Vinaire's Blog

Reference: Essays on Substance

Substance & Space

The classical understanding of Space is as follows:

Space is that part of the universe that does not contain matter. We assess dimensions in space the same way that we measure the dimensions of matter. Therefore, space is an abstraction of the dimensions of matter.

In light of The Spectrum of Substance, the dimensions of substance can be measured in terms of wavelengths. This gives us an actual “spectrum of space” that accompanies the spectrum of substance. We can visualize matter floating in a sea of energy, and energy floating in a sea of aether. Space expands as consistency decreases. For an infinite wavelength the consistency of substance would be extremely thin. With this understanding of space there is no such thing as void. 

Space (wavelength) provides an index of how expansive a certain substance is. Its inverse, consistency (frequency) provides an index of how condensed a certain substance is.

The concept of velocity in free space is essentially a state of balance between motion and inertia of a particle. The product of velocity and inertia (mass, consistency) provides the momentum that can be sensed. Acceleration occurs when motion and inertia of a particle fall out of balance.

Newtonian physics assumes matter and space to be absolute and independent of each other.  Space is viewed as “absence of matter” or void.

Einsteinian physics views space to be abstraction of the dimensions of matter. If matter can expand, contract, twist and bend, then so can space.

But matter has a spectrum as substance; and space is real property of that substance. Space is neither absolute nor an abstraction.

.

Reference: Essays on Substance

Objections to Einstein’s Relativity

In 1931, A book One Hundred Authors Against Einstein was published in Leipzig, Germany, to disprove General Relativity. Einstein’s response to the book was, “Why a Hundred? If I were wrong one would have been enough.”

I think that the objections that were raised by these authors against RTH (Einstein’s theory of Relativity) deserve to be examined closely. I want to see if at least one of these objections is truly valid on a scientific basis, and not necessarily philosophically.

I looked at the objection by the first author, Professor Dr. WALTER DEL-NEGRO / SALZBURG. He says,

“The space-time values of a system are thus generated by the relative movement. However, since the relative movement itself has to be defined in a space-time, which in turn would have to be conditioned by relative movement, etc., an infinite regression results.”

When I look at the solar system, there is a dynamic equilibrium between the relative movement of the planets (including the sun) and space-time. The relative movements and space-time influence each other but there is no infinite regression. So, this objection does not pan out. This is covered in the section on Gravity in The Theory of Substance.

I shall be looking at the objections form other authors, and writing down my observations on this thread, one author at a time. Hopefully, time will allow me to do this.

.

Reference: Essays on Substance

Space and Medium of Light

A question was asked:

“Why is space not considered to be the medium of light when its properties determine the speed of light?”

In 1873, Maxwell’s effort to determine the relationship between electromagnetic theories and the Newton’s theory of motion resulted in the amazing discovery that light was an electromagnetic phenomenon.

Maxwell wrote in the preface to the first edition of his book A TREATISE ON ELECTRICITY AND MAGNETISM:

“The most important aspect of any phenomenon from a mathematical point of view is that of a measurable quantity… I have therefore thought that a treatise would be useful which should have for its principal object to take up the whole subject in a methodical manner, and which should also indicate how each part of the subject is brought within the reach of methods of verification by actual measurement… before I began the study of electricity I resolved to read no mathematics on the subject till I had first read through Faraday’s Experimental Researches in Electricity.

“As I proceeded with the study of Faraday, I perceived that his method of conceiving the phenomena was also a mathematical one, though not exhibited in the conventional form of mathematical symbols. I also found that these methods were capable of being expressed in the ordinary mathematical forms, and thus compared with those of the professed mathematicians.

“For instance, Faraday, in his mind’s eye, saw lines of force traversing all space where the mathematicians saw centres of force attracting at a distance: Faraday saw a medium where they saw nothing but distance: Faraday sought the seat of the phenomena in real actions going on in the medium, they were satisfied that they had found it in a power of action at a distance impressed on the electric fluids.

“When I had translated what I considered to be Faraday’s ideas into a mathematical form, I found that in general the results of the two methods coincided, so that the same phenomena were accounted for, and the same laws of action deduced by both methods, but that Faraday’s methods resembled those in which we begin with the whole and arrive at the parts by analysis, while the ordinary mathematical methods were founded on the principle of beginning with the parts and building up the whole by synthesis.”

It is interesting to note that Maxwell finds Faraday’s “lines of force traversing all space” to be mathematically equivalent to other mathematician’s “centers of force attracting at a distance”. Maxwell notes, “Faraday saw a medium where they [other mathematicians] saw nothing but distance”.

Space is not “nothing” because it has the electromagnetic properties of permittivity and permeability. These properties of space determine the speed of light per Maxwell’s equations. This fact alone should be enough to convince that space is the medium through which light travels.

Why is space not considered to be the medium of light? Why can’t the mysterious ether be space itself?

This thinking led to the theory of Substance.

.