THE TRUE ESSENCE OF "RELATIVITY"
Consider again the observations of "primitive" man, who has not yet been indoctrinated with the future concepts of irrelevant units of distance such as feet and miles, nor with the units of time such as seconds and hours. The primitive man is constantly aware of his surroundings as perceived in the current instant of existence. His primary objective is simply that of survival. His existence depends on the relative distance (simply near or far), and momentary motion (or lack thereof) of each separate object in his surrounding environment.
RELATIVE DISTANCE
"Fixed" objects, such as trees or stones present no obvious threat, and the only perception of major significance about such objects would be the relative distance between each such object and himself. Because there is no perceived motion of those fixed objects there is no concern about a dissipation of the currently existing distance between himself and the objects. Having no concept of pre-established units of measurement, the only factor of concern is the relative distance of each object. The word does not yet exist, but in essence the relative "unit of distance" is simply that total distance which applies for each specific object. The rock is one relative "me-to-rock" unit of distance. The tree is one relative "me-to-tree" unit of distance. The primitive man has no knowledge, nor any need for words such as feet or yards or miles which have not yet been "invented"..
MOTION AND RELATIVE TIME
If the man perceives motion of an object in his surroundings, then he must add a second consideration in his thinking. If objects are in motion, then the possibility exists that the object presents a threat to his own safety. The degree of potential risk includes two factors. The first is relative distance between object and self. The second is how quickly that distance of separation might be traversed by the object, based on the perceived amount of motion during the current instantaneous observation. ( If the concept of instantaneous motion is difficult for the reader to comprehend, think of the term as the value of our current concept of "average velocity" as the associated duration of time used to calculate that average value decreases toward zero.)
The primitive man has no knowledge, nor any interest, in the number of "seconds" or "minutes" for that possible change to occur - he only has the more basic thought about the duration of time for that current separation distance to be reduced to zero.. That potential duration of time is the "relative" unit of time of concern..
If the man were to shift his attention from one tree or from one bear to any other object in his environment, then the thought process about a unit of distance and a unit of time would be identical to the above. In the mind of that primitive man each specific object would be one "relative" unit of distance separated from himself, and if he sensed "relative" motion, the unit of "relative" time would be that time associated with the dissipation of that current relative unit of distance based on the currently perceived instantaneous "relative" motion.
COMPARITIVE RATIOS
The above considerations do not deny that the primitive man still has the ability to perceive many different objects, at many different distances, and with or without current differences in motion. The primitive man might even evaluate the differences which he perceived by means of comparisons - or what we currently call "ratios" of comparison. Such as ‘the distance between me and the bear is twice as far as the distance between me and the tree’. But since the concepts of absolute units such as feet of distance or seconds of time had not been "invented" yet, they could not possibly be factors of interest within his own mind.
APPLICATION OF PRIMATIVE UNITS OF RELATIVE MEASUREMENTS
TO MODERN MATHEMATICAL CONCEPTS
Modern man’s actual physical sensory capacities are probably very similar to those of the primitive man. Modern man sees relative distances between self and other objects in his environment, and is aware of the instantaneous relative motion (or lack thereof) between self and other objects.
But modern man no longer "thinks" about that which he perceives in the same terms as the primitive man. Modern man’s communication and thought processes have been modified as the result of eons of socialization, commerce, trade, and academic training.
Even though our most basic, subconscious thoughts may closely parallel those outlined above for primitive man, if we wish to communicate those thoughts then we relay the message in terms of modern words such as
- ‘the distance from me to the bear was 200 feet. I could see that the bear was running at a velocity of about 20 miles per hour. At that velocity, I only had a few seconds of time to get to a tree located 100 feet away before the bear might reach me.’
Note that while the basic thought (and emotion) of primitive and modern man may be identical, the primitive man had no awareness (or need) to express the distances in a number of feet (irrelevant units), or velocity in a certain number of miles per hour (irrelevant units), or the time in a certain number of seconds (irrelevant units). The primitive man just needed to survive - he could worry about explaining later.
RELATIVE VERSUS ABSOLUTE DISTANCE
The contrast is quite simple. Modern man insists that every distance should be expressed in terms of the ratio of some specific number of pre-defined fixed units of length, which have no relativity to the specific distance of interest. Hence the mathematical value which applies for distance can vary from zero to infinity. Relative distance is simply that specific unit relativity between any two points of interest. The mathematical value of relative distance can therefore never be any value other than simply 1.0
RELATIVE MOTION VERSUS VELOCITY
The modern word "velocity" is a mathematical equation which implies a ratio of a specific change in the location of an object of interest during an associated lapse of time. The amount of the change in location is expressed in terms of a mathematical ratio of observed change in location to a predefined (irrelevant) unit of length. The duration of the associated change in time is expressed in terms of a mathematical ratio of recorded lapse in time to a predefined (irrelevant) unit of time lapse. The mathematical value of instantaneous "velocity" is meaningless because both the numerator and denominator of the associated ratio (change in location, and change in time) are equal to zero.
Relative "motion" is a natural factor which either currently exists or is absent. Relative motion is unrelated to time or time lapse. Furthermore, because it is based on an instantaneous observation, an associated relocation in space does not physically occur. Motion is a scalar factor, rather than a vector value such as that which modern science applies to the term of "velocity". Relative motion is a factor which man senses without need for use of dimensional units. Examples include our physically sensing of the motion of an overhead cloud as the result of a sudden change in the light around us. Or we sense the motion of a bothersome fly near our face, or the danger of an impending collision due to an automobile seen only out of the corner of our eye. We sense the occurrence of such events as current instantaneous "motion", without concern about the scientific mathematical value of any "velocity" which might be applied.
If we wish to create a parallel concept of "relative velocity" then we must divide the current (instantaneous) relative unit of distance between the two objects of interest, by the current relative unit of time required for that distance to dissipate, based on the current existing motion. If there is a distance of separation, but no relative motion, then the relative value of velocity is meaningless (one unit of relative distance divided by an infinite number of units of relative time required for the current motion to result in the closure of that unit of distance). If however, any relative motion does exist, then the value of relative velocity can never vary from simply 1.0 (one unit of current "relative" distance divided by one unit of current "relative" time).
SIGNIFICANCE OF RELATIVE UNITS OF MEASUREMENT
This concept is simple, but requires some mental adjustment before it can be understood. But it is both logical and understandable after a little mental effort. Remember that the relative unit of distance is based on an instantaneous, current observation, and the relative unit of time is also based on an how long it would take for the two objects to merge, based on the current instantaneous state of motion.. The thought process is circular, with only one possible conclusion. If any motion exists, then the mathematical value of "relative" velocity can never vary from one. Once that paradoxical thought is recognized, most of the remaining concepts of classical science become meaningless when the measurements of interest are considered in terms of relativity to the specific observation of interest. At that point a domino effect sets in.
The most immediately obvious scientific "word" which becomes meaningless is the word "acceleration". If the mathematical value of relative distance can never vary from 1.0, and the relative time can never vary from 1.0, then the mathematical value of "acceleration (distance divided by the square of time) must also be constant at 1.0.
If the value of acceleration can never vary from 1.0, then the mathematical value of "mass" must be identical to the mathematical value of "force". Either that is true, or the basic law of physics (F=MA) must be false.
Note that this is exactly the same conclusion that we reached earlier during the discussion about Newton’s experiments which led him to the development of the equation F=MA. In that chapter we found that his experiment actually only proved that the ratio of an applied force to the natural resisting force must be a mathematical constant. In that section it was stated in the form Fa/Fn = K. Based on the information presented in this section, we become aware that when a relative system of measurements is utilized then the value of that constant "K" is simply 1.0.
We are beginning to close the loop. But so far, we have only begun to scratch the surface of the significance of using the concept of relative units of dimensions. A little mental rest and recuperation is in order before we continue in the next segment of this document
