Gravity Is The 4th Dimension

by K. B. Robertson

Where are the dimensions and where are they not?
Boundless dimensions of music and thought.
Infinite dimensions of cold and of hot.
But countless dimensions of space there are not.
Dimensions of beauty and wine and of thee.
Occure in spacial dimensions of which there are three.
A 3-D you anna 3-D me, munching 3-D apples from a 3-D tree.
3-D up and 3-D down, 3-D apples to the 3-D ground.
A 3-D fall anna 3-D 'thump'. 3-D sugar inna 3-D lump.
3-D smooth and 3-D rough. 4-D Einstein, saying 'three ain't enough'.
4-D guitar and 4-D strings. Alberts 4-D song about 4-D things.
4-D amplifier and 4-D gear, singing'4-D music into 3-D ears.
3-D professors on a 3-D jag, stuffin'4-D physics in a 3-D bag.
If your looking for a message, 'Einsteins Velcro' is here.
It's of 4-D headaches from a 3-D beer.
3-D professors tellin 3-D lies, gettin 3-D money for the Nobel Prize.
3-D scientists anna 3-D pension, refusing to recognize,
Gravity is the 4th Dimension.

Newton, finally acknowledged the conditional existence of gravity; only because his own newly invented calculus confirmed that, indeed the same force that motivationally generates falling apples does likewise generate and sustain the orbits of planets. Yet, as we are about to be reminded, Newton took great care to point out that he did not know or purport to know the identity of gravity, and that his mathematical address to gravity is not concerned with or dependent upon its causal identity, or, its direction... As we shall see, the popular term 'Newtonian concept of attraction (a pulling force)', as applied to gravity, was never unconditionally endorsed by Newton. "For I am induced by many reasons to suspect that they may all depend on certain forces by which the particles of bodies, by some causes hitherto unknown, are either mutually impelled towards each other, and cohere in regular figures, or are repelled and recede from each other; which forces being unknown, philosophers have hitherto attempted the search of Nature in vain". [Re Einstein's Theory of Relativity]

"The General Principle is also known as the 'Equivalence Hypothesis', or 'The Principle Of Equivalence'; which states: 'There is no way to distinguish the effects produced by the inertial force of acceleration (a pushing/repelling force) from the effects produced by gravitational force (assumed to be a 'pulling/impelling force: identity unknown')... "The explanation originally used by Einstein to point out the meaning and implications of the GENERAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY is popularly termed 'the elevator analogy'. THERE IS NO WAY FOR THE OBSERVERS INSIDE THE ELEVATOR TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY ARE FALLING IN A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD (as they actually are), OR SIMPLY 'FREE-FLOATING' IN THE VOID OF DEEP SPACE, FREE OF ANY GRAVITATIONAL INFLUENCE WHATSOEVER. The Classical and Contemporary popular concept of UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION continues to be, a 'pulling force of attraction'.

Yet, here we find Contemporary Theoretical Physics - specifically Einstein's General Theory Of Relativity - equating gravity with acceleration as - and which is - a 'pushing or repelling force'. "That is to say, in 1686, Newton categorically and formally allowed that gravity 'may be' in fact, a repelling force. Then, in 1916, we have Einstein's General Principle Of Relativity equating gravity with acceleration, which is, once again, a repelling force. Newton's Gravitational Alternative and Einstein's General Theory on the same table. Time and Motion are measurable and comprehensible in Three Dimensions. Why not in 4? What is it about proven and measured 4-dimensional reality that has not been recognized? Why has it not been recognized?

