UNIVERSAL REALITY

Implications and Ramifications Of A Shift In Reality

The presentation in this web site provides a shift in our perspective on the nature of reality. Supported by illustrations it provides the philosophical foundation for a new understanding of the reality we experience and a scientific account in terms of mathematics and physics. Its text exposes hidden and invalid assumptions in existing theories clearing the way for a broader foundation on which to advance physical science. As a result, familiar explanations of reality are swept aside revealing a basis for resolving previously irreconcilable conflicts and paradoxes not only in science but also in society and our daily lives. The presentation introduces a purely geometric interpretation of space and time. Its main text provides a scientific explanation of this geometry's manifestation in our everyday reality as gravity and electromagnetic radiation in both its wave and particulate form. A non-scientific account may also be found at this web site. The discussion that follows takes an informal look at the implications of this new understanding on some of the more familiar assumptions and concepts of science starting with an alternate 'no frills' deduction of the conclusions in the main text.

Relativity postulates that the velocity of light is invariant, i.e. it will be the same in all inertial reference frames regardless of the latter's differential speed. Light thus can be used as a gauge to measure both space and time with the same scale. Accordingly, the distance travelled by light divided by the number of ticks of the clock, its velocity, will equal 'one'. Simply put space÷time=1, although this relation is far from a complete account, in essence it says that space=time. In other words, space and time are alike, begging the question whether their dissimilarity in our experience, rather than inherent is not a consequence of our human vantage point that constrains our perception (the equality occurs at the velocity of light, unfortunately riding along a light beam is impossible in our human condition). The spatial dimension considered by Relativity is always in the line-of-sight, the direction of the light we see and, hence, of the space measured with our light gauge. If we should turn at a right angle we will observe the same relation between time and space in this new direction. Moreover, no matter which way we turn time seems to be perpendicular to space, which has led to the assumption that time has a singular omnipresent quality. However, such a conclusion has a macroscopic bias: while a different direction in space gives us different things to see, its essence like time remains unchanged regardless of our orientation. Certainly we do not conclude that two directions of space that are perpendicular to the third and each other are therefore one and the same. In fact there would be no contradiction if similarly to space, time would have dimensionality (its resultant divergence in experience at a macroscopic scale is discussed separately with respect to subjectivity in the Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum Mechanics). Moreover, the dimensionality of time would be a more reasonable explanation why we should encounter time's equality with space at the speed of light. (Space and time in our terrestrial environment are usually measured in meters or feet and seconds, these are converted by a constant usually denoted by the letter 'c'- which since space=time, is dimensionless; when using light as a gauge the constant as noted, equals unity).

Electromagnetic radiation (whose spectrum includes radio and microwaves, light, gamma and x-rays) is constituted of two components that are at right angles of each other and that propagate as transverse waves (sine-waves), i.e. their magnitude at any phase is perpendicular to the direction of propagation. However, as light from a point source demonstrates the components are not spatial but arrive in the-line-of-sight, i.e. perpendicular to the two dimensions of space that we can see directly as opposed to the one in the-line-of-sight that we can only see indirectly (the senses of a subjective observer do differentiate between the space co-ordinates whose orientation Relativity presumes arbitrary because it assumes the line-of-sight to posses an objective reality independent of any particular observer). A sine-wave results from the projection on a co-ordinate of a radial vector with a constant rotational speed and translation of the co-ordinate at a constant rate (moving it to successive parallel positions), hence, cannot be considered fundamental. In fact if the two sine-waves projected by the rotating vector on two orthogonal co-ordinates are recombined, then the circle traced by the radial vector will be reconstructed. It follows that the sinusoids and rate of rotation (indeed the progress of time) derive from a more fundamental relationship.

Relativity postulates that the velocity of light cannot be exceeded, meaning any increase in a given direction in space cannot surpass the corresponding advance of our clock. The reason for this limit derives from the geometrical relationship between space and time, a hyperbolic tangent whose value cannot exceed plus or minus unity (the main text at this web site arrives at a similar conclusion regarding the limit on the velocity of light from a different geometric perspective). Nevertheless, there is a simple loophole to this restriction (i.e. one that does not contradict Relativity) that becomes apparent if we acknowledge the dimensionality of time and its equivalence to space at the speed of light: if indeed they are equivalent then it should be expected that they can trade places. However, keeping velocities at or below that of light in such a transposed world means that in our reality the relationship between space and time is as if superluminal (exceeding the speed of light), except that we should not expect this condition to manifest itself in any tangible way that the conventional laws of physics would regard to be in violation of the principles of Relativity.

