[Physics] New beginning in physics necessary?

[Arend Lammertink]

On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Thomas Goodey <thomas at flyingkettle.com> wrote:
> Nainan wrote:
>
>> In material world, existence of matter is nearest to
>> absolute truth. Hence, existence of matter can be chosen
>> as the fundamental assumption on which all physical
>> theories should be based.
>
> But actually the words "matter" and "material" are not
> fundamental concepts in (modern) physics.
>
> To quote from
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter
>
> "... matter is not a fundamental concept because a
> universal definition of it is elusive: elementary
> constituents of atoms may not take up space individually,
> and massless particles may be composed to form objects that
> have mass (even when at rest)."
>
> "Matter should not be confused with mass, as the two are
> not quite the same in modern physics."

Mass can fundamentally be defined as "aether mass", which can be
considered to behave like a fluid and thus has a certain mass
*density* in continuous differential math, as defined in my work. The
existence of this kind of "matter" (in *Nainan's* words" can indeed be
chosen as the fundamental assumption on which all physical theories
should be based. It may be that at some point this assumption will
need to be refined, but it appears to be a pretty fundamental
assumption so far.


So, contrary to Nainan's understanding of what "matter" is,  the
concept of "matter" - "material", "molecules",  "particles", etc. -
can then be defined, and I would propose to start out be defining
"matter" as:

  "aether mass in rotational (bound) motion",

which would mean that, fundamentally, the presence of a non-zero
magnetic field [B] is a necessary *requirement* for *ANY* kind of
"matter" to exist.

In other words:

1) "mass"  equals "aether mass"

2) no [B] field, no "matter".


It is likely this definition will need further refinement, since it is
unclear whether or not "photons" are "matter", while they definitely
are quantized and have a non-zero magnetic ([B] field) component.

Yet, I think it is a good starting point to define a first, formal
distinction between "mass" and "matter" as described above.

For further suggestions on how to work out such a physics model using
Hans' work about Hilbert spaces, and thus mathematically evaluate the
aether model I described using Hans' methods, see this post by me:

http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/2016-December/000280.html

Regards,

Arend.