1

Space-Time Dialectics; Reconceptualizing the Space-Time Continuum in Terms E=ST David Findley imdavidfindley@gmail.com Abstract: Deriving a logical basis from Dialectical Method, it becomes possible to come to definitive estimations of Space and Time, thereby establishing the basis for a novel interpretation of the Space-Time continuum. Upon rough delimitation of this Space-Time continuum, relationships between fundamental elements in physics may be derived so as to simplify General Relativity, develop a theory of gravity, and discern the ontological basis of (E=mc^2) in terms (E=ST).

Written as a deductive ontology of elementary phenomena, this work makes use of philosophical method in an attempt to outline a dynamic substructure of the physical universe. Upon establishing a few fundamental principles, it will unravel in a series of inductive inferences that involve re-conceptualizing the nature of the Space-Time continuum in respect to its development in terms of initial cosmological phase-transitions (herein described as ontological derivations.)

Foundational Principles;

A) A singular entity whole and complete in itself cannot serve as catalyst to change. B) In order for change to occur, there must be at least one primary, self-contrasting dichotomy that can unfold in terms of dialectical procession. C) Such a primary dichotomy serves as the ontological foundation for all series of change that proceed from it. Every stage of its dialectical procession exists within the context of the primary duality. D) As dialectic extends from a primary duality, the structure of the system it perpetuates reflects its binary nature. Hence, duality is recognized as primary principle governing the nature of the system.

1) The beginning of the universe, in the Big Bang, may be recognized in a primary sense as the beginning of the divergence of Space and Time. The divergence of Space and Time thereby establishes an original duality wherein the motion of the universe, in the sense of Change, becomes possible. 2) We may here assert three primary phenomena: Space, Time, and Change. Discerning between these primary phenomena as such, we must address the abstract natures of each as distinct from one another. 3) The phenomena Time and Change, then, must be addressed in their exclusivity. Change may be recognized as a dynamic that occurs within the context of a relationship between two or more phenomena, whereby a latter circumstance succeeds a prior circumstance. Change, then, is the conceptual basis for Causality. However it is the case that Change unfolds in Time, it would be a mistake to confuse Change as Time, or Time as Change. 3A) This may particularly be proven in so far as we recognize that the rate of Time will enter into flux relative to gravity. As the rate of Time

speeds up or slows down in relation to gravity, similar occurrences of Change unfolding in either instance are distinct in their circumstances, exclusive to the rate of Time in which they unfold. 4) If Time is so distinct from Change, then we may draw the conclusion that the concepts of Past and Future exist only within the contextual domain of Change, and not of Time. The notions Past and Future concern the unfolding of causal events in Time, but in a strict sense are distinct from Time. 5) By thus delimiting the nature of Time, we are simultaneously abstracting the essential nature of Time from the material. Time, abstract as such, can only be positively recognized in the sense of an incorporeal power. 6) Delimiting the abstract nature of Time in terms of its exclusivity from Change, we may make an initial assessment in regards the nature of Spaceas Space and Time are acknowledged in terms of duality, Space must stand as negative, polar compliment to Time. This may stand as theoretical basis for Space-Time relativity. 6A) Please note that this dualistic dynamic is subtly, but discernibly, distinct from the more traditional four-dimensional conception of Space-Time. 7) If we may assert Space and Time as the primary dualism from which the universe proceeds unto Change, then we are at the same time saying that it was through the polar interactivity of Space and Time that the universe began. 8) If we are asserting a polar interaction between Time, (as an abstract power,) and Space, (as its negative compliment,) then we are also simultaneously implying a spectrum of gradations that would define the various interactions of their polar relationship. Space and Time are not merely immediately relative, but through their polar interaction establish a continuum:

*Please note that a two-dimensional representation of the Space-Time Continuum is an over-simplification, illustrated to draw only an initial understanding.

