The concept of the vacuum is problematic for conventional physics. Electromagnetic wave theory models it as consisting of nothing at all, but yet paradoxically having finite electric and magnetic constants. Quantum mechanics models it as consisting of temporary particles, but no average substance. General Relativity theory includes a spacetime medium, without describing the composition. In all cases the underlying physical mechanisms are obscure. Furthermore, these existing perspectives conflict in their expectations, so the integration is poor. The treatment is not always logical either: conventional theories find the idea of the matterbased aether thoroughly unacceptable, yet ironically all include something that looks conceptually much like a medium. The Cordus conjecture provides a conceptual solution for the composition of the vacuum: it provides a fabric that is granular (similar to quantised) at the smallest scale, scales up to a continuum, provides a medium for propagation of disturbances and waves, provides a medium for electromagnetism and gravitation, is relativistic, is not a matter aether, and includes a time signal. In the cordus solution the vacuum is made of tangled hyff (force lines) from all the surrounding matter particuloids. This cordus fabric concept also provides a descriptive explanation as to why the speed of light is a finite value. The fine structure constant is given a physical interpretation, as a measure of the transmission efficacy of the fabric. Cordus also distinguishes between the fabric that makes up the vacuum of space, as opposed to the void which has neither fabric nor time as we perceive it. This model is radically unorthodox in suggesting that the speed of light is relativistic but not invariant; that it depends fundamentally on the fabric density and hence the accessible mass density of the universe at that locality.
Comments: 8 pages.
[v1] 6 Apr 2011
Unique-IP document downloads: 130 times
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.