Mass Is a Component of Force

The dichotomy of using the field concept in two mutually contradictory fashions as something massless and also as something massive — still unresolved in electrodynamics — is clearly summarized by Jackson's important statement {128} of the prevailing view:

"Most classical electrodynamicists continue to adhere to the notion that the EM force field exists as such in the vacuum, but do admit thatphysically measurable quantities such as force somehow involve the product of charge and field."

In trying to rationalize the "massive field versus massless field" dichotomy, Jackson {129} also states:

"...the thing that eventually gets measured is aforce..." "At the moment, the electric field can be defined as the force per unit charge acting at a given point."

Actually, field is not force, so cannot be force per unit charge. Field produces force when it interacts upon charge. Causing something as an effect, but then being that same effect identically, is a confusion of cause and effect and a non sequitur.

We point out that spacetime is charged, but with observably massless (virtual) charge. So the field in spacetime is observably massless and therefore observably force-free. That massless field then interacts with an observable massive charge in the "observable" world, to create an observable force and an observable forcefield. In space, from a quantum mechanical view we may consider the field to have virtual force x time, since the field may be regarded as a curvature of spacetime acting upon the virtual charged masses in the ever-bubbling virtual particle fluctuations of the vacuum permitted by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Nonetheless, that is only the "potentiality" for an observable force, as pointed out by Feynman and Wheeler, should the field — including its interactions with the virtual charges of the vacuum to produce forces and accelerations on those virtual particles — interact upon an observable charged mass.

Obviously, the force-free field as a product of spacetime curvature and massless (virtual) charge, and the force field as a product of that observably force-free field but virtual force field (in the vacuum) with observable charged mass, cannot be the same thing. Assuming they are the same assumes an oxymoron, and confuses cause and effect. This illustrates the continuing dreadful foundations difficulties propagated in classical electrodynamics.

To resolve these EM foundations difficulties so long maintained and cherished as dogma, the scientific community at the highest priority should (1) fund extensive and rapid work by our very best theoreticians and foundations physicists to heal these century-old festering sores, (2) extend electrodynamics back to a higher group symmetry theory, as in O(3) EM theory for example, and (3) provide a rigorous dictionary of science foundations concepts and terms which does contain valid definitions and full discussions — clearing misdefinitions and disinformation now notable in the electrodynamics literature.

Nobelist Feynman, co-founder of quantum electrodynamics, was careful to state the notion of the field in mass-free space very differently. Quoting Feynman {130}:

"...the existence of the positive charge, in some sense, distorts, or creates a "condition" in space, so that when we put the negative charge in, itfeels aforce. This potentialityfor producing a force is called an electric field."

Feynman's imagery clearly invokes a "distortion condition in spacetime" {131}, eventually coupled to a charged mass and interacting with it — and then one has a force and a force field. He erred in still somewhat making the force separate from the charged mass, in the phrase "it feels a force" — which ignores the fact that the mass of the interacting charge is a component of the force, not separate from it and not "feeling it as a separate external thing". He pointed out that the field in spacetime represents only the potential for a force field, if a charge should be placed there. And he points out that the field is a "condition in space" — in the full sense, a condition in spacetime.

We comment that, in a sense, spacetime and vacuum may be considered one and the same. Vacuum contains many fluctuations and virtual state dynamics, all of which are curvatures of spacetime or produce curvatures of spacetime. Vacuum has energy density, and is therefore a potential. This energy density has dynamics, so the ambient vacuum potential has dynamics, and so therefore does spacetime {132}.

However, a dynamic of the potential is precisely what a field is. It follows that dynamics of spacetime are what fields are. So fields (as force-free entities in spacetime) may be taken more accurately as the dynamics of the vacuum-spacetime, or as dynamics of the ambient vacuum-spacetime potential, or as dynamics of the ambient curvature of spacetime.

Again quoting Feynman {133}:

"We may think of E(x, y, z, t) and B(x, y, z, t) as giving the forces that would be experienced at the time t by a charge located at (x, y, z), with the condition thatplacing the charge there did not disturb the positions or motion of all the other charges responsible for the fields. "

Here Feynman very clearly shows that E and B involve functions of spacetime (x, y, z, t) only, prior to interaction, but do not physically exist until interaction with charge has occurred. But he has not quite yet completely eliminated the "force field" as a separate force acting on the charged matter independently. This centuries-old fundamental mistake in mechanics — that force is independent of and external to mass — has simply been propagated into electrodynamics, without correction. Physicists such as Feynman and Wheeler have been trying very hard to correct it.

The observed/measured force field is an output of observation, and observation is a d/dt operator imposed upon spacetime LLLT. All observables are 3-spatial, and any observation is an instantly frozen "3-space snapshot" at a single point in time. A single observation has no temporal existence a priori, since it is only an instantaneous 3-space snapshot existing at one moment only. Hence an observable — being 3-spatial and frozen — does not persist as such in time. Indeed, the next instant after an observation, that particular snapshot does not exist any more. [Refer again to Figure 1-3 in Chapter 1].

2.1.3 Mechanism for the Flow of Time and Related Matters It is well recognized that the nature of time is itself an unresolved question. For our purposes, we are interested in the energetics42 approach.

So we apply that approach to arrive at a mechanism generating the "flow of an object through time". First we will choose our fundamental units.

Saving Power, Saving The World

Saving Power, Saving The World

Get All The Support And Guidance You Need To Be A Success At Helping Save Power. This Book Is One Of The Most Valuable Resources In The World When It Comes To How To Use Renewable Energy As Your Alternative Power Suppliers.

Get My Free Ebook

Post a comment