9) The assertion of such a spectrum, or continuum, illustrates the various interactions

of Space and Time, and is simultaneously an assertion of different modes of Being-each mode categorized by its unique situation along the Space-Time continuum. 10) If we have still yet to address the nature of material reality, then we may come to the conclusion that the various modes of our material reality (i.e., energy,) may actually be illustrated as existing within the context of this Space-Time continuum. 11) To begin to assert the utility of this re-conceptualization of the Space-Time continuum, we must recognize in nature a secondary dualism that is also all-pervasive throughout the universeelectromagnetism. There are many dynamical manifestations of electromagnetism, but primarily the phenomena must be recognized in terms of a basic duality between its electric and magnetic aspects. We can illustrate the hypothetical circumstance of electromagnetism on the Space-Time Continuum as such:

*Asserting electromagnetism as the very first cosmological phase-transition following the initial divergence of Space and Time

12) Asserting the circumstance of electromagnetism hypothetically as such on the Space-Time Continuum, we should determine also two primary modes of electromagnetic phenomena. The dual nature of generalized electromagnetic phenomena are as discerned between particles and radiation. These two modalizations of electromagnetic energy are then recognized as ontological derivatives of electromagnetism, in turn derivative of Space and Time in the Space-Time Continuum:

*e= electric; m=magnetic; p=particles; r=radiation. This spectrum represents the first two phase-transitions after the initial divergence of Space and Time, after which Baryogenesis becomes possible. Following, illustrating the dualistic relationships between the elements as determined so far:

*The particle/radiation duality illustrating the basis for wave-particle duality in quantum physics

13) This is a hypothetical arrangement of primary dualistic phenomena in the suggested Space-Time Continuum. Due to the dualistic nature of the phenomena circumstanced in context of a single continuum, we must remember further that the modal manifestations of energetic phenomena are still yet relative to their ontological antecedents. That is, there must be a definitive relation between particles and Space, and a definitive relation between electromagnetic radiation and Time. These hypothetical relations may be illustrated as such:

*Representing the initial phase-transitions of the early universe, including their ontological relationships.

14) The current task, then, is to investigate the consequences of an ontologically polar relationship as between the elements of particles and Space, as well as between electromagnetic radiation and Time. 15) Here, it is important to explore the open-ended mystery of the hypothetical Higgs

field, Higgs mechanism, and Higgs boson. The Higgs field is thought to permeate all Space; The Higgs mechanism is the activity whereby elementary particles interact with the Higgs field to gain the property of mass; the Higgs boson is the hypothetical sub-atomic particle that is responsible for permeating/substantiating the Higgs field. 15A) According to contemporary theory, sub-atomic particles seem to have relationship with an invisible, (or as of yet undiscovered,), Higgs Fieldwhereby the different sub-atomic particles bounce, shake, vibrate, or zig-zag in response to it. The more the particles seem to vibrate, the more mass they accumulate. 16) If we are trying to assert a polar relation between sub-atomic particles and Space, then perhaps it is working hypothesis to suggest that there is no Higgs boson, that the Higgs field is actually the fabric of Space itself, and the Higgs mechanism is just this polar interaction between Space and sub-atomic particlesthe friction of the polar relationship manifesting as mass. 16A) Mass as stated herein references sub-atomic particles who gain their massive quality via interaction with the Higgs Field. This usage of the term is then used exclusively from the kind of mass that is determined by the Mass-Energy Equivalence Principle, which implies that even photons have mass. We must hereby emphasize this discernment between these two qualities of massmass proper, as determined by direct interaction with the Higgs field, and mass in equivalence, as determined by the Mass-Energy Equivalence principle. As mass proper is that quality of mass that is the effect of the proposed Space-Particle ontological relationship, (i.e., Higgs mechanism,) then we may determine that is different from mass in equivalence, in that mere mass in equivalence is not massive via direct interaction with Space, and is regarded as mass only theoretically, in calculation of latent forces of energy.. 17) As we assert the Higgs mechanism as simply this polar interrelation between Space and elementary particles, and suggest that mass (proper,) is the actual consequence of this relationship, then we may simultaneously conclude the basis for a definitive relationship between Space and matter. 18) We have thus far only managed to assert that the apparent relationship between properly massive elementary particles and Space may only be responsible for a mere friction between the two entities, but we must also remember that mass is the foundation of gravitational phenomenathe warps in Space in influx unto the particle. As we reassert the Higgs mechanism as a Space-particle relationship in this

