Einstein, Maxwell, and Energy

Consciousness, Physics, and the Holographic Paradigm

Essays by A.T. Williams

Part I: Sneaking Up On Einstein

All matter is immersed in it and it penetrates everywhere. No doors are closed to ether.
- Albert Einstein, The Evolution of Physics 1

Section 1

Section 2

Section 3

Section 4

Chapter 3: The Unexamined Alternatives

Section 1: Einstein, Maxwell, and Energy:

James Clerk Maxwell and Albert Einstein are inextricably linked in scientific history through Maxwell's electrodynamic field theory and Einstein's theory of special relativity. Maxwell, following his classical (Newtonian) interpretation of Michael Faraday's electric and magnetic laboratory experiment test results, independently developed a dynamic electromagnetic field theory. An incomplete comprehensive revision of his electrodynamic field theory was part of Maxwell's legacy when he died at age 48 in 1879. Einstein, who was born the year Maxwell died, published his theory of special relativity in 1905 as a critique and extension of Maxwell's dynamic electromagnetic field theory.

A careful reading of Einstein's writings suggests he concluded that the material ether was incorrect sometime prior to 1905, but his radical excision of the material ether did not actually solve the problem he faced. While Einstein openly removed the rigid Lorentzian ether in his theory of special relativity, he quietly replaced Lorentz's rigid mechanical connections with Lorentz-invariant transformation equations in a sufficiently small space. Einstein later moved beyond Lorentz-invariance to generally covariant field equations in order to solve the problems he encountered during the development of general relativity theory.2

But the damage had already been done. Declaring the rigid Lorentzian ether unnecessary and superfluous was instrumental in halting the search for a viable alternative to the material ether by interested others, especially those in the physical chemistry community. Nonetheless, a century after Einstein's miraculous year of 1905 the recently discovered universal principle of energy provides new insight into the physically real basis of an omnipresent, pervasive, nonmaterial alternative to the ad hoc rigid, material, Lorentzian ether Einstein rejected in his theory of special relativity.

Maxwell's view of energy:

In 1801 Thomas Young (1773-1829), the chemistry, physics, and biophysics researcher, lecturer, and first Professor of Natural Philosophy at The Royal Institution of Great Britain, London, England, proposed that the concept of energy be used in conjunction with the mechanical force described in Newton's Second Law of Motion. Elaborating on the significance of Young's innovative concept of energy in 1877, Clerk Maxwell wrote:

Physical Science, which up to the end of the eighteenth century had been fully occupied in forming a conception of natural phenomena as the result of [mechanical] forces acting between one body and another, has now fairly entered on the next stage of progress – that in which the energy of a material system is conceived as determined by the configuration and motion of that system, and in which the ideas of configuration, motion, and [mechanical] force are generalised to the utmost extent warranted by their physical definitions.3

This early concept of the energy present in a material system was, and is, limited to mechanical (i.e., potential and kinetic) energy. Maxwell wrote:

... we are acquainted with matter only as that which may have [mechanical] energy communicated to it from other matter, and which may, in its turn, communicate [mechanical] energy to other matter.
Energy, on the other hand, we know only as that which in all natural phenomena is continually passing from one portion of matter to another.4

Special relativity gedanken assumptions revisited:

Twenty-six years after James Clerk Maxwell died, Albert Einstein defined the virtual or apparent equivalence between the mass and energy of a material particle at rest in a closed or isolated (conservative) material system in his 1905 paper, "Does the Inertia of a Body Depend Upon Its Energy Content?," by deriving the equation m = ^E/_c².5 Measured in the rest frame, m is the so-called relativistic mass, E is rest energy, and c is the speed of light.6

In his 1938 book, The Evolution of Physics, 1 Einstein writes:

    Energy, at any rate kinetic energy, resists motion in the same way as ponderable masses. Is this also true of all kinds of energy?
    The theory of [special] relativity deduces, from its fundamental assumption, a clear and convincing answer to this question, an answer again of a quantitative character: all energy resists change of motion; all energy behaves like matter; a piece of iron weighs more when red-hot than when cool; radiation traveling through space and emitted from the sun contains energy and therefore has mass, the sun and all radiating stars lose mass by emitting radiation. This conclusion, quite general in character, is an important achievement of the theory of relativity and fits all facts upon which it has been tested.
    Classical physics introduced two substances: matter and energy. The first had weight, but the second was weightless. In classical physics we had two conservation laws: one for matter, the other for energy.7

As science enters the 21st century CE we now know that nonmechanical, nonmaterial energy per se is unambiguously physical. As a man of his own time, however, Einstein was unaware of that fact when he derived the virtual or apparent equivalence between the rest energy and the so-called relativistic mass of a material particle at rest in a closed or isolated system, m = ^E/_c². Transposed this equation becomes E = mc². Interestingly, Einstein's virtual or apparent mass-energy equivalence is valid only in closed or isolated (conservative) material systems.

