V.1

11 - 12 - 13

Matter as physical reality

11

some counter-field of equal value? Proceeding from the cited statement - yes, as all factors inherent in the interaction will be absent; in the view of materialism - no, as the fields will be compensated. This will not annihilate the space materiality but simply will transform the matter to another state. To clear this point finally, address a simple experiment.

Let in some space region where we can neglect the external fields be two bodies A and B each having the mass m and same-signed charge q. Then the body A will be affected by the repulsive force caused by the electrical field of the body B

where r is the distance between the mass centres of these bodies. And A will affect B in the same way. In case F₁ = F₂  with any r, both bodies in relation to each other will behave independently, i.e., the power interaction is absent; therefore the resulting field is zero.

