Absolute Space and Time versus Aether or Cosmic Center

2016

This paper is a brief (and hopelessly incomplete) non-standard introduction to the philosophy of space and time. It is an introduction because I plan to give an overview of what I consider some of the main questions about space and time: Is space a substance over and above matter? How many dimensions does it have? Is space-time fundamental or emergent? Does time have a direction? Does time even exist? Nonetheless, this introduction is not standard because I conclude the discussion by presenting the material with an original spin, guided by a particular understanding of fundamental physical theories, the so-called primitive ontology approach.

2000

When we discover the world, neither space nor time are shown to us and named as such, and we have neither rulers nor clocks independent from it. Practically, it is within the phenomena that we choose what allows us to think and to build space (material points declared to be bound together in an immobile way), and what allows us

Journal of Philosophy, 1996

If two different authors use the words "red," "hard," or "disappointed," no one doubts that they mean approximately the same thing.... But in the case of words such as "place" or "space"...there exists a far-reaching uncertainty of interpretation.-Albert Einstein' T Nhere is supposed to be a problem concerning the metaphysics of space and time (or space-time), which, following Lawrence Sklar,2 goes by the name the substantivalist-relationist controversy. What is presumably at stake is whether we should be realists in some suitably robust sense about space and time (space-time), or whether no such entities exist over and above the objects and events of the material world. Insofar as this question is intended to have anything to do with physics, I shall argue that it is no longer a meaningful one. In the course of its development, physical theory simply lost touch with the categories necessary for the original formulation of the problem. One might, of course, seek judicious criteria for projecting old categories onto new terrain. Part of my project is to explain why, given the relevant historical developments, one should be skeptical that there is any such natural or preferred projection in this case. The other part is to make evident that the current controversy reduces to verbal disputes occasioned by arbitrary preference for one manner of projection over another. I. AN EINSTEIN "PUZZLE" * Work on this was supported by National Science Foundation grant # SBR-9310561. Frank D6ring was most kind to proof the translations from German. I would also like to thank Peter Achinstein and Steve Gimbel for helpful comments on an earlier draft. I am grateful to the Albert Einstein Archives at the Hebrew University ofJerusalem for granting permission to quote from the Einstein papers. ' "Forward," to Max Jammer, Concepts of Space (New York: Dover, 1993, 3rd ed.), p. xiv. 2 Space, Time, and Spacetime (Berkeley: California UP, 1974).

Journal of Philosophical Theological Research, 2024

Contemporary theology is realizing the importance of integrating the knowledge of modern/contemporary physics into the metaphysical and ontological categories used to consider God and the God-world relationship. Time is a complex notion with different meanings, characterized by a plurality of uses. The concept of time opens up to broader conceptions than those of physics, mathematics, and philosophy and reveals that the human being, the earth, and the cosmos are not the center of space or time. The concepts of space, time, and matter, to which the concept of vacuum is connected, are of central importance in any modern physical theory, and particularly in the theories of unification. It is being discovered that spacetime is absent at the most fundamental level and only emerges at an appropriate limit. This emerging image of time leads to new conceptual challenges that must be faced in parallel with philosophy and theological research to achieve its correct understanding. It is a comparison of the viewpoints of the three investigative domains concerned with understanding the nature of consciousness, namely science, philosophy, and metaphysics. This thought process is connected to the intuitions of the contemplative and mystical traditions and seems to be in line with current scientific thought, which can be mathematically expressed. Recent scientific research struggles to grasp the subjective aspect of consciousness; subjective experience is in conflict with the figure of the observer classically understood in the scientific sense. The evolution of life and the relationship with the transcendent could have their information

PROCESS STUDIES, 2007

Following the introduction of the special and general theories of relativity and development of consequent cosmological models, the extent to which time and space play a starkly abstract role in physics has become more and more apparent. We examine here whether the full force of such abstract characterizations comes ultimately into opposition with the practice of science and implies some hard limitations on the scope of scientific discourse.

2017

The text proposes some directions of research, as based on previous works made by the author. Our purpose is to discuss the contribution of general relativity to the epistemology of space and time, in the context of a relational, and not substantial, rationality. General relativity brings us the important idea (of a relational nature) that space and time do not constitute a scene external to phenomena, but that, on the contrary, the phenomena themselves, in the first place the phenomenon of gravitation, are responsible for assessing the corresponding variables. However, this contribution does not make us progress on the "mystery" of time, that remains conceptually separated from space, even though, since the relativity theory, the values of space and time variables are related. Encouraged by general relativity, we must go further and express more strongly the link between the concepts of space and time, and their identity of substance. The relational approach must extend t...

