For example Einstein’s relativistic and gravitational theories can explain predict the evolution of the large scale structure and movement of the stars and planets but cannot explain the structure of the atom.  Additionally it cannot be used to explain one of the most important aspects of the universe’s evolution: how atoms fuse together in stars to create enough energy to prevent their gravitational collapse.  While quantum mechanics explains the small scale structure of atom how they fuse together to prevent that from happening however it cannot be used to explain the evolutionary movement of the stars and planets.

Determining which on of these theory came first is difficult not only because no one was around to observe when they began but because they are defined in different units.  For example Einstein theories define the universe in terms of the temporal field properties of a space-time dimension while quantum theories do so in terms discrete quantized properties of position.  However if one can view them in terms of the same units one may be able to determine which one came first by showing how one could have evolved from the other.

Einstein gave us the ability to do this when he used the constant velocity of light in the equation E=mc^2 to define geometric properties of energy/mass because it allows one to convert a unit of time in his four dimensional space-time universe to a unit of space in a one consisting of only four *spatial* dimensions.  Additionally because the velocity of light is constant it is possible to defined a one to one correspondence between his space-time universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.

In other words it would allow one to define both the evolution of gravity and the quantum mechanical properties of energy/mass in terms of a common property related to their spatial components.

This provides the bases for assuming, as was done in the article “Defining energy?” Nov 27, 2007 that all forms of energy including that associated with gravity and the quantized energy associated with Schrödinger’s wave equation in terms of a spatial displacement in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

For example as was shown in the “Why is energy/mass quantized?” Oct, 4 2007 one can derive the quantum mechanical properties of energy/mass by extrapolating the laws governing resonance in a classical three-dimensional environment to a matter wave on a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

(Louis de Broglie was the first to predict the existence of a matter wave or the physical equivalent to Schrödinger’s wave equation when he theorized that all particles have a wave component.  His theories were confirmed by the discovery of electron diffraction by crystals in 1927 by Davisson and Germer).

Briefly it showed the four conditions required for resonance to occur in a classical Newtonian environment, an object, or substance with a natural frequency, a forcing function at the same frequency as the natural frequency, the lack of a damping frequency and the ability for the substance to oscillate spatial would be meet by a matter wave in a four-dimensional environment.

The existence of four *spatial* dimensions would give a “surface” of a three dimensional space manifold the ability to oscillate spatially with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension thereby fulfilling one of the requirements for classical resonance to occur.

These oscillations would be caused by an event such as the decay of a subatomic particle or the shifting of an electron in an atomic orbital.  This would force the “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension to oscillate with the frequency associated with the energy of that event.

However these oscillations in four *spatial* dimensions would generate a classically resonating system or “structure” in it because it meets the requirements listed earlier for the creation of one.

These resonant structures are responsible for the quantum mechanical properties of energy/mass.

Additionally it also tells us why in terms of the physical properties four dimensional space-time or four *spatial* dimensions an electron cannot fall into the nucleus is because, as was shown in that article all energy is contained in four dimensional resonant systems. In other words the energy released by an electron “falling” into it would have to manifest itself in terms of a resonate system. Since the fundamental or lowest frequency available for a stable resonate system in either four dimensional space-time or four spatial dimension corresponds to the energy of an electron it becomes one of the fundamental energy unit of the universe.

Yet it also allows one to define the boundary of a quantum system in terms of the geometric properties of four *spatial* dimensions.

For example in classical physics, a point on the two-dimensional surface of paper is confined to that surface. However, that surface can oscillate up or down with respect to three-dimensional space.

Similarly an object occupying a volume of three-dimensional space would be confined to it however, it could, similar to the surface of the paper oscillate “up” or “down” with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

The confinement of the “upward” and “downward” oscillations of a three-dimension volume with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension is what defines the spatial boundaries associated with a particle in the article  “Why is energy/mass quantized?” Oct, 4 2007. 

In other words one can understand how the quantum mechanical properties of energy/mass could have evolved from field properties Einstein’s theories if one assumes that it is a result of the resonate structured form by a matter wave in continuous field properties of space 

However if true one must also show how the probabilities associated with Schrödingerâ€s equation could have evolved out of that medium.

Classical mechanics tell us that because of the continuous properties of waves, the energy the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?” Oct, 4 2007 associated with a quantum system would be distributed throughout the entire “surface” a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension similar to how the wave generated by a vibrating ball on a surface of a rubber diaphragm are disturbed over its entire surface while the magnitude of the displacement it causes will decrease as one moves away from the focal point of the balls oscillations.

However, this means if one extrapolates the mechanics of the rubber diaphragm to a “surface” of three-dimensional space one must assume the oscillations associated with each individual quantum system must be disturbed thought the entire universe while the spatial displacement associated with its energy; defined in the in the article “Defining energy?” Nov 27, 2007 would decrease as one moves away from its focal point.  Therefore their is a non-zero probability they could be found anywhere in our three-dimensional environment. 

Classical Wave Mechanics also tells us a resonance would most probably occur on the surface of the rubber sheet were the magnitude of the vibrations is greatest and would diminish as one move away from that point,

Similarly an observer would most probably find a quantum system were the magnitude of the vibrations in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold is greatest and would diminish as one move away from that point.

However this is exactly what is predicted by Quantum mechanics in that one can only define a particle’s position or momentum in terms of the probabilistic values associated with vibrations of its wave function.

In other words is it is possible to derive a scenario in which the concepts of quantum mechanics could have evolved out for the continuous field properties of an environment consisting of four dimensional space-time or four *spatial* dimensions.

As was mentioned earlier we can never by sure if Einstein’s theories or Quantum mechanics is the primary mover and creator of our universe because no one there when it began.  However the fact that one can derive the concepts of quantum mechanics using Einstein’s theories is a strong indicate that it came first.

In other words it suggests that the Quantum chicken was more than likely born out of a Relativistic egg.

It should be remember that Einsteinâ€s genius and the symmetry of his mathematics allows us to choose whether to define the evolution of the universe in either four *spatial* dimensions or four dimensional space-time.

Later Jeff

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2016

The post Which came first the Quantum chicken or Relativistic egg? appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.

