"When looking at Einstein's equation E= mc² and any equation where the symbol (m) for mass appears, the (m) almost always represents invariant mass ("rest mass") as we now understand it. It is suggested that Einstein never used relativistic mass himself. The equation E= mc² is only meant to be used in the rest frame of a particle. Einstein introduced the idea that the mass of a body increases with energy content, not velocity."

I agree that the relativistic mass of a body increases with the energy content, not velocity is correct as far as it goes (its space energy level rises). That is because the inertial mass of matter has no velocity (zero (0) motion) relative to absolute space as indicated by the (null) results of the Michelson/Morley experiments! Nothing moves (zero(0)velocity) relative to absolute space BUT the mass of a body does increase with energy content. (Einstein only introduced the idea that the mass of a body increases with its energy content - he did not say relative to absolute space.)

Rest mass is inertial mass energy level of a body (relative to absolute space) in a locality such as the surface of earth. (Einstein's frames.)

Relativistic mass is the inertial mass energy level of the body relative to absolute space regardless of its locality. This is the "space energy level" of the body.

The "Laws of Nature" create Absolute (universal) Space. They create and govern all matter and energy in the universe. The universe is a closed finite system, where the laws end the universe ends. The galaxies are falling - accelerating toward the end (boundary)of the universe. Einstein's equation E= mc² is more universal if you use relativistic inertial mass instead of rest mass.

Newton's definition of mass M=F/A is more universal if you use relativistic mass also.

Gravity's strength decreases with altitude. At the top of Mount Everest a body's weight decreases about 0.28%. At an altitude of 250 miles, gravity loses about 10% of it strength as at the Earth's surface. This is because of the change in the body's relativistic mass and distance from the earth's center of gravity. Newton's law of gravity depends on the relativistic inertial mass/energy of its attracting bodies and distance squared apart of the bodies.

F = G x (M₁M₂)/D²

Inertia is one of the most fundamental and interesting law's of nature. Galileo experimented with it and Newton partially explained it with his famous mathematical equation (F=MA). Newton says that a body of mass tends to resist any change in motion (acceleration) unless a force is exerted on the body. Actually the body does not resist the change in motion. Inertia is one of the Laws of Nature that requires a force be exerted on the body to change its motion - relative to other bodies and its mass relative to Absolute Space.

Newton thought that the force exerted was proportional to the acceleration achieved. This was not quite true however it was later discovered that as the body accelerated more and more force was required to maintain the same rate of acceleration. The body's energy level relative to absolute space had become more massive requiring greater force for the same amount of acceleration - its relativistic mass/energy had increased.

What had happened was that the body had risen to a higher energy level, relative to absolute space, ("space energy level") its inertial mass had increased. The body had not acquired more matter, a force had been exerted on the body and as a result it simply had risen to a higher "space energy level". (A tremendous amount force must be exerted for the body's inertial mass to increase even a tiny bit.) At this higher space energy level - the law of inertia now required more force be exerted to maintain the same rate of acceleration.

Einstein's famous equation (E=MC²) explained this phenomenon by stating - that the body's mass and energy are equivalent. This equation represents the scalar inertial mass/energy of the body relative to absolute space. It has no motion or direction or momentum - it simply indicates the body's 'energy level' relative to absolute space itself. This is the body's 'inertial mass/energy'.

Einstein may not have realized that in his equation "mass" represented the "energy level" of a body relative to absolute space but it does.  Apparently he did not accept the results of the Michelson/Morley experiment that indicated nothing moves relative to absolute space.

The Laws of Nature created (Absolute) Space and brought the universe into existence.

Newton's equation (A=F/M) only represents the vector acceleration of the body - relative to other bodies. The body's acceleration is measured relative to other bodies or reference points only - not to absolute space itself. Momentum=Mass x Velocity is also a vector motion - relative to other bodies. (Potential energy another major form of a body's energy which is relative to the position of other bodies.)

George Berkeley's argument against Newton's pail experiment - to prove the existence of absolute motion (motion relative space itself) - was that the pail had many motions in space such as the Earth's rotation, annual revolution, etc. He didn't realize that these were all vector/momentum motions relative to other bodies - not to absolute space itself. The spinning force was causing the water to move against and up the wall of the pail (a vector momentum motion). Relative to absolute space, the pail was not moving.

Newton's disciple, Sam Clarke was on the right track when he said "Absolute space is one and essentially indivisible".

Space itself has no coordinates or dimensions - it has no geometry - a body is always completely motionless relative to space itself as indicated by the results of Michelson's many fruitless experiments to find aether. Michelson's experiments were among the most successful undertakings of the 19th century however - the NULL results of the experiments indicated that the Earth was not moving relative to absolute space (nor is anything else). Relative to absolute space neither matter or energy moves.

A body, at Earth's "space energy level" however, does possess tremendous scalar energy/forces (the primary energy/forces - electromagnetic (radiation) energy, gravitational energy, nuclear energy). These energy/forces are perceived as the body's inertial rest mass. The strength of these energy/forces depend on the "space energy level" of the body. The body's energy level relative to absolute space. (Only the four primary forces of nature are energy/forces, all other forces are ordinary (secondary) forces and possess no energy of their own.)

The only way bodies can move about the universe are relative to other bodies - in relation to absolute space a body has no motion - only a scalar "space energy level" which is perceived as its relativistic inertial mass.

The relativistic mass of a body varies with its "space energy level". The "rest mass" of a proton on Earth will be different - then a on planet in a galaxy that is at a different "space energy level"'. The "rest mass" of a body is determined by the space energy level of its environment (a locality such as the surface of the earth). A body at a very low "space energy level" has little gravitational attraction power since its relativistic mass is lower and the strength of gravity depends upon the inertial masses of the attracting bodies. (This is an important factor in the formation of stars.)

