which gives rise—assuming equality of relative motion in the two cases discussed—to electric currents of the same path and intensity as those produced by the electric forces in the former case.”

This introductory paragraph from the paper mentions asymmetry observed in the relative motion between a magnet and a conductor. This asymmetry occurs in the reference frame of the lab, which results in different interpretation of the same phenomenon.

This “asymmetry” disappears when we use the magnetic lines of force, which are attached to the magnet, as the reference frame. The conductor moves relative to these lines of force the same way in either case producing the same result.

“Examples of this sort, together with the unsuccessful attempts to discover any motion of the earth relatively to the “light medium,” suggest that the phenomena of electrodynamics as well as of mechanics possess no properties corresponding to the idea of absolute rest. They suggest rather that, as has already been shown to the first order of small quantities, the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good. We will raise this conjecture (the purport of which will hereafter be called the “Principle of Relativity”) to the status of a postulate, and also introduce another postulate, which is only apparently irreconcilable with the former, namely, that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body. These two postulates suffice for the attainment of a simple and consistent theory of the electrodynamics of moving bodies based on Maxwell’s theory for stationary bodies. The introduction of a “luminiferous ether” will prove to be superfluous inasmuch as the view here to be developed will not require an “absolutely stationary space” provided with special properties, nor assign a velocity-vector to a point of the empty space in which electromagnetic processes take place.”

This paragraph states that no motion of the earth relatively to the “light medium” has been discovered. This is incorrect because the very fact of radial acceleration due to inertia is a proof of motion relatively to the “light medium”.

This “light medium” is the space itself as established by Maxwell’s equations. The very fact that the speed of light is determined exclusively by the permeability and permittivity of space establishes space as the “light medium”. Light is a disturbance in space.

It was assumed that space could not be a medium because it could not be rigid to electromagnetic waves, while being completely permeable to matter. It was not realized that space puts up resistance to motion relative to it in the form of inertia. Thus space is not completely permeable to matter. Space resists the motion of matter. This resistance shows up as inertia.

Any motion relative to space requires force and it is accompanied by acceleration. Moons are always accelerating toward their planets.  Planets are always accelerating toward their stars. Stars are always accelerating toward the center of their galaxies and so on. There may appear to be no acceleration in the direction tangential to an orbit. But there is always a radial acceleration toward some center. When there is no force or acceleration, there is no motion relative to space.

There is no uniform motion without acceleration that travels in straight line. All Newtonian or Einstenian inertial frames are actually a single frame, which is at rest relative to space. This nicely explains the Principle of Relativity.

Any motion in this single frame is resisted by inertia. A fixed velocity in this frame shall result from a balance between acceleration and inertia. The velocity of light is finite and constant because there is a balance between an electromagnetic push of disturbance and the inertia of disturbed space.

If a Michelson-Morley experiment is conducted to compare the speed of light in the direction tangential to earth’s orbit and also normal to it, it is likely to observe a difference due to the centripetal acceleration of earth. Einstein’s assumption that there is no motion of the earth relative to the “light medium” is not fully justified.

An absence of inertia may be used as an absolute rest point from which to measure motion. This would also be an absence of electromagnetic frequency. Any motion relative to space will manifest some force due to inertia as acceleration.

The phenomena of electrodynamics as well as of mechanics, has inertia as a property common between them that can be referenced from the idea of undisturbed space.

Einstein postulates as the Principle of Relativity: “The same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good.”

This postulate assumes that light has same magnitude of inertial characteristics as matter. This assumption is not justified.

Einstein makes another postulate: “Light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.”

This postulate assumes that there is no property shared by light with the body that emits it, which control their respective velocities. This assumption is also not justified because the velocities of light and the emitting body are related by their respective inertia relative to inertialess space.

“The theory to be developed is based—like all electrodynamics—on the kinematics of the rigid body, since the assertions of any such theory have to do with the relationships between rigid bodies (systems of co-ordinates), clocks, and electromagnetic processes. Insufficient consideration of this circumstance lies at the root of the difficulties which the electrodynamics of moving bodies at present encounters.”

Essentially, Einstein uses RIGID MATTER as its reference frame. We may call it the Material Reference Frame or MRF. This reference frame does not properly account for the inertia associated with light and sub-atomic particles. It actually considers inertia of light particle (photon) to be zero.

