This is Essay CXI of Mr. Stolyarov’s series, “A Rational Cosmology,” which seeks to present objective, absolute, rationally grounded views of terms such as universe, matter, volume, space, time, motion, sound, light, forces, fields, and even the higher-order concepts of life, consciousness, and volition. See the index of all the essays in “A Rational Cosmology” here.
Here, I shall expand on my view of how light is transferred between its source and its target. Conceiving of light as a direct relationship at a distance between source and target, I claim that light does not “travel” between the two, as a particle might. Rather, light appears on the target directly from the source, without ever being present in any intermediate locations where no other entity exists. I explain this in “Light as a Direct Relationship Between Source and Target”:
“Since light is not a particle, it cannot simply be sent from one entity to another and then affect the target entity. There is no ‘sending” of light, but rather the relationship is directly between the source entity and target entity, without any entities that must necessarily be intermittent for the relationship to occur. Light is the name for the interaction at a distance which the source and target entities undergo. In that sense, there is quite a contrast between a wave relationship, such as sound, which requires the presence of billions of periodically vibrating molecules between the source and the perceiver, and light, which requires only the source and target entities. Though, like a wave, light is a relationship, in certain critical fundamental aspects it is as far removed from waves as relationships can get.”
This view is grounded in ubiquitous observation — which has never encountered light except as manifested by some source or target entity. It is not a widely accepted view, however. What prevents its understanding by scientists and the public at large is a commonplace fallacy: the idea that all relationships of process must involve some transfer of matter from one entity to another.
A corollary to this fallacy is that all relationships of process are also relationships of contact, that no two entities can have a relationship of any sort unless some third material entity is transferred between them by moving spatially from the entity that originates it to the entity that receives it.
Falling prey to this fallacy, many of today’s scientists think that light can only be manifested if some particle or entity is transferred through space between the source and the target. I shall shatter this misconception here and show that it is quite conceivable for light to occur without any transfer of matter. Furthermore, the direct transfer of light without any contact between source and target — and without any intermediate “light carriers” — is the only view of light consistent with logic and ubiquitous observation.
The Universality of Matter Transfer Fallacy
Post-Classical physicists often commit a fallacy which results in their invocation of a myriad of fictitious particles, including the “photon” particle of light. This fallacy is the result of an attempt to explain all existent processes by means of a single quality: matter.
Under this view, no process can occur except by the transfer of matter from one entity to another; every process requires that the fundamental “stuff” of an entity be altered in some manner. Since matter cannot exist except as possessed by entities — a view that most people grasp implicitly if not explicitly — advocates of the fallacy claim that no relationship can occur without the originating entity either directly touching the entity it affects or sending some intermediate entity to it. The idea of the universality of matter transfer leads to the presumption that all relationships are ultimately relationships of contact.
This idea is false, and ubiquitous observation can demonstrate its falsehood. One can observe relationships of force, such as gravitation and magnetism, which do not require the continuity of two entities’ boundaries, or the transfer of some intermediate material entity between them.
These relationships occur directly and at a distance, without at all altering the intermediate space between the two participant objects. We are all constantly affected by the Sun’s gravitation, for example, but this does not mean that the Sun transfers any of its mass to us — or that we, who also exert a gravitational force on the Sun, transfer any of our mass to it. If such a case were true, we would be quite rapidly wasted away into nothing by the mere fact of our presence in the Solar System!
What do distance forces between two entities do? They accelerate both entities, altering their velocities. The entities’ amounts of the quality, matter, remain the same as they were before the interaction. Acceleration is the change in velocity with respect to time — or, in terms of the fundamental qualities of entities, the change of “the change of distance with respect to time” with respect to time.
Acceleration alone nowhere concerns the change in an entity’s amount of matter. The magnitude of an entity’s acceleration due to a force is dependent on the amount of matter an entity has (the more material it is, the less it will accelerate), but no entity in the force interaction gains or loses matter to the other entity. An entity’s acceleration might depend on an entity’s mass, but this is a one-way dependency. An entity’s mass does not depend on its acceleration.
Force is a relationship that affects entities’ acceleration alone — which means it affects qualities other than their matter, which means that the relationship of force does not require an alteration in an entity’s material qualities. Of course, contact forces do exist, but these forces also do not transfer matter to the entities they affect. They only “push” or “pull” those entities, altering their velocities but nothing else. (Inelastic collisions, which do involve matter transfer, are a different subject entirely. Forces are involved in those collisions, but the transfer of matter only accompanies the forces. It is not in itself a part of the forces.) However, forces are not required to be contact forces, since they are not a transfer of the quality, matter.
In the face of contrary evidence, dogged adherents to the universality of matter transfer fallacy still maintain that all interactions are ultimately contact-based. When confronted with gravitation or magnetism, they invent fictitious particles, such as “gravitrons,” which they claim “convey” forces to their target entities. I thoroughly demonstrated the logical impossibility of this scenario in “The Non-Existence of Gravitrons or Other ‘Force Particles.'”
Forces are only possible among entities with mass. Gravitrons, as “immaterial force carriers,” are self-contradictory on many levels, since all entities must be material, and all entities that can exert forces must also be material. Furthermore, the idea of intermediate particles such as “gravitrons” is entirely superfluous for describing a relationship that can be much more simply accounted for by the direct interaction of two entities at a distance.
Read other parts of “A Rational Cosmology” by clicking here.