Fundamental Physics Looks at Mass

Fundamental Physics Looks at Mass

By: Miles Pelton, May 2014

Abstract:

            There is reason to believe that the term mass as used in modern physics may have no legitimate relevancy with the amount of energy in an object of matter and that calculations used as proof are a sham devised to prove the conservation of energy law imbedded as the foundation of modern physics theory.       

Discussion:    

            The term MASS is fundamental to modern physics beliefs therefore it should have an absolute meaning but the term as used in modern physics is anything but definitive let alone absolute. The term is said to define energy that is inherent in the object of concern and nothing more. That is not the case with modern physics.

            First of all modern physics defines intrinsic or rest mass as the energy required to accelerate an object. Big problem; the energy it takes to accelerate an object has no relevance to the energy it took to make the object. Further, the energy it takes to accelerate an object involves overcoming forces not produced by the object. Specifically, gravity is a factor in accelerating an object yet gravity involves two forces, that produced by the object and that produced by the earth. The gravity force the earth exerts on an object is a function of the earth not the object. The intrinsic energy of an object is the energy it took to produce the elementary particles with which an object is made plus the amount of energy it takes to apply force to bind the elementary particles to make the object. The intrinsic energy of an object has no relevance with the speed the object is traveling. It is the intrinsic energy that is released by combustion or nuclear reactions

            The speed of light has been established as a factor in defining the mass and thereby the energy of an object. The speed of light is the rate photons radiate, which is the rate at which fundamental energy applies force to accelerate the radiation of photons. Fundamental energy acts instantaneous, it exists as a field that surrounds a singularity point. The field intensity (strength) decreases as the distance from the singularity point increases. That is determined by the formulae for calculating the volume of a sphere (V = 4/3 pi r^3) because the energy field established by a singularity is a sphere. As a consequence, the force applied to a radiating object decreases with distance from the singularity point.

            Calculated in that manner the rate of energy strength decrease is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. Therefore, because the energy available to produce force decreases the rate of speed of an object accelerated by that force decreases with distance from the singularity, which translates to a speed of 186,00 miles per second, the speed of light. That fact has been proven by direct measurements. There is no evidence of a relationship between the speed of light and the energy that it took to make an object. In fact there is no evidence of a relationship between the kinetic energy of an object and the speed of light.

            Those who believe in the theory of relativity and the theory of equivalence contend that the equation E = Mc^ squared has been proven, fail to clarify that proof has not been the result of direct verifiable measurement but rather by mathematical calculations using the very equation whose viability is in question. Further, the equation says E and M are equal when M is multiplied by the speed of light squared but relevance between the speed of light and the intrinsic energy in an object (M) has not been established. Without relevance the proof offered is a sham.

            There are other inconsistencies in the logic applied to the current explanation of mass. Foremost is the belief that kinetic energy is equivalent to fundamental energy. That belief is ensnared with the belief that force is energy. There is no arguing with the fact that force can do work as demonstrated by a wrecking ball or the force of an explosion. Fundamental energy is not the product of force, it produces force. Force does not exist until or unless fundamental energy is expended to create the force.

            Throughout the history of modern physics there has been a concerted effort to establish creation is not/was not the work of an almighty creator. Those efforts have concentrated on the development of theories proving that creation came into existence and has been sustained since being initiated without the aid of a source of energy. The mindset driving the anti-creation belief was set by the conservation of energy law. It is a mindset that has hidden the truth about fundamental physics. Each step along the progression of physics has seen observations and conclusions made to show conformance to the conservation of energy law. The theories propagated by Einstein, including the E = Mc^ squared equation, is a culmination of those efforts.

Conclusion:

            The equation E = M c^ squared and the term mass have no relevance. The equivalence theory is flawed. The theories developed in an effort to deny the insertion of energy into the universe system are flawed and have succeeded in hiding understanding critical to the development of viable fundamental principles.