In first scenario, there would be enough matter in the universe to slow the expansion to the point it would come to a halt and gravitational forces would  cause it to begin contracting which eventually would result in a fiery death called the “Big Crunch.

In the other scenario, there would be too little matter to stop the expansion and everything would drift on forever, always slowing but never stopping. This would end in a vast, dark, and cold state: a “Big Chill,” as the stars faded and died out.

However the discovery of a force causing the expansion of the universe to accelerate called Dark Energy opened up the possibility that the galaxies, solar system, stars, planets, and even molecules and atoms could be shredded by the ever-faster expansion.  In other words the universe that was born in a violent expansion could end with an even more violent expansion called the Big Rip.

Most scientists would agree that the best way of determining which one these scenarios defines its ultimate fate would be to understand the forces involved based on the most successful theories we have regarding the macroscopic properties of the universe.
However modern theories only address two of them.  For example the laws of thermodynamics which defines the forces associated with heat early in the universe and Einstein General Theory of Relativity which defines the gravitational forces which effect its evolution are two of the most success theories we have.  Unfortunately neither of them, in their present form addresses the expansive force called Dark Energy.

This is true even though Einstein foresaw the existence of Dark Energy when he added a cosmological constant to his General Theory of Relativity to make it conform to his belief in a static universe. 

Granted he added it in an “adhoc” manner to force it, in keeping with physicists thinking at the time to predict a stationary universe.  However when it became clear that the universe wasn’t static, but was expanding Einstein abandoned the constant, calling it the ‘”biggest blunder” of his life.

But lately scientists have revived Einstein’s cosmological constant (denoted by the Greek capital letter lambda) to explain this mysterious force which as mentioned earlier is causing the expansion of our universe to accelerate even though they have been unable to Einstein integrate it into the theoretical structure of his General Theory of Relativity.

However we may find clue as to why by observing how our universe is expanding.

For example observations of the universe’s expansion tell us that three-dimensional space is expanding towards a higher spatial dimension not a time or space-time dimension.  

Therefore, to explain the how the expansive force called dark energy is accelerating the spatial expansion of the universe one would have to assume the existence of a another *spatial* or fourth *spatial* dimension in addition to the three spatial dimensions and one time dimension that Einsteinâ€s theories contain to account for that observation.

This would be true if Einstein had not given us a means of qualitatively and quantitatively converting the geometric properties of his space-time universe to one consisting of only four *spatial* dimensions.

He did this when he defined the geometric properties of a space-time universe in terms of a dynamic balance between mass and energy defined by the equation E=mc^2 and the constant velocity of light because that provided a method of converting the displacement in space-time manifold he associated with energy to its equivalent displacement in four *spatial* dimensions.  Additionally because the velocity of light is constant he also defined a one to one qualitative and quantitative correspondence between his space-time universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.

In other words by defining the geometric properties of a space-time universe in terms of mass/energy and the constant velocity of light he provided a qualitative and quantitative means of redefining it in terms of the geometry of four *spatial* dimensions.

The fact that the equation E=mc^2 allows us to quantitatively derive the spatial properties of energy in a space-time universe in terms of four *spatial* dimensions is the 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 displacement in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension instead of one in a space time manifold.

As mentioned earlier one reason why it is difficult to integrate the accelerated special expansion of three-dimensional space towards a higher space dimension into Einstein space-time universe because it does not define one. 

However it is easy to do if one redefined it, as was done above in terms of four *spatial* dimension because that higher spatial dimension would become an integral part of its theoretical structure.

Yet it also allows one to understand how and why Dark Energy is causing the accelerated spatial expansion of the universe and what its ultimate fate will be in terms the laws of thermodynamics and the concepts of Einstein’s theories.

We know from the study of thermodynamics that energy flows from areas of high density to one of low density very similar to how water flows form an elevated or “high density” point to a lower one.

For example, if the walls of an above ground pool filled with water collapse the molecules on the elevated two-dimensional surface of the water will flow or expand and accelerate outward towards the three-dimensional environment surrounding it while the force associated with that expansion decreases as it expands.

Additionally we know from observations of the cosmic background radiation that presently our three-dimensional universe has an average energy component equal to about 3.7 degrees Kelvin. 

However this means that according to concepts developed in the article “Defining energy” (mentioned earlier) the three-dimensional “surface” of our universe which has an average energy component of 3.7 degree Kelvin would be elevated with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

Yet this means similar to the two dimensional surface of the water in the pool the particles that occupy that elevated region of three-dimensional space and the space they occupy will accelerate and flow or expand outward in the four dimensional environment surrounding it and that the force associated with that expansion will decline as it expands.

This shows how reformulating Einstein’s theories in terms of four *spatial* dimensions allows one to use the laws of thermodynamics to explain what the force called Dark Energy is and why it is causing the accelerated expansion of the universe in terms of those theories.

Many feel that because space is everywhere, the force called Dark Energy is everywhere, and its effects increase as space expands. In contrast, gravity’s force is stronger when things are close together and weaker when they are far apart.

However the law of conservation of energy/mass tells that energy/mass cannot be created or destroyed in a closed environment. Therefore because the universe is  us since, by definition is closed system the kinetic energy of the universeâ€s energy/mass cannot exceed its gravitational contractive properties of its mass because Einstein tells us that its kinetic energy is made up of that mass.

Therefore because some of the kinetic energy of some of its components is not directed towards its expansion because of the random motion of star and galaxies the total gravitational contractive properties of its energy/mass must exceed the kinetic energy of its expansive components. Which means at some point in time the gravitation contractive potential of its energy/mass must exceed the kinetic energy of its expansion because as just mentioned not all of its kinetic energy is directed towards its expansion. Therefore at that point, in time the universe will have to enter a contractive phase.

Some may disagree by saying that as the universe expands its energy is spread out over a larger volume so after a while it just vanishes so to speak or as some like to say that the universe experiences a heat death. However Einstein theories do not permit energy to just disappear or “die”. It unequivocally tells us that if the kinetic energy content in a closed environment decreases as it cools the mass content of that environment must increase irrespective of the volume of that environment. Therefore because by definition the universe is a closed system one must assume that any reduction in its overall energy content of the universe including its heat energy must be must be compensated for by an increase in its total attractive gravitational mass content.

