ULTIMATE SYMMETRY:

Fractal Complex-Time and Quantum Gravity

III.2 Space-Time Diffeomorphism and Mass-Energy Equivalence

It is commonly believed that the equivalence between mass and energy arose from the Theory of Relativity as described by Poincar in 1900, and later by Einstein in 1905, in his famous paper Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy-content? , in which he proposed the equivalence of mass and energy as a general principle and a consequence of the symmetries of space and time. However, in the previous and many other related papers that he published in the next fifty years, Einstein gave various heuristic arguments for this relation without ever being able to prove it in any theoretical way [16], as no one else also ever did. Based on Doppler effect and Maxwell s theory of radiation, the reasoning that he gave in his 1905 original derivation was questioned by Planck and shown to be faulty. In 1907, Einstein acknowledged the controversy over his derivation. He later produced more than half dozen proofs that all suffer from unjustified assumptions or approximations. He never succeeded in producing a valid general proof [23]. In 1955 he wrote in a letter to Carl Seelig (1894-1962): I had already previously found that Maxwell s theory did not account for the micro-structure of radiation and could therefore have no general validity. [5].

As we already explained in Chapter V of Volume II, an exact derivation of this experimentally verified relation is not possible without postulating the inner levels of time, since it incorporates motion at the speed of light which leads to infinities on the physical level. Therefore, the Duality of Time is the only way that leads to exact mathematical derivation of this relation directly from the principles of classical Newtonian Mechanics, as we shall describe with further details in the following simple methods that could not have been possible without the metaphysical behavior in the inner levels of time, where the velocities of each individual geometrical points are perpetually and sequentially changing abruptly from rest to the speed of light, and vice versa, in literally zero time on the outer level. This is obviously not allowed on the normal level of time when dealing with physical objects that have mass, because it will lead to infinite acceleration and infinite energy.

The relation between mass and energy dates back to the 17th century, when the termvis viva, from the Latin for living force , is used for describing the kinetic energy in an early formulation of the principle of conservation of energy, proposed by Leibniz during the period 1676-1689. He noticed that in many mechanical systems of several masses, the quantity:  was conserved, and he called this quantity the vis viva, or living force of the system. It was later realized that this observation is only accurate for the conservation of kinetic energy in elastic collisions, and it is independent of the conservation of momentum. In 1807, Thomas Young (1773-1829) was the first to use this term as energy, but it was later calibrated to include the coefficient of a half:

(3.3)

Einstein was not the first to have related energy with mass. In 1717, Newton speculated that light particles and matter particles were inter-convertible. In 1734, in his own Principia, Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772) speculated that matter is ultimately composed of dimensionless points of pure and total motion .

Additionally, in the end of the 19th century, there were many attempts to understand how the mass of a charged object depends on the electrostatic field. The concept was called electromagnetic mass, and was considered as being dependent on velocity and direction as well, thus the object may have different longitudinal and transverse electromagnetic masses. One year before Einstein, in 1904, Lorentz expressed transverse electromagnetic mass as:

(3.4)

Shortly after that, Planck defined the relativistic momentum and gave the correct values for the longitudinal and transverse masses, but this concept of mass was redefined in 1909 as the ratio of momentum to velocity, instead of the ratio of force to acceleration. However, the concept of relativistic mass is not used anymore in Relativity, but it is considered as an invariant quantity, whereas the energy is relativistic.

In 1900, Poincar also associated electromagnetic radiation energy with a fictitious fluid having momentum and mass related by: . By that, Poincar tried to save the center-of-mass theorem in Lorentz s theory, though his treatment led to radiation paradoxes. Like Poincar , Einstein also concluded in 1906 that the inertia of electromagnetic energy is a necessary condition for the center-of-mass theorem to hold.

Back in 1873 also, Nikolay Umov (1846-1915) pointed out a relation between mass and energy for aether in the form of , where , and in 1903, Olinto De Pretto (1857-1921) published a paper in which he presented a mass-energy relation. De Pretto imagined that the Universe was filled with an aether of tiny particles that always move at the speed of light, thus each of these particles has a kinetic energy of  up to a small numerical factor .

After World War II, when huge energies released from nuclear fission, as demonstrated by the atomic bombs of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, the mass-energy equation  became linked by the public with the power of nuclear weapons, but the equation was not strictly necessary to develop the weapons. As Robert Serber (1909-1997) put it:

Somehow the popular notion took hold long ago that Einstein s Theory of Relativity, in particular his famous equation , plays some essential role in the theory of fission. Albert Einstein had a part in alerting the United States government to the possibility of building an atomic bomb, but his theory of Relativity is not required in discussing fission. The theory of fission is what physicists call a non-relativistic theory, meaning that relativistic effects are too small to affect the dynamics of the fission process significantly. [31, 7]

It can be readily seen from Figure III.2 that the transmutability between mass and energy can only occur in the inner levels of time, because it must involve motion at the speed of light that appears on the normal level of time as instantaneous, hence the same Relativity laws become inapplicable since they prohibit massive particles from moving at the speed of light, in which case , so the mass  would be infinite and also the energy. In the inner levels of time, however, this would be the normal behavior because the geometrical points are still massless, and their continuous coupling and decoupling is what generates mass and energy on the inner and outer levels of time, respectively, as explained further in section III.2.3 below.