The Physical Dimensions, 1 thru 4 (Revisited):
"The mathematical definition for the 4th Dimension is also the geometric definition. In order to consider the geometric definition for the 4th Dimension we will first review the singularly scientific and formal definition for the Three recognized Dimensions of Space. Then we will consider the 4th Dimension and its relationship - if any - to Einstein's General Principle of Relativity and/or Newton's Gravitational Alternative. "The (only known; geometric; metrically spatial) definition for physical dimensions begins with no dimensions whatsoever - specifically a geometric point. We will call it 'point zero ('0'). Any motion of point '0' will inevitably be at right angles from itself, and, any motion, at any speed, for any length of time, generates a One Dimensional Straight Line 'O' - 'A', of arbitrary length. It cannot be a curved line yet because it has no dimension(s) to curve into. It may become a longer or shorter One Dimensional Straight Line, but it cannot change its dimensional quality until it moves at right angles (90 degrees, perpendicular) from itself (again). Then it generates a Two Dimensional Plane 'A'- 'B'. When a Two Dimensional Plane ('A'-'B') moves at right angles to itself (yet a third [right angled move]), it generates a Space and/or Solid 'B'-'C' of Three Dimensions. "Of course, the rule here is the right angle projection of each dimension from out of the preceding dimension. This is how physical dimensions are generated; hence this is their singular physical and philological definition.

That leaves us here and now with the conceptual-geometric credentials to contemplate the Three recognizable Dimensions of Space occupied - or occupiable - by matter. A familiar enough concept, by-way of its Universal physical-conditional manifestation in the entire reception of physical-sensory, instrumental and therefore psychological-conceptual human experience (at large). Knowing; not speculating, that we are obliged by the laws of geometry, combined with Einstein's (allegedly 'acknowledged') proof that the entire physical Universe is 4-Dimensional: not merely to 'consider', but to find the physical as well as spatial Three Dimensions of Space moving at right angles from themselves. This is not a mere idea, or consideration, or project; it is an ultimatum. THE 4-DIMENSIONAL ULTIMATUM. "Because, it demands without ambiguity or equivocation, that the entire recognized physical 3-Dimensional Universe of Space and Matter, must be and is moving at right angles from itself in one of two possible 4-Dimensional directions: that of overall 4-Dimensional contraction, where everything recognizable as 3-Dimensional, is constantly growing smaller. Or, the direction of overall 4-Dimensional expansion, where everything recognizable as 3-Dimensional, is constantly growing larger (moving at right angles, constantly, to all three of its recognized dimensional coordinates).

Do we see or measure 3-Dimensional reality as moving at right angles from itself, shrinking ever smaller with 4-Dimensional contraction, or growing ever larger with 4-Dimensional expansion? The unanimous and seemingly inevitable answer to this (seemingly absurd, apparently pointless) question since Einstein required it, has uniformly been (as will be documented, shortly), 'No, we do not observe or measure 3-Dimensional reality as 4-Dimensional'. 'Obviously matter is not expanding'. 'If the universe is made up of a number of disturbed areas, by now it would have spread indefinitely' [this quote from conventional physics is shown to be false]. The formula is exactly as simple as it is inescapable.

Einstein's GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY equates gravity with acceleration. Einstein's 4th Dimension demands overall right-angle motion of the Three recognized Dimensions Of Space: in one of two possible 4-Dimensional directions (Overall expansion or overall contraction). "Since objects do not fall 'upward' and away from 3-D Matter, this rules out overall 4-Dimensional contraction. Objects do fall 'downward' toward the center of 3-D Matter; therefore confirming by demonstration - in situ: a physically (materially) expanding Universe. The unrecognized causal identity (the source) of the observed, measured, acknowledged, and recognized spatially expanding universe. The conclusion is without precedence - although it has many historically noted revolutionary counterparts and parallels, in the history of Western Science. Recognizing the four dimensional space time continuum as being gravity, and conversely, is and has been since its remarkably progressive advent; for the reasons provided herein, patently unavoidable: "The material as well as spatial Universe is 4-Dimensionally expanding; it is this 4-Dimensional accelerating expansion that generates the force experienced and recognized as gravity. Hence objects do not fall to earth; the earth, instead, accelerates [expands] upwardly and overtakes them (just as the floor does in Einstein's elevator). Gravity is the 4th Dimension.