In other words if this theoretical model is correct our universe has never ending future which exists between an icy death caused by Dark Energy and a fiery rebirth created by gravity.

Later Jeff

Copyright Jeffrey Oâ€Callaghan 2014

The post Fire or ice how will our universe end? appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.

However there is a conceptual discontinuity between QFT and its relativistic component because it is based on the abstract properties mathematics while the Einstein’s Theory of Relativity is based on the physical properties of space-time environment.

For example the Schrödinger wave equation that is used to mathematically define a particle in QFT does so in terms of a non-dimensional harmonic oscillator at each point in space but does not define what is physically oscillating while Einstein defines the relativistic properties of space and time in terms of a physical interaction of time with three-dimensional space.  Additionally it is difficult to understand how non-dimensional point oscillation can be responsible for dimensional properties of a particle because by definition it cannot have those properties.

Yet one may be able resolve this issue if one views the relativistic properties of our universe in terms of four *spatial* dimensions instead of four dimensional space-time and define what physically happens to continuous properties of space and time when a particle is created.

(The reason will become obvious later.)

Einstein gave us the ability to do this when he used the velocity of light to define the geometric properties of space-time because it allows one to convert a unit of time in his four dimensional space-time universe to a unit of space identical to those of our three-dimensional space.  Additionally because the velocity of light is constant it is possible to defined a one to one correspondence between his space-time universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.

In other words by mathematically defining the geometric properties of time in his space-time universe in terms of the constant velocity of light he provided a qualitative and quantitative means of redefining it in terms of the geometry of four *spatial* dimensions.

The fact that one can use Einstein’s equations to qualitatively and quantitatively redefine the curvature in space-time he associated with energy in terms of the field properties of four *spatial* dimensions is one 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 field with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension. 

However it also allows one to define the physicality of the harmonic oscillator QFT associates with a particle in terms of physical interaction of the field properties of three-dimensional space with a fourth spatial dimensional similar to how Einstein define gravity in terms of a physical interaction of time with three-dimensional space.

For example the article, “Why is energy/mass quantized?” Oct. 4, 2007 showed that one can explain and understand the physicality of the harmonic oscillator QFT associates with particles terms of the classical field properties of a wave by extrapolating the laws of resonance in a three-dimensional environment to a matter wave moving on “surface” of a three dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.  It also explained why all energy must be quantized or exist in these discrete resonant oscillators when observed.

Briefly it showed the four conditions required for resonance to occur in a classical environment, an object, or substance with a natural frequency, a forcing function at the same frequency as the natural frequency, the lack of a damping frequency and the ability for the substance to oscillate spatial would occur in a matter wave moving in four *spatial* dimensions.

The existence of four *spatial* dimensions would give a matter wave the ability to oscillate spatially on a “surface” between a third and fourth *spatial* dimensions thereby fulfilling one of the requirements for classical resonance to occur.

These oscillations would be caused by an event such as the decay of a subatomic particle or the shifting of an electron in an atomic orbital.  This would force the “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension to oscillate with the frequency associated with the energy of that event.

However, the oscillations caused by such an event would serve as forcing function allowing a resonant system or “structure” to be established in four *spatial* dimensions.

Observations of a three-dimensional environment show the energy associated with resonant system can only take on the incremental or discreet values associated with a fundamental or a harmonic of the fundamental frequency of its environment.

Similarly the energy associated with resonant systems in four *spatial* dimensions could only take on the incremental or discreet values associated a fundamental or a harmonic of the fundamental frequency of its environment.

Therefore these resonant systems in would be responsible incremental or discreet energy associated with quantum mechanical systems.

This allows one to define the physicality of the harmonic oscillators QFT associates with particles in terms field properties of either four dimensional space-time or four spatial dimensions because as was shown earlier they are equivalent.

However, one can also define its field properties of a particle in terms of the boundaries of its harmonic oscillator.

In classical physics, a point on the two-dimensional surface of paper is confined to that surface.  However, that surface can oscillate up or down with respect to three-dimensional space. 

Similarly an object occupying a volume of three-dimensional space would be confined to it however, it could, similar to the surface of the paper oscillate “up” or “down” with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

The confinement of the “upward” and “downward” oscillations of a three-dimension volume with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension is what defines the spatial boundaries of the harmonic resonator associated with a particle in the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?“

However as mentioned earlier it also defines the physical boundaries of the harmonic oscillator QFT associates with a particle in terms of the properties of a wave moving on a continuous field consisting of four *spatial* dimensions or four dimensional space-time because remember as was show earlier they are equivalent

This also provides the ability to understand the inseparability of the concepts of a field and particles in QFT because it clearly defines how one is depend on the other.

However it also explains why a field can display either the properties of a particle or the wave properties of a harmonic oscillator when measured because if one wants to measure the total energy contained in a given volume of space one will observe it as a particle while if one want to measure how it is propagated through space one must observe its wave properties.

Additionally it defines a classical reason why particles sometimes behave like oscillators and sometimes like particle and why it is impossible simultaneously observe these two different properties.

As shown earlier the energy contained in a quanta of space associated with a particle would be defined by the wavelength of its harmonic oscillator.  In other words to observe or measure the particle properties of a given volume of space one has to sample all of its energy leaving nothing of its wave component to measure.  Similarly if one wants to observe or measure fully the wave energy of a quantum of space one would have to sample all of its energy leaving none of its particle properties behind. 

(If one does not want to observe all of the energy in a given volume of space then one would expect that the difference would be made up by the emission of the harmonic oscillator QFT associates with photon or other particle.)

The reason why one cannot simultaneously measure both its wave and particle of the harmonic oscillator it is because as mentioned the energy of a particle is defined by its wave properties. Since the energy that defines a particle is the smallest unit of its harmonic oscillator if one measures its particle properties there would be no wave energy left for measuring its wave proprieties while if someone measure its wave energy there would be no energy left to support its particle properties. Therefore making one of these measurements precludes the other.

This shows that one can integrate the abstract mathematical properties of Schrödinger wave equation or the foundation of Quantum field theory with the continuous physical of space and time In Einstein’s theory of relativity.

