Files
memex/0_inbox/books/TWOW/html/36 Spatial global regularities.html

244 lines
18 KiB
HTML
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<title>Spatial global regularities</title>
<meta name="generator" content="LibreOffice 4.2.8.2 (Linux)">
<meta name="author" content="Amr Gharbeia">
<meta name="created" content="20010831;13300000000000">
<meta name="changed" content="20150721;234832880453886">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin-right: 1.2cm; margin-top: 1.2cm; margin-bottom: 1.25cm }
p { text-indent: 1.27cm; margin-bottom: 0.25cm; direction: ltr; color: #99ccff; line-height: 120%; text-align: left; widows: 2; orphans: 2 }
p.western { font-family: "Arial", sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; so-language: en-US }
p.cjk { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 10pt }
p.ctl { font-family: "Simplified Arabic"; font-size: 10pt; so-language: ar-EG }
a:link { color: #0000ff }
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang="en-GB" text="#99ccff" link="#0000ff" dir="ltr">
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><font color="#993366"><font face="Verdana, sans-serif"><b>S<img src="" name="OdkC19" align="right" hspace="5" width="55" height="22" border="0">patial
global regularities. </b></font></font>The basic spatial global
regularity is that matter is conserved. The total quantity of matter
in any closed or isolated region of space does not change. But under
certain circumstances, it entails a less general spatial global
regularity, the conservation of energy.</font></font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Spatial
global regularity” is an appropriate name, because nothing is
assumed about the nature of matter except what is entailed by
spatiomaterialism (besides space, the existence of many particular
substances, each coinciding with some part of space or other.) This
global regularity is the purest ontological effect of the wholeness
of space.</font></font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
regularities caused ontologically by space are not just global. The
structure of space also helps cause necessary principles and
contingent laws about local regularities (or the basic laws of
physics, classical and contemporary). Since bits of matter have
spatial relations to one another because they coincide with parts of
space, the way those spatial relations change as a result of motion
is partly determined by the structure of space. This might be called
the local aspect of space.</font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The global
aspect of space, on the other hand, is its wholeness, or the fact
that all the parts of space fit together as a single system of
locations that are all related to one another geometrically. The
wholeness of space is an ontological cause of regularities about
change in entire regions of space, because it requires that all the
local changes that occur in any region fit together in space as time
passes. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">When
combined with the assumption that matter has a nature that makes the
basic laws of physics true, the spatial global regularity (that
matter is conserved in a closed or isolated system) entails that
energy is conserved in any closed system. That is an ontological
explanation of the first law of thermodynamics in a spatiomaterial
world like ours. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Conservation
principles are called “principles”, because they are supposed to
be too basic to be explained by anything else. But conservation
principles can be explained ontologically, though in the case of the
conservation of matter, the global regularity is so obvious that it
may seem to be trivial. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><font face="Verdana, sans-serif">The
conservation of matter.</font> Spatiomaterialism holds that matter
and space are substances enduring through time. Since matter is a
substance, it neither comes into existence nor goes out of existence
over time. That is how matter itself is an ontological cause of the
conservation of matter. The total quantity of matter cannot change,
because matter is a substance. But space is also a ontological cause
of this regularity, because matter is contained by space and it is by
coinciding with parts of space that bits of matter have spatial
relations to one another. Space is what gives particular substances
the relationship that makes it possible for them to add up, that is,
to be added together and have a total, as we saw in <font color="#0000ff"><u><a href="/F:/Philosophy/Existentialism/The%20Wholeness%20Of%20the%20World/www.twow.net/Lo/LoOtjR.htm" target="Lo"><font face="Arial, sans-serif">Relations</font></a></u></font>,
where the truth of mathematics was explained ontologically. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
relevance of space as a cause of conservation principles is implicit
in the way they are formulated. They hold that some quantity does not
change in closed or isolated regions of space. But this reference to
a region of space indicates a further ontological effect of space.