What Humans Perceive as Time and Space are just Facets of Energy, 2022

Physics might bring recollections of boring and frustrating physics classes at high school, and complicated, long, cumbersome equations based on frightening Mathematics. This is not Physics. Science in general, and the science of Physics in particular, are about human endeavors to understand Nature, the Universe, and the Existence in general. Indeed, Physicists rightfully insist on presenting Physics theories using Mathematics, because Mathematics is the language that Science and Physics utilize, because it is based on unambiguous and precise statements. But if the layer of Mathematics from fascinating Physics theories is peeled off, what is revealed is a layer of fascinating ideas, based on human ingenuity. As stated already above, Mathematics provides validity to Science and Physics theories, because it provides unambiguousness and precision to the elements presented in these theories. But the basics ideas, from which the elements of this layer, of human ingenuity emerged, can be usually presented also by using just common language, because Physics ideas can be also presented, with a limited use of Mathematics. This is what this book tries to do. As already stated above, Science in general, and the science of Physics in particular, are about human endeavors to understand Nature, the Universe, and the Existence in general. As such, in the last few centuries, Science and Physics made significant progress in unveiling many mysteries about Nature and the Universe. Although Mathematics provides unambiguousness and precision to the elements presented in Science and Physics theories, no Science and Physics theory is assumed to be the ultimate truth and embed complete validity, because, after all, all these theories are based on humans' ideas, and limited humans' ability to understand Nature. An acceptable measure of validity of a Science and Physics theory is its compliance with physical experiments, which test the validity of its results. Nevertheless, also these experiments are based on limited humans' ability to devise complete full proof experiments, which might result in observations, which cause the necessity to correct a Science or a Physical theory, or even replace it, with a totally new theory, which better complies, with the most recent observations. And, although Science and Physics theories utilize Mathematics to present their statements, still Physics embeds many unresolved questions regarding Nature and the Universe, and it also embeds quite a few peculiarities and paradoxes. Some of these unresolved questions, peculiarities, and paradoxes, that still exist in the Science of Physics today, are the subject of this book. The author of this book is not a physicist by profession and education. The author of this book is a retired Electronics Engineer. However, many years ago, when the author of this book was a young student at high school, the author of this book found the drive to understand appealing. For example, when the author of this book understood that Einstein's General Relativity Theory concluded, that Mass is just a form of Energy, the author of this book tried to understand why the Electric Charge is not also recognized as a form of Energy, based on many similarities between the Mass and the Electric Charge entities. Recently, when the author of this book retired, he could concentrate on delving into such issues and finalizing the ideas that resulted in several published papers, and this book. As already stated above, this book is about attempts to explain some Physics unanswered questions, peculiarities, and paradoxes, which resulted in a revolutionary conclusion: Time, Space, and the Electric Charge are just forms (or facets) of Energy, like Mass is already recognized and accepted by the science of Physics as a form of Energy, following the introduction of Einstein's Special Relativity Theory. This also boils down into another revolutionary conclusion: Nature is composed of only one entity: Energy!!! From the dawn of civilization humans are struggling to understand Nature. Many ideas, tools and theories were developed during this quest, in attempts to narrow down the elements that are important in understanding Nature. However, the science of Physics today still uses many elements to explain Nature, such as Energy, Mass, Electric Charge, Forces, Fields, Space, Time, etc. This book concludes that all the elements, or entities, used by the science of Physics to explain Nature are just facets of one entity: Energy. As already stated above, the conclusion that Nature is composed of only one entity, Energy, is the result of attempts to explain some unanswered questions, peculiarities, and paradoxes, that still exist in the science of Physics today. These attempts use analysis, which is based only on nowadays acceptable Physics theories, and uses only thinking experiments, logic, and reason, as the tools to carry over this analysis. Although the thinking experiments, login, and reason, used in the above-described analysis, seem as very sound and very difficult to contradict, these cannot be sufficient, to provide complete validity, to what is presented in this book. Thus, in addition to the above, this book also proposes several experiments. If these experiments will be executed, and their results will be successful, as this book predicts, this might provide validity, to what is presented in this book. These experiments require means and funds which are beyond the reach of the author of this book.

Academia, 2021

Albert Einstein’s theory of special relativity stems from the constancy of the speed of light, regardless of the speed of an observer. In addition, the theory of special relativity postulates that it is impossible to define absolute speeds. The speed of a body always needs to be specified as being relative to some other body. Time is also found to be relative between two observers moving relative to each other. In particular, as the speed of an observer increases, time dilates relative to a ‘stationery’ observer. In this paper, it is postulated that all these characteristics of relativity theory are inherent in all wave systems when the measurement of time and distance is made utilizing measuring instruments that are themselves waves within those systems. A wave existential reference frame is defined as a way of formalizing this concept. Based on these findings, it is postulated that ‘rigid matter’ is part of the electromagnetic wave existential reference frame and suggests that space is not vacant as proposed by Einstein but is composed of an aether that is the fundamental fabric of the universe.