Adapted for the Internet from:

Why God Doesn't Exist

    1.0   A field is not a portion

    Let’s first distinguish between a region and a portion. A region answers a question starting with ‘where’
    whereas a portion answers a question starting with ‘what’. A region has to do with places and locations. A
    portion has to do with objects. We talk about a region around a magnet or of a country. This is a qualitatively
    different notion than talking about a portion of pizza. A region is specified with coordinates. A portion is a
    stand alone object that has dimensions (length, width, and height). Hence, the only way that a field could
    qualify as a portion is if we regard it as a chunk of space and assume that space is a physical entity. If
    space is not a physical object, the mathematical physicist cannot equate space with a portion.

    We could still regard the word field as an entity if the word region qualifies as a physical medium or
    substance. For example, we routinely refer to a section of the human body or a piece of land as a region.

    However, it is easy to distinguish between them. Until it is cut and removed, a portion, a piece, or a chunk
    is a region of a greater whole. An arm is a region of the body that turns into a chunk when it is chopped off.
    A region cannot be extracted without losing its identity. A place such as Mongolia is not just a piece of land
    or an outline on a map. Mongolia cannot do without Russia or China. The references are crucial to reach an
    understanding of the concept Mongolia. The Mongolian farmer does not lift a region of Mongolia with a shovel,
    but a chunk of soil. If the word field is defined as a region of space, it is conceptually a place and not a portion.
    It cannot be ripped from the mother entity and stand alone. A place is defined not in terms of what it is itself,
    but in terms of what contains it.
The mathematical field
is unphysical
A field is a region, a chunk of space,
a portion of nothing, you know, like a
piece of a pie. The purpose of this
region is to accelerate charges
through the region.

    2.0   A field does not occupy space

    A region is not equivalent to the thing occupying the region itself. Either a field – the medium – occupies
    space or a field is space. Einstein claims that gravitational field is space (for otherwise he would have to
    define what space is, which he never did.):

    Einstein himself said that so far as his general relativity is concerned, space
      (actually space-time) and the gravitational field are the same things...” [1]

    “ There can be no space nor any part of space without gravitational potentials;
      for these confer upon space its metrical qualities, without which it cannot be
      imagined at all. The existence of the gravitational field is inseparably bound
      up with the existence of space.” [2]

    Of course, it is absolutely irrational to even suggest that field and space are identical. Einstein needs to
    have his head examined! Equating the gravitational field to space leads to logical contradictions.

Fig. 1   Field: Region vs. Portion
Ooooh Stevie! Your
explanation is
A region can never attain indepen-
dence from its references. Unlike a
piece, a chunk, or a portion, a region
is not a stand-alone object. Once we
cut a portion of pizza, it stands alone.
We can’t do this with a region. A field
is not formally defined as a piece or
as a portion of space. It never has.
A field is defined as a region of
space. Therefore, by definition, a
field cannot stand alone.


                                  Home                    Books                    Glossary            

        Copyright © by Nila Gaede 2008