If anyone asks or demands from this point onward, that this statement must or need be proven, they are reminded that this has already been accomplished. By Einstein. And Newton. And the laws of mathematics and geometry at - by definition - their most fundamental, physically definitive level. We have simply taken Einstein's renowned accomplishments and recommendations seriously enough to actually apply-them-to and recognize-them-within, the human Gravitational Experience. "The Question is no longer, 'What and Where is the 4th Dimension in my own experience?' - Einstein proved that it is Everything; Everywhere. The Question regarding the 4th D. is: 'What and Where is it not?' Fundamental material constituents of all apparently solid Universal Matter, i.e., neutrons, protons & electrons and all other so-called 'sub-atomic particles', are not 3-Dimensionally static solids at all, but rather 4-Dimensionally accelerating fields. "Consider the physical definition of an expanding field. The singular definition for all expanding field systems is: 'A measurable and definable area or system of or within space, which is inherently and constantly growing larger (or smaller). "Such definable field areas of space may have any number of dissimilarities. But all manifestations of expanding field energy have in common one inevitable characteristic.

Consider the comparative relationship of two otherwise totally unrelated fields. Specifically, we will compare the qualities of an expanding field of sound with that of an expanding field of electro-magnetism - which is light. In the example of a field of sound we will consider a simple mechanical alarm clock which is ringing, but not otherwise moving relative to an observer. The innermost circle represents the outside diameter of the alarm clock itself; of course the concentricity's emanating from center - the ringing alarm clock - represent the systematic structure of sound waves projecting omni-directionally from it. In the case of sound, the field is expanding from the alarm clock @ slightly less than 1,100 ft. per-second. Note, that the sound Field system which is circumscribed by and contained within the area encompassed by the outermost (largest; oldest) sound wave is completely symmetrical; that is to say, it has the same uniform structure in any direction from the center-source and throughout all of its parts.

Now, we will consider the above diagram of a ringing alarm clock as a source of light rather than sound. Whereas, light does not require a con-ducting medium to support its motion through space from its source, and sound does, and, whereas light moves at 186,000 miles-per-second as compared to the 1,100 foot seconds of sound. Nevertheless, what these two comparatively considered fields do have in common becomes graphically evident when either or both of them are in motion relative to an observer.

That commonalty is a very well known phenomenon, originally discovered in the mid-1800's by the Austrian physicist, Christian J. Doppler. This phenomenon is acknowledged to be invariably characteristic of all expanding fields. It is called 'Doppler effect', or sometimes 'Doppler shift/contraction'. The definition of which is: 'The contraction of any field system in the direction of its motion at a rate increasingly proportional to the velocity of its (center) source'.

When we consider the field Source to be a ringing alarm clock, we will observe in that case the indicated left-to-right motion of the alarm clock - or the right-to-left motion of the observer - to be approximately one-half the speed of sound. When we consider the moving source of the field to be a light-field source rather than a sound-field source, we then consider the left-to-right moving source or the right-to-left moving observer to be moving at approximately 4/5ths the speed of light. Under these circumstances, the field is no longer symmetrical. The structure is not uniform in all directions from the source and throughout all of its parts. It is instead contracted in the direction of its motion; the contraction ratio corroborate to relative speed; forming a non-symmetrical field System; reasonably approximated in the referenced illustration. "Let it be emphasized here that Doppler contraction is not and has never been applied to, or recognized as, applicable to Matter. "I have said that Einstein proved that matter is 4-Dimensional. Yet, I have also said that Doppler effect has never been applied to matter. This can only mean that Doppler effect is not applicable to matter; for the inevitable reason that matter is not an accelerating 4-Dimensional field after all. Or, that Doppler field contraction is actually applicable-to and exhibited-by matter, but that this application - like the 4th Dimension itself - has yet to be recognized.

