Books > Philosophy >Essays in Science and Philosophy ©2004-2009
Seven essays exploring and explicating various interrelated scientific and philosophic subject matter: such as temporality, gravity, relativity, epistemology, agnosticism, metaphysics, existentialism, consciousness, music, art, physics, and cosmology.
Any rigorous methodologies emerging within the analyses are met, driven, and balanced by healthy doses of skepticism and thought experiment.
"Restructuring Time and Gravity Through Einstein's Relativity"
"Agnosticism: The Beauty of Gray"
"Metaphysical Expanses of Existential Potentiality"
"Harmony in Contrast"
"Singular Wave Hypothesis"
"Thinking Beyond Linear Time"
*for more info on this book check out this blog post
That I have passed through the doorway allows me to walk across the room. And as I approach a chair near the wall, a procession of uneasy thoughts traverses my mind. I am an existence in the universe; but my perception here now is causing me a feeling of strangeness. From whence does this feeling emanate? It is from all around me. It is the unseen restraint of a forced inhabitance: the feeling of being pinned to this planet by something invisible. I am inexorably bound to withstand this gravitational field, always touching and being touched by it. So then why can I not directly perceive of its nature or form? My eyes are not sensitive to its wavelengths, nor do I possess an antigravity platform from which I could sample it objectively. Nevertheless, I am slated to live my entire life here. And even if I could achieve an escape velocity comparable to that of Earth’s, how would I ever be able to spontaneously produce oxygen in the vacuum of space with which to sustain my respiratory process? Don’t you see? I am trapped. Here in this chair by the wall, I can see across the room. On the other wall hangs a clock: ticking out the seconds until death do us part...
I sit and watch the clock. Gravity holds me to the chair in a space for a time. I am inactive; yet somehow gravity and time continue to act upon me. My existence is static and motionless. The only thing I hear and see is the tick of the clock; the only thing I feel is an invisible force adhering me to the chair. The ticking never stops, nor does the adherence. If I believed in a humanlike god I might say that its right hand holds me down while its left hand spins the clock. Either way, in this state of existing inertly, I begin to wonder whether or not the same force operates both before me and beneath me. Something is forcing me to continue existing even though I have undoubtedly halted. Involuntarily, the ticking clock and my beating heart connect as the blood holds open my eyes and ears. What force maintains this vivid involuntary connection? I notice my heart’s beating has suddenly synchronized with the clock’s ticking; and so close my eyes and ears...now all is dark and silent. There remains only the feeling of adherence and a heartbeat. All other bodily awareness has evanesced. My existence is now purely an entity of time and gravity; my awareness, of merely an activation and an attraction: an activation in the heart of me, an attraction to the heart of the planet beneath me.
What on Earth is happening here? The most basic situation seems to be utterly incomprehensible. I have successfully reduced myself to time and gravity; and yet only perceive them as an activation / attraction: which does not reveal anything of their nature. Thus, we must consult the foremost human expert on the subject matter: Albert Einstein. On the cusp of the 19th and 20th centuries he worked as a patent clerk and did physics in his free time. In 1905, he published his Special Theory of Relativity: in which the speed of light held center stage. The groundbreaking theoretical discovery he made was that regardless of the motion of light sources, the speed of light remains the same. It was from this breakthrough that E=mc2 developed, with c as its constant: the speed of light in a vacuum (c) is always 3 × 108 meters per second. Now, how can this assist us in a clarification of the most basic situation?
Let us first acknowledge those things regarding it that are already clear: time seems to be activating my heart, and gravity seems to be attracting me to Earth’s center. My heart’s activation is a temporal phenomenon. In other words, with no time to beat, it would not beat. Earth’s attraction is a spatial phenomenon; and likewise, with no space between Earth’s center and I, there would be no attraction. Thus, we are dealing here with what seem to be two phenomena: the heartbeat and the adherence, the temporal and the gravitational, the time and the space. In 1916, Einstein published his General Theory of Relativity: in which matter’s effect on space and time stood at the forefront. Basically, his motif exhibits matter altering the space around it; which in turn alters the time within that space. Consequently, as it came to be evident that space and time were affected together, the two terms were combined to form one: space-time.
In light of this, we can simplify the most basic situation: Earth’s mass below alters my space-time. That statement however still retains a phenomenon of indefinite vagueness: the term ‘alters.’ What is this ‘alters’? Is it the force acting between Earth’s mass and I, is it gravity? Let’s say that it is. What then, is gravity? The traditional definition will no longer suffice, considering that we have already established it in the most basic situation (as the invisible force that attracts me to Earth’s center.) Instead, what if we attempted to make visible the invisible of ‘invisible force’? Would we then be able to define gravity itself? There is currently a term that represents this invisibility: ‘graviton.’ Supposedly, gravitons are the mysterious particles causing the invisible force. Ok...assuming that gravitons do exist, what are they?
