M1

M1 'Variant Mass' Model

M1 is the modern (circa 1Q2021) predominant view of theoretical astrophysics (and physics in general). M1 does not nor can it accomplish unification. The reason is its core constructs preclude it exactly because the spacetime-mass interface can not be transitioned by anything real without first conversion to energy by a fairly famous equation. That cold hard fact is not the issue. Why that fact is true is.

  • This Encapsulated Interpretive Model (EIM) is fundamentally logical in its nature.
    • Employing a common geometric basis point for all real objects in any given reference frame requires and demands transit of the spacetime-mass interface and since that can not happen here we must conclude that this Encapsulated Interpretive Model (EIM) is logical in nature.
    • Transiting the spacetime-mass interface must be reconciled in all action instantiating any force; consequently the same issue above exists for any ability to fully couple all reference frames.
  • The spacetime-mass interface converts anything real to energy transiting the interface and energy itself is generally construed to be a logical construct

 

We should also point out that it really is not historically accurate to state that M1 is associated with Einstein. Einstein did not believe mass was variant and therefore the most accurate Encapsulated Interpretive Model (EIM) following true to Einstein's beliefs, as stated by him, is M2, not M1. None of the EIMs employing the same, or similar, core constructs will accomplish unification exactly because their relationships preclude unification. It is worth pointing out that unification was not the original problem being solved by M1's creators. It is therefore not appropriate nor fair to label this as a failure. Indeed M1 is the most successful model ever employed by humanity. We simply did not ask the right questions at the right time. That situation has now been corrected. Langer Epistemology Errors now enters our lexicon along with some other new terms. Also see the historical analysis on The Concept of Mass, by Dr. Lev B Okun.

Einstein Letter
Einstein stating his belief that mass is invariant.

 

Readers here are cautioned: if this is your first time encountering all of this that none of the words that follow are in the fundamental context of your previous experience. Elegant Reasonism leverages a philosophical framework which eliminates Langer Epistemology Errors and juxtaposes intrinsic context relative to and respective of encapsulated interpretive models of the Universe, one of which must now close to unification. The Emergence Model's logical view M5, a product of a some 15 year R&D effort was the first such model to close to unification and it is included here in fulfillment of that requirement. It is included in the patent for exactly the same reason. These models manifest context. IT IS IMPROPER TO JUDGE ONE MODEL FROM THE CONTEXT OF ANOTHER. BE WARNED. EACH MODEL IS DISCRETE AND UNIQUE. CONSEQUENTLY ALL SUCH MODELS ARE CONSIDERED "ENCAPSULATED" BECAUSE THEY ESTABLISH 100% OF THEIR RELATIVE AND RESPECTIVE CONTEXTS.

The Cogent Description

The reason this paragraph does not exist for M1 is that it does not unify physics. Writing such a paragraph requires unification because all forces must be in context of one another and how they relate to all core concepts of the model. All objects in every frame should be able to be referenced by a single geometric basis point and fully coupled to all forces in such a reference frame across all scales (e.g. the entire spectrum of the Entanglement Gradient).

Core Concepts

M1 generally defines the core abstraction concepts as:

  • Space - the dimensions of height, depth, and width within which all things exist and move.
  • Time - the indefinite continued progress of existence and events in the past, present, and future regarded as a whole.
  • Mass - is both a property of a physical body, typically coherent, typically large body of matter with no definite shape and is also a measure which resists changes in its state of motion (e.g. acceleration) when a net force is applied. Relativistic measures in M1 hold that Mass is variant under relativity. That is to say inertia, momentum, etc. have an affect on the measure of Mass at relativistic velocities. In M1 there are both "M" and "m" quantities associated with the measure of mass depending on whether or not its "rest mass" is being considered.
  • Energy - power derived from the utilization of physical or chemical resources especially to provide light and heat or to work machines.

Space

Critical clarity is required contemplating discernment of these issues as we employ the language describing the concepts here. Wikipedia defines Space as the boundless three-dimensional extent in which objects and events have relative position and direction. Usually along one of three axis: x, y, and z. The intersection of these directional axis is the geometric basis point establishing relative relations, metrics, and measurements. Therefore, 'Space' is generally the area, or distance, between real objects.

Time

Time, in M1, is defined as an additional dimension of 3-dimensional space to holistically form a real construct called 'spacetime'. Taking the speed of light over the course of one year as a unit of measurement for the three dimensions linking time we can then assign each as a unit of 1 and connect space with time via that measurement. We can similarly deconstruct spacetime such as the commonly used Concept 0294.

Mass

Mass as defined above "warps" spacetime to yield the phenomena humans perceive as gravity.

Energy

As defined above then requires us to employ root cause analysis to determine definitions for the terms in alphabetical order chemical, energy, heat, light (e.g. electromagnetism), machines, physical, power, provide, resources, work, and do so in a non-looping manner consistent with Elegant Reasonism Rules, and its process & methods: Recognition, Illumination, and Analysis such that all Langer Epistemology Errors are minimized or eliminated and documented in the ISO 9001 Unification Tool or its equivalent. These same requirements exist for all definitions of real constructs in any model.

Historical References

Students and investigators should note that it is not fair to judge any of these historical references by modern information sciences standards. That would constitute 'moving the goal post' and is generally prohibited by Elegant Reasonism. The idea here is to present the thinking, at the time, by that original author. Where this specifically comes into affect is commission of Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs); which to make this point salient was first quantified by Susanne K Langer in 1948 and codified by SolREI INC. Another facet of unraveling historical points of view relative to requirements of unification are both logical and physical views in context both Systems Engineering and of LEEs. Subsequent to this contextual update in our thinking we are then required to employ critical situational awareness thinking that something may be logically correct yet remain physically different.

"We can not solve problems using the same thinking we used when we created them.", ~ Albert Einstein

Challenges

The historic challenge with M1 has always been the inability to use a common geometric basis point for all real objects in every frame as is required of any valid geometry. A similar inability of M1 is what Stephen Hawking called "fully coupled".  M1 cannot accomplish that task. "Fully coupled" means that 100% of the forces in the frame are coupled to all real objects in the frame. The inability for M1 to fully couple is essentially the same one precluding the inability to use a common geometric basis point. These 'inabilities' can be traced to the spacetime-mass interface, which is fundamentally an intrinsic feature of the model's core constituents listed above. The conclusion reached as a result of our Elegant Reasonism systems review is that M1 is a logically correct model, but it will never unify physics (e.g. represent the real unified Universe), exactly because of the spacetime-mass interface implications.

Logic Artifacts

Logic artifacts are clues to any model's logical nature. However, here they conspire to leave clues regarding the model's inability to represent the real unified Universe.
No common geometric basis point for the construct "spacetime". The argument about the vastness of space does not hold as a common geometric basis point and could not be employed even in a local frame due to the spacetime-mass interface defined behavior.

This is why geometric 'grids' depicting some phenomena mysteriously simply extend beyond the range of images and pages. They conveniently represent a geometric object without representing its basis.

The Big Bang, as defined by M1, manifests the core construct of spacetime, however, that begs the question of the geometry and physics supporting the actual event itself. If time did not exist, then how did anything fluctuate? There are a range of theoretical questions whose answers only grow ever more elaborate, and that condition represents a logic artifact consistent with a logical view of a physical system.

Status

As of YE 2019 M1 remains the predominant basis of scientific thought worldwide. Civilization is entrenched and ensnared within its grips. Practitioners commit Langer Epistemology Errors every second. LEEs are more common than critical thinking in any venue or endeavor. So tight is this grip that even SolREI managers struggle to maintain clarity.

 

Our Shop Is Open!





#ElegantReasonism #EmergenceModel #Unification #EIM #VariantMassModel #M1 #LevBOkun #ConceptOfMass #Mass #Architecture #KnotTheory #StringTheory
#AlbertEinstein #WolfgangPauli #Relativistic #Relativity #LambdaCDM #BigBang #InflationaryTheory #RapidExpansion #InfiniteCompression #BlackHole
#Information #GalacticAcceleration #Astronomy #Cosmology #Graviton #Gravity #Warp #Alcubierry
%d bloggers like this: