0.9k
1.1k
788
404
1kWe have and will show throughout this blog and its companion book “The Reality of the Fourth *Spatial* Dimension” observations of our environment suggest that space is composed of a continuous non-quantized field of energy/mass.
One of them is that it would give us a definition of what space is that is more consistent with our experiences than the currently accepted models.
For instance quantum mechanics assumes that all energy/mass is in the form of point particles. Therefore. it defines the volume of space between them in terms the existence of nothing because a point particle has no volume. Yet this appears to contradict our experiences which tells us that all volumes require some internal physical material or substance to support or maintain their three-dimensional integrity.
For example, it tells us that beams or some other physical component is required support the volume of a building. These components must be continuous on a macroscopic scale and physically interconnected to both themselves and the building to provide support. If they become cracked or disconnected, the volume associated with that building will collapse.
Our experiences also show us that objects and people can move about randomly in the volume of a building but they cannot support it because they are not physical attached to its structural supporting system.
However, why should we assume the microscopic structure and volume of the universe is any different?
Quantum theories tell us the particles in a vacuum can move randomly in space similar to the way people can move randomly about in a building. However, as mentioned earlier our experiences in the macroscopic world tell us all buildings require structural support, which must be continuous (on a macroscopic level) and attached to it to maintain its volume. Therefore, based on macroscopic observations, particles could not support a three-dimensional volume because by definition they are discontinuous and not connected its supporting structure.
Therefore, the Quantum Mechanical assumption that all energy/mass is made up of discrete point particles    cannot provide an explanation that is consistent with our observation of a macroscopic environment as to what supports a volume of space.Â
This is one basis for assuming the existence of a continuous field of energy/mass because, as mentioned earlier observations of our macroscopic environment show that the structural supports of a volume must be continuous because its existence would provide an explanation that agrees with our experiences for the stability and structure of a volume of space.
Many scientists believe our universe is expanding due to the energy left over from the big bang. Many of them would say the momentum of particles expanding though space is the reason for its continuing expansion.
However, this does not explain why a volume of space that does not contain particles expands because without the mass of particles, it would not possess the properties of inertia and momentum which would be required to keep it expanding.
Some might say that the movement of particles in a vacuum is responsible for its expansion of its volume similar to the way the movement of air molecules in a balloon supports its volume.
However, there is a difference between a balloon and the universe in that a balloon has a rigid structure or membrane for the particles to interact with while observations of “empty” space indicate that it does not.
Therefore, based on our experiences in a macroscopic environment we must assume that space must be composed of a continuous non-quantized field of energy/mass because without it the volume of space between particle could not expand.
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 that 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.”
These would be the properties of a continuous non-quantized field of energy/mass because being continuous it would not have parts “which may be tracked thought time”.
The this blog has and will shown these observations and those of Einstein’s are one of many that point to the existence of a continuous non-quantized field of mass.
Another would be, as shown in the article “Why is mass and energy quantized?” Oct 4, 2007 that one can derive the quantum mechanical properties of energy/mass by extrapolating the laws of classically resonance to matter wave in a continuous non-quantized field of mass.
So please visit us occasionally if you are interested gaining a better understanding of how assuming the existence of a continuous non-quantized field of mass can help us better understand the physical structure of our environment.
Later Jeff
Copyright 2007 Jeffrey O’Callaghan
0.9k1.1k7884041k