-
Email An Imagineer
Blog Search
Loading...(This article is a collaboration between Benny Creemers, a proponent of Super Relativity and Jeff. Please visit his web site to gain a different perspective on this subject and Mark Fiorentino site for a discussion of the principals of Super Relativity.)
We have been suggesting in "The Imagineer’s Chronicles" space is composed of a continuous non-quantized form of mass and four *spatial* dimensions instead of four-dimensional space-time.
Many believe this implies the Newtonian concept of absolute space and time should be valid.
However, this may not be true!
In the article "Defining time?" Sept. 20, 2007 it was shown defining it only in terms of a measure of sequential ordering of the causality of events provides an unambiguous definition that is consistent with both physical and mathematical observations, while the article “Defining energy” Nov 27, 2007 showed all forms of energy can be derived in terms of a curvature in a "surface" of a three dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth spatial dimension.
If true this means the Newtonian concept of absolute time does not exist because the measurement of the magnitude of a time interval between events would vary with respect to an observer even though the ordering of all events for all observers would remain absolute.
This is because time would be dilated with respect to an external reference frame with a different energy content because we as three-dimensional being can only observe the cord of the arc in four *spatial* dimensions made by that energy differential. Since the length of the cord of an arc is always less the arc itself the distance between events will always be longer for an observer who is viewing it from all reference frames with a different energy content. Therefore, the time interval between the causally of those events in those reference frames will be longer for someone viewing those events from outside of that reference frame.
It can also be shown the existence of a physical medium such as a continuous non-quantized form of mass does not necessarily imply the existence of absolute space
Einstein realized this because in the address "Aether and the theory of Relativity" he delivered on May 5th 1920 at the University of Leyden Germany he indicated that The General Theory of Relativity predicts, "space is endowed with physical qualities".
"Recapitulating, we may say that according to the General Theory of Relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an Aether. According to the General Theory of Relativity space without Aether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this Aether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts, which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it."
However, he was careful to define the "quality characteristics" of this physical medium. Specifically he said that it could not consist of parts, which could be tracked though time. This would be one of the properties of a continuous non-quantized form of mass because being continuous it would not have "parts which may be tracked through time".
Earlier in the article "Defining space" Sept. 13, 2007, it was shown the existence of a continuous non-quantized form of mass is responsible for defining a volume of space.
(The conclusion is supported by Einstein’s statement that "space without Aether (continuous non-quantized form of mass) is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time.)
However, since we have defined space in terms of the existence of a continuous non-quantized form of mass and four *spatial* dimensions, to be consistent with the "qualities" Einstein indicated his Aether (continuous non-quantized form of mass) should have we should define its other quality or "The idea of motion may not be applied to it." in terms of four *spatial* dimension instead of four-dimensional space-time.
The article Defining energy Nov. 26, 2007 showed the momentum of an object in motion was a result of a displacement in a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
Isaac Newton defined an inertial reference frame as one in which an object at rest will remain at rest, and an object in motion will remain in motion in a straight line at a constant speed, and if a repulsive force acts between two bodies of the same mass, they will acquire equal velocities in equal amounts of time.
As mentioned earlier the momentum of an inertial reference frame can be defined in terms of constant displacement in a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
According to this definition of momentum the continuous non-quantized form of mass defining the volume of an inertial reference frame will be "stationary" with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension. Therefore, the continuous non-quantized form of mass associated with that volume would appear to a three-dimensional an observer in that volume to be moving in a straight line at a constant speed with respect to other internal reference frames.
This also means that if two volumes of three-dimensional space occupy the same "position" along the axis in four-dimensional space, they will remain at rest or stationary with respect to each other in three-dimensional space.
The reason a force that acts between two bodies of the same mass in a inertial reference frame causes them to acquire equal velocities in equal times is because, as was shown in article the "Defining energy" force is the result of a movement of a three-dimensional volume with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension. Therefore, if an equal force were applied to two masses in an inertial reference frame the three-dimension volume associated with those masses would move with equal and opposite with directions with respect to a common point in four-dimensional space where that inertial reference frame was located.
This shows the existence of continuous non-quantized form of mass and four *spatial* dimensions instead of four-dimensional space-time does not mean that the Newtonian concept of absolute space and time should be valid.
It should be remembered that a continuous non-quantized form of mass is not part of a volume; it is what defines a volume.
Later Jeff
The "Shadows" of four spatial dimensions
hey…
wonderful…