For the past 50 years, the Standard Model of particle physics has given us a complete mathematical description of the particles and forces that shape our world with the exception of gravity.  It predicts with so much accuracy the microscopic properties of particles and the macroscopic ones of stars and galaxies that many physicists feel it is the ultimate theory of matter and energy.

But as Charles Seife mentions on page 142 of his book Alpha & Omega "Taken literally the plain vanilla form of the Standard model does not say anything about particle mass at all: in fact if theorists try to put mass in to its equations they blowup and become meaningless."

Mass Moment of Inertia of Rigid Bodies

In 1964 Peter Higgs showed that one can solve this problem and explain why particles have inertial or rest mass if one assumes space is permeated by what is called a Higgs field.

He was able to show that if the particles called boson change their velocity or accelerate, then the Higgs field should exert a certain amount of resistance or drag which according to his theory is the origin of mass.  In a slightly more precise terminology, the origin of mass is an interaction between a particle and the (nonzero) Higgs field.  It also assumes the disturbance created by mass as it moves through this field would break it’s symmetry triggering the Higgs mechanism, causing the bosons it interacts with to have mass and generate the particle called the Higgs boson.

In 4 July 2012, the ATLAS and CMS experiments at CERN’s Large Hadrons Collider announced they had each observed a new particle the Higgs boson which many physicists tell us confirms the existence of the Higgs field.

However the Standard model’s explanation of mass as a broken symmetry of a spatial environment does not tell us what it is symmetrical to.  In other words it does not answer the question "What spatial boundary or axis are the components of the Higgs field asymmetrical to?"

As was mentioned earlier the addition of the Higges field to the Standard Model gives us an almost complete mathematical description of the particles and forces that shape our world in terms of broken symmetries because it does not incorporate the gravitational forces into it.

Einstein on the other hand mathematically derived the causality of gravity in terms of an asymmetrical property of a space-time environment.

However the fact that Einstein used the broken symmetry of a space-time environment to derive gravity or the forces associated with mass suggests he may have provided a method of defining the physical mechanism responsible for the symmetry breaking the Standard Model assumes is responsible for that mass.

This is true even though time is only observed to move in one direction forward and never appears to stop so therefore does not have a boundary by which one can define asymmetries. 

However he gave us the ability redefine the asymmetries in a space-time environment responsible for mass in terms of their spatial properties when he defined them in terms of the constant velocity of light because that provided a method of converting a unit of time to its equivalent unit of space in four *spatial* dimensions.

Additionally because the velocity of light is constant it also defined a one to one quantitative and qualitative correspondence between his space-time universe and one made up of only four *spatial* dimensions.

The fact that one can use Einstein’s theories to qualitatively and quantitatively define the displacement he associated with gravitational energy and mass in a space-time environment in terms of four *spatial* dimensions is bases for assuming as was done in the article “Defining energy” Nov 27, 2007 that all forms of energy including that associated with mass can also be defined in terms of a spatial displacement in a "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

This would allow one to define the asymmetrical properties or broken symmetries Einstein associated with gravity in terms of a spatial displacement in the "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimensions.

However it also allows the Standard Model to use Einstein theories define the asymmetry associated with the energy of the mass component of particles in terms of their spatial instead the time properties of space.

For example the symmetry of the mathematics of the Standard Model tells us that particles and antiparticles are always created in pairs.  However the only way to explain this in a space-time environment is to assume that they are moving backwards in time.  Yet, as was mentioned earlier no one has ever observed time to move backwards.

Yet if one interprets the symmetry of the Standard Model in terms of its spatial instead of its space-time properties as was shown above to be possible one would realize that because we can move in two direction upwards and downwards in the spatial dimensions one can easily define the symmetrical boundary between particles and antiparticles in terms the equal distance they would occupy above and below the physical "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to fourth *spatial* dimension.

Yet one can also define asymmetrical properties of the Higgs field the Standard Models assumes is responsible for mass in terms of object or particle occupying the volume either above or below the physical "surface" of a three dimensional space manifold with respect to fourth *spatial* dimension.

In other words converting or transposing Einstein space-time theories to their spatial equivalent as was done above shows that the asymmetries the Standard Model associates with mass and those Einstein associated with gravity share a common property of the geometry of space. 

It should be remember Einstein’s mathematical model which defines the physical geometry of our universe tells us that an all objects must simultaneously exist in both a space-time environment and one consisting of four spatial dimension because as was shown above one can use his mathematics to define two identical universes; one in four dimensional time and another made up of only four *spatial* dimensions. 