way, then we also simultaneously determine the theoretical basis for this relationship as it is apparent in gravity. We see the relationship between Space and particles as not merely resulting in a sort of friction, but as a sort of drawing of Space unto the particle, in polar attraction, to create the warps in Space we recognize as gravitational fields. Mass, then, can be recognized as a condensed concentration of the fabric of Space itself. 18A) Asserting the nature of gravity as this hypothesized draw of peripheral Space unto elementary particles, as such, does have its drawbacks. It implies that only properly massive particles exhibit gravitational fields. According Einsteins Mass-Energy Equivalence Principle, it is assumed that all energetic phenomena, including light, exhibits gravitational fields. The theory of gravity as presented herein would assert that however force-carriers such as photons might act as conducive to the gravitational force of a material body, they do not in themselves and independent of a material body exhibit the property of gravitational force. Force-carriers, such as the photon, can only interact with the material body to produce an increase in heat, and thus to indirectly enhance the gravitational force of massive particles by contributing to them energetically. It must also be noted that the assumption that light (in itself and independent of a material body,) must exhibit gravitational force has never been experimentally verified. Lacking such experimental verification, both these hypotheses of gravity must be entertained as at least equally valid. 19) Asserting the present theory of gravity as such, we may continue the investigation as it is relevant in implication to General Relativity. 20) As was briefly addressed in (3A), Time dilates in response to gravitythe stronger the effect of gravity, the slower the rate of Time. As we have above interpreted gravity as an effect of Space, we may here conclude that Time has an inverse relationship with Space: as Space is concentrated in its influx unto a massive body, Time goes slower. Inversely, Time is faster in areas wherein Space is in its more expansive state. This is may stand as the theoretical basis for Gravitational Time Dilation. 20A) Further, recognizing Space as the essence of mass, we may begin to understand why time slows down for objects moving closer to the speed of lightas objects travel at speeds closer to the speed of light, and gain in mass, (i.e. in terms of accumulating densities of Space,) Time becomes less prominent. 21) We may here explore further the relationship between the above hypotheses and

Einsteins famous dictum, (E=mc^2). 22) As above there were discerned between the two qualities of mass (16A) it was determined that mass-proper was the consequence of the Space-Particle Relationship, contemporarily understood in terms of the Higgs Mechanism. The other kind of mass, mass in equivalence, is merely instrumental in a theoretical understanding (i.e. calculation,) of latent forces of energy. Making the discernment as such, we make the assertion that mass-proper is the ontological derivative of Space, per the Space-Particle relationship, in accordance with the phase-transitions of the Space-Time continuum presented in (8) through (13). Understanding thusly the ontological nature of (m) in (E=mc^2) as derivative of (S) (Space), then so must we in turn discover the ontological nature of the speed of light (c) in respect to its hypothesized relationship with (T) (Time), as was proposed by the out-lining of the Space-Time continuum presented in (8) through (13). 23) In (13) above, Just as we determined the ontological nature of the Space-Particle relationship, then there should also be a correlating relationship between radiation (light,) and Time. This hypothetical relationship between light and Time, then, might stand as the basis for the reason why the speed of light is always as great as it is, irrespective of any other phenomena with which it may be related. 24) If it indeed be the case that light have such a relationship with Time, reflective of the way particles relate to Space, then we may assert that as mass (m) is an ontological derivative of Space, then so is light, particularly the speed of light, (c), an ontological derivation of Time. We may then explain the nature of (E=mc2) as an expression of the fundamental structure of the universe, in the terms, (E=ST). 25) Here, we answer the question why (E=mc2), and discover the basic structure of the universe in terms (E=ST), as was hinted at in the above sections (8) through (13), and illustrated by diagram in (8) (11) and (13). (E=ST) is then recognized as the formal expression of the Space-Time continuum. In terms of the beginning of the universe in the Big Bang, (E=ST) may also serve as the formal expression of the genesis of the material universe.

Conclusions; Describing the Space-Time continuum in terms of an ontological sub-structure, we find that just as the weak force was discovered as derivative of electromagnetism, (in

Electroweak force,) then so should we find a structure wherein all phenomena stem from the same ontological antecedent. However the process of Baryogenesis can only be recognized as a Chaotic break from these initially symmetric transitions, it should still be possible to identify the nature of complex particles in respect to their relation to this underlying structure. Further development of this theoretical system, then, lies in the creation of an abstract model that can describe the Space-Time continuum better than a two-dimensional black and white spectrum, so as to include more specifically other phenomena. This paper does also produce a significant prediction, that radiation does not independently in itself exhibit gravitational fields. It would be necessary to attempt to devise an experiment to determine whether or not radiation does after-all exhibit its own gravitational force, independent of material bodies, (as discussed in 21), so that either Einsteins original theory of gravity, or the one presented herein, is proven correct.