Either, matter is found to exhibit Doppler shift and is therefore re-confirmed to be 4-Dimensional. Or, matter does not exhibit any evidence of Doppler shift, and, therefore, cannot possibly be a 4-Dimensionally expanding; accelerating field. Presently, to briefly introduce for review one of the several unexpectedly discovered prevailing conditions of reality; derived yet once again directly from Einstein's combined Theories of Relativity. Its original technical derivations are the mathematical equations of the Dutch physicist, Hendrik Antoon Lorentz. Einstein's functional incorporation of the Lorentz equations within Relativity Theory, are, for this reason now totally acknowledged-among and familiar-to the physical science community at large. Specifically these equations are termed, 'the Lorentzian Electromagnetic Equations'. Successfully and covariantly employed by Einstein to describe the behavior of sub-atomic 'particles', combined with Maxwell's electro-magnetic equations.

Although H. A. Lorentz originally intended their application exclusively to moving sources ('particles'/'charges') of electromagnetism or light, Einstein very interestingly found another and quite unexpected application for them. Specifically, Einstein discovered that Lorentzian Electromagnetic Field Transformations are descriptively applicable to matter (in motion) itself. (A recurring echo in the acoustically unimprovable halls of science?) ((What?)) The term, 'Lorentz Transformations' may sound somewhat formidable. What is mathematically and faithfully described here is still however, non-mathematically, already familiar to all of you. To quote non-mathematically, exactly what Lorentz Transformations describe, by way of what Einstein categorically proved: 'Matter contracts in the direction of its motion at a rate increasingly proportional to its velocity'. That is to say, matter, be it rocket or rhinoceros, and all of its contents, contracts in the direction of its motion at a Lorentzian measured rate increasingly proportional to its velocity.

A brief but excellent non-mathematical elaboration of this fact can be found on page 190 of THE EVOLUTION OF PHYSICS, by Albert Einstein and Leopold Infeld. More elaborate documentation of this fact is available in any advanced physics text on Relativity. I call this Einsteinian phenomenon of the Lorentzian contraction of Matter, 'MassField Doppler Effect'. It not only re-confirms that Matter is a 4-dimensionally expanding field, it also proves once again that gravity is the 4th Dimension. One may quite reasonably ask why Einstein's successful and renowned applications of Lorentzian electromagnetic Field Trans-formations to Matter: have never been recognized as MassField Doppler Effect.

That is an extremely relevant question, and it has an equally fascinating and yet familiar 'answer' - that being that anyone and everyone can 'see' and therefore 'knows' that Matter, that is to say, physical reality at large 'is not' expanding. 'If matter was made up of a disturbed areas, it would by now have spread outward indefinitely, which obviously it is not'.

Now, to present an abbreviated but entirely accurate description of yet another proven and still unrecognized fact which furthermore categorically confirms that Matter is 4-Dimensionally expanding. The allotted time does not permit elaboration of all the details of the involved experiments, but more importantly, the source of this information will be provided, and especially the world-endorsed scientific response to its proven and acknowledged results. The most popular sources include a renowned book on physics written by the late and eminent physicist, J.W.N. Sullivan. It is very appropriately entitled, THE LIMITATIONS OF SCIENCE.

On pages 100 and 101 of the hard cover edition of that title, the author is describing an experiment and discovery (entailing the controlled *bombardment of singular-atomic-thickness gold plates/filaments; with subatomic particles); originally fulfilled by physicist, G.P. Thompson (Incidentally, G.P.Thompson is not to be confused with J. J. Thompson who was the discoverer of the electron some decades earlier). What G.P.Thompson did in 1937, when technology finally permitted him to be the first to plunge into the sub atomic/microcosmic realm of so-called 'particles ('electrons, protons, neutrons'; et al - 'sub-atomic particles')', was to overtly and experimentally discover and mathematically and repeatedly re-confirm that the ultimate physical constituents of matter - that is, neutrons, protons, and electrons - are not reducible to the anticipated microcosmic, 3-dimen-sional particles having specifically defined boundary-'surfaces'; discontinuous from surrounding space. Instead, G.P.Thompson, discovered that neutrons, protons and electrons are microcosmic charges of undulating electric field energy ('disturbed areas'), having no definite boundary surfaces whatsoever separating them from their surrounding space.

