Offline ColinT

  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
There is no such 'thing' as energy.
« on: May 29, 2018, 07:45:42 PM »
"There is no such thing as matter. Everything is energy." Statements such as this are found in most modern physics textbooks; but is energy a 'thing'?

The material objects around us are manifest realities that have mass; but what do we mean by 'mass'? In general, it means that all objects near the Earth's surface possess weight, and also that they possess inertia. Mass is commonly defined as 'the amount of matter in a body', more accurately as 'the property of matter that measures its resistance to acceleration'. We can say that 'mass' is the quantification of matter that finds manifestation in weight and inertia. Both of these are observables: they can be detected, sensed, and measured; that is, quantified. They are qualities or properties of material objects that can be given a value on a scale of measurement.

Similar statements are true of motion. Generally speaking, all objects around us are either stationary or in motion relative to us, as determined by observation. Motion is also a manifest reality that can be quantified. If we know the mass and motion of an object, we can make statements and deductions about it. A tennis ball rolling along level ground will slow down and stop, whereas on a slope it will continue to move. In either case, appropriate measurements allow us to calculate the ball's motion to any desired degree of accuracy using well-established mathematical statements, and to calculate much else besides: velocity, acceleration, force of impact and so on. These properties can be called parameters of the object from the Greek para meaning beside and metron meaning measure.

Thus matter demonstrates mass, whilst radiation demonstrates motion; yet matter can also move, and radiation has an effective mass: both are fundamental components of Physical Reality.

A most useful parameter of a material object is its momentum: the product of mass and velocity: p = mv. Although derived from mass and motion, momentum is not an observable, but a concept: a calculated parameter. Neither is it a manifest reality as are mass and motion. If an object's momentum changes, it is NOT the case that momentum has been added to or subtracted from it: rather has its mass or its motion changed, and the calculated value of its momentum changes accordingly.

A similar parameter is kinetic energy. This, too, is a concept: a mathematical term naming the product of mass and the square of velocity: E = 1/2mv^2. What applies to momentum applies equally to kinetic energy, and to energy in general. It is a calculated quantity, neither an observable, nor a manifest reality. Energy cannot be added to or taken from an object; rather does it change in accord with mass, motion, position and composition. All calculation of energy requires the inclusion of a value for mass. If mass is unknown, energy cannot be calculated.

Recall now the first statement of this post, "There is no such thing as matter. Everything is energy." To claim that matter and radiation are both energy is to replace manifest realities with a mathematical parameter, and this surely is absurd.

It is true that all substance - sc. matter - is ultimately vibration, a contained, stationary resonance rather than the propagating vibrations of radiation; but vibration is not energy, even though it can be assigned an energetic value. In the case of electromagnetism, Planck's constant substitutes for the mechanical aspects of mass and motion: E = hf.

In spite of the foregoing, energy has proved to be one of the most valuable concepts in modern science, which is undoubtedly why it has been reified: that is, turned into a 'thing'. For more than a century, scientists have treated it as an actual physical reality instead of as a useful concept. What is needed is a new conceptual understanding of mass and motion, rather than the claim that both are composed of concepts.

For more see: http://vitency.com/npt/Ch03.html

Offline ColinT

  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: There is no such 'thing' as energy.
« Reply #1 on: June 05, 2018, 07:22:52 AM »
Summary response after one week.

All physical objects are comprised of atoms. Atoms, individually or in aggregate, are called matter. All matter is visible and revealed to us by light. Some objects are so small as to be invisible to the naked eye, but microscopes can reveal them. Even individual atoms can be seen via light:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2161094-a-single-atom-is-visible-to-the-naked-eye-in-this-stunning-photo/

Some objects are so distant as to be equally invisible without instrumental assistance, but in theory could be seen using a sufficiently powerful telescope. There may be a finite limit to this, perhaps the Hubble limit.

All motion is visible and revealed to us by light. It requires two or more observations separated by intervals of time. Some motion is so rapid as to be indiscernible, but is also amenable to instrumental detection, as in the case of strobe lighting. Some is so slow as to require extended periods of observation.