Space-time is altered around a mass, which causes us to perceive gravity. This would lead me to believe that gravitons must be created when space-time is altered. But in what structure would this altering take place? When graphically illustrated in textbooks, it is portrayed as a two-dimensional bend into the mass; which, while helping students to more easily visualize the effect, fails to convey an accurate portrait of what is really going on. In reality, Einstein’s bend would have to be three-dimensional, due to the fact that all masses are perceived by us to be three-dimensional objects. So now we must ask the question: what would a three-dimensional bend look like? If we think of spherical Earth and simultaneously bend every bit of space around it toward its center of mass, what is the resulting mental image? It is not a curvature: for that is exactly how a two-dimensional object bends. It would have to be a curvature from all directions toward a central point: a spherical shrinkage, or a contraction.
Thus we have successfully structured the altering of space-time around a mass. Yet what sort of gravitons could be created in this 3D-contraction? The gravitons themselves can possess no attractive qualities: because that would imply an invisible force as their cause; and as we have already established, gravitons are the invisible cause! Thinking back to the two-dimensional model of space-time’s curvature into a mass (which looks a lot like a bowling ball set upon a trampoline of stretched pantyhose), objects supposedly follow this curvature downward into the mass, which appears to us as gravity. Now, how would an object follow along a 3D-contraction into a mass? Well what if matter, instead of attracting other matter, attracted space-time itself? Assuming all space-time were attracted to exist within and throughout matter, would there not have developed a process by which all of it at some point or another is able to achieve this ibidem existence? If the entire chunk of space we call the universe were all-one-piece, and invisibly rigid as such, it could never achieve this ibidem existence. Therefore, it must be in multiple pieces and non-rigid. Eo ipso, what happens to space-time around masses? It shatters.
It shatters into gravitons! To exist within and throughout masses, it must shatter to the size of molecules, atoms, subatomic particles, and even smaller than that. So as an object approaches a mass, it encounters a gradual increase in the intensity of shatter; and consequently, slips toward the mass (as through quicksand.) Let us consider myself as the object. Remember, I feel only two things: an activation and an attraction. Now, in terms of gravitons...what is this attraction I feel? Why am I endlessly adhered to the chair cushion? My adherence is endless because my perpetual slippage through gravitonic quicksand is constantly opposed by the chair. The quicksand pulls me coreward; while the chair holds me spaceward. But what about the other thing I feel: the activation? What is it that drives my heartbeat?
It must be some characteristic of the gravitons I exist within and throughout. Assuming we do not all know what happens to time in a gravitational field, the effect will be relayed here: the passage of time has been shown by experimentation to slow down ever so slightly with increases in gravitation. Basically, physicists placed two identical atomic clocks in a skyscraper: one on the bottom floor, and one on the top floor. They then observed that the one on the bottom floor moved through time a bit slower than did the other. This effect is referred to as time dilation due to gravity. Now, what possible structure of our graviton would be consistent with this evidence? Obviously in and around larger masses (stronger gravitational fields), the space-time shattering would be more intense, which would result in smaller gravitons. Hence, smaller gravitons must be associated with a slower time rate. But is this to say that time is contained in a graviton?
Indeed it must be: for it is only as I slip deeper into the gravitonic quicksand that I experience this time dilation. If I were lowered from space down into my chair, I would feel my heartbeat gradually decrease in its rapidity. As was said earlier...my heartbeat is a temporal phenomenon. Without the time to beat, it would not beat at all. It seems clear here that, quite simply, time is energy. Time is the energy sufficient to activate my heart. We can then think of our gravitons as containing an amount of energy. Thus when I am in space, the gravitons within and throughout me are a bit larger due to their distance from the source of gravitation. These larger gravitons contain more energy, which causes my heart to beat slightly faster than it does in my chair on the planet surface. Consequently, this spaceward dilation is rather similar to the increase in angular velocity experienced by children as they venture outward from the spindle of a merry-go-round. In this scenario, if their velocity represented time, the children nearer to the spindle would age slower than those on the edge of the merry-go-round...just as I would age slower in my chair than would someone nearer to the edge of Earth’s gravitational field.