It should be remember Einsteinâ€s genius allows us to chose whether to solve all problems in either a space-time environment or one consisting of four *spatial* dimension when he defined the geometry of space-time in terms of energy/mass and the constant velocity of light. This interchangeability broadens the environment encompassed by his theories by making them applicable to both the spatial as well as the time properties of our universe and gives us a new perspective on the integration of QFT with the relativistic properties of space and time.

Later Jeff

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2014

The post Solving the conceptual problems with quantum fields appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.

For example Kepler’s Laws are wonderful as a description of the motions of the planets.  However, they provide no explanation of why the planets move in that way.  Moreover, Kepler’s Third Law only works for planets orbiting the Sun and does not apply to moon’s orbiting around the planets.

However 1686, Isaac Newton presented his three laws of motion in the “Principia Mathematica Philosophiae Naturalis” which provided a more general explanation Kepler’s laws and allowed them to be applied not only to of the motions of the planets but also to those of their moons.

This is primarily because Kepler developed his laws directly from the quantitative observational records given to him by Tycho Brahe and did not attempt to generalize them.  Additionally he was unable or did not try to understand why those numbers appeared in nature but only to find a way of making the fit them into the consistent mathematical structure we now call Kepler’s laws.
However Newton was able to reformulate them by defining a gravitational mechanism that not only provide a theoretical understanding of their validity but also expanded, as mentioned earlier their domain to a much broader environment.

There are many aspects of modern physics that might gain the same benefits from the reformulation of existing ideas.

One in particular would be Einstein theories because it may allow one to derive a theoretical understanding of the casualty of Dark Energy and what Dark matter is.

Dark Energy or the mysterious force that is causing the accelerated, spatial expansion of the universe does not appear to be integrable into any of the currently accepted theoretical models of our universe.

This is true even though Einstein foresaw its existence when he used his intuition to arbitrarily insert a term, called a cosmology constant into his General Theory of Relativity that would create an expanding force very similar to that of Dark Energy.  Similar to Kepler he based this addition only on the observational records of his time that suggested space was static and unchanging and not on any theoretical principal.  Additionally like Kepler he either could not or did not try to integrate it or explain why it exists in terms of a theoretical model.

However there are some who feel that we may be able to use his intuitive genius and the concept laid down in his space-time theories to understand the causality of spatial expansion associated with Dark Energy even though Einstein called the insertion of his cosmological constant “His big blunder” when it was discovered that the universe was not static.

As   mentioned earlier Einstein either could not or did not try to conceptually  integrate his cosmological constant or an expansive force now called Dark   Energy into the theoretical structure of Relativity possibly because, as mentioned earlier they are   both related to how three-dimensional space expanded or was prevented from   contracting with respect to a higher spatial dimension not a time or   space-time dimension.   

Therefore to understand Dark Energy in terms of Einstein space-time theory one would have to add a new *spatial* dimension to the three that it already contain to define its spatial properties thereby significantly increasing the complexity of its theoretical structure.

This would be true if Einstein had not given us the ability reformulate his space time theories in terms of four *spatial* dimensions when he defined the geometric properties of a space-time universe in terms of a dynamic balance between mass and energy defined by the equation E=mc^2.

As was just mentioned Einstein defined the geometric properties of a space-time universe in terms of a dynamic balance between mass and energy defined by the equation E=mc^2.  However when he used the constant velocity of light in that equation to define that balance he provided a method of converting a unit of space he associated with mass to a unit of space-time he associated with energy.   Additionally because the velocity of light is constant he also defined a one to one quantitative correspondence between his space-time universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.

In other words by defining the geometric properties of a space-time universe in terms of mass/energy and the constant velocity of light he provided a qualitative and quantitative means of redefining his space-time universe in terms of the geometry of four *spatial* dimensions.

As mentioned earlier it is difficult to integrate and define the causality of why three-dimensional space is expanding towards a higher *spatial” dimension into Einstein space-time universe because it does not define a higher spatial dimension. 

However one can easily integrate it into one consisting of four *spatial* dimensions because of the fact that it would allow three-dimensional space to expand toward a higher fourth *spatial* dimension.

In other words if one reformulates Einstein’s equations and quantitatively defines energy in terms of a spatial displacement in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimensions instead of one in a space-time environment one can understand how the observed spatial expansion of three-dimensional space associated with Dark Energy can occur.

We know from the study of thermodynamics that energy flows from areas of high density to area of low density very similar to how water flows form an elevated or “high density” point to a lower one.

For example if the walls of an above ground pool filled with water collapse the elevated two-dimensional surface of the water will flow or expand and accelerate outward towards the three-dimensional environment sounding it.

Yet we know from observations of the cosmic background radiation that presently our three-dimensional universe has an average energy component equal to about 3.7 degrees Kelvin. 

However this means that according to concepts developed in the article “Defining energy” (mentioned earlier) the three-dimensional “surface” of our universe which has an average energy component of 3.7 degree Kelvin would be elevated with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

Yet this means similar to the two dimensional surface of the water in the pool three-dimensional space will accelerate and flow or expand outward in the four dimensional environment surround it.

This shows how reformulating Einstein space-time concept in terms of four *spatial* dimension can provide a theoretical understanding of the accelerative force called Dark Energy which can be generalize to broader environment than a space-time universe.

For example observations tell us that five to seven billion years ago, the expansion of the universe stopped slowing due to gravity and started to accelerate due to Dark Energy.

However this is exactly what one would expect if the theoretical model outlined above was correct because in the early universe the distance between it mass components was small relative to the its energy components.   Therefore gravitational forces would predominate.  However because gravitation force decease with the square of the distance there would come a time when the expansive forces associated with Dark Energy  would be predominate because they would, according the above model decease linearly with respect to gravities.

This shows why reformulating Einstein’s space-time universe into one of four *spatial* dimension allows it to be applied to a more broader more generalized environment and provide a theoretical understand of why we presently observed the expansive forces of Dark Energy overtaking the slowing force of gravity.

It should be remember Einstein’s genius allows us to chose weather to solve problems, such those associated with Dark matter or Dark Energy in either a space-time environment or one consisting of four *spatial* dimension when he defined the geometry of space-time in terms of energy/mass and the constant velocity of light. This interchangeability broadens the environment encompassed by his theories by making them applicable to both the spatial as well as the time properties of our universe similar to how Newton laws of gravity broaden domain of Kepler’s laws of planetary motion to their moons.

Later Jeff

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2013 

The post Reformulating space-time appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.

In first scenario, there would be enough matter in the universe to slow the expansion to the point where, like the baseball, it would come to a halt and the gravitational forces associated with it would result in it retracting causing it to crash together in a “Big Crunch.”

In the other scenario, there would be too little matter to stop the expansion and everything would drift on forever, always slowing and slowing but never stopping. This would end in a vast, dark, and cold state: a “Big Chill,” as the stars faded and died out.

However the discovery of Dark Energy or a force causing the accelerated expansion of the universe opened up the possibility that the galaxies, solar system, stars, planets, and even molecules and atoms could be shredded by the ever-faster expansion.  In other words the universe that was born in a violent expansion could end with an even more violent expansion called the Big Rip.
Most scientists would agree that the best way of determining which one these scenarios defines its ultimate fate would be to list all of the observations regarding the forces controlling its expansion and try to understand them based on the most successful theories we have regarding the macroscopic properties of energy/mass.

For example it is assumed by many that because space is everywhere, the force called Dark Energy is everywhere therefore its effects should increases as it expands.  In contrast, gravity’s force is stronger when things are close together and weaker when they are far apart.  Therefore many believe the expansion will continue at an ever increasing rate, eventually ripping space apart.

However if one views the observational evidence supporting the existence of Dark Energy in terms of the laws of thermodynamics and Einstein’s theories, it strongly suggests that it will weaken not increase as space expands and that eventually gravity will become the dominate force in our universe.

Observations of the expansive force called Dark Energy tell us that three-dimensional space is expanding towards a higher spatial dimension not a time or space-time dimension.  

Therefore, to explain the observed spatial expansion of the universe one would have to assume the existence of a another *spatial* or fourth *spatial* dimension in addition to the three spatial dimensions and one time dimension that Einstein’s theories contain to account for that observation.

This would be true if Einstein had not given us a means of qualitatively and quantitatively converting the geometric properties of his space-time universe to one consisting of only four *spatial* dimensions.

Einstein defined the geometric properties of a space-time universe in terms of a dynamic balance between mass and energy defined by the equation E=mc^2.  However when he used the constant velocity of light to define that balance he provided a method of converting a unit of space he associated with mass to a unit of space-time he associated with energy.   Additionally because the velocity of light is constant he also defined a one to one quantitative correspondence between his space-time universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.

In other words by defining the geometric properties of a space-time universe in terms of mass/energy and the constant velocity of light he provided a qualitative and quantitative means of redefining his space-time universe in terms of the geometry of four *spatial* dimensions.

The fact that the equation E=mc^2 allows us to quantitatively derive the spatial properties of energy in a space-time universe in terms of four *spatial* dimensions is  the 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.

As mentioned earlier it is difficult to integrate the causality of how three-dimensional space can be expanding towards a higher *spatial” dimension into Einstein space-time universe because it does not define a higher spatial dimension. 

However it is easy integrate it if one reformulates it, as was done above in terms higher fourth *spatial* dimension.

Yet it also allows one to understand how and why the expansive force called Dark Energy is causing the spatial expansion of our universe in terms of the laws of thermodynamics because it gives one the ability, as mentioned earlier to use his equations to qualitatively and quantitatively define energy in terms of a spatial displacement in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimensions instead of one in a space-time environment.

We know from the study of thermodynamics that energy flows from areas of high density to one of low density very similar to how water flows form an elevated or “high density” point to a lower one.

For example, if the walls of an above ground pool filled with water collapse the elevated two-dimensional surface of the water will flow or expand and accelerate outward towards the three-dimensional environment surrounding it while the force associated with that expansion decreases as it expands.

Yet we know from observations of the cosmic background radiation that presently our three-dimensional universe has an average energy component equal to about 3.7 degrees Kelvin. 

However this means that according to concepts developed in the article “Defining energy” (mentioned earlier) the three-dimensional “surface” of our universe which has an average energy component of 3.7 degree Kelvin would be elevated with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

Yet this means similar to the two dimensional surface of the water in the pool three-dimensional space will accelerate and flow or expand outward in the four dimensional environment surrounding it and that the force associated with that expansion will decline as it expands.

This shows how reformulating Einstein’s theories in terms of four spatial dimensions allows one to use the laws of thermodynamics to explain what the force called Dark Energy is and why it is causing the accelerated expansion of the universe in terms of the Einstein’s theories.

As mentioned earlier many feel that because space is everywhere, the force called Dark Energy is everywhere, and its effects increase as space expands. I n contrast, gravity’s force is stronger when things are close together and weaker when they are far apart.

However if the above theoretical model is correct than the magnitude of Dark Energy relative to gravitational energy will not continue to increase as the universe expands but will decrease because Einstein also told us that there is an equivalence between mass and energy and since mass is associated with the attractive properties of gravity it also tells us, because of that equivalence, the kinetic energy associated with the universeâ€s expansion also possess those attractive properties. However the law of conservation of energy/mass tells us that in a closed system the creation of kinetic energy cannot exceed the gravitational energy associated with the total energy/mass in the universe and that a reduction in one must be compensated for by an increase in the other.

This means the total gravitation potential of the universe must increase as it expands and cools approaching a maximum value at absolute “0” while at the same time the kinetic energy of its expansive components must decrease. Therefore, at some point in time, the universe MUST enter a contractive phase because the total gravitational potential must eventually exceed the kinetic energy of its expansion. This is would be true even though the gravitational potential of its kinetic energy components would be disturbed or “diluted” by a factor of c^2.

(Some may try to dismiss this by saying that as the universe expands its energy is spread out over a larger volume so after a while it just vanishes so to speak or as some like to say that the universe experiences a heat death.  However Einstein theories do not permit energy to just disappear or “die”.  It unequivocally tells us that if the kinetic energy content in a closed environment decreases as it cools the mass content of that environment must increase irrespective of the volume of that environment.  Therefore because by definition the universe is a closed system one must assume that any reduction in its overall energy content of the universe including its heat energy must be must be compensated for by an increase in its total attractive gravitational mass content.)