Thus, if Einstein's mass-energy equivalence is limited to rest energy in a closed or isolated (conservative) material system, then the limited equivalency can neither be generalized to other kinds of physical systems, nor to massless, nonmechanical, nonmaterial physical energy per se. Indeed, Einstein's assertion that "all energy behaves like matter" is certainly not valid in open (nonconservative) ^{high energy}/_{low mass} material systems such as our own material universe, nor in open or closed massless, nonmaterial energy systems that contain no particulate matter.

In contrast, The Energetic Holographic Paradigm (TEHP, pronounced "teep") model of physical reality postulates that our finite, local material universe is a boundless, dependent, open (nonconservative) material system which is immersed in and pervaded by a transcendent, nonmaterial (subquantum) physical energy domain from which it receives energy and information.

In the 1938 passage quoted above Einstein does not distinguish between the emission (radiation) of material particles which possess physical mass (e.g., electrons, atoms, molecules) and the emission (radiation) of omnipresent, pervasive, massless nonmaterial energy per se. This is very a puzzling stance for a physicist in the year 1938, especially an eminent physicist of Einstein's stature.

As Einstein knew very well through his own contributions to 20th century science, the numerous imponderable fluids of the 18th century had given way in the 19th century to imponderable matter. Imponderable matter was further subdivided into radiant matter and radiant energy.

The search for radiant matter led from chemistry through Faraday, Maxwell, Crookes, and Röntgen, to J.J. Thomson and his discovery of the electron in 1897. Similarly, the search for radiant energy led from electricity and magnetism through Faraday, Maxwell, Helmholtz, and Hertz, to thermodynamics and Max Planck's discovery of the quantum of blackbody electromagnetic radiation in 1900.

Even so, Einstein's position in 1938 is perfectly consistent with (1) his view that the universe is a closed or isolated (conservative) material system, (2) with his lifelong atomistic, deterministic view of fundamental, irreducible physical reality just-as-it-is,8 and (3) with his explicit rejection of energy per se as either a fundamental or a heuristic principle.9 Moreover, he reinforces the tone he set for 20th century science in 1905 while firmly rejecting the qualitative classical difference or distinction between material mass and nonmaterial energy in a closed or isolated (conservative) material system.

Einstein then generalizes his virtual or apparent mass-energy equivalence of a particle at rest to ostensibly include all forms of energy while implicitly limiting the derived equivalence to closed or isolated (conservative) material systems:

According to the theory of relativity, there is no essential distinction between mass and energy. Energy has mass and mass represents energy. Instead of two conservation laws we have only one, that of mass-energy.10

In distinct contrast, the new universal principle of energy directly points to the essential difference between material mass and omnipresent, pervasive, physical energy per se: Nonmechanical, subquantum physical energy per se is massless, weightless, and nonmaterial in nature. On the other hand, discrete, organized particulate matter is material in nature and possesses physical mass.

This new insight into fundamental, irreducible, holonomic physical reality just-as-it-is requires a greater attention to detail and specificity in terminology as to which kind of physical system is under consideration.

For example, compared to a relatively simple, stand-alone, closed or isolated (conservative) material system, the TEHP holographic model of our local, holonomic spacetime continuum is a compound ^{closed (conservative) nonmaterial}/_{open (nonconservative) material system} which is immersed in and pervaded by the fundamental, irreducible, nonmaterial physical energy domain. Thus, subquantum physical energy per se is conserved globally in the encompassing closed (conservative) nonmaterial system, and neither material mass nor nonmaterial, subquantum physical energy per se is conserved in the open (nonconservative) material system.

20th century science demonstrated that nonmaterial energy and material mass are indeed interconvertible in a closed or isolated (conservative) material system. Nevertheless, the transcendent, nonmaterial (subquantum) physical energy domain was unknown in the 20th century. Therefore the virtual or apparent equivalence between the rest energy and the so-called relativistic mass of a material particle at rest in a closed or isolated (conservative) material system as expressed in Einstein's popular equation E = mc² is neither valid for all forms of energy, nor for any other kind of physical or material system.

Material mass is created by the discrete, organized aggregation of nonmaterial physical energy. Therefore material mass does indeed represent the physical energy that constitutes particulate matter. But to assert that massless, free (i.e., unbound), nonmaterial physical energy per se has material mass, as Einstein apparently did, points directly to the root cause of the wave-particle duality problem Einstein and his generation bequeathed to their successors.

The wave-particle duality problem is created, in large part, by the classical assumption that all energy, including nonmechanical, nonmaterial physical energy per se, is a property of matter which can be, and is, precisely described by certain mathematical equations pertaining to one or more forms and phases of matter.