Which one we use to define a solution to a problem, as mentioned earlier is only dependent on how an observer interprets his mathematics

Later Jeff

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2016

   

 

Anthology of
The Imagineer’s Chronicles
Vol. 1 thru 6

2007 thru 2015

 
Ebook
$10.50

The Reality
of the Fourth
Spatial
Dimension 

 
Paperback
$9.77
Ebook

   $6.24
     

The Imagineer’s
Chronicles
Vol. 6 — 2015


Paperback
$12.25
E-book
$9.89

         

 
 

The Imagineer’s
Chronicles
Vol. 5 — 2014
 
 

Paperback
$13.36
Ebook
$9.97

The Imagineer’s
Chronicles
Vol. 4 — 2013 
 

Paperback
$13.29
E-book
$7.99

 The Imagineer’s
Chronicles
Vol. 3 — 2012

 

Paperback
$10.96
Ebook
$6.55

 
 

The Imagineer’s
Chronicles
Vol. 2 — 2011
 
Paperback
$8.32
Ebook
$6.57

 

The Imagineer’s
Chronicles
2007 thru 2010

 
Paperback
$14.97
Ebook
$7.82
 

 
     
 

 

Understanding the connection between space and time is difficult because we cannot see time or space even though we can perceive the void in space when it contains nothing

Additionally defining or describing what time is extremely difficult. Some define it only in the abstract saying that is an invention of the human consciousness that gives us a sense of order, a before and after so to speak of the changes that occur in our environment.  However one can define or describe space in terms of the void we can see between objects that it contains.

Fay Dowker Public Lecture – Spacetime Atoms and the Unity of Physics

In other words time and space do not appear to share any physical qualities.

Even so physicists have derived the physical structure of the universe in terms of a mathematical model that combines space and time into a single interwoven space-time continuum.

However it is difficult to understand how in a space-time environment they can physically interact when, as was just mentioned neither of them have any common properties.

Granted using mathematics one can explain how they do in terms of abstract concepts but it does not explain how and why they do in physical terms.

Yet one can use the fact that the one of the primary functions of time is to define change to form a physical image of how it interacts with space to create it.

Einstein gave us the ability to do this when he defined the energy contained in a volume of space-time in terms the constant velocity of light because that provided a method of converting a unit of time to its equivalent unit of space in four *spatial* dimensions.  Additionally because the velocity of light is constant it also defined a one to one quantitative and qualitative correspondence between his space-time universe and one made up of only four *spatial* dimensions.

In other words he tells the physical properties of space and time are relative to an observer’s interpretation similar to how the measurements of their magnitudes are relative to an observer’s velocity because, as was show above one can reinterpret the mathematics associated with the space-time environment of both the General and Special Theories of Relativity purely in terms of its spatial components to create an identical one in only four *spatial* dimensions.  However one must be careful not to think of this as the physical replacement of the time dimension in Einstein’s space-time universe with a spatial one because according to his mathematics they simultaneously coexist in the same geometric plain.

However the fact that one can use Einstein’s theories to qualitatively and quantitatively define the displacement he associated with energy in a space-time universe in terms of four *spatial* dimensions is bases for assuming as was done in the article “Defining energy” Nov 27, 2007 that all forms of energy can be derived in terms of a spatial displacement in a "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

Doing would also allow one to form a physical image of how the geometric properties of space or time interact to create change because as mentioned earlier we can form a clear physical image of how a void in four spatial dimensions created by that displacement would cause change.

For example we can physically observe how the energy stored in the displacement of water in dam causes change in an environment when it is released or allowed to flow over it.  In other words we can form a physical image of the causality of the changing level of water in the dam in terms of its movement through the spatial void between the top and bottom of the dam.

Similarly one can form a clear physical image of how and why change would occur in  our three dimensional environment by assuming the energy stored in a spatial displacement in a "surface" of a three dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension is released though the void that displacement creates in four dimensional space.

As was mentioned earlier it is difficult to form physical image of how time can interact with space because of its abstract properties.

However one can from a very clear image of how it does when one realizes that according Einstein theories the physical properties of space and time which as was shown above are relative to an observer coexist on in the same dimensional plain.  Therefore an observer who looks at his theories form a spatial perspective can easily understand how change occurs in a space time-environment in terms of the physical example of water flowing over a dam.

It should be remember Einstein’s mathematical model which defines the physical geometry of our universe tells us that an all objects must simultaneously exist in both a space-time environment and one consisting of four spatial dimension because as was shown above one can use his mathematics to define two identical universes; one in four dimensional time and another made up of only four *spatial* dimensions.  Which one we use to define a solution to a problem, as mentioned earlier is only dependent on how an observer interprets his mathematics. 

Later Jeff

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2016

     

Anthology of
The Imagineer’s Chronicles
Vol. 1 thru 6

2007 thru 2015


Ebook
$10.50

The Reality
of the Fourth
Spatial
Dimension 
 
Paperback
$9.77
Ebook

   $6.24
     

The Imagineer’s
Chronicles
Vol. 6 — 2015


Paperback
$12.25
E-book
$9.89

         

 
 

The Imagineer’s
Chronicles
Vol. 5 — 2014
 


Paperback
$13.36
Ebook
$9.97

 

 

The Imagineer’s
Chronicles
Vol. 4 — 2013

Paperback
$13.29
E-book
$7.99

 The Imagineer’s
Chronicles
Vol. 3 — 2012

 

Paperback
$10.96
Ebook
$6.55

 
 

The Imagineer’s
Chronicles
Vol. 2 — 2011
 
Paperback
$8.32
Ebook
$6.57

 

 

The Imagineer’s
Chronicles
2007 thru 2010

 
Paperback
$14.97
Ebook
$7.82

 
     
 
 

 

« Previous Articles    
The Imagineer's Chronicles is based on WordPress platform, RSS tech , RSS comments design by Gx3.