Because of the outcome of G.P. Thompson's original experiment and many other related experiments since then, physical science today formally recognizes, acknowledges, and categorically states, that two or more physical entities: be they individual neutrons, pro-tons or electrons, or billiard balls in collision, or automobiles moving in opposite directions at 90 miles per hour and colliding head-on: never actually touch or contact one another. The subjective term 'touch', and even the objective term 'contact' directly imply and require one surface meeting another surface. Of course, for all subjective purposes in the human experience, the terms 'touch' and 'contact' are perfectly acceptable. We observe that apparently solid 3-Dimensional substance has apparently discontinuous surfaces, therefore we intelligently - but in this case incorrectly - assume that all solid material substance including that of our own bodies, is ultimately constituted-of and reducible-to solid 3-D particles; also having discretely defined surface-boundaries, discontinuous from surrounding space.

G.P. Thompson's original discovery that there are only charges of electricity; which 'somehow influence each other at-a-distance-across space', evoked the following commentary from Lord Bertrand Russell: 'No two particles of matter ever come into contact. When they get too close, they move off'. - p.126 THE ABC OF RELATIVITY. Mutually opposing field's of two charges/ particles; in oppositional collision) All of this is to review and clarify the context in which it is an observed and acknowledged physical fact that no two or more physical entities ever actually touch or contact each other.

On the other hand, this conclusion is reached by way of the unanimously agreed upon and yet quite incorrect assumption that the field produced by atomic and sub-atomic structures - which Thompson refers to as 'disturbed areas' - is not a physical constituent of those structures. Although it is proven that any two or more material systems never actually contact each other, it is invariably observed and agreed that they do have, to say the least, an 'influence' on one another. Which influence must, because they do not touch or contact, be attributed to conflicting field forces.

On this premise and for this reason, any answer to any question or consideration of whether or not two or more bodies touch, is entirely dependent upon the popular as well as literal interpretation of what is actually meant or circumspectly intended - in what qualified context - by and in the practiced; applied terms: ' Matter' and/or 'physicality'. contemporary physics refuses to acknowledge or term an energetic field entity, 'Matter' (instead, grotesquely calling it 'an unstable; disturbed area'), even though that field entity disallows the simultaneous occupation of its space by any other field entity. That is to say summarily, these two qualities observed of field entities are quite literally the formal definition of matter. That definition being: 'That which possesses inertia and occupationally demands 3-Dimensions of Space'. Sullivan comments furthermore on pages 103 & 104 of THE LIMITATIONS OF SCIENCE: 'These disturbed areas which are discovered to demand 3-Dimensions of Space indicate the position of the electron; yet we cannot state that the disturbed area is the electron. Because any such locality has a tendency to spread, and if the matter of the universe were a number of disturbed areas, by now it would have spread indefinitely'.

Electrons, protons and neutrons invariably generate and project electromagnetic fields. In Newton's era and long afterwards, the phenomenon of electromagnetism generated by alleged 3-D 'particles' was totally unknown. Matter, be it what Newton called 'particle', or systems of particles such as a planet or star, is simply represented here by and within this solid circle suspended in the center of an otherwise blank page (orbited by question marks suspended in statically suspended, - non-expanding - structureless space). This was before the advent of Field Physics established by Maxwell.

The existence, structure and dynamics of the electromagnetic field was firstly and most successfully recognized and described in relation to 'Space and Time' by the differential equations of the Scot, James Clerk Maxwell, in 1873. The matter ('particle', electron, neutron, proton, 'mass-point') at the center, generates the apparent and familiar 'spider web pattern' of radiating electromagnetic field energy projecting omnidirectionally from its center source (matter generates electricity and gravity proportionate to it's - the measured source's - given mass value; size, density). (Note: 5-D electricity moving at right angles out of 4-D matter; 6-D magnetism moving at right angles to the 5th D of electricity. This identification of previously unrecognized dimensions 5 and 6, is clearly and non-mathematically explained and proven on pages 28 and 29, herein.) Prior to this time, Michael Faraday had already recognized the existence of some force originating in material bodies and projecting out of them across Space - but he had also considered this ' force' to be static; that is to say, 'non-expanding' (pre Field Physics).

