Does Energy Have Mass?

PSI Blog 20221129 Does Energy Have Mass?

 

Cosmogonists still don’t realize that energy does not exist—it is simply a calculation.

The radiation produced by fire does not exist—it occurs. Credit: Vladyslav Cherkasenko, Kyiv, Unsplash.com.

Bill:

 

Glad you are enjoying www.scientificphilosophy.org and TTAOS (Borchardt, 2004).

 

Your question was:

 

“Re: E=mc², if I do the algebra and if c is constant, then c=(sqrt)(E/m). Since m can't be 0 (as far as our physical universe is defined), then doesn't E have to have some mass, even if vanishingly small?  If the above is true, then could the (even vanishingly small) amount of mass in all the electromagnetic radiation in all of the universe contribute a significant portion of the 'missing mass' problem in cosmology?  This question also gets into the current 'solution' to the missing-mass problem that proposes the existence of dark matter.  Seems to me that it's fundamentally based on a refusal to question the assumption whether Newton's Law is universal.  It seems so much simpler to both me and Occam's razor to admit we may be ignorant about the cosmos and then look at Modified Newtonian Dynamics instead of hypothesizing a theoretical substance that we can't detect but that simply MUST exist so that Newton Law can remain valid.  Anyway, just some thoughts for your consideration (or amusement :)”

 

[GB: Another interesting question. Here is a famous quote from Prof. Richard Feynman of Cal Tech:

 

"It is important to realize that in physics today, we have no knowledge what energy is. We do not have a picture that energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount. It is not that way" (Feynman, 1964).

 

Unfortunately, your derivation of c won’t give those little blobs mass. You might want to review the chapter in TTAOS on inseparability along with my paper on “The Physical Meaning of E=mc²” (Borchardt, 2009). In brief, E has no mass, because it is a calculation that uses a matter-motion term for describing the motion of matter. Matter exists, while motion occurs. Other matter-motion terms include momentum (P=mv) and force (F=ma). Neither of these actually exist, they simply describe what happens when things collide. So, Feynman is right about energy not being matter. His consternation remains today, as you still won’t get a straight answer from most regressive physicists.

 

Radiation has no mass, if one assumes, as I do, that radiation is the motion of matter. Thus, aether is the medium for the motion called light, just as air is the medium for the motion called sound. Few would think of sound as having mass, but, as you have picked up on, well-studied modern physicists would be remiss if they did not consider light to be material (although a contradictory matterless particle, at that). Like most of us, you are playing with the cards that we have been dealt, so it is not surprising that we might think of “dark energy” as a “thing” having mass. The aether, like the air, indeed has mass (Borchardt, 2017, Table 11), and is an absolute necessity for Infinite Universe Theory. The Cosmic Background Radiation is evidence for the presence of the aether and its complexes, which, like all matter, vibrates to produce temperature.

 

Many of the paradoxes and many of the questions still being asked by cosmogonists and regressive physicists are based on religious assumptions (Borchardt, 2020). Once the correct assumptions are used, those disappear. I suspect “dark matter” is simply aether particles that have been decelerated when they produce the acceleration of gravitation (Borchardt, 2017, 2018). It could be that the mass of the forbidden aether is enough to satisfy some of the math once we assume that the universe is infinite and not expanding.

 

As Einstein admitted, Newton’s great work will remain so for all time. Newton’s error, similar to Einstein, was to assume finity. Your somewhat prescient call for a Modified Newtonian Dynamics was answered in the “Neomechanics” chapter of TSW (Borchardt, 2007). Instead of getting rid of the aether, however, it absolutely required it. So, no luck with that for saving the Big Bang Theory.

 

In sum, energy is a calculation, and like time, it does not exist. Energy is an attempt to describe certain collisions undergone by things that do exist.]

 

References:

 

Borchardt, Glenn, 2004, The ten assumptions of science: Toward a new scientific worldview: Lincoln, NE, iUniverse, 125 p.

 

Borchardt, Glenn, 2007, The Scientific Worldview: Beyond Newton and Einstein: Lincoln, NE, iUniverse, 411 p.

 

Borchardt, Glenn, 2009, The physical meaning of E=mc², Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance: Storrs, CN, v. 6, no. 1, p. 27-31 [10.13140/RG.2.1.2387.4643].

 

Borchardt, Glenn, 2017, Infinite Universe Theory: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science Institute, 327 p. [http://go.glennborchardt.com/IUTebook].

 

Borchardt, Glenn, 2018, The Physical Cause of Gravitation: viXra:1806.0165 (“Aether Deceleration Theory”)

 

Borchardt, Glenn, 2020, Religious Roots of Relativity: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science Institute, 160 p. [https://go.glennborchardt.com/RRR-ebk]

 

Feynman, Richard, Leighton, R.B., and Sands, Matthew, 1964, The Feynman lectures on physics, Addison Wesley, v. 1, p. 4-2. [BTW: Feynman is famous for helping to solve the reason for the Challenger shuttle disaster of 1986.]

 

 This an update of PSI Blog 20090909

Link to Medium: https://medium.com/@glennborchardt/68d84c72cbc5?source=friends_link&sk=ec62a5ce26a4775dffd5bbb12735056a