The reason the total quantity of matter does not change in any closed
or isolated region of space is that that is how change of any kind
adds up in space as time passes when the bits of matter conform to
the principle of local motion.</font></font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
principle of local motion holds that the only way that bits of matter
can change location is by motion, and since it was derived from
spatiomaterialism, it is an ontologically necessary principle. But if
it holds of all possible change, then the total quantity of matter in
a closed region of space cannot change, because to be closed or
isolated means that there is a two-dimensional surface surrounding
the matter across which no matter is moving That is how bits of
matter must “add up” over time because they coincide with space
as a substance enduring through time. “Adding up” is an
ontological consequence of the wholeness of the space that contains
them. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Change in
bits of matter adds up in space in the same way that the bits of
matter themselves add up in space, except that change takes their
endurance through time into consideration. The bits of matter endure
though time, but since whatever happens, they cannot change location
except by motion, the total matter cannot change in any closed or
isolated region of space. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Though
it may be obvious and simple, the lack of change in the total
quantity of matter in a closed region of space is a regularity about
change over time. It is a global regularity, because it has to do
with the properties of whole regions of space. The regularity is not
just what is assumed by postulating matter as a substance, but rather
is explained ontologically by spatiomaterialism, because it is an
aspect of the world enduring through time that depends on both space
and matter and how they exist together as a world. Thus, the
conservation of matter is an ontologically necessary regularity. If
the total matter in a closed or isolated region did change,
spatiomaterialism would be false. Matter is conserved, therefore, in
every possible spatiomaterial world. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><font face="Verdana, sans-serif">The
conservation of energy.</font> The first law of thermodynamics is the
principle of the conservation of energy. It is a consequence of this
spatial global regularity, if we take into account the forms of
matter we have assumed in order to explain the basic laws of
classical physics ontologically. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This
implication will hardly be a surprise, since we used the principle of
the conservation of mass and energy as a guide to ensure the
completeness of our inventory of the forms of matter that had to be
postulated in order to explain the basic laws of classical physics.
But since that was just a working hypothesis for distinguishing the
various forms of matter, it is relevant, now that we have shown that
the forms of matter we assumed can indeed explain the truth of the
basic laws of physics, to consider how those forms of matter make the
principle of the conservation of energy true. The ontological
explanation is not as simple as it may seem.</font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">It
may seem that the principle of the conservation of energy is an
immediate consequence of the conservation of matter, because it is
usually assumed that mass and energy are conserved separately as long
as no nuclear reactions, converting rest mass to energy, occur in the
region. The total quantity of matter that exists as energy in the
region cannot change, because when the total rest mass does not
change, matter does not exist in any other forms and matter does not
come into existence or go out of existence. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">However,
the principle of the conservation of energy is not so simple
ontologically, because given our ontological explanation of the
nature of potential energy, there <i>is </i>a conversion between rest
mass and kinetic energy (or other forms of actual energy) whenever
potential energy is being consumed or created, which happens in most
ordinary physical processes.</font></font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Material
objects exert forces that can accelerate material objects, and our
theory is that those forces are a form of matter that helps make up
the material objects and whose quantity is counted in their rest
masses. When potential energy has given the objects kinetic energy,
for example, the objects have not only changed their relative
positions, but the force field itself has changed. The change in the
force field means that less matter is required to constitute it, and
that is the source of the kinetic energy, which on our theory is also
a form of matter. Thus, it is a conversion of some of the matter
counted as rest mass into matter that is counted as kinetic energy.
The opposite conversion occurs when kinetic energy becomes potential
energy, and the same principle holds for conversions between
potential energy and photons (and other forms of matter). Thus, the
conversion between potential energy and kinetic energy does not
violate the principle of the conservation of <i>mass and energy</i>. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Even
though, in these processes, matter is being converted between a form
that is counted as rest mass and a form that is counted as kinetic
energy, the total quantity of energy does not change. The reason is
that potential energy is counted as zero when it is maximum and that
any potential energy that is consumed as kinetic energy (or photons)
is counted as a bit negative energy in the region. There can be no
such thing as negative matter, since matter is a substance. But
counting potential energy as negative energy keeps the energy
accounts balanced. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Negative
potential energy is explained ontologically as a decrease in the rest
masses of the material objects. The “rest mass” of a material
object is defined, according to our ontological explanation of
physics, as its mass when it is at rest in absolute space and the
only force field in its neighborhood is the one that it imposes by
itself (that is, separate from other material objects). </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Thus, when
it is (falsely) assumed that the rest masses of the objects involved
are unchanged, counting potential energy as negative energy keeps the
total quantity of mass and energy the same. The actual loss of mass
from the total quantity of rest mass in the region is so small
(according to Einsteins equation, <i>E = mc</i><sup><i>2</i></sup>)
that the change in potential energy is not easily detected as a
change in rest mass. Thus, counting potential energy as a negative
quantity makes it seem that energy is conserved separately from rest
mass in these processes. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">But in
fact, rest mass is not conserved. An objects mass changes as its
potential energy is actualized. Only the total of mass and energy are
conserved even in most ordinary processes (where an objects mass
apart from its kinetic matter is accurately determined by subtracting
the potential energy it has given up from its rest mass). </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Thus,
whereas the conservation of matter is an ontologically necessary
global regularity, the conservation of energy is ontologically
necessary only on the condition that matter has a nature that makes
the basic laws of physics true, and thus, this shows it to be
ontologically necessary only in spatiomaterial worlds like our own.</font></font></font></p>
</body>
</html>