As we introduced in section I.4.5 above, the normal limited velocities of massive physical particles and objects are a result of the spatial and temporal superposition of the various dual-state velocities of their individual points. This superposition occurs in the inner levels of time, where individually each point is massless and it is either at rest or moving at the speed of creation, but collectively they have some non-zero inertial mass , energy , and limited total apparent velocity , which can be calculated from equation 3.1. We also explained in section IV.4.2, that when we consider this imaginary velocity as being real, the Duality of Time Theory reduces to General Relativity, but when we consider its imaginary character we will uncover the hidden discrete space-time symmetry and we will automatically obtain Lorentz transformation, without introducing the principle of invariance of physics laws. For the same reason, we can see here that the mass-energy equivalence  can only be derived based on this profound discreteness that is manifested in dual-state velocity, which then allows the square integration in Figure III.2, because the change in speed is occurring abruptly from zero to . Otherwise, when we consider  to be real continuous in time, we will get the gradual change which produces the triangular integration with the factor of half that gives the normal kinetic energy .

Based on this metaphysical behavior in the inner levels of time, we will provide in the following various exact derivations of the mass-energy equivalence relation, in its simple and relativistic forms, directly from the classical equation of mechanical work . The first two methods, in sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3, involve integration (or rather: summation) in the inner time when the velocity changes abruptly from zero to , or when the mass is generated (from zero to ) in the inner time. This is obviously not allowed on the normal level of time when dealing with physical objects. The third method, in section III.2.8, gives the total relativistic energy , by integrating over the inner and outer levels together, while in section III.2.9 we will derive the relativistic energy-momentum relation directly from the definition of momentum as , also by integrating over the inner and outer levels together and accounting for what happens in each stage. Furthermore, we will see in sections 3.3 and 3.3.1 that the absolute invariance, and not just covariance, of complex momentum and energy, provide yet other direct derivations because they also lead to , that is equivalent with  or .

Actually, since we have shown previously that the new vacuum  is a perfect super-fluid, the mass-energy equivalence relation can be easily derived from the equation of wave propagation in such perfect medium: (), but we will not discuss that further in this book.

Other Pages Related to Search Keywords:

• ... Space Transcendence Read this short concise exploration of the Duality of Time Postulate: DoT: The Duality of Time Postulate and Its Consequences on General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics ...

• ... Normal Behavior =>:

• ... rohibit massive particles from moving at the speed of light, in which case , so the mass  would be infinite and also the energy. In the inner levels of time, however, this would be the NORMAL BEHAVIOR because the geometrical points are still massless, and their continuous coupling and ...

• ... Prohibit Massive =>:

• ... levels of time, because it must involve motion at the speed of light that appears on the normal level of time as instantaneous, hence the same Relativity laws become inapplicable since they PROHIBIT MASSIVE particles from moving at the speed of light, in which case , so the mass  woul ...

• ... Involve Motion =>:

• ... n process significantly. [31, 7]   It can be readily seen from Figure III.2 that the transmutability between mass and energy can only occur in the inner levels of time, because it must INVOLVE MOTION at the speed of light that appears on the normal level of time as instantaneous, henc ...

• ... Called Electromagnetic =>:

• ... and total motion . Additionally, in the end of the 19th century, there were many attempts to understand how the mass of a charged object depends on the electrostatic field. The concept was CALLED ELECTROMAGNETIC mass, and was considered as being dependent on velocity and direction as well ...

• ... Simple Methods =>:

• ... ly way that leads to exact mathematical derivation of this relation directly from the principles of classical Newtonian Mechanics, as we shall describe with further details in the following SIMPLE METHODS that could not have been possible without the metaphysical behavior in the inner leve ...

• ... Incorporates Motion =>:

• ... . [5]. As we already explained in Chapter V of Volume II, an exact derivation of this experimentally verified relation is not possible without postulating the inner levels of time, since it INCORPORATES MOTION at the speed of light which leads to infinities on the physical level. Therefore ...

• ... Verified Relation =>:

• ... account for the micro-structure of radiation and could therefore have no general validity. [5]. As we already explained in Chapter V of Volume II, an exact derivation of this experimentally VERIFIED RELATION is not possible without postulating the inner levels of time, since it incorporate ...

• ... Famous Paper =>:

• ... y Equivalence It is commonly believed that the equivalence between mass and energy arose from the Theory of Relativity as described by Poincar in 1900, and later by Einstein in 1905, in his FAMOUS PAPER Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy-content? , in which he proposed the e ...

• ... Derived Based =>:

• ... cally obtain Lorentz transformation, without introducing the principle of invariance of physics laws. For the same reason, we can see here that the mass-energy equivalence  can only be DERIVED BASED on this profound discreteness that is manifested in dual-state velocity, which then al ...

• ... Fifty Years =>:

• ... valence of mass and energy as a general principle and a consequence of the symmetries of space and time. However, in the previous and many other related papers that he published in the next FIFTY YEARS , Einstein gave various heuristic arguments for this relation without ever being able to ...

• ... Light Particles =>:

• ... rgy, but it was later calibrated to include the coefficient of a half:    (3.3)   Einstein was not the first to have related energy with mass. In 1717, Newton speculated that LIGHT PARTICLES and matter particles were inter-convertible. In 1734, in his own Principia, Emanuel ...

The science of Time is a noble science, that reveals the secret of Eternity. Only the Elites of Sages may ever come to know this secret. It is called the First Age, or the Age of ages, from which time is emerging.
Ibn al-Arabi [The Meccan Revelations: Volume I, page 156. - Trns. Mohamed Haj Yousef]

The Sun from the West:

Welcome to the Single Monad Model of the Cosmos and Duality of Time Theory

Message from the Author:

I have no doubt that this is the most significant discovery in the history of mathematics, physics and philosophy, ever!

By revealing the mystery of the connection between discreteness and contintuity, this novel understanding of the complex (time-time) geometry, will cause a paradigm shift in our knowledge of the fundamental nature of the cosmos and its corporeal and incorporeal structures.