Thus matter and motion are the two fundamental observables of Physical Reality. Light is invisible: we cannot see light, only those objects which emit or reflect it. Matter, motion and light - more generally radiation - existing within space and time comprise Physical Reality.

Energy, momentum, power and so forth are invisible. They always have been and will be because they are not observables: not physically real. They are concepts within the minds of Men, useful in describing and explaining the manifest phenomena of the Physical Realm, but not a part of it.

Those who insist that such concepts are 'things' - manifest realities - are incapable of differentiating between physical reality and imagination, and so live in delusions of their own creating. This insistence is modern mysticism, part of the religion of Scientism that Modern Western Science has become.

The greater the delusion, the greater the anger, arrogance, conceit and conviction of the deluded, as plainly evidenced by many replies on other forums.

Re: There is no such 'thing' as energy.
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2018, 04:45:53 PM »
Summary response after one week.

All physical objects are comprised of atoms. Atoms, individually or in aggregate, are called matter. All matter is visible and revealed to us by light. Some objects are so small as to be invisible to the naked eye, but microscopes can reveal them. Even individual atoms can be seen via light:


Some fundamental particles are so unimaginably small that the photon of light is larger than the particle and so it doesn't interact with it, e.e. you cant see a higgs boson or a quark or an electron









Re: There is no such 'thing' as energy.
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2018, 05:44:06 PM »
missed a lot of basics physics here buddy.  so much is wrong here wouldnt know where to start. 

easiest one to debunk that you state is you are incorrect, energy isnt dependant on mass.   how do you explain light?  it has no mass, but has energy...in fact its pure energy.  and it doesnt einsteins lawas since that equation for objects not a rest should be E2 = m2c4+(pc)2

my point is, your entire foundation of your argument is flawed.

Quote from: SiDawg
Planes fall out of the sky all the time

*

Offline QED

  • *
  • Posts: 208
  • As mad as a hatter.
    • View Profile
Re: There is no such 'thing' as energy.
« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2018, 06:01:11 PM »
missed a lot of basics physics here buddy.  so much is wrong here wouldnt know where to start. 

easiest one to debunk that you state is you are incorrect, energy isnt dependant on mass.   how do you explain light?  it has no mass, but has energy...in fact its pure energy.  and it doesnt einsteins lawas since that equation for objects not a rest should be E2 = m2c4+(pc)2

my point is, your entire foundation of your argument is flawed.

Wrong again. The dependence of energy on mass is a known function, and demonstrates that light through a vacuum should have zero mass. But the Universe is not a complete vacuum, is it? Hence, the photon acquires a non zero rest mass. You following me?

Thus, the photon acquires a non-zero mass and hence a non c value for speed through the Universe.

I like talking to you.

Re: There is no such 'thing' as energy.
« Reply #5 on: August 24, 2018, 06:43:07 PM »
missed a lot of basics physics here buddy.  so much is wrong here wouldnt know where to start. 

easiest one to debunk that you state is you are incorrect, energy isnt dependant on mass.   how do you explain light?  it has no mass, but has energy...in fact its pure energy.  and it doesnt einsteins lawas since that equation for objects not a rest should be E2 = m2c4+(pc)2

my point is, your entire foundation of your argument is flawed.

Wrong again. The dependence of energy on mass is a known function, and demonstrates that light through a vacuum should have zero mass. But the Universe is not a complete vacuum, is it? Hence, the photon acquires a non zero rest mass. You following me?

Thus, the photon acquires a non-zero mass and hence a non c value for speed through the Universe.

I like talking to you.

Based on the OP's original two posts in this thread, i am pretty sure he wasnt getting that technical to bring up invariant mass, resting mass or relativistic mass.   
Quote from: SiDawg
Planes fall out of the sky all the time

Re: There is no such 'thing' as energy.
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2018, 05:15:48 AM »
missed a lot of basics physics here buddy.  so much is wrong here wouldnt know where to start. 

easiest one to debunk that you state is you are incorrect, energy isnt dependant on mass.   how do you explain light?  it has no mass, but has energy...in fact its pure energy.  and it doesnt einsteins lawas since that equation for objects not a rest should be E2 = m2c4+(pc)2

my point is, your entire foundation of your argument is flawed.

