Sei sulla pagina 1di 3

ZERO MASS THEOREM

(The Theoretical Impossibilty of the Existence of Matter)

by f. maiello

_____________________

Postulate: There can be no limit, in theory, to the factor of shrinkage [in] approaching an
infinitesimal microcosm.

Mental Experiment:

Question: If one were capable of shrinking to the size of


a
quark, for example, what would one expect to
see?

Answer: For illustrative purposes*, we'll describe it as


a sphere the size of a basketball.

Question: What would one expect its composition to be?

Observation 1: If this represents the level where particles were finally considered to be
solid matter (as a result of being regarded as elementary, indivisible, incapable of being
made out of some combination of other things), the implied presumption is that it also
represents the microscopic limit (i.e. we can't look beyond, nor does anything exist which is
smaller than the quark dimension). Whereas, if an observer were capable of breaking this
size barrier and further shrink to the next micro-level down (viz: .0000000001 times the size
of an average sub-atomic particle), the result would yield a quark relatively the size of a
planet. Now, what would its previously imagined solidness look like in this dimension?
What characteristics would or could such hypothetical material take on?

Reasonable Conclusion 1: At this new 'super-sub-atomic' level, the spacetime continuum is


again in evidence, establishing its typically vast regions between [what are now suddenly
noticed to be] still another set of [smaller] spherical units, which may be referred to as
'ultra-super-sub-atomic' particles or ussaps. Whereof, incidentally, the presumed existence
of these newfound particles, in turn, proves that the quarks, leptons, or bosons can no longer
be considered, in of themselves, solid units of matter (indeed, they have not been considered
thus by all).

Observation 2: We can now insert the idea of the ussap into the format of "Observation 1"
and reach the selfsame conclusion, cranked down to the next sub-dimension. Moreover, this
procedure can be repeated again and again, reaching the next level down, and the next, and
so on, ad infinitum! (The suggestion may seem incredible that there can be no end to the
depth of the microcosm , yet it seems even more incredible that there would be! In fact,
only the arbitrary reference point of the ego (observer) in spacetime has the tendency to
indirectly assume a limit. And 'indirectly' is stressed here because such a limit is never
actively reasoned out, but is subconsciously taken for granted; for, as soon as it's
investigated, the idea soon collapses.)

Final Conclusion: Since there can be no diminished limit, in theory, to the size of
conceivable globes of apparent substance, there can neither be any solid matter finally
beheld in any of their relative dimensions.

___________________

This may be referred to as the Theory of Zero Mass, and it has far-reaching implications--
not the least of which pulls the [already precarious] foundation of classical mechanics with
its user-friendly laws, clean out from under the entire idea of what physics itself is supposed
to represent! The fundamental problem we've been missing all along is the fact that we have
been dealing with the effects of consciousness (viz. data derived from the world of
phenomena, our sensual interpretation of it and, incredible as it may sound, our thoughts
apprehending the measurements recorded by our senses ). We have been juggling,
assorting, defining and categorizing merely the byproducts of something much deeper. And
the mistake we're still making is, to use an analogy, not unlike the way we formerly
[classically] viewed a big world object, naively concluding that what we saw was what we
got--i.e. that it was utterly composed of the material which it represented to our senses...
until we were capable of magnifying our focus, mentally as well as experi-mentally.

Not to suggest that this theory, or something similar to it, hasn't been conceived by any
other physicist. However, it is suggesting that its methodical approach is novel, simpler and
much more compelling.

___________________

The Zero Mass Theorem Formula:

m = E(0)/c

(mass equals Energy times zero divided by


the velocity of light )

or: m = 0

___________________
* A quark is a hypothetical fragment of a hadron (which is a sub-atomic constituent that
participates in the strong force in atomic structure), carrying a partially fractional electronic
charge. To describe its appearance in simple terms is an impossibility; since it thrives within
a complex virtual field of potential, probable and dualistic particle/wave characteristics.
Therefore, for our purposes here, we will grossly simplify its apparent phenomenal event.

** Or, like the macrocosm (according to general relativity), it curves in on itself. Einstein's
proposal that mass feigns some mysterious linear force called gravity, where in fact it really
causes curvatures which influence the paths other masses take, is here over-rode by the
radical idea that mass itself appears in the format of an energy event which is, in turn,
technically nothing more than a thoughtform! It has no objective reality (apart from the
entified consciousness conceiving it).

One may also theorize (as an embellishment to what Einstein was suggesting) that there may
in fact be a limit to the microcosm which, upon reaching it, one would then be plunged into
an interval of nothingness whereupon one's 'psychic momentum' would further eventually
transport its host past this interval and on into the field of--the macrocosm!...suggesting a
sort of spherical closed-loop structure to the format in which consciousness itself manifests.
This seems to be a neat model, and one that appears to satisfy an archetypal paradigm
infused throughout nature and--as science is beginning to discover--within the artform and
experiential methodology of the human mind as well. (i.e.: It boils down to the fact that we
are perhaps witnessing exclusively the infinite diversity of mindshapes. This is the central
theme contended by deep metaphysics; and, specifically, relates to what the Hindus refer to
as the maya of kriyashakthi {the projection of forms and energies emanating from the power
of the mind}.) 'As Without, so Within.'

Obviously, if the latter were true, it would refute the postulate upon which my theory is
founded. Yet, it will, just as simply and even more artistically, prove the non-objective
existence of matter.

*** Please disregard this idea [regarding the implied transient nature of thoughts] if it is
found so fundamentally disagreeable as to cause a reaction of apathetic indifference to the
experiment. If the remainder of what is contended is found plausible, and if the reader so
desires to pursue it further, this idea is addressed elsewhere in the website.

**** Translated: Mass is an appearance of the non-event of Energy. This will likely be met
with vigorous opposition, if not cynicism or even laughter. Nevertheless, it is a conclusion
reached--albeit incredible--via the scientific method. Only a measure of patience and a fair
dose of an open mind will enable one to perhaps come to recognize that it is a viable
possibility.

___________________

Potrebbero piacerti anche