The proper reference frame would however be SPACE. We may call it the Space Reference Frame or SRF. This reference frame shall account for the inertia associated with light and sub-atomic particles. It would not represent space by rigid coordinates. The SRF coordinate system shall take into account the varying characteristics of inertia of the particles being considered.

[To be continued…]


Theory of Relativity & SRF


Per Maxwell’s equations, the speed of light ‘c’ is determined by the properties of space. Light appears to travel in space from one location to another as a transverse wave. From the model of a wave traveling in a medium it appears that the medium of light is space. The new idea here is that a non-material space acts as a medium. Up till now the medium was thought to be “ether” of material-like properties. That didn’t work out. So, what are the non-material properties of space as a medium?

Space, when disturbed seems to break into electric and magnetic fields. Space “doesn’t move”, but the disturbance in space (electromagnetic field) moves. This disturbance moves in such a way that the ratio of its wavelength to period is the constant ‘c’. This is what an electromagnetic wave is.

But light also moves at speed ‘c’ relative to uniformly moving material, regardless of how fast or how slow that material might be moving. Therefore, uniformly moving material has a velocity zero relative to space. It is “carrying space” with it, so to say. That is why no “ether wind” was discovered in Michelson-Morley’s experiments.

We have two different reference frames. The first is Galilean Reference or relativistic frame attached to matter called MRF (material frame of reference). The other is non-material reference frame attached to space called SRF (space frame of reference). The latter has never been considered in science. NOTE: The Lorentz transformations, like Galilean transformations are part of MRF.

We are conditioned to MRF. In it we see the distance changing uniformly between two uniformly moving material bodies moving towards each other or away from each other. But in SRF a uniformly moving material has a velocity zero relative to space. So, the distance is invariable, or it does not exist, between two uniformly moving material bodies.

In MRF we see time changing as a material body moves with uniform speed. In SRF the time is invariable, or it does not exist. The truth is that space and time exist in SRF as “wavelength” and “period” and the ratio between them is the constant ‘c’. All matter has infinitesimal wavelength and period. This gives us a uniform character of space and time in MRF. But in SRF this situation exists only at the upper end of the electromagnetic spectrum. MRF is, therefore, a specialized subset of SRF.

SRF gives us a much wider view of reality than MRF. This explains the relativistic “length contraction” and “time dilation” in terms of increasing or decreasing frequency. In MRF the frequency is collapsed beyond gamma range and appears to be “uniform”; and this gives us a uniform measure of length and time.

The relativistic world is understood much better when viewed through Space Reference Frame (SRF) derived directly from Maxwell’s Equations.

It appears that the speed ‘c’ can be attained only by an inertialess particle in MRF. As particle gains inertia its maximum attainable speed will reduce to a fraction of ‘c’. This is evident by the speed of electrons in MRF.

The Unified Field Theory


Evolution starts by increasing discreteness. This aspect of evolution covers the whole realm of physics. Discreteness evolves from

  1. Frequency of disturbance to
  2. Resonance as reinforced frequency to
  3. Particle as collapsed resonance.


The subject of physics started from observation of the motion of planets and other heavenly bodies in the sky. The fundamental property associated with these bodies was mass. So, physics evolved within a frame of reference based on mass. This aspect of physics was rounded up by Newton in the second half of 17th century.

Another aspect of Physics emerged in the beginning of 20th century when Einstein formulated the Theory of Relativity. This theory established the speed of light as a universal constant. The concepts of space and time could no longer be conceived as independent of each other as was the case in the frame of reference based on mass. The frame of reference of Physics had now shifted from mass to energy.

Following the above development, another aspect of physics evolved very rapidly during the first quarter of 20th century to explain the observations made at atomic dimensions. This aspect was called Quantum Mechanics because it did not have a well-grounded theory, and was based primarily on mathematical models. It seemed to have a frame of reference based on resonance.

Physics has long been trying to come up with a unified theory that can bring these three aspects of physics together. We may make some progress in that direction by relating the frames of reference of Theory of Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and Newtonian Physics on a scale of increasing discreteness. On this scale space shall have zero discreteness.

Energy (frequency) obviously is disturbed space; resonance is reinforced frequency; and mass (particle) appears to be collapsed (folded up) resonance. We may be able to use space as a reference point for all these frames of references.

Thus, if we can reformulate the Theory of Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and Newtonian Physics using a frame of reference based on space, we may be able to come up with a unified theory. This is the idea underlying the Disturbance theory, which is currently under development.