The mysterious dark matter that physicists are looking for is simply matter at a very high relativistic inertial mass that allows gravity to compress the matter so much that fusion reactions can take place. This happens in the outer portions of spiral galaxies (as can be seen by the formation of the new blue stars in these outer regions.

Atoms of uranium may not be as radioactive if they were in an environment such as a galaxy that is at a higher "space energy level" then our Milky Way galaxy. This may be proven experimentally by rising the energy level of a lump of uranium in a centrifuge to see if its rate of radioactivity was reduced??

"Space energy level" is the energy level of a body relative to absolute space. A body that is at a very low energy level has very little inertial mass/energy. Inertia would not require as much force for the body to accelerate - relative to other bodies - or to rise to a higher "space energy level" - relative to absolute space. The same body at a very high "space energy level" is very massive. Its inertial mass requirement would be high therefore inertia would require a large force be exerted for the body to accelerate relative to other bodies or rise to a higher space energy level (relative to absolute space).

Matter has no intrinsic inertial "rest mass" itself - it is only when a force is exerted on matter does it began to acquire mass/energy - to rise to a higher "space energy level". Its relativistic inertial mass begans to increase -relative to absolute space. Evidence of this is observed when a body is accelerated in a cyclotron - as its velocity increases it requires more and more force to maintain the same rate of acceleration. The body is rising to a higher 'space energy level' - this is perceived as an increase in the body's relativistic inertial mass/energy.

There are two fundamental things to consider about the energy of matter. (1.) The body has a motion energy - potential energy or kinetic energy relative to other bodies - (momentum, acceleration, or position). (2.) The body also has inertial mass/energy - where no motion at all is involved - only the relativistic inertial mass level relative to absolute space. Matter always has these two attributes - one of motion relative to other bodies, the other is mass relative to absolute space.

1. Momentum/energy - Bodies can zip around universal space relative to other bodies. The changing positions of a body relative to other bodies - (vector velocity) would be the kinetic momentum/energy of the body. This we perceive as the momentum or acceleration of the body relative to other bodies. A satellite in orbit has a very high momentum relative to Earth but virtually no momentum relative an astronaut space walking next to the satellite. (A body can also possess a 'potential energy' in relation to its position with other bodies.)

2. Inertial mass/energy - the body's energy level - relative to absolute space. This is energy that manifests itself as the "inertial mass' of the body - (there is no vector motion, or momentum whatsoever involved in this aspect of a body's energy). It is the scalar nondirectional motionless mass/energy of the body. At Earth's 'space energy level' environment a body of matter contains a tremendous amount of this scalar mass/energy which we perceive as the inertial mass of the body. Einstein's E=MC² represents the tremendous amount of energy a body of matter possesses relative to absolute space. This energy represents the four primary energy/forces - not just radiation energy of the body. This inertial mass/energy depends on its "space energy level" (its energy level relative to absolute space) - NOT to other bodies.

Take a bullet for example. The bullet at rest has no vector momentum/energy relative to other bodies around it but it does have inertial mass (a tremendous mass/energy - relative to space). When we fire the bullet from a gun it gains tremendous kinetic energy as it accelerates out of the barrel (a vector velocity momentum energy) it also takes on a very tiny additional inertial mass - relative to space itself. Its space energy level rises a very tiny amount. When the bullet hits an object both the vector momentum and the inertial mass energies are transferred to the object and the bullet returns to its original energies. The point is that the bullet, whether at rest or moving always has two energies - one relative to other bodies (vector) and one relative to absolute space (scalar).

The Constancy of the Speed of Light

The concept that a body has no motion relative to absolute space is also relevant to when a particle emits a photon. The emitting particle must be considered alone in space - having no direction or motion - no other body is considered. The photon will always speed away from the particle at the speed of light. Only the emitting body and space itself is considered. It makes no difference how fast the emitting particle (body) is traveling relative to other particles (vector velocity) - it is motionless relative to absolute space itself. No matter what direction (relative to other bodies) the photon is emitted the photon will always travel away from the emitting body at the same speed - the speed of light.

In conclusion - when we consider the vector velocity momentum energy of a body we must also - always consider the scalar inertial mass energy of the body - (the energy level of the body relative to absolute space). A body always has two energies - one vector and one scalar - momentum/energy and inertial mass/energy. Space itself has no direction, or geometry (Euclidean or Riemmanian). When you speak of coordinates or manifolds you are not speaking of absolute space - you are speaking of points or lines within space - not absolute space itself. Absolute Space does not curve because a body does not move relative to space. There is no Fitzgerald-Lorentz or Einstein contraction relative to absolute space because there is no motion involved.

The "Inertia" is a requirement of absolute space. Inertia requires a force be exerted on a body to accelerate the body (vector motion) relative to other bodies or to rise the body to a higher 'space energy level (scalar inertial mass) relative to absolute space. The inertial mass of a body depends the amount of atoms it contains and its energy level relative to absolute space (its "space energy level"). When a body emits a photon the body has no motion relative to absolute space (it is zero). The motion of the body relative to other bodies or reference points is not considered.

Donald Louis Hamilton © All rights reserved.

Reference - "The MIND of Mankind: Human Imagination, the source of Mankind's amazing power!"
Chapter 15,18. Pub.1996, ISBN-0964926512.

(Click on cover!)

The Effects of Earth's Slowing Rotation.

The Nature of Universal Space.

The Many Motions of Planet Earth.

Comments