Nevertheless, particulate matter is material in nature while omnipresent, pervasive physical energy per se is nonmaterial in nature. Thus material objects and nonmaterial energy manifest in separate domains. Moreover, the new universal principle of energy points directly to physically independent, nonmaterial (subquantum) energy per se as the fundamental, irreducible foundation of our finite material universe, and to particulate matter as organized aggregations of nonmaterial energy which are immersed in. and dependent on the independent, subquantum energy domain.

Furthermore, the rest energy of a material particle at rest described by the equation E = mc² in a closed or isolated system 1) is not the same kind of energy, 2) is not produced or propagated in the same manner as the energy of a massless, virtual photon which never rests and always travels at the speed of light, and 3) does not perform the same, or a similar task in the perpetual puzzle of Nature.

At least three of the four known fundamental forces or interactions are mediated by massless virtual particles:

Massless, materially dimensionless photons are the virtual 'exchange particles' of the electromagnetic force.
The massless graviton postulated by Einstein is the virtual 'exchange particle' of the gravitional force.
- If the hypothetical graviton physically exists, it presently remains undiscovered.
The eight massless gluons of quantum chromodynamics (QCD) are the virtual 'exchange particles' of the color force interactions between quarks.
- In principle the strong force is derived from the more fundamental QCD color force.

Note: In the electroweak theory (i.e., the unified theory of the electromagnetic and the weak forces or interactions) gluons are thought to have non-zero mass through symmetry breaking.

Continued in Chapter 3, Section 2: EMR and Light Wave Energetics

Reference Notes (Click on the Note number to return to the text):

1 Einstein, Albert, and Infeld, Leopold. The Evolution of Physics, Simon & Schuster, Inc., New York NY, 1938, p. 167. Copyright renewed 1966. ISBN 0-671-20156-5

2 Stachel, John. "Einstein's Search for General Covariance, 1912-1915;" Einstein from 'B' to 'Z', Birkhauser, Boston MA, 2002, pp. 301-337. ISBN 0-8176-4143-2

3 Maxwell, James Clerk. Matter and Motion (1877), Dover Publications, Inc., Mineola NY [1952] 1991, preface. ISBN 0-486-66895-9 (pbk)

4 Ref. 3, p. 89.

5 Einstein, Albert. "Ist die Trägheit eines Körpers von seinem Energieinhalt abhängig?", Annalen der Physik, 18 (1905): 639-641. Anna Beck, translator; The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein: English Edition, vol. 2, Doc. 24, p. 174, Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ, 1989. ISBN 0-691-08549-8.

6 Ibid.
In the notation used by Einstein in his 1905 paper, "Does the Inertia of a Body Depend Upon Its Energy Content?," L is the idealized electromagnetic radiation energy of visible light emitted by the body under consideration and V is the speed of light. In modern notation, L becomes E and V becomes c, where E is the energy of the radiation emitted, and c is the speed of light. Einstein's derivation of the decrease in mass m can now be seen as m = ^E/_c² = ^E/_{9 × 10²⁰}.
Transposed, the result is the more familiar energy equation E = mc². Note well that Einstein's idealized thought experiment of 1905 derived the virtual or apparent so-called relativistic mass of a particle at rest in a closed or isolated (conservative) material system. Thus, contrary to modern practice, momentum is not a factor in his derivation of the equation. (cf. The more detailed description of Einstein's derivation of m = ^E/_c² in Chapter 5, section 3.)

7 Ref. 1, p. 197.

8 Einstein, Albert. "Theoretical Atomism" ("Theoretische Atomistik"). Paul Hinneberg, ed. Die Kultur der Gegenwart. Ihre Entwicklung und ihre Ziele. Part 3, sec.3, vol. 1, Physik, ed. Emil Warburg. Leipzig, Teubner, 1915. Anna Beck, translator; The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein: English Edition, vol. 4, Doc. 20, pp. 232-245, Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ, 1989. ISBN 0-691-02610-6.

9 "In 1913, [Einstein] wrote in praise of Planck's 1896 essay against the energeticists ...,'in which it is shown that energetics is worthless as a heuristic method, indeed, that it even operates with untenable concepts'... ." Einstein from 'B' to 'Z'; supra, p. 132, footnote 12. (cf. The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein: English Edition, vol. 4; supra, Doc. 23, p. 272.)

10 Ref. 1, p. 197-198.

Back to Chapter 2, Section 1: The Universal Principle of Energy

Index: Consciousness, Physics, and the Holographic Paradigm

Last Edit: December 28, 2004.

Comments and suggestions welcome.

This paper is a work in progress.
Please check for the latest update before quoting in other venues the concepts and hypotheses presented here.
Thank you.

eMail