0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
If you have come across the word ‘reify’ before, you can skip this paragraph. If you haven’t, it is defined in the dictionary as follows: “To regard or treat an abstraction, as if it had a concrete or material existence.” Probably, like me, your first thought is about fundamental religious beliefs, such as the existence of a ‘supreme being’. But as scientists, we too have fundamental beliefs embedded in our theories of physics. This article deals with the true nature of ‘space’.The analysis starts with an everyday experiment which we all carry out and it works every time! Whether you are tied to a planet by gravity or floating free of it in space, there is nothing that stops you from being able to move through the space around you, given the necessary locomotive power and that there are no barriers of matter in the way. And the simple reason that you can perform this experiment again and again successfully is because ‘space’ doesn’t have a physical presence. It is only created by the presence of matter. Sounds a simplistic statement, but it is true and only dismissible because we have grown to ‘reify’ space by giving it a ‘concrete or material existence’ of its own. So if space doesn’t exist, then it cannot be created. It can only be the result of a material structure being built which incorporates spaces within it. Looked at another way, space is infinite in all directions, simply because it doesn’t have a material presence of its own. This brings us to the start of the universe more colloquially called the ‘Big Bang’. The expansion of the universe from its infinitesimally small point is not creating a symmetrically based 'sphere of space' around itself. It can only be constructing a network or lattice of material particles that create enclosed spaces. The particle that could meet this requirement, has been called the ‘WIMP’, standing for Weakly Interacting Massive Particle. And the search is on all over the world, with complex experiments being devised to find out if it really exists.If it does exist, then we are all living within a universal network of minute particles, oblivious to their existence, but a network that is continually being expanded, enclosing more space as it goes. Where the energy comes from to constantly create these particles and expand the network is currently a mystery, but it is being called ‘Dark Energy’ and the particles themselves, ‘Dark Matter’. What is possible with the existence of a universal network or lattice of particles, is the ability to create ‘quantum gravity’ from the displacement of the lattice particles by the formation of matter within the lattice.If so, then the mainstream theory of gravity, based upon Einstein’s abstract concept of ‘space-time’, is likely to come up for re-appraisal. But we are not there yet.
Space always existed and was never created.
Einstein wrote:"what is essential is merely that besides observable objects, another thing, which is not perceptible, must be looked upon as real, to enable acceleration or rotation to be looked upon as something real."I think sums it up.. Yeah there probably is some fundamental ether 'particle' but we cannot ascribe time or motion to it and hence will never be able to perceive it.
Yeah there probably is some fundamental ether 'particle' but we cannot ascribe time or motion to it and hence will never be able to perceive it.
Einstein clearly believes in his 'general theory of relativity' as a means of explaining the phenomenon of gravity, which enabled him to predict gravitational waves and the bending of light around large bodies of matter. This, I believe, is his starting point for this article and the final statement quoted above.
The purpose of Einstein's new theory has often been misunderstood, and it is criticized as a attempt to explain gravity. The theory does not offer any explanation of gravitation; that lies outside its scope, and does not even hint at a possible mechanism. It is true that we have introduced a definite hypothesis as to the relation between gravity and a distortion in space; but if that explains anything, it explains not gravitation, but space, i.e. the scaffolding constructed from our measures. - A.S. Eddington, Nature, March 14, 1918, page 36.
While I will take the time to read your position, right off the bat, the lattice seems the same as the Aether position which was considered unlikely by the MMX.
I have my own Fractal Foam Model of Universes, in which the cosmic foam (galaxy clusters surrounding voids) of our universe IS the aether foam of the next larger-scale universe (our super-universe), and the aether foam of our universe IS the cosmic foam of a smaller-scale universe (our sub-universe).
They have produced surprisingly realistic pictures of a universe with clusters of galaxies containing both spherical and spiral patterns and initially give you the impression that they are the real thing.
Are space and time - as "extent" and "duration" - elements of nature or are it elements of our thinking about nature?
Mathematical/virtual space and time are constructs of our minds.
A wave has to be on something. Virtual something suggests something from nothing while we know energy is something (photon).
Space is the nothing between somethings.