Probably the most important unanswered in "space science" is what is it.
Einstein in the address "Aether and the theory of Relativity" << http://www.aetherometry.com/Electronic_ ... mments.php
>>he delivered on May 5th 1920 at the University of Leyden Germany he indicated that The General Theory of Relativity predicts, "space is endowed with physical qualities".
"Recapitulating, we may say that according to the General Theory of Relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an Aether. According to the General Theory of Relativity space without Aether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this Aether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts, which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it."
However, he did not attempt to define what this "substance" is.
Similarly many modern physics have "endowed" space with what is called quantum fluctuation or a temporary change in the amount of energy in a point in space, arising from Werner Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.
However, they only define what space contains not what it is.
Space is the background in which all aspects of our environment evolve. Therefore, an understanding of what it is crucial to our understanding of the evolution of particles stars, galaxies, and the universe itself.
Given this fact it is difficult to understand why physicists do not spend more time trying to figure out exactly what it is.
Below is a repost of an article in the Imagineer's Chronicles "What is space?" Sept 13, 2007 << http://www.theimagineershome.com/blog/?p=11
>> that gives one definition of what space is and why it exists. There are probably many more.
In the article "What is Dark Matter" Sept. 10 2007 it was shown that one could derive the gravitational properties of dark matter if one assumed that space is made up of a continuous non-quantized form of mass.
However, there is another reason to assume the existence of a continuous non-quantized form of mass.
Our experiences show us that all volumes require physical support to maintain their three-dimensional integrity.
For example, beams or some other physical component are required support the volume of a building. These components must be continuous on a macroscopic scale and physically interconnected to both themselves and the building to provide support. If they become cracked or disconnected, the volume associated with that building will collapse.
Our experiences also show us that objects and people can move about randomly in the volume of a building but they cannot support it because they are not physical attached to its structural supporting system.
However, should we assume the microscopic structure and volume of the universe is any different?
Quantum theories tell us the particles in a vacuum can move in randomly in space similar to the way people can move randomly about in a building. However, as mentioned earlier our experiences in the macroscopic world tell us all volumes require structural support, which must be continuous (on a macroscopic level) and attached to the buildings structure to maintain its volume. Therefore, based on macroscopic observations particles could not support a three-dimensional volume because by definition they are discontinuous.
This provides the conceptual basis for assuming all three-dimensional volumes must contain a continuous non-quantized medium or form of mass to provide structural support to prevent it from collapsing.
Some would say that the reason why a three-dimensional universe does not collapse is because it is expanding even though gravitational forces are trying to collapse it.
However, this does not explain why a vacuum or a volume of space that does not contain particles expands because without any mass it would not posses the properties of inertia and momentum therefore there would be nothing to keep it expanding.
Others might say that the movement of particles in a vacuum could support its volume similar to the way the movement of air molecules in a balloon supports its volume.
However, there is a difference between a balloon and the universe in that a balloon has a rigid structure or membrane for the particles to interact with while observations of "empty" space indicate that it does not.
This shows yet another reason to assume the existence of a continuous non-quantized form of mass because if space were unbounded there would be nothing for particles to interact with to prevent it from clasping.
In upcoming week and months we will present many more.
For example, the article Why is mass and energy quantized? Oct 4, 2007 will show that one can derive the properties of a particle in terms of a resonant system formed in a continuous non-quantized form of mass.
So please visit us occasionally if you are interested gaining a better understanding of how the properties of a continuous non-quantized form of mass relates to the physical structure of our universe. .
Copyright 2007 Jeffrey O'Callaghan