7. DISCUSSION

7.1. Conclusion

I stated in the introduction that most of Einstein's theory of special relativity is impeccable. However, Einstein created special relativity by augmenting classical physics to satisfy his postulate of the constancy of the speed of light in a vacuum. Although his postulate is correct, his augmentation of classical physics retains archaic principles that are wrong, and these principles are the weak points of special relativity. These archaic principles include the infinite speed of space, the separation of space and time, and the concept of a mass for matter. Also, special relativity does not agree with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and does not predict the probabilistic location of a particle of matter. This is true for classical theory as well. Furthermore, the minimum requirements to be a quantum time and space theory is that it agree with the elementary principles of quantum theory. Therefore, special relativity is not a quantum theory of time and space; in reality, it is a classical theory. To eradicate these archaic principles and predict elementary quantum principles from a structure or space and time, I did not augment the past. Instead, I invented a new theory of time and space.

In creating a new theory of time and space, I had to predict the experimentally verified results of previous successful theories of time and space. What I did was derive classical and relativistic verified results: I predicted rod and clock measurements, the motion of bodies relative to each other, Einstein's two postulates of special relativity, and relativistic kinematics and dynamics. However, in order for this theory to be distinct, it also had to make new predictions that were not made in these previous theories. In this new theory, I predicted a finite speed for space, a here-now, the equivalency of time to distance, and the definition of time and space that agree more with the measurement of particles, the rest momentum-energy for matter, the photon's perspective of space and time, the laws of cause and effect governing the photon, and the speeds for quantum tunneling via an infinitesimal space. In addition, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and the probabilistic position of a matter-wave have been shown to agree with distance-time theory. Since Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and the probabilistic position of a matter-wave agree with distance-time theory, it seems only logical to conclude that distance-time theory is a quantum theory of space and time. These predictions, which I have just listed, were not made in traditional theories of time and space. The relationship between distance-time theory to the special theory of relativity is best portrayed in Figure 1. This figure displays two circles. The smaller circle is included within the larger one. The larger circle's area represents the predictions of distance-time theory. These predictions include special relativistic results plus predictions only found in distance-time theory. The smaller circle's area represents only verified predictions made by the special theory of relativity.

I believe that, one of the most unique elements of distance-time theory is that it is a structure of time and space which predicts elementary quantum principles mostly independent of quantum mechanics. (First, I derive the quantum principles in this article from a distance-time manifold. Second, I refer to elementary quantum mechanics as a reference.) Quantum mechanics by itself is not a structure of time and space, yet it does make inferences about time and space. Both Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and the probabilistic location of a particle are essentially laws stating the relationship of a particle to space and time. These laws about a particle's relationship to space and time are significant! Yet, special relativity does not predict such laws. On the other hand, distance-time theory does predict these laws. This does not mean that distance-time theory is a form of relativistic quantum mechanics. Relativistic quantum mechanics is essentially applying relativity to quantum theory. In contrast, distance-time theory is not about applying relativity to quantum theory. Instead, it is about a new structure of time and space with intrinsic quantum characteristics, and it makes new predictions not found elsewhere.

There are other characteristics of distance-time theory, which separate it from special relativity. In the remainder of this article, I elaborate on the relationship between matter, antimatter, light, and distance-time theory. I use the phrases "matter mechanics," "antimatter mechanics," and "photon mechanics" to refer to all laws that govern matter, antimatter, and light, respectively. Toward the end of the explanation, I hypothesize about the relationship between matter, antimatter, and photon mechanics. I begin by analyzing the destruction and creation of matter, antimatter, and light.

When a particle of matter emits light, a portion of the mass of the particle of matter is destroyed and light is created, according to Einstein's Equation E = mc². [1–5] When matter absorbs light, matter is created and light is destroyed according to the equation I just put forth. Considering these phenomena, I pose two questions. First, what happens to matter mechanics once matter transforms to the state of light? Second, what happens to photon mechanics once light becomes matter?

In another phenomenon, called “pair annihilation”, a particle of matter and its corresponding antiparticle of antimatter annihilate each other, thereby creating light [10]. A phenomenon believed to exist, which is a reversal of “pair annihilation”, is known as pair production. This is defined here as the creation of matter and antimatter out of pure light [10]. If the same light from a pair annihilation were captured and used in a pair production, the particle and antiparticle created in the pair production would still obey the same mechanics that the particle and antiparticle obeyed before pair annihilation. Therefore, matter and antimatter mechanics are not created arbitrarily when light transforms to the states of matter and antimatter, and matter and antimatter mechanics must have been preserved in some unrecognizable form in photon mechanics. Hence, once the light transforms back to matter and antimatter, the mechanics of matter and antimatter reemerge.

At this point, I analyze a couple of examples of the transformation between a matter mechanics and a photon mechanics, using distance-time theory. In distance-time theory, relative to matter, the photon crosses a distance per period of time at a rate of D/T = c. Since, relative to matter, the photon, traveling in a vacuum along its event line, moves as fast as eventons, the photon experiences only one set of events here-now, including its own event line, which is the path of the photon relative to matter. On the other hand, if the photon, through some unknown process, comes to rest, it could easily be contacted many times with a distinct eventon. As a result, the photon would experience a rest speed across distance-time, as is the case with matter, and it would experience its own event line expanded out, not located here-now, and this would be similar to matter. The sets of events located here-now to the photon would be the same set of events located here-now to a body of matter at rest with the photon. The photon, at rest in a reference frame for matter, would experience time and space the same as matter in that reference frame. Hence, this illustrates how a matter kinematics can be derived from a photon kinematics. This is in contrast to special relativity, where this cannot be shown, as there are no rules given for a photon's distance-time defined in special relativity.

In this next example, I discuss the conservation of momentum-energy in the transformation between the states of light and matter. In distance-time theory, light and matter possess momentum-energy. Therefore, in the transformation between matter mechanics and photon mechanics, momentum-energy is unaltered in the state of light or matter. This is not the case in special relativity theory, where matter possesses a mass-energy. Therefore, the momentum-energy of light is perceived to have altered to mass-energy, according to relativity. Since no altering of momentum-energy is necessary in distance-time theory, matter and photon mechanics are more similar in distance-time theory than they are in special relativity theory.

In the last two examples, I have shown how characteristics of light and matter can be preserved in the transference between light and matter in distance-time theory. Again, I reiterate that this is not the case in special relativity theory. As I indicated previously, matter can be created out of light and vice versa. Nevertheless, this does not mean that light possesses the same characteristics as matter. For instance, light does not possess an electric charge, whereas matter does. Still, in the earlier hypothetical scenario where I concluded that matter and antimatter mechanics are conserved in an unrecognizable form in a photon mechanics, I propose the following hypothesis: matter and antimatter mechanics can be derived from a photon mechanics and vice versa. As a result, the characteristic of an electric charge can be derived from a photon mechanics. According to my hypothesis, this occurs even though the photon does not possess an electric charge. In order for matter mechanics to be derived from photon mechanics, the process that transforms light to matter and matter to light needs to be fully understood. Because this process is unknown, I have not derived a photon's distance-time directly out of matter mechanics in this article. Instead, I have merely defined a photon’s distance-time as compatibly placed in a reference frame for matter by using distance-time theory.

Physics began with the classical structure of space and time. In this model, time was not a fourth dimension. It was an axis that was added to the three dimensions of space to allow for the movement of things. All classical theories were developed using this structure. The classical space and time model evolved into the space-time continuum. In this model, the time axis is a fourth dimension. All physics theories were developed using this model. However, one question still remains: Is there any direct way to test for any dimension beyond three? So far, the answer has been no. If there are only three dimensions, ultimately all theories are going to have to find ways to agree with only three dimensions. The best theories in classical physics have been based on the space and time model. The best theories of the twentieth century have been based on the space-time continuum model. I strongly believe that the best theories of the future will be three-dimensional, which is the only number of dimensions proven to exist.