DISCONTINUITY
The apparent condition of everyday, colloquial 'discontinuity' is not an issue of dispute here. Whereas (until further notice), the so called 'particle' is by colloquial standards and formal definition, a hypothetical condition which has yet to be singularly or collectively found or proved.
This notation is by no means written with any serious argument with Sir Isaac Newton.
By far the objective of this author's authentic but previously unrecognized observation that 'gravity, electricity & magnetism are the 4th, 5th & 6th dimensions', is established on the confluence and almagamation of, Newton's 'Classical Mechanical, Discontinuous Particle Physics', and Einstein's 'Modern, Continuous Field Physics'. The record is not here to question Newton's rightful place in his era, as among the most achieved scientist-philosophers in all of recorded history.
On the other hand, Newton, like Einstein, did make some mistakes - none of which by any means disqualified the enormous contributions of either personage; though each - especially Einstein - has come under heavy, routine fire as the author of not merely a 'flawed' theory, but an altogether equivocated one.
In the allotted time and space (space-time) for this essay format, the attacks on Einstein's work will not be excavated here, beyond reminding the attentive Reader that vigorous efforts and proclamations claiming that 'Einstein was wrong (without qualification)' are routine and, for the most part, apocryphal.
In the experience of this student of Einstein, by far, the most significant arguments with Einstein, are made by way of the - often well intended - critic's misunderstanding(s) of Einstein's work(s).
Newton, Maxwell and Einstein shared several common strengths, among the most powerful of which was unprecedented applications of - metric - mathematics.
For all of Newton's unarguably monumental contributions to science, perhaps his most significant, and certainly obscurely controversied mistake, was the generalized proclamation he made of his most renowned and distinguished work regarding universal gravitation. That statement was:
"I make no hypothesis."
('Hypothesis non fingo'.)
Assuredly, Sir Newton did not make many presumptions of any kind, it was in fact his forte to exclude any kind of conjecture or speculation from any true process of scientific method, with specific regard to the courageous and formidably challenging establishment of scientific laws.
Yet, still, Newton's Classical Mechanics, for all its acknowledged revolutionary progressions, was then and still is, for the most part, based on the consummately hypothetical premise of the indivisible - ultra-microcosmic, 'billiard ball model', irreducible 'particles' of Democritus - 'Father of atomism'...
The ex parte, a priori, supposedly out-dated and antiquated Aristotelian schools of well served intuition - implication, inference, deduction, induction. Functionally if implicitly perpetuated, while explicitly denied, in an extant cirriculum of 'particle physics'.
The entire foundation of Modern Physics - generally excluding Einstein (a non sequitur in its self) - is based on so called 'Particle Theory', while apparently, every expedition to find or prove a 'particle', anywhere, at any time, has yet to return with anything but a Big Dipper full of 'point mass fields' ('standing field particles'); having no distinct surface seperating them from surrounding space; only becoming more dense toward their - apparently infinitely dense - centers, and, corroborately less dense as they expand omnidirectionally at the speed of light, thinning out in a value of square... This is the signature of wave and field - not particle - energy...
The record is not embarked on a Newtonian, Aristotelian or Democritean bashing expedition here. However, what all of these unarguable giants in the evolution of physical science share as a - completely understandable - misconstruance, is: the practiced vocabulary of the yet to be proved concept of a 'discontinuous particle', having a 'surface', seperating its interior - defining its presumptuously anticipated, 'inevitably surfaced boundary' - from the space surrounding it. The beginning and ending of the so called 'particle', from its established (inaccessibly dense) center, to its elusive 'surface.'
('Limitless are the number of reasonable conclusions, that may be based on a false premise'. - Anon)
(To be continued...)
Linear Mode