Granted the above ideas are very sketchy and are nothing more than conjectures at this stage, but they provide an overall coherence within which a unified theory may be developed.


The Photon

Light theory

Reference: Spacetime 5: A New Model of Atom

Light (electromagnetic radiation) is a disturbance in space. Light spreads uniformly in space in all directions as it moves away from its source. The intensity of light decreases with distance, but the frequency remains the same. Frequency is the only discrete aspect of light. Each cycle of light represents an energy equal to the Planck’s constant ‘h’.

In 1905, Einstein wrote in his paper “On a heuristic point of view concerning production and transformation of light”:

“It seems to me that the observations associated with blackbody radiation, fluorescence, the production of cathode ray by ultraviolet light, and other related phenomena connected with the emission and transformation of light are more readily understood if one assumes that the energy of light is discontinuously distributed in space. In accordance with the assumption to be considered here, the energy of light ray spreading out from a point source is not continuously distributed over an increasing space but consists of a finite number of energy quanta which are localized at points in space, which move without dividing, and which can only be produced and absorbed as complete units.”

Why did Einstein assume light to be discontinuously distributed in space even when this idea was contradictory to the known wave nature of light?


The key reason was that Einstein wanted to explain how light of low intensity could still eject electrons instantaneously when shined over some metals. The energy of the electron followed the equation,

V0.e       =       hf  –  φ0


V0.e represents maximum kinetic energy of electron

hf represents energy supplied by the photon of light

φ0 represents energy consumed in ejecting an electron

This relationship was accurately verified by Robert Millikan in 1914 with great precision.


Einstein formulated the idea of light quantum (photon) based on the idea of ‘energy quantum’ suggested by Max Planck five years earlier to explain the blackbody radiation.

When heated, a blackbody radiated light at all frequencies. But the frequency distribution of that radiation could not be explained using the principles of classical physics. Max Planck used the “mathematical idea” of energy quantum to resolve the difficulty.

‘hf’ was the energy quantum suggested by Max Planck that was required to activate an “atomic oscillator” of frequency ‘f’, which then radiated light at that frequency.


In photoelectric effect, frequency was involved in ejecting the electron and not the intensity of light. Electron could not be ejected by light below a threshold frequency. Energy of the ejected electron then increased only with increasing frequency. An increasing intensity of light did not eject electrons below the threshold frequency. Above that frequency, the increasing intensity simply increased the number of electrons ejected.

At the threshold frequency f0, light supplied the energy hf0 to the atomic oscillator to release the electron. This energy had to be supplied as a bundle to activate the oscillator. So, the energy supplied by light had to be bundled in space.


Robert Millikan, who didn’t agree with Einstein’s particle theory of light, analyzed the absorption of light in photoelectric emission (see Section 9, Theories of Photo Emission, of Millikan’s paper). He noted that his experiments showed exact proportionality between the field strength and the force acting on the electron, which contradicted any kind of discontinuous structure in space. This leaves the only alternative that the energy supplied by light must bundle up within the metal.

Frequency triggers resonance in an oscillator of the atom. The initial amplitude of incident light determines how many of those resonances build up and discharge an electron. The amplitude has decreased as the wave front has spread. But it builds up very quickly in a resonating oscillator. The electron discharges at a certain amplitude of oscillator. Energy imparted to an oscillator per cycle of incident light is ‘h’. The more oscillators are exposed to light, the more energy per cycle is imparted. The oscillator discharges at energy ‘hf’.

If we assume that all oscillators in an area can pool their energy to one central oscillator, and that there is one oscillator per atom, then ‘f’ atoms shall be pooling their energy to eject an electron instantly.

With this assumption we can calculate the amount of potassium required to instantly generate a photo electron. For potassium the threshold frequency is 5.537 x 1014 Hertz. One mole of potassium is 39 gram, which consists of 6.022 x 1023 atoms. 5.537 x 1014 atoms of potassium would weigh 3.59 x 10-8 gram. This is an extremely small amount.

Thus, when a very weak star light of threshold frequency falls on a very small area on film of potassium, it can easily eject electrons. We may thus assume that photons are generated upon the interaction of light with the photoelectric material, instead of assuming that photon must already exist in space.

The metallic surface must act as an energy lens to the light shining upon it. The energy carried by the wave front of light is then concentrated at the atomic oscillators within the surface as a photon.

We do not really need to postulate a particle theory of light to explain the photoelectric effect. We may simply postulate that the photon is created as part of the energy interaction.