|
Page 3 sur 6
Postulate of the special relativity, expressed by Einstein.
According to Einstein :
the energy E of a material point of mass m, is not expresssed by equation : mv²/2 ,
but by : mc²/(1 - v²/c²)½
or, when this expression is developed in series, by : mc² + mv²/2 + m(3/8)(v²/c)² + ...
The third term of the series and those which follow are very small and can be neglected,
it remains :
- mc² which is representative of the intrinsic energy that characterizes a body of mass m, because mc² is independent of the speed v,
- and mv²/2, which is kinetic energy's equation used in classic mechanics.
Some comments
To the equation E = mc ², we prefer however the equation E ↔ Mc ² which is expressing better the passage of the state of potential physical energy to the state of materialized physical energy, and vice versa.
What can we say about E, this primordial energy, universal and without dimension, which, permanently, enables world's regeneration ?
Black mass of the universe (dark energy), is it one of its expressions ?
Where is it ?
Equation E = mc² ignores too (and that concerns all speechs),
creative entity, of transcendent order and master of the sense, who uses letters, figures, ..., and value references, and recognizes herself in the I (ego, subject, spirit).
Curiously these facts have not bothered the physicists, the philosophers and theologians !
As for time, it is not the fourth dimension of the universe because we can express it and exploit it with vectors "t", as easily enable from believing Lorentz's equations and special theory of relativity.
According to us, time is a means, transcendent and universal (a potentiality), which allows to integrate the universe's evolutions into rigorous chronologies ; when this potentiality is actualized (materialized by an operator, ourselves for example), it becomes a real and singular time (an appropriate time),
more exactly, it becomes a group of durations, these intervals which are not space.
So, universal time has no dimension ; it has neither beginning nor end ; universal time has a different order (a different nature) of one which characterizes space and its links with the things are "implication links".
There is thus an infinite number of singular times and we recognize only those which emerge from consciousness state.
This understanding of the time allows to remove another major "mortgage" which affects the equations of Lorentz and Einstein : it is the limited speed of the light, in vacuum,
a limited speed that do not enable the comprehension of the instantaneous interactions between very remote quantum particles, (the experiments EPR and of Alain Aspect).
It is true that instantaneousness does not belong to reality ; nevertheless, let us remember that the instantaneousness "resides" in our abstraction domain where "cohabit" the past, the present moment and future.
The universal forces too, which are postulated as being in the things, are to potential state, in every point of the universe, in a transcendent domain associated with space that contains reality,
a domain which we named spacimplicatio because ignored of scientists, philosophers and theologians.
As for speed, it's not only a physical phenomenon as it is commonly said but above all, a concept which presupposes relations interpretation between lengths and durations.
We find again the rôle of the interpretation particularly of value’s references by means of faculties that are not at all of physical order as the energies and matter, but of transcendent order.
Thus, we understand better why, if we consider Lorentz's equations, a fact totally absurd, an uniform movement even of very weak amplitude, modifies length which characterizes an object ; what is modified is not length but perception's interpretation of the length, an important nuance !
Einstein's General Theory of Relativity (published in 1915).
According to Einstein :
"… we wish to understand by “general principle of relativity” the following statement: All bodies of reference K, K', ..., are equivalent for description of the natural phenomena (formulation of general laws of the nature), whatever may be their state of motion. " (cf. Special and General Principle of Relativity).
So and logically,
- on one hand,
since acceleration of the gravity field does not depend of things's nature (of their constituents and their structural complexity), but of the force and mass according to Newton's equation : F = m γ ,
an equation which can be understood in two ways because inertia and weight are both "facets" of one of universal characters of any entity having a mass,
- or by considering mass as inertia :
F = "representative mass of inertia" multiplied by "acceleration",
- or by considering the acceleration as inherent to the intensity of the gravity field :
F = "representative mass of weight " multiplied by "intensity of the gravity field",
- on the other hand,
because there is inexorably an attraction between mass entities (between all things), by means of universal forces of the gravity field,
forces given by equation F = mm'/d² , where "d" is distance which separates these entities,
Einstein concludes that particles of very small mass undergo this attraction and therefore, that light's rays (the photons) which propagate in cosmic space, have a modified trajectory by the celestial bodies,
and in particular that it results from it a displacement of the light's spectrum from the great stars.
Numerous experiences, more and more precise, have confirmed this theory; one of the first ones in 1919, showed that curvature of light's rays passing near sun is 1,75 arc-second.
Nevertheless, it has been only in February / March 1960 that Robert Pound and Glen Rebka observed in a laboratory, movement towards the red of the light's spectre when this one is subjected to a gravitational field.
Obviously, integration of the gravitation phenomenon into relativity's theories, more exactly, the integration of the gravitation phenomenon into geometrical representation of the cosmic trajectories, is rich of information for the philosophers and theologians.
This fact gives evidence, in a singular way, of permanent interactions between reality and the mysterious "beyond" of the forces, between reality and "realm" of the potentialities.
*
According to general theory of relativity a traveler moving himself straightly in space, would return to his point of departure, after an universe tour ; the spacetime proposed by Einstein is therefore, finished and without internal border.
But today, we know that there are in the universe, a very large number of black holes, limited with a border, which are "swallowing" several millions stars ; in particular the black hole M33X - 7 situated in the galaxy M33 approximately to 3 million light-years of our sun and observed by means of the spatial telescope "Chandra" and of the telescope "Gemini" (at the top of the Mauna Kea to Hawaï).
"Expression" of the time's implication in space, elaborated by Einstein, can be applied only in spatial contexts, precise and limited.
It led nevertheless to development of numerous non-Euclidean geometries.
Let's remind that Euclidean geometry, the first one imagined by man, is based on postulates (more exactly on 23 definitions, 8 common notions and 5 postulates), expressed by Euclid (-325 ?, -265 ?).
Who is ignoring his most famous axiom ?:
by a precise point, we can draw only one parallel to a straight line (or, two points can be united by an only straight line).
Among the "non-Euclidean spaces" which "furnish" abstraction domain of the mathematicians and physicists, we shall quote the spherical space, elliptic space and hyperbolic space.
Nevertheless, in a research of the primordial causes, that's not important that the space is curved or not ; these theories mask the main points, in particular the world's substratum.
What is this domain without shape and without dimension where is most elementary state of the energies ?,
this eternal "beyond" whence reality emerges.
As for time, can we believe, as Minkowski (1864, 1909) who has had Einstein as pupil, that it’s the fourth dimension of the space ?
No, we said it previously ; to judge it more, let's quote the Minkowski reasoning, very subtle but also very ambiguous.
|
