The Ontological Causes of the Lorentz Distortions. Lorentz explained the negative result of the Michelson-Morley experiment by distortions in material objects caused by their motion through absolute space, and his own research focused on explaining those distortions as an interaction between material objects and the luminiferous ether according to his electron theory of matter, a theory that is now known to be false. He could have simply assumed the Lorentz distortions as basic laws of physics, as we have thus far, but we will travel once again in Lorentz's footsteps by considering a deeper explanation of his distortions, an ontological theory that makes use of our assumption that there is an inherent motion in space and which uses certain assumptions about the nature of material objects that will not be defended until we explain the truth of quantum mechanics ontologically.

By contrast to Einstein's elegant mathematical derivation of the Lorentz transformation equations from the assumption that inertial frames are all empirically equivalent, Lorentz's Newtonian theory seemed merely to be tinkering with classical physics in an ad hoc manner. First, he recognized the length contraction, and then a few years later, a time dilation. And to extend his argument to explain why dynamic phenomena do not reveal absolute rest or motion, two more distortions would need to be recognized (an increase in mass and a flattening of force fields).

The Lorentz distortions are, however, neither arbitrary nor contrived. In fact, there is a certain necessity about them, as I will try to demonstrate by showing how they follow from what is known about the nature of material objects (or rather from the spatiomaterialist ontological explanation of what is known about them) together with our assumption that space is the medium of light transmission (with the velocity of light manifesting an inherent motion in space).

It is now known that material objects are constituted by electromagnetic interactions among its constituent parts, and the assumption that is required in order to explain the truth of quantum mechanics ontologically is that those electromagnetic interactions have a unit-like nature (or a “quantum” nature, as it is called).

Atoms, for example, are made of a nucleus of protons and neutrons which interacts by electric and magnetic forces with a number of electrons that is normally equal to the number of protons. It is a stable configuration, because the nature of those electromagnetic interactions between the nucleus and the electrons is such that the potential energy cannot be lower (that is, no more of their rest masses can be converted to kinetic energy or other forms of matter). That is contrary to what is expected according to the laws of classical physics. They imply that electrons would quickly spiral into the nucleus, radiating all their energy away as electromagnetic waves. But that does not happen, and the attempt to explain why not led to the discovery of quantum mechanics. The structure of the atom was one of the first discoveries.

On the ontological explanation of quantum mechanics defended in Quantum Mechanics, there is a unit-like, or quantum, nature to electromagnetic interactions. Interactions cannot take place unless they involve a certain minimum quantity of action. Thus, the energy level of electrons bound to a nucleus in an atom can change only in a step-like way, each involving a whole quantum of action in which the energy is carried away by a photon, the units of which electromagnetic waves are composed , according to quantum mechanics. And there is a minimum energy level for electrons in atoms, because in that state, as we shall assume, such electrons are bound to the nucleus by the smallest electromagnetic interaction possible.

The details about the unit-like nature of these quantum electromagnetic interactions will be discussed later. (See Change: Quantum mechanics.) What is relevant here is that material objects generally are constituted by such unit-like electromagnetic interactions among simpler material objects with electric charges. Not only atoms, but also molecules, crystals, and other complex structures composed of atoms depend on electromagnetic bonds among electrically charged parts that exhibit this quantum nature.

Material objects are composed of many such quantum electromagnetic interactions. They give the material object its structure as a whole, because all these quantum events not only coincide with space in a consistent geometrical pattern, but also fit together in time. Any given material object can interact with more than one other material object at a time, and since the quantum interactions are synchronized, the effects of different interactions of the object can be repeated regularly in the same way, cycle after cycle, constituting a structure that does not change over time.

We are assuming that space is the medium of light transmission, and since light is constituted electric and magnetic forces coupled according to Maxwell's laws, space must also mediate the exertion of such forces. Our working hypothesis is that space has an inherent motion by which it mediates light transmission, and thus, if electric and magnetic forces are exerted across space as time passed by way of an inherent motion in space, the electromagnetic interactions involved in the constitution of material objects will inevitably be affected by the object's motion through space as a whole. And the way that they are affected, given this ontological explanation of their quantum nature, explains the Lorentz distortions.

Whatever is going on in the quantum interactions constituting material objects, it involves the exertion of electric and magnetic forces, and any such inter-action requires photons traveling both ways between them. But since we have assumed that the motion of photons depends on the inherent motion in space, the material object as a whole will inevitably be affected by its motion across space, because it will change the effective velocity at which those forces are exerted.

I will assume that in each unit-like electromagnetic interaction, say, between the nucleus of an atom and one of its electrons, a photon travels, first, one way between the objects and, then, back the other way between them before a single quantum interaction is completed. (Indeed, the interaction may involve symmetrical two-way trips of photons, one starting from both of the objects involved in the interaction.) Such two-way trips are necessary, because quantum interactions occur only as a whole, if they occur at all. Never is one of the objects changed while the other is not. Since the objects are separated from one another in space, the only way that one of the objects can change when, and only when, the other object also changes is by something traveling both ways across space between them in the period of time that it take to complete the unit-like action. Nothing less is ontologically possible, if there are such unit-like electromagnetic interactions. 

The material object’s motion across space will not make much difference as long as its velocity is small compared to the velocity of light. In fact, the velocity of light (that is, the inherent motion in space) is so enormous that the effect on most ordinary material objects is undetectable. Nevertheless, since material objects subject to appropriate forces will continue to accelerate, they can acquire velocities approaching that of light, and the objects will be affected by the change in the one-way velocities of light. There are four effects, and I will describe them qualitatively here, since an ontological explanation is meant to identify the aspects of the substances to which physical laws correspond. Their quantitative aspects would clearly be the same as the Lorentz distortions.

Slowing down of quantum interactions. The first and most obvious effect of high absolute velocity in space is a slowing down of all the quantum electromagnetic interactions constituting the material object, so that all processes take place more slowly.

Slowing down is inevitable, because in each unit-like interaction, the photons being exchanged must travel not only the distance between the parts with electric changes, but also all the distance covered by the material object as a whole in the time it take to complete the unit-like interaction.

Suppose, for example, that one of the electromagnetic interactions constituting an atom is oriented perpendicularly to the direction of the atom's motion through space. In order to complete the interaction, a photon must travel from the nucleus to the electron and then back again in the period of a single unit of interaction. But all the time that the photon is traveling, the atom as a whole is also moving across space, and thus, in keeping up with the atom, the photon will have to travel farther that in it would at rest. Since its velocity is due to the inherent motion in space, the photon cannot speed up, and so it will take longer to complete the two-way trip between the nucleus and electron. Unit-like electromagnetic interactions will take longer to complete on a moving atom than they would at rest. And since this is true of all the unit-like electromagnetic interactions constituting material objects, all physical processes involved will be slowed down at the same rate as a function of their absolute motion. (The quantitative description of this effect of absolute velocity is given in the discussion of the Lorentz Distortions.)

Longitudinal shrinking of quantum interactions. A less obvious, but no less necessary, effect of high velocity motion across space is a shrinking of the size of quantum electromagnetic interactions in the direction of absolute motion.

The two-way trip of an electromagnetic interaction in the direction of motion will be slowed down just as much as such a unit like interaction in the direction transverse to motion described above, because once again, the photon will have to cover all the extra distance across space that the material object as a whole covers during the period required to go both ways. Thus, the longitudinal quantum interactions will be synchronized with the transverse quantum interactions. But a further distortion of the quantum interaction is required in the direction of motion, because in order to remain synchronized with the transverse quantum interaction, the photon must travel a shorter distance.

The additional effect comes from the asymmetry of the two-way trip of the photon in the longitudinal quantum interaction constituting a material object, such as an atom. Unlike the transverse quantum event, the motion of the material object as a whole makes the effective velocity of light different in each direction. When the photon is traveling from the nucleus to the electron in the same direction across space as the atom itself, it has a lower velocity relative to the atom than it would at rest, because the other object is moving away from it all the time it travels. And then, on the return leg of its two-way trip, the photon is traveling in the opposite direction, and that makes its velocity relative to the atom higher, because its destination is moving toward it. The problem is that, even though the distance between the nucleus and the electron is the same both ways, the velocity of the photon is different, and thus, it cannot complete the two way trip in time to be synchronized with transverse quantum events -- unless the distance is shortened. The effect on the total time of travel depends on how long the photon spends traveling at each velocity, and since it spends more time traveling slower than the velocity of light relative to the atom on the forward leg than it does traveling the same distance faster than the velocity of light on the return leg, its completion of the two way trip would be delayed -- unless the distance between the electron and the nucleus were less than it would be at absolute rest.

This effect can also be seen from the point of view of absolute space. The photon traveling in the direction of motion has farther to go to reach its destination than in the opposite direction, because in the forward direction, its destination is moving away from it and in the backward direction its destination is moving toward it. Though the effects of the two legs are in opposite directions, they do not cancel out, because the photon spends more time chasing destinations that are retreating than it does traveling toward destinations that are approaching it. It cannot make up on the return leg all the time it loses on the forward leg. (The quantitative description of this effect of absolute velocity is given in the Lorentz Distortions.)

The first two distortions in material objects with a high velocity are what must happen, if material objects are constituted by synchronized, unit-like electromagnetic interactions and the propagation of electric and magnetic forces is due to an inherent motion in space. But two further changes in material objects are required in order for them to interact in the ways described by the basic laws of physics, one affecting the masses of the objects involved and the other affecting the forces they exert. They too can be explained ontologically, given the the various forms of matter that we have already postulated in order to explain the laws of classical physics.

Increase in mass. Quantum electromagnetic interactions involve the exertion of forces, as if the objects involved were accelerating one another in some way, and in order for forces to have the same effects on material objects with high velocity as they do on material objects at absolute rest, a further change is necessary, because the same interaction takes longer to be completed when the material object is moving across space at a high velocity.

Consider a quantum interaction in the transverse direction constituting a material object, such as an atom. The transverse distance between the two objects is not changed, but the time required for the interaction to take place is longer. The only way that it is possible for an unchanged force to accelerate an object more slowly is when the mass of the object is greater. Newton’s second law holds that the force is equal to the mass times the acceleration, and since the acceleration is lower, the mass must be greater by at the same rate.

Thus, we assume that the increase in the period of the unit-like electromagnetic interactions is accompanied by a similar increase in the masses of the objects from what their masses are at rest. And since all the quantum interactions among all the parts of the material object in motion are slowed down, the (rest) masses of all the parts increase accordingly, and thus, the (rest) mass of the material object as a whole increases at the same rate.

The increase in the mass of the moving material object can be explained, on our ontological explanation of the basic laws of classical physics, as simply the kinetic energy it acquires by its motion. Kinetic energy is one of the forms of matter, and since the quantity of matter determines its mass, the kinetic matter required to have a high velocity in absolute space can explain the increase in its mass.

The quantitative aspects of this explanation depends on the theory of kinetic matter in Change: Quantum mechanics. But we can already see, in principle, how its mass could increase to infinity as the material object approaches the velocity of light. In order to increase the velocity of the material object, each bit of kinetic matter as well as each bit of rest mass must be accelerated, that is, given additional kinetic matter, and thus, the amount of kinetic matter required to increase it at higher velocities depends on how much kinetic matter it already has. The limit is the velocity of light because of how the units of kinetic matter involve the velocity of light.

Longitudinal decrease in electric field. Though all quantum interactions suffer a time dilation and increase in mass, quantum interactions in the direction of motion suffer an additional distortion, which shrinks the lengths of the material objects they constitute. What remains to be noticed here is that such a shrinkage in the length of the moving material object also involves a change in the shape of the electric force fields exerted by charged objects. Instead of being spherical, they are flattened out in the direction of motion.

The electric force field is, we are assuming, a form of electromagnetic matter that is spread out around the center of mass of the object with a electric charge. It is what is responsible for the electric force that the nucleus, say, exerts on its electrons. But as we have seen, the forces exerted by way of such an electric field can act only over a shorter distance, and that requires us to hold that the electric field itself is shorter in the direction of motion than it is in the transverse direction.

Though the electric field is a form of matter according to this ontological explanation, it is not just matter being dragged along by the center of mass with the charge. The electric field is shortened both in front of the electric charge and behind by the same amount (with the transverse distance unchanged). Since that shortening is the result of having to complete a two-way trip with different one-way velocities of light, that suggests that the matter making up the electric field itself must be explained as a cyclic, unit-like change when we take up the ontological explanation of the basic particles (the simplest bits of matter with rest mass).

Let us assume, therefore, that the essential nature of matter making up a spatiomaterial world like ours is such that material objects in motion suffer these four kinds of changes, or “distortions” from what they are like at absolute rest, as a result of motion through a substantival space in which an inherent motion is responsible for the exertion of electric and magnetic forces.

Let me emphasize that the foregoing explanation of the four distortions is intended only to show how the four Lorentz distortions in moving material objects are not mere ad hoc contrivances for patching up a hole in Newtonian physics, but fit comfortably into this ontological explanation of the truth of physics, including its explanation of quantum mechanics.

Such an explanation of the four distortions is not required, however, to meet the challenge of showing that it is possible for spatiomaterialism to explain the truth of Einstein’s special theory of relativity. It would be enough simply to assume the Lorentz distortions as part of the basic nature of matter, as if they were basic laws of physics. Hence, doubts about the ontological assumptions I have made about the nature of material objects to explain the Lorentz distortions should not cast doubt on the capacity of spatiomaterialism, in general, to explain the truth of Einstein’s special theory of relativity.