Section XIII: Conclusions, and Acknowledgements, from "Is Space the Only Substance in the Universe"

 

VIII.                   CONCLUSIONS

In summary, the new “Nothing but Space” model includes the following thesis and hypotheses:

1.         The Fundamental Principle: Space is the ultimate material of the universe, and is the medium of fields and of the transmission of gravity and electromagnetic waves.  This serves as the thesis, and as the ultimate cause of the remaining conclusions, which may be considered as hypotheses. Postulating any additional fundamental substances complicates theoretical physics unnecessarily. Space is proposed to be quantized and made up of discrete, unchanging, universal units. The name “volons” has been tentatively assigned to such units.

2.         Gravity involves the quantized deletion of units of space, and the Hubble expansion involves their quantized but disseminated addition. When units of space between objects such as waves are deleted, the objects appear to draw closer together; and when units of space are being added, the objects appear to recede from one another. Additions and deletions are transfers of units of space between our visible three dimensions and three additional unseen dimensions. When units of space are added to one portion, they come from deletions in the other portion, and vice versa. In addition to these predominant directions of space transfer in different locations, tiny Planck-scale amounts of space are constantly exchanged back and forth between the two sets of dimensions, with restorations not necessarily in the exact locations of deletions, explaining some quantum effects.

3.         The properties of matter and energy can be accounted for by processes within the space medium, e.g., their wave functions complemented by effects of space addition and deletion, vibration, and seemingly random motion. Complete mathematical equations encompassing every one of the properties of both waves and particles have yet to be developed.

4.         The traditional concept of sub-atomic particles is intuitive but not the best representation of reality, and lacks relevance in the cases of the majority that have no stability or sustainability. It serves as an intellectual barrier to understanding the present model as well as the wave-like nature of the quantum world. The concept that any particles exist may eventually be considered as a historical term for certain waves and other processes in space.

5.         The concept of time as a geometrical fourth dimension, and of four-dimensional, spacetime (whether flat as in special relativity or curved as in general relativity), can likewise be a barrier to a simpler reconceptualization of motion through the three-dimensional space medium, as it expands by addition of more quantized units.  Time itself is an intuitive and useful but mathematically optional concept. Spacial terms and repeating motions could be substituted for time in equations, at the risk of greater complexity.

6.         Light (electromagnetic waves) can only travel where there is space in our familiar three dimensions; and the speed of light is one of the properties of space. Electrical and magnetic fields might be due to related electrical and magnetic waves, each having two configurations, the interactions between which could explain polarity, attraction, and repulsion.

7.         The physical existence of “singularities,” dimensionless points, or of lines and surfaces without thickness, is not evidence-based. Space as we experience it is three-dimensional, and units of space should logically be likewise. Physics breaks down for anything smaller than a Planck length; and both scientific observations and theory indicate a finite size and age of the universe. Although infinity is a useful abstraction in calculus and geometry, there has never been evidence for the physical existence of anything infinitely large or small.

8.         Things with no space between them are adjacent, with respect to the ability of light waves or presumably anything else to travel. This produces the impression of being in the center of the universe regardless of location.

9.         The model offers an explanation for many of same results as special and general relativity, by different mechanisms and in quantized space. By applying to all frames of reference regardless of acceleration or gravity, throughout the universe without restrictions of locality, it might substitute one theory for two. Inertial mass would be gravitational in origin, and asymmetry of gravitational fields as they adjust to velocities approaching the speed of light might produce the Lorentz transformations of special relativity. However, the ability to distinguish “real” or absolute motion might be different from relativity theories, and potentially testable experimentally.

        More speculative implications:

10.     Our “observable universe” could be in harmonic oscillation with an invisible portion in the three additional dimensions, which is currently contracting as our portion expands, and may eventually expand while ours contracts. These phases could explain the “Big Bounce” theory.

11.     The expansion and deletion of space over the history of the universe could theoretically be the ultimate source of all or most energy and mass.

12.     In a black hole, time might conceivably reverse in direction inside the event horizon. If so, everything should collect there and not progress further toward the center.

             Some of these theoretical proposals are new, while others have been stated before by others, but not extrapolated to consider their full implications. All of them are soundly based on science and on scientific reasoning, and all are necessarily caused by the Fundamental Principle or are consistent with it. A model constructed as an alternative to current physics concepts should not be castigated for succeeding, and thereby calling such concepts into question. Those who might wish to excommunicate the model from the science of physics may consider it as an important contribution to the philosophy of science, and specifically of space and time.

            This “Nothing but Space” model, in which space is the ultimate substance, might potentially evolve to contribute to a pathway to the elusive “grand unified theory” Even if its reach does not turn out to be that grand, it is directly relevant as a quantized explanation for gravitation (quantum gravity), the Hubble expansion and its increase, and “dark energy.” Documented and confirmed experimental findings relating to some aspects of mechanics, electromagnetism, special and general relativity, and quantum mechanics may prove to be consistent with this model. The insertion and deletion of discrete units of three-dimensional space might be able to create similar results.

            More study should of course be done, and more details of this new model for the universe can be filled in. In particular, the mathematics implied by the model needs to be developed, and shown to be consistent with observations. Predictions based on the model, and tests of those predictions, could be conceived and conducted. Problems that must be overcome for the model to succeed should be identified and quantified.

             The goal is to create an alternate, simpler system that comes closer to explaining phenomena that are well-described but not really explained in other models. Everyone is invited to explore this conceptualization, including those theoretical physicists, astronomers, and mathematicians who dare to think “outside the box,” philosophers of science (who always think “outside the box”), and lay persons from other occupations simply interested in the world they live in. Such further development can help determine the value of this model as a cosmic solution for unresolved problems in physics and cosmology, and perhaps as a step toward a unified “theory of everything” (or at least of many things.)

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Dennis Polis, a retired physicist in Fontana, California with multi-disciplinary experience, provided instruction in physics and calculus, and shared eclectic perspectives.

Christine Curry, an artist in Redlands, CA, did the illustrations per the author’s designs.