I figured out one metaphor for it. E=Mc2. I don’t think he even realized it. The rrmarksbimity if that equation is almost magical to a scientist. But it isn’t magical and isn’t remarkable. The simplicity and beauty of that equation and it’s meaning is a farse. The equation is relative to other equations, it wasn’t anything new. Let me explain. The equation describes a relationship. Maybe there a hidden metaphor there as well. I’m still open to relativity being s metaphor for something familiar as well. Anyway. The relationship is found by plotting a bunch of measurements. You end up with a fuzzy cloud of data. But it has a trend. So he deduced the trend. That was his genius was finding the trend. What variables do you pick? He found that a general trend exists such that energy = mass times the square of the speed of light. It seems remarkable because wow, he has data showing a simple relationship between values we already use. It fits. It’s simple. It must be law.
But the truth is, it’s just a rearrangement if other equations. And they’re all just relative to each other, not tied to any thing concrete. It’s becasue of the energy value. It can’t be measured. The same as force. Force and energy are deduced by the human mind. They are concepts. And all equations are relative to that deduced concept. It overly simplified everything, when nature might be much more complicated. Our current system of science just found a way to make it all relative.
We can only directly measure length, time, and temperature. Anything else must be deduced from those measurements. The deductions form this complex system of equations that are all only relative to each other, not necessarily anything concrete. That’s what his brain was projecting. And I don’t think he knew what he was saying! It’s so cool how the brain works. It expresses the truth, but rarely in the right context. And that’s my metaphor.
The concepts, force and energy, are likely projected metaphors of the scientists mind as well. Every man wants strength and energy right?
But they don’t necessarily actually exist or have any relevance to physical reality. They are just the hinge that makes all of our current understanding work, they are the pieces that make everything else relative. I think this means we are missing something fundamental, and Einstein touched on it by finding that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. I am missing strength and energy myself. But I think scientists have more to find.
Sorry, we can’t directly measure temperature. It is deduced from a length measurement. As kength gets longer, temperature goes up. That’s a metaphor as well.
So you see? We measure distance and time and arrive at a deduced value, a concept, called force. We measure length of mercury and end up at another concept, temperature. We use either of those to deduce energy. We measure distance again on a scale to arrive at force, and then deduce yet another concept from that, mass. Then we can make another two level deduction to arrive at energy again. Do you see it? All we can see is length and time and then we put them into these equations to make sense. And it seems remarkable that they all end up being relative to each other. But they have to be relative, because we created them that way. So it isn’t remarkable. In e=mc2, he’s simply found another way of expressing existing equations. The equations of what length he measured to find the speed of light, what length he measured to find the mass, and what length he measured to find the temperature. It’s hard to see.
It’s like this. You have a steel ball. You want to measure it’s weight. You hang it from a spring. You measure the distance. Ok deduce a weight from that. Hanging from the spring. So then you say, ok I can use this weight measurement to deduce how the much spring will compress if I put the steel ball on top the spring. So you use your previous distance measurement and the deduced weight to figure out the springs constant. Now you calculate ok if I put the weight of that steel ball on this spring with this spring constant, then it should compress this far. Magically, you calculate the spring will compress exactly the same amount as it extended when you weighed it!!!
But you didn’t actually find anything out. You just made calculations relative to deduced concepts of force and weight.
This is where we are at with science. Einstein ended up at the other edge of our deduced realtivities based on our ability to perceive. And came up with the equation that sort of back calculates everything. And it all hinges around that constant. The speed of light.
It’s like social media. It all hinges a round a central theme with sub themes sort of like a steel ball going up and down in a spring. But the central focus, with the clarity of light, stays true. Something like that. A big bright white explosion right in the middle.
A sensory perception. What if time only exists in the human brain? Or this whole speed of light conundrum is simply a symptom of our filtered perception? It’s scary to realize that there may be things, but things, that exist, but we can’t see. Like an ant. He can’t perceive me, but I can control his destiny.