Perhaps the most famous of all mathematical relations in physics, that is even recognised by most who are not familiar with its principles, is the equivalence of energy (E) and mass (m) formulated by Albert Einstein as a consequence of Relativity: E=mxc² (the actual equation also has a term for linear momentum of a particle requiring that the equation be rendered as the 'square' of 'E'). Even so, there is a fundamental problem with this equation: in its present form it obscures a deeper meaning. We had previously noted that the speed of light 'c' is no more than a conversion of space and time increments to identical units of measurements. In other words the square of this conversion factor (c²) in principle cannot convert a fundamental unit but must be understood as the product of two such factors (cxc) each separately related to two units of measurement which indeed may be found in the equation when written in the form: E÷c=mxc. How does this recasting of the equation explain why these same units (E and m) are nevertheless apart by the factors (cxc)? The new concept of geometry of space and time introduced in this web site reveals other space-time domains on account of the dimensionality of time. In these the velocity 'c' can be made up not just of 's' and 't' but also other vectors, and includes relationships that are inverted to account for the '1/c', which in a way can be interpreted as a superluminal limit case: in other words E and m originate in separate space-time domains. The presentation in our web site shows that the elementary objects that comprise all matter are ultimately not material but geometric in nature. Interestingly the apparent particulate nature of elementary objects stems from their newly identified geometrical property as the real manifestation from their 'superluminal side', i.e. elementary particles are in effect 'mini' black holes. Of course if you think about it this conclusion is all but common sense, after all when you shine a light on any substance, some may be reflected and the remainder is interpreted as being absorbed thereby increasing the temperature- energy level- of the substance. The geometrical interpretation would have some light get sufficiently close to the centres of the substance's elementary constituents where it cannot escape the 'curved' geometry of these 'mini' black holes.

The aggregation of elementary objects- the matter that constitutes our bodies and the material world around us- conceals the behaviour of its individual constituents. The following example illustrates how elementary characteristics can differ from those of aggregate objects seen at the scale of our normal surroundings in surprising ways. For instance in every day life, when we hold a coin between our fingers so that its denomination faces us and then rotate it about the vertical axis say approximately 45º, we will notice a foreshortening in the line-of-sight so that the horizontal length is now shorter (the coin will appear oval). If we next turn our hand so that the vertical axis becomes horizontal and rotate the coin again as much about the vertical axis, the foreshortening that would shrink the horizontal length combines with the earlier rotation and produces an effect as if we had rotated the coin only once about an axis at a 45º angle to obtain an oval coin whose major axis is at a 45º angle. In the space-time geometry disclosed at this web site each of the directions of spatial rotation has a corresponding temporal (time-like) counterpart (in one of the three dimensions of time). Hence, for elementary objects these rotations would not interact, so that the length in both horizontal and vertical axes would decrease. In other words, if the coin could be an elementary object, it would not turn into an oval but instead would become a smaller coin. In effect its spatial extensions have turned into temporal dimensions beyond the horizon of our perception. In the process non-spatial physical phenomena are created that strain our comprehension such as infinitesimals, microscopic and cosmological point objects.

An elementary particle exhibits rotations called spin that can only be observed in an orientation which appears to depend solely on an arbitrary measurement. This puzzling result has defied explanation by current physics theories. The "standard model" of quantum theory allows that point-like quanta such as electrons can exhibit "spin" and that photons may have an orientation. However, if these are true vector properties, the model's interpretation does not dwell on ramifications such as that these are not recognised in infinitesimals by current vector theory (direction of objects that have no spatial extension is presumed to be a contradiction). The standard model of Quantum theory 'side-steps' the potential enigma by adopting the position that the spin's internal process cannot be interpreted as it is not experimentally accessible, thus in principle can never be understood and, hence, only its external effect is of consequence. The expansion of vector theory presented in this web site permits that vectors that reduce to mere points may still have an extension in an imaginary dimension, where for instance they may contribute to geometric relations that are non-spatial and exhibit rotation. Specifically, this geometry identifies a radial vector that may rotate freely and is shown to comprise the component vectors of electromagnetic radiation (whose frequency is known to be proportional to energy- E), while the component vectors of another radial vector are exhibited as gravity.

As a consequence of the understanding presented at this web site, hypotheses such as the big bang, inflation of the physical universe and related cosmological issues, the Quantum theory and its panoply of particles are exposed as limit phenomena and artefacts of the way we observe our macroscopic aggregate world. In a sense they are the creation of the observer, that is us, as a consequence of macroscopic constraints- measuring instruments made of aggregate matter (even when Quantum devices are involved)- and unawareness of the dimensional nature of time and associated vector spaces that had not been recognised as constituents of space-time.

Much of the above may sound far removed from every day life, yet our reinterpretation of the reality of nature has a philosophical basis that challenges current understanding of reality and will influence its experience. As behoves a 'theory of everything' every aspect of society and our existence will ultimately be affected. No doubt this new way of looking at our world will spur technical developments that ultimately should improve our wellbeing. However, its philosophical basis will also affect existing aspects of our lives: many of the institutions and boundaries that we had accepted as fixtures in human society will be transformed or replaced to eliminate their coercive aspects, as will the way we interact with others and the way we see ourselves. A freer and more peaceful world should await us.