What is the origin of kinetic energy and why should we care?
Einstein was able to define the origins of gravity and potential energy associated with rest mass in terms of curvature or the changing geometry of a space-time manifold but he did not tell us anything about the causality of kinetic energy.
For example he told us that gravity is caused by curvature or distortion in a space-time manifold however he did not due the same for kinetic energy associated with constant relative motion.
Yet its casualty is central to our understand of our universe because it along with gravity and Dark Energy are assumed to be responsible for evolution of the universe.
However one reason may be because kinetic energy of relative motion is constant with respect to both distance and time. In other words the energy of an object in constant motion always moves the same distance in a given time interval.
As was just mentioned one of the difficulties in defining the kinetic energy in terms of the space-time environment defined by Einstein is that its magnitude is determined only by the distance an object moves through space within a constant time interval. In other words it is only dependent on the spatial not on time parameters of its movement.
However redefining Einstein’s space-time universe in terms of its spatial properties would allow one to define the energy of constant motion in terms of those spatial properties.
Einstein gave us the ability to do this when he define the displacement or curvature he associated with the potential energy of rest mass in terms of the equation E=mc^2 and the constant velocity of light because that gave us the ability to redefine a unit of time in his space-time universe to an equivalent unit of space in a universe consisting of only four *spatial* dimensions.
This fact is the bases for assuming as was done in the article “Defining energy” Nov. 26, 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.
Using those concepts one could define the energy of rest mass in terms of magnitude of a physical displacement in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension cause by a objects mass while defining the kinetic energy of two masses in relative motion in terms of the spatial displacements cause by that motion.
In other words the “surface” of three dimensional space associated with objects in relative motion would exist on different three dimensional plains with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
For example magnitude of kinetic energy of two masses would be defined the relative magnitude of their displacement in “surface’ of three dimensional space with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension
In other words it allows one to mathematically derive the causality of relativistic motion in terms of the geometry of either four *spatial* dimensions or four dimensional space-time space because when Einsteinâ€™s defined his space-time universe in terms of energy/mass and the constant velocity of light he allow to chose one or the other and get the same end results.
Einstein in his General Theory of Relativity derived the causality of gravity in terms of a curvature or displacement in a space-time manifold however in his Special Theory of Relativity he only told us the effects of relative motion has on an environment not what caused the energy of that motion. However as was shown above one can use his theoretical concepts to mathematically define its casual in terms physical displacement in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension thereby give a more complete understanding of the relativistic environment encompassed by his theories.
This is significant because understanding the spatial properties of relative motion is the first step in understanding how Newton’s laws of motion are physically connected to Einstein’s space-time environment.
Copyright 2018 Jeffrey Oâ€™Callaghan