Therefore, just after the big bang when the concentration of energy and mass was high, gravitational force would predominate over Dark Energy because the distance between both its energy and mass components was relatively small.

However as the universe expands the its gravitational attractive forces will decrease more rapidly than the expansive force associated with Dark Energy because they are related to the square of the distance between them while those of the expansive forces of Dark Energy are more closely related to a linear function of the total energy of content of the universe. 

Therefore after a given period of time the expansive forces associated with Dark Energy will become predominate and the expansion of the universe will accelerate.

However as the universe expands and cools that force will decrease because as mentioned earlier similar to the two-dimensional surface of the water in a collapsed pool, the forces associated with that expansion will decrease as it expands.

This means that eventually gravitational forces will win because, as mentioned earlier thermodynamics tells us the total accelerative forces associated with Dark Energy will decease and therefore will eventually approach zero, while the total mass content and the gravitational attractive forces associated with it will remain constant as the universe expands even though they may be separated by a greater distant.

Therefore, gravity will eventually win the battle with dark Energy because as was just mentioned the forces associated with it approach zero as the expansion progress while those of gravity remain constant.

There can be no other conclusion if one accepts the validity of Einstein’s theories and the laws of thermodynamics because the theoretical arguments presented here are a base solely on their validity.

Later Jeff

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2013

The post Gravity or dark energy: which one will win? appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.

But why have the best minds in the scientific community been unable devise an experiment to detect the physical properties of space that Einstein was so sure must exist to support the propagation of light.

The reason may be because they are not looking in the right direction.

For example 1887 Albert Michelson and Edward Morley devised an experiment to detect the relative motion of matter through the stationary Aether (“Aether wind”) by creating a device that sent yellow light from a sodium flame through a half-silvered mirror that was used to split it into two beams traveling at right angles to one another. After leaving the splitter, the beams traveled out to the ends of long arms where they were reflected back into the middle by small mirrors. They then recombined on the far side of the splitter in an eyepiece, producing a pattern of constructive and destructive interference. If the Earth is traveling through an Aether medium, a beam reflecting back and forth parallel to the flow of Aether would take longer than a beam reflecting perpendicular to the Aether because the time gained from traveling downwind is less than that lost traveling upwind.

However they did not observe a fringe shift and therefore conclude that space did not contain the “physical medium” called Aether. This negative result is generally considered to be the first strong evidence against the then prevalent Aether theory, and initiated a line of research that eventually led to special relativity, in which the stationary Aether concept has no role.  The experiment has been referred to as “the moving-off point for the theoretical aspects of the Second Scientific Revolution”.

However Einstein in his General Theory of Relativity did not endow space with the physical qualities of mass, he endowed it with the geometric properties of a space-time dimension.  Therefore, when Einstein referred to space as having physical properties he may not have been referring to the physical properties of a medium made up of mass such as the “Aether” but those imparted to it by the geometry of space-time.

The significance of changing one perspective form space having the physical properties associated with mass to one of the geometric properties of space or a space-time dimension can be best understood if, as has been done many times in the The Road to Unification one transposes Einstein’s space-time universe to one of four *spatial* dimensions.  This is because one could use the physicality of the spatial dimensions instead of the non physical properties of a time or space-time dimension to derive the physical properties of Einstein’s space. 

Einstein made this possible when he derived the geometric properties space-time, energy and the dynamic balance between it and mass in terms of the constant velocity of light and the equation E=mc^2. 

For example he told us the energy associated with mass causes a curvature or contraction in the “surface” of space-time and when mass is converted to energy it causes the three-dimensional properties of space-time to expand because of a decrease in its curvature he associated with that event.  This spatial expansion and contraction would be analogous to how the two-dimensional surface of a balloon either expands of contract when air (energy) is added or taken away from it.

Observations of our environment tell us that all forms of mass have a spatial component or volume and because of the equivalence defined by Einstein one must assume that energy also has a spatial component.  However, one can use the fact that the equation E=mc^2 uniquely defines the geometric properties of a space-time universe in terms of both energy and mass to convert or transpose the curvature in space-time Einstein’s equations associated with energy to one that would define it in terms of a curvature in a four *spatial* dimensions associated with the *spatial* properties of mass.

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

This was the bases for assuming as was done in the article “Defining energy” Nov 27, 2007 that one can derive all forms of energy in terms of a displacement in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth spatial dimension.

Additionally it tells us the medium Einstein referred to in his address at the University of Leyden was most likely the geometry of three-dimensional space because his theories show that space it in itself has physical properties in that it can cause changes in its environment similar to how the geometric expansion and contraction of the two dimension surface of a balloon can cause physical changes in its environment.

If it is true that the physical medium Einstein was referring to was related to the geometric properties space and not a properties of mass as we are suggesting one should be able to explain why Albert Michelson and Edward Morley were unable to detect it in terms of the concepts contained in that article.

Part of the answer can be found in the article “The causality of motion” May 1, 2013 which derived the causality of an inertial reference frame in terms of the relative separation the “surfaces” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

Briefly it showed the causality of all accelerated motion including gravitational was a result of the interaction of an inertial reference frame with the slope of a curvature in the “surface” of three-dimensional space while deriving the causality of its inertial properties in terms of a constant linear displacement of two different “surfaces” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

(This curvature is analogous to a curvature in a four-dimensional space-time manifold Einstein theorized was the causality of all accelerated reference frames.)

In other words it showed the energy of relative motion was not imparted to it by its motion through space but by a displacement of its three-dimensional geometry with respect to fourth *spatial* dimension.

However this means the casualty of the forces experience by the components of an inertial reference frame in constant motion are an integral part of the geometry of their moving environment and therefore would not be dependent of their relative motion.

The theoretical significance of defining the causality of constant motion in terms of the geometry of four *spatial dimensions is that it allows one to understand why the propagation of light or electromagnetic energy is independent of the motion of an inertial reference frame.

As mentioned the article “Defining energy” Nov 27, 2007 derive all forms of energy in terms of a geometric displacement in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

This was the basis for defining the causality of electromagnetic energy in the article “What is electromagnetism?“ Sept, 27 2007 in terms of the differential force caused by the “peaks” and “toughs” of a matter wave moving on a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

Briefly it showed it is possible to derive the electromagnetic properties of electromagnetism by extrapolating the geometric properties of a three-dimensional environment to a matter wave moving on a “surface” of three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

A wave on the two-dimensional surface of water causes a point on that surface to be become displaced or rise above or below the equilibrium point that existed before the wave was present.  A force will be developed by the differential displacement of the surfaces, which will result in the elevated and depressed portions of the water moving towards or become “attracted” to each other and the surface of the water.

Similarly a matter wave on the “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension would cause a point on that “surface” to become displaced or rise above and below the equilibrium point that existed before the wave was present.

Therefore, classical wave mechanics, if extrapolated  to four *spatial* dimensions tells us a force will be developed by the differential displacements caused by a matter wave moving on a “surface” of three-dimensional space with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension that will result in its elevated and depressed portions moving towards or become “attracted” to each other.

This defines the causality of the attractive forces of unlike charges associated with the electromagnetic wave component of a photon in terms of a force developed by a differential displacement of a point on a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

However, it also provides a classical mechanism for understanding why similar charges repel each other because observations of water show that there is a direct relationship between the magnitudes of a displacement in its surface to the magnitude of the force resisting that displacement.

Similarly the magnitude of a displacement in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension caused by two similar charges will be greater than that caused by a single one.  Therefore, similar charges will repel each other because the magnitude of the force resisting the displacement will be greater for two charges than it would be for a single charge.

One can define the causality of electrical component of electromagnetic radiation in terms of the energy associated with its “peaks” and “troughs” that is directed perpendicular to its velocity vector while its magnetic component would be associated with the horizontal force developed by that perpendicular displacement.

However, Classical Mechanics tells us a horizontal force will be developed by that perpendicular or vertical displacement which will always be 90 degrees out of phase with it.  This force is called magnetism.

This is analogous to how the vertical force pushing up of on mountain also generates a horizontal force, which pulls matter horizontally towards the apex of that displacement.

However this also defines the causality of the electromagnetic properties of light and its propagation in terms of the physicality of the dimensional properties of space.

Yet this also means that the propagation of light would not be depend on the existence of the physical properties of mass as most including Albert Michelson and Edward Morley associated with the aether but only on the physicality of of the geometric properties of space.

This also means the velocity of light would not be influenced by the relative motion of an inertial reference frame because as mentioned earlier all of its components including light share the same geometry and therefore the same relative velocity.

This suggests that the “Aether” or the medium Einstein said must exist to support the propagation of light, and the existence for standards of space and time is a physical property of the geometry of space and not that of an independent element as is suggested by the modern interpretation of the Albert Michelson and Edward Morley.

However it also means that according to Einstein space-time concepts no experiment no matter how sensitive to motion will be able to detect any change in the velocity light due to the relative motion of an inertial reference frame.

Latter Jeff

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2013

The post Light and the physicality of space appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.

“Recapitulating, we may say that according to the General Theory of Relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists 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.”

But why have the best minds in the scientific community been unable devise an experiment to detect the physical properties of space that Einstein was so sure must exist to support the propagation of light.

The reason may be because they are not looking in the right direction.

For example 1887 Albert Michelson and Edward Morley devised an experiment to detect the relative motion of matter through the stationary Aether (“Aether wind”) by creating a device that sent yellow light from a sodium flame through a half-silvered mirror that was used to split it into two beams traveling at right angles to one another. After leaving the splitter, the beams traveled out to the ends of long arms where they were reflected back into the middle by small mirrors. They then recombined on the far side of the splitter in an eyepiece, producing a pattern of constructive and destructive interference. If the Earth is traveling through an Aether medium, a beam reflecting back and forth parallel to the flow of Aether would take longer than a beam reflecting perpendicular to the Aether because the time gained from traveling downwind is less than that lost traveling upwind.

However they did not observe a fringe shift and therefore concluded that space did not contain the “physical medium” called Aether.

However Einstein in his General Theory of Relativity did not endow space with the physical qualities of mass, he endowed it with the geometric properties of a space-time dimension.  Therefore, when Einstein referred to space as having physical properties he may not have been referring to the physical properties of a medium made up of mass but those imparted to it by its geometry.

For example he derived the energy of accelerated reference frames not in terms of mass but how it changes as it approaches a gravitational field by assuming it moved through curvature or change in geometry of space-time.  However he could not do the same for the energy associated with inertial reference frames in constant relative motion because it does not change with time,

Therefore to define the energy and mass associated with of the geometry of an inertial reference frame one must transposes or convert Einstein’s space-time geometry to four *spatial* dimensions because that is only thing that changes in inertial reference frames in motion .

Einstein gave us the ability to do this when he use the equation E=mc^2 and the constant velocity of light to define the geometric properties of space-time because it provided a method of converting a unit of time he associated with energy to an equivalent unit of space in four spatial dimensions.  Additionally because the velocity of light is constant he also defined a one to one quantitative correspondence between his space-time universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.

(This was the bases for assuming as was done in the article “Defining energy” Nov 27, 2007 that one can derive all forms of energy in terms of a displacement in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.) 

However If it is true that the physical medium Einstein was referring to was related to the geometric property of space and not a properties of mass as we are suggesting one should be able to explain why Albert Michelson and Edward Morley were unable to detect it in terms of geometry of its spatial properties.

Einstein told us that gravitational mass was the result of a curvature in the geometry of a space-time manifold.  In other words a change in the relative height of an object in three-dimensional space with respect to the time-dimension was responsible for the gravitational energy of mass

Similarly one could define the energy associated with the constant relative motion of an inertial reference frame in terms of a constant spatial displacement of a “surface” of a three-dimension space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

In other words it showed the energy of relative motion was not imparted to it by its motion through time but by a linear geometric displacement of three-dimensional space with respect to fourth *spatial* dimension.

However Einstein also told us that mass and energy are interchangeable therefore the substance of the Aether he was referring to in his address was the energy of the relative motion of inertial reference frames.