Utilizing our new graviton, we seem to have explained both time and gravity. However, there remains another phenomenon we must aptly describe before accepting this graviton as true: acceleration due to gravity. According to the ‘space-time shatter theory’ in development above, we observe the effect of gravity due to an object’s slippage through gravitonic quicksand toward a mass. Employing this terminology, what sort of explanation of acceleration due to gravity would result? Or first off, more specifically, what exactly is an object’s slippage? If we imagine gravitons as non-rigid quasi-spheres of space, and then paint a mental picture of the space-time shatter surrounding a planet, what results is a gradient of gravitons increasing in size with increased distance from the planet surface. Presumably then, if a ferryboat were levitated away from the surface, it would eventually reach a point at which it would be completely engulfed in one graviton.
This creates no dilemma: for one can easily imagine the difference in behavior of a ferryboat in a quicksand pit as opposed to one in a pit of ferryboats...it would sink in the former; and attain stasis in the latter (due to its comparable size.) Obviously, this region to which we have levitated the ferryboat lies very far away from the planet: nearly out of its gravitational field. But let’s say that we lower it planetward until it is shared between two gravitons. The ferryboat no longer exists in stable space. Though, would simply existing within two gravitons cause it to suddenly accelerate planetward? No indeed. For that to occur, there would have to be an invisible force...the very force we are trying to discern here!
What about the motion of the planet itself? Would that affect the gravitons? It would seem that as the planet barreled through space, the space would have to continually shatter to satisfy its attraction. Thus, a sort of gravitonic convection would need to occur: i.e., smaller gravitons being forced to vacate the area nearer to the center of mass to allow newly shattered gravitons a residence within and throughout it. Here is where the dilemma arises. While there would surely be a massward convection due to newly shattered gravitons, there would also be a spaceward convection due to the smaller gravitons vacating. Furthermore, the massward and spaceward thrusts would have to be equal because the multidirectional convection would occur in the first place to fill voids on either side. And as we know, a void left by a vacated object can only be filled by either an object of comparable size to the void, or a number of objects comparable in size to the void.
Clearly we have encountered a serious dilemma regarding the graviton that has landed us in a metaphysical corner. The only thing that would cause a ferryboat to experience a slippage through so-called ‘unstable space’ would be what? An invisible force! Hence the force causing gravity has maintained its invisibility even for all of our efforts to functionally define the graviton. What is there left for us now? From my chair here, I see only one possibility - gravitonic evanescence. That’s right...let’s forget the graviton altogether. Gravity must still remain as an effect (because it is observably evident.) However, from this point on, its cause is no longer a mysterious particle.
Perhaps it is time the reader and Einstein’s equation had a proper introduction: E=mc2 (wherein m represents the amount of mass in kilograms, c represents the speed of light in a vacuum, and E represents the amount of energy into which that mass can be converted.) Our original inquiry into the most basic situation must reconvene herewith. I sit and watch the clock; thus here is my concern. Within the space atop my chair, what is this ‘gravity’ that allows me to sit? And as I sit, what is this time that allows the clock to tick? Hence as before, my concern rests upon time and space; or upon ‘space-time.’ Verily, this concern leads to an odd question: where is the space-time in E=mc2?
It is in the speed of light, which represents the movement of light through space in time; and in a vacuum, equals 3 × 108 meters per second. However, there is one aspect of the equation that must be logically rationalized before moving on: why is it that the speed of light is raised to the second power? To answer this I must refer to a property light exhibits which physicists call its ‘wave-particle duality’: that is, in certain test situations it behaves like a wave (revealing frequency, wavelength, etc.); and in others, it behaves like a particle (oftentimes referred to as a ‘photon’: literally, a discrete packet of energy.) Thus, the speed of light is multiplied by itself (it is squared) because light exists as both matter and energy, as both particle and wave. It is the most matterlike energy, and the most energylike matter, simultaneously!!!
Let us therefore rewrite E=mc2 as [E = m ( s / t )2]: so as to disclose a visual representation of the space-time in the equation. In view of this, we can then think of the speed of light’s units as meters of space per seconds of time, which will allow us a consideration of how space-time itself is affected by changes in mass. First off, what can be deduced mathematically with regards to the manner in which the variables affect each other? Basically, when the m in [E = m ( s / t )2] increases, the s in the numerator increases correlatively through multiplication; while the t in the denominator remains unaffected. Because remember, m is really m / 1; and when multiplied by s2 / t2, you get ms2/1t2. The time has only been multiplied by 1: which allows it to elude any affection by the mass increase. But what does that mean, keeping in mind that s / t merely ‘represents’ light’s movement through space-time?
What it means is that matter and space are connected through light in time. Time, it seems, is the energy of space: wherethrough matter exists and can pour forth its own energy, light. And what is light? Light is matter that has undergone conversion to a lightness which can travel with the speed of time. It has become ‘light enough’ to ride the space-energy wave. Light is the least massive matter in existence.
Go to Top