Wrong again. The dependence of energy on mass is a known function, and demonstrates that light through a vacuum should have zero mass. But the Universe is not a complete vacuum, is it? Hence, the photon acquires a non zero rest mass. You following me?

Thus, the photon acquires a non-zero mass and hence a non c value for speed through the Universe.

I like talking to you.


Isn't the basis for a photon having mass that it has momentum or apparent momentum when acting like a particle but can also behave as a wave and thus have no mass?


Also, if it had a non c value, wouldn't that fuck up gps?

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 5141
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: There is no such 'thing' as energy.
« Reply #7 on: August 25, 2018, 10:11:50 AM »
Only if you couldn’t account for it. Which they can. I imagine the variation is minuscule over 40,000kms as well.
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6642
    • View Profile
Re: There is no such 'thing' as energy.
« Reply #8 on: August 25, 2018, 02:14:06 PM »
Isn't the basis for a photon having mass that it has momentum or apparent momentum when acting like a particle but can also behave as a wave and thus have no mass?

The first part is correct but the second part isn't. Waves aren't waves because they have no mass. A photon is a wave because it satisfies the wave equation. This just means that it has a frequency, a wavelength, interference, etc. It has properties of a wave and a particle simultaneously.

Also, if it had a non c value, wouldn't that fuck up gps?

Pretty much all light entering our atmosphere is going to go less than the speed of light because of the non-zero amount of time it takes for matter to absorb and then re-emit electromagnetic radiation.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2018, 02:15:50 PM by Rushy »

Re: There is no such 'thing' as energy.
« Reply #9 on: August 26, 2018, 04:25:02 PM »
Isn't the basis for a photon having mass that it has momentum or apparent momentum when acting like a particle but can also behave as a wave and thus have no mass?

The first part is correct but the second part isn't. Waves aren't waves because they have no mass. A photon is a wave because it satisfies the wave equation. This just means that it has a frequency, a wavelength, interference, etc. It has properties of a wave and a particle simultaneously.
Gotcha.  Been a while since college physics.

Quote
Also, if it had a non c value, wouldn't that fuck up gps?

Pretty much all light entering our atmosphere is going to go less than the speed of light because of the non-zero amount of time it takes for matter to absorb and then re-emit electromagnetic radiation.
Fair.

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 357
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: There is no such 'thing' as energy.
« Reply #10 on: October 28, 2018, 03:57:39 AM »
I believe that mass and energy are just two different phases of the same thing.  You can turn ice into water and then water into steam.  You can turn energy into mass and mass into energy.  The equivalence equation is well known and has been verified.  Light is interesting, it's said to have no mass, but does have momentum.  It obviously carries energy.  I get sunburned and a solar panel generates electricity.  What I don't get on this site is the avoidance of the earth having any mass.  I can pick up a part of that earth (a rock) and throw it thru a window.  I impart a certain amount of kinetic energy to that rock and it then imparts a certain amount of that energy into the window upon contact.  Since a tiny part of the earth (the rock) has a tiny mass, then the whole earth should have a big mass.  That big mass should be convertible into a tremendous amount of energy.  All that happens in a fusion reaction.  Mass converted to energy.   Are there different forms of mass and the energy that it can be converted into?  Since the gravitation equation has only mass and distance in the equation something must be different about the mass of the earth vs mass of the stars for instance.  The stars are said to be responsible for the tides.  You have the mass of the stars effecting the mass of the water on the earth causing tides.  Why doesn't the mass of my body get attracted to the mass of the earth, that has the capability of carrying kinetic energy and can be converted to pure energy?  You should be able to dispense with UA and just go with gravity to keep us all on the earth.       
For FE no explanation is possible, for RE no explanation is necessary.