This means in an inertial reference frame in constant motion all of it parts in including the energy and therefore any Aether it contains is part of its geometric properties therefore must share the motion of as all its other parts.

In other words the reason Albert Michelson and Edward Morley were unable to detect the relative motion of an inertial reference frame through the geometry of space-time or four spatial dimensions because the Aether is that geometry.  In other words no relative motion was observed in their experiment for the same reason that an object or reference frame cannot have any relative motion with respect to itself

It should be remember Einsteinâ€s genius allows us to choose whether to define the mass or substance contained in all systems in either a space-time environment or one consisting of four *spatial* dimension when he defined it and the geometry of space-time in terms of the constant velocity of light.

Later Jeff

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2013

The post The geometry of Einstein’s Aether appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.

Einstein told us that it is made up of a dynamic balance between the properties of space and time.

For example he told us that space is a sort of multidimensional fabric, where the presence of mass causes the fabric of space-time to curve.  However he did not tell us anything about its composition.  Granted he did tell us what occurs when mass is present however he said nothing about space without mass.  In other words he simply told use how space reacts when mass is present.
However it is difficult to form a clear picture of how the physical properties of mass can interact with time because it is not perceived by most as matter or space but as an irreversible physical, chemical, and biological change in physical space.  So it is difficult to understand how mass can change time in a space-time dimension because it by definition is change.  In other words it does not make any sense to say that when mass is present in space it changes change.

Yet Einstein gave us the ability to solve this conundrum and develop more direct understand how and why the fabric of space is effected by mass when he used the equation E=mc^2 and the constant velocity of light to define the geometric properties of space-time.  This is because that provided a method of converting a unit of time associated with energy in a space-time dimension to unit of space associated with mass in four *spatial* dimensions.  Additionally because the velocity of light is constant he also defined a one to one quantitative correspondence between his space-time universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.

One of the many theoretical advantages to doing this is that it allows one to define the fabric of space in terms of physical properties of mass because it tells us why it causes the fabric of space-time to curve. For example one can see how moving a mass from one point to another physically changes the space it occupies which agrees with as mentioned earlier with what most of us perceive time to be.

In other words it tells us that mass must be an integral part of fabric of space.

However Einstein’s theory defines mass only in terms of the continuous field properties of space-time which means if one is to accept his theory one must also assume that there is continuous field of mass throughout space.  In other words it tells us that it is made up of that field.

This is true despite the fact that many believe that mass only exists in its particle or quantized form.

But observations tell a different story.

For example Louis de Broglie was the first to predict space is made up of the field properties of mass when he theorized that all particles have a wave component.  His theories were confirmed by the discovery of electron diffraction by crystals in 1927 by Davisson and Germer.

In other words the space we associate with the particles must be composed of the field properties of mass because that is the only thing that could be responsible for the wave component of particles.  However this means the space the wave is moving through also must be made up of it to.

If this is true why then do we only observe its particle properties?

One can understand why by extrapolating the laws of governing resonance in a three-dimensional environment, as was done in the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?” Oct. 4, 2007 to the field properties of the wave Davisson and Germer to a fourth *spatial* dimension instead of four dimensional space-time.

Briefly it showed the four conditions required for resonance to occur in a classical environment, an object, or substance with a natural frequency, a forcing function at the same frequency as the natural frequency, the lack of a damping frequency and the ability for the substance to oscillate spatial would occur in one consisting of four spatial dimensions.

The existence of four *spatial* dimensions would give the continuous field properties of mass the ability to oscillate spatially on a “surface” between a third and fourth *spatial* dimensions thereby fulfilling one of the requirements for classical resonance to occur.

These oscillations would be caused by an event such as the decay of a subatomic particle or the shifting of an electron in an atomic orbital.  This would force the “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold to oscillate spatially with the frequency associated with the energy of that event.

The oscillations caused by such an event would serve as forcing function allowing a resonant system or “structure” to be established space.

Therefore, these oscillations in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold would meet the requirements mentioned above for the formation of a resonant system or “structure” in four-dimensional space if one extrapolated them to that environment. 

Classical mechanics tells us the energy of a resonant system can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its fundamental or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency.

Hence, these resonant systems in the field properties of space would be responsible for it particles properties.

Yet one can also define its boundary conditions in terms of the classical laws space and time.

For example in classical physics, a point on the two-dimensional surface of paper is confined to that surface.  However, that surface can oscillate up or down with respect to three-dimensional space. 

Similarly an object occupying a volume of three-dimensional space would be confined to it however, it could, similar to the surface of the paper oscillate “up” or “down” with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

The confinement of the “upward” and “downward” oscillations of the field properties of mass with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension is what defines the spatial boundaries associated with a particle in the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?“

However there are at least two reasons why we are unable to directly observe the field properties of mass. The first is because all observations require an exchange of energy between what is being observed and the observer.  However the most effective and efficient way for nature to transfer information to our instruments is, as was shown in the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?“ in a resonate system made up of the field properties of mass.  Therefore in all measurements the particle properties associated with its resonant system will always be predominant over its field ones.

The second is that to directly measure a quantity there must be a physical difference between what is being measured and what is doing the measuring.  For example one cannot measure the changing level of water in a ship lock from a ship in it by measure how high it is above the surface of the water ship is floating in because it is changing at the same rate.

Similarly one cannot measure the field properties of the mass component of space because the field properties in the measuring instrument are changing at the same rate.

However we can indirectly measure how the field properties of mass interact with particles as was shown by in 1927 by Davisson and Germer observation of electron diffraction by crystals

This shows that the fabric or our cosmos is made continuous field of mass.

Unfortunately for those who believe that all mass must be contained in particles the logic for that conclusion is based purely on observations and the validly of Einstein theories.  Therefore to deny the existence of a continuous field of mass and the fact that it is the fabric of the cosmos one would have to deny the validity of Einstein theories.

It should be remember Einsteinâ€s genius allows us to choose to define all environments in either space-time or one consisting of four *spatial* dimension when he defined their geometry in terms of the constant velocity of light. This interchangeability broadens the environment encompassed by his theories by making them applicable to both the quantum and field properties of space thereby giving us a new perspective on their interactions.

Later Jeff

Copy right Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2012

The post The fabric of the cosmos appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.