Physics Help Forum (http://physicshelpforum.com/physics-help-forum.php)
-   Philosophy of Physics (http://physicshelpforum.com/philosophy-physics/)
-   -   e = t (http://physicshelpforum.com/philosophy-physics/12364-e-t.html)

 pittsburghjoe Jan 2nd 2017 04:17 PM

e = t

Energy is a dimension just as much as Time.

In this dimension everything travels as energy in waveform.

The entire EM Spectrum is a subset to this dimension (until it is measured).

All quantum weirdness events takes place in this dimension (superposition).

The double slit experiment finally makes sense. The particle is an energy wave until it is measured and becomes mass.

Dimensions of Mass = xyz
​Dimension of Energy = quantum waves
Dimension of Time = t

 HallsofIvy Jan 3rd 2017 06:14 AM

What do you mean by "dimension". It is clear that you are not using the usual meaning. For one thing "the entire EM spectrum" is not a subset of any "dimension"! An wave (not an "energy" wave) becomes a particle after it is measured, not a "mass"- mass is a particular property of matter, not a physical object itself.

I strongly suggest you look up the actual definitions of "dimension" and "mass" before you go on. No, "xyz" (I assume you mean three axes in space) have nothing to do with mass.

 Woody Jan 3rd 2017 06:15 AM

Hi PittsburghJoe,
I'm not sure that I understand your post,
however you might like to consider the <Four Dimensional Momentum> vector.
Note how mass appears in the space-wise components and Energy in the time-wise component.

 pittsburghjoe Jan 3rd 2017 01:40 PM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by HallsofIvy (Post 33770) What do you mean by "dimension". It is clear that you are not using the usual meaning. For one thing "the entire EM spectrum" is not a subset of any "dimension"!
How would you describe what I'm talking about without using the word "Dimension"? Maybe "realm" or "layer to our universe"? I'm basically saying that we live in a world of three major channels: Mass, Energy, and Time. EM waves are part of this dimension, that's what this thread is about. Time to rewrite the textbooks!

Quote:
 Originally Posted by HallsofIvy (Post 33770) An wave (not an "energy" wave) becomes a particle after it is measured, not a "mass"- mass is a particular property of matter, not a physical object itself.
I'm sticking to my new way of describing "mass".

 pittsburghjoe Jan 3rd 2017 01:42 PM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Woody (Post 33771) Hi PittsburghJoe, I'm not sure that I understand your post, however you might like to consider the vector. Note how mass appears in the space-wise components and Energy in the time-wise component.
Interesting, as soon as I can wrap my head around it, I might be able to work it into my theory. thanks

 HallsofIvy Jan 4th 2017 07:47 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe (Post 33775) How would you describe what I'm talking about without using the word "Dimension"? Maybe "realm" or "layer to our universe"? I'm basically saying that we live in a world of three major channels: Mass, Energy, and Time. EM waves are part of this dimension, that's what this thread is about. Time to rewrite the textbooks! I'm sticking to my new way of describing "mass".
So you don't want anyone to understand you anyway.

 pittsburghjoe Jan 4th 2017 12:27 PM

I treat mass the same way as a 3D modeling program. A measured neutrino or electron has a single set of x,y,z (a vertex). Anything bigger being brought over from Energy Dimension will have depth (more x,y,z's assigned to the object).

 Woody Jan 5th 2017 04:59 AM

In physics the term "dimension" is generally reserved for the four components of the vectors defining relative positions in spacetime.
(In string theory they add extra "dimensions", but that is another story).

The scalar quantities detailing the properties of an object (e.g mass & energy) are not generally referred to in terms of "dimension".

While the magnitude of these scalar properties could be represented along an additional axis of a graph (i.e. along an extra dimension), this terminology would not (in general) be used.

 pittsburghjoe Jan 5th 2017 03:02 PM

Do I dare call this Energy layer a Force?

 topsquark Jan 9th 2017 07:56 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe (Post 33785) Do I dare call this Energy layer a Force?
Nope. Energy is not a force and can't be labeled as such. Listen to what Halls and Woody are saying...they are correct. In order for you to progress here you need to stop talking about "dimensions" and "xyz." These are terms that have specific, and widely accepted, definitions. In order to talk comprehensively you need to attach new and descriptive variable names to your concepts. Else you are talking gibberish.

-Dan

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:50 AM.