Moreover, Faraday had no idea of the structure and/or shape/ pattern of the electromagnetic field. Maxwell, on the other hand, proved that electromagnetic fields possess a characteristic and predictable shape and intensity ('field density') in (Classical) Space & Time, and are projected continuously and omni-directionally outward from their alleged 3-D 'particle' sources at a finite velocity; that being 186,282 mi.p.s. Along Came The Untangled Weave, Warp & Woof - Creating an interestingly similar pattern; as that structural transverse projection, so characteristically like a spider-spun web (A natural expression of the inverse square law; projected omni-directionally from its source; more dispersed with distance). With the spider at the center representing the field-generating 'particle' (charge of electricity having no distinct boundaries, growing increasingly dense as you approach its center; having no surface, separating it from 'surrounding space') at the source of Maxwell's omnidirectionally projecting electromagnetic field.

Incidentally, it was presumed in the Newtonian Classical Mechanical era, that gravity ('F', 'the unidentified Force' in the since adopted universal Newtonian formula for gravity: F=GMM/R^2: Force=Gravity x Mass x Motion squared) acted across Space instantaneously. Out of said 'particles' and/or combinant systems of particles. It is since then proven and acknowledged that whatever gravity is (it is politically prohibited from being electricity, or electromagnetism): also moves at the same omni-directional velocity from Matter as does electromagnetic or light energy.

Newton unarguably mastered the description of gravitational effects, while he did not pretend to know, and was careful about specifying that he did not know the causal identity - or even the directional vector - of F (Force Universal Gravitation). No one else besides this record seems to have allowed for the offered gravitational alternative (that gravity might actually be a repelling force. That Newton's famous findings allow for that unknown, unpursued possibility; from the preface to the PRINCIPIA); since Newton made a noteworthy point of offering it.

Thereby and thence, it was Maxwell from whom we learned that the presumed static field, already known to originate-with and project-from Matter, is actually expanding - thereby generating a perfect Natural expression of the geometric LAW OF THE INVERSE SQUARE. Projecting and distributing the same amount of energy, omnidirectionally from matter sources; over an increasingly greater area, at the speed of light. A field unfolding outwardly that way per light wave and/or system of light waves, without end. It is noteworthy also that the Inverse Square Law of Electro-Magnetism, like its velocity (that of light), is likewise, equally applicable to gravity; whatever else gravity may be. It is emphasized here that gravity is not acknowledged or recognized to be electromagnetism.

The formula with which Maxwell successfully described and predicted the structure and dynamics of the previously unknown (presumed static) ElectroMagnetic Field are now of course very well renowned as, 'Maxwell's ElectroMagnetic Equations'; describing the much-controversied, newly recognized and acknowledged field forces. "In consideration of what Einstein called a 'TOTAL FIELD THEORY', it is consistently said that Maxwell's ElectroMagnetic Equations are not (POST-FIELD PHYSICS) applicable to the alleged 3-D static 'particles', because Maxwell's Equations describe expanding energy exclusively, and, 'therefore break-down at the non-expanding surface of the particle'. The in-place, 4th dimension-excluding, 3-dimensional filibuster.

Yet, since Maxwell, we long ago unexpectedly discovered that the alleged 3-D particle does not have a surface, and in fact is not even a particle at all, but an electrical charge of energy which simply becomes increasingly more dense towards its center. A charge of electricity fulfilling the formal identity of particulate matter. Ostensibly, having been 'doing this', all along, as it were.

Credits to K. B. Robertson

Gravity 4-D Index


Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Valid CSS level 3!