Results of SIM were for the first
time published in the news-group sci.physics under the name "NEW UNIVERSAL
LAW OF PHYSICS" from December 22, 1999. (SI is the International
System of Units. SIM is a system
built here using only mechanical units.)
Protons and electrons are indistinguishable equivalent particles
in microcosm, that is to say, they are equivalent in the 4d lattice
relatively lattice's links, which are the absolutely elementary particles,
link-particles. Three dimensions of microcosm 4d lattice degenerate
into our 3d space, and the 4-th dimension of microcosm degenerates into
the time axis relatively objects composed of elementary particles, and
relatively large conglomerates of particles.
Mass is space inertia; charge is time inertia. Units for measuring
mass and charge must be of the same type. (Imagine the situation then
somebody measures the horizontal dimensions in meters, and vertical
dimensions in feet. We are now in the analogues situation.) The law
“F=ma” must be more general. Acceleration in space, which is measured
in L/T2 units, must have its analogue in the form of time
acceleration, measured in T/L2 units.
Let's try to investigate and find the symmetry in the bottom table:
- spatial inertia
q = mt
- time inertia
Components of four-dimensional force
= qE = mtat
Units of accelerations in SI:
The conclusion must work in any system of units; and we can take
any system. For example, let’s take SI.
Velocity of light is the ratio of 299792458 spatial units to one time
Consequently, in order to calibrate the space-inertia units (mass) and
time-inertia units (charge), we must take into account that space unit
in SI is 299792458 times smaller than time unit. Hence, between the
elementary mass (mass of proton) and elementary charge there must be
an equation: q=mr*k, where k is defined through c3,
because of asymmetry of accelerations units (L/T2, T/L2)
(L/T2)/( T/L2) = L3/T3 =
It is known that in Special Relativity Theory the 4d force is used,
which is not the same as 3d force, used in classical mechanics. Here,
on the contrary, the forces are divided into two types:
1. Gravitational (inertial) or space-like force, which is directed along
2. Electrical or time-like force directed along the time axis.
Because we have equivalent calibrated units of mass and charge, mass
of proton and charge of an electron, we can write the following set
From the last set of equations we can derive the charge of an electron,
written in mechanical units:
q = mrc3 = 0.04506711 kg*m3/s3
We can forget about the "coulomb" unit, but for reference here it
is written in mechanical units:
1 C = 2.8128687E+17 kg*m3/s3,
I = Q/t.
1A=1C/s = 2.8128687E+17 kg*m3/s4.
1V=1W/A = 1J/s/A = 3.5550895E-18 s/m
Look! Voltage is a velocity along the time axis, i.e. [U] = s/m.
You can compare it with space-like velosity: [v] = m/s. Difference of
electric potentials is measured in the same units: [j1-j2]
= s/m, which is also characterized as time-like velocity.
Electric field strength, E:
Electric field strength is the time-like acceleration: [E] = 1V/m
= 3.5550895E-18 s/m2. Compare it with space-like acceleration:
[ar] = m/s2
Indeed, F=qE, which reminds us the upper written formula F=ma. But
now the electric field strength is measured in simple mechanical units:
[E] = s/m2, time-like acceleration.
Permittivity of empty space, e0:
The value of electric constant can be defined with the help of the
e0 = q2/(2ahc)
= 7.005637E+23 kg*m3/s4
The flux of electrical field strength
is measured in seconds!The ideas of
N.A. Kozyrev are realized here. He spoke, that massive objects absorb
the time. And we have received here the analogous picture: one charge
absorbs the time; other charge emits the time. Somebody wrote that that
was the hypothesis of R. Feynman. Let’s calculate the flow of E-field
from the elementary charge, and we’ll know the difference of time readings
between physical vacuum and electron.
T = FE = q/e0 = 6.432979E-26
The time reading of elementary charge with other sign will be negative.
That is, the positive elementary charge always on 6.432979E-26 seconds
outstrips the coordinate time, physical vacuum time. The negative charge,
on the contrary, is always late by the same microscopic fraction of
a second. This difference in elementary charge time and coordinate time
can be compared with Compton time determined from:
mc2 = hn, t = 1/n,
t = h/mc2.
In the case of proton we have:
t = h/mc2 = 4.40775E-24 s.
Fine structure constant, a:
The ratio of Compton time, which is the length measured in seconds along
the spatial coordinate, to the charge time, which is the height of a
peak in vacuum is:
t / T = 68.51799988 = (2a)-1,
This result is obvious, because all formulae in SI continue to be
valid, and their outlook in new units sheds the light onto many old
riddles. It is clear now, that the fine structure constant, multiplied
by two is a tangent of an angle formed by legs of a time triangle.
The preliminary analysis has shown, that the above-mentioned forces
can be written down as 4-vector of force, just as it was made in SRT,
but there it was made without the account of the charge. It is also
interesting to use these units in Maxwell and Schr�dinger equations.
It is the usual substitution.
What is electromagnetic wave?
The electromagnetic waves are wide-spreading fluctuations and twisting
of time in space. Polarized light is a rotating fluctuations of time,
Why don't physicists use such units as m, s, kg, instead V, A, C,
T, ...? Mechanical units reflect reality. Electricity and magnetism
can be interpreted in more understandable language. Perhaps I am not
the first person to see this, so if you have seen F=qat,
anywhere else, please refer me to the author. Has anyone said: "Charge
is time inertia", before me?
The error in CGS system.
I don’t believe to be the first. Indeed the first was Gauss. However,
at that time it was impossible to go the above shown way. In the Gaussian
system CGSQ (centimeter, gram, second) the electrical units
were introduced with the help of Coulomb law, F=q1q2/r2,
and with the equation, F=G*m1m2/r2.
It is clear that these equations are not symmetric, and, as a result,
the unit of charge received the fractional dimensionality: [Q] = cm3/2
g1/2 / s.
Obviously, such fractional units did not reflect reality. Moreover,
the representation of electrical units in different CGS systems is incorrect
methodologically, because the gravity and electricity are put in an
asymmetrical form. In the formula for gravitational force, F=G*m1m2/r2,
there is a dimensional gravitational constant G; in the formula for
electrical force, F=q1q2/r2, there
is no such constant, but there is a dimensionless coefficient “1”. It
is this coefficient “1”, which must take/give some part of dimensionality
on itself and make them integer (non-fractional). It would be correctly
F = m1m2/r2, F = q1q2/r2,
F = G*m1m2/r2, F = k*q1q2/r2.
In the first case we lose the dimension of mass. It follows from
the solution of the system of the equations: F=m2/r2,
F=ma. The unit of mass is expressed through: [m] = [r2a]
=1m3/s2. Mass becomes not base, but derived quantity.
If we use meter and second as standards, then new standard of mass would
be 1/(6.67*10-11) times bigger than former. The unit of mass
would be: 1 unit of mass = 1.5*1010 kg = 1m3/1s2.
New unit of force would also be bigger. Dimension of force would be:
dim F = L4/T4. Dimension of a charge would be
equal to the dimension of mass: dim Q = dim M = L3/T2;
dimension of electrical current would be: dim I = L3/T3.
The second case reflects SI. Mass remains the base quantity, and
as the result, there appears the electric current, as new base quantity.
On the contrary, here we had kept the mass as the base quantity.
Mass is spatial inertia, charge is temporal inertia. Proton and electron
are equivalent particles in the 4d lattice, but move under different
angles relative to our space and time coordinate axes. This is why the
investigation of the system SIM is necessary for the study
of space-time-matter properties.
The comparative table of dimensionalities of some
quantities in systems SI, SIM, CGSsymmetric, is
electric charge, q
electric field strength, E
electric potential, j
electric flux, FE
electric induction, D
magnetic induction, B
magnetic flux, FB
magnetic field strength, H
It was shown that the representation or expression of such physical
quantities as charge and mass in the same identical units is not contradictory.
That means that in 4d space lattice in microlevel the charge and mass
are the same entities but we, 3-d macro-beings, see them differently.
Dimensionality of the system of units is very closely connected with
the dimensionality of the Universe on its different scales. We say that
we live in 3d space and time. Space and time intervals can be measured
in the same units, for example, in seconds. Are spatial second and time
second equivalent for us? Certainly, not. If we could jump in future
at the distance equal to one second, we would not see much difference,
but if you could jump to the right or to the left at the distance equal
to one second, you would find yourself far from the Earth, may be much
closer to the Moon. By the way, we live at the Earth’s surface, and
our space coordinates are also non-equivalent. We can easily move along
the horizontal axis, but we cannot move along vertical axis without
support. The rates of watches on the ends of one-meter horizontal rod
are equal, but the rates of watches on the ends of the same vertical
rod are not equal. This difference is very small. If it would be much
greater, then we would measure the horizontal length in one sort of
units, and the vertical length in other units.
But the situation in the micro-world is quite different. Three-dimensional
space and time transforms into 4d spacetime with equivalent axes. And
in this section we have show that the elementary charge and elementary
mass are equivalent properties in the microworld.
And here is the main conclusion: Charge is the time-like inertia.
Mass is the space-like inertia. If you unite space and time into space-time,
then you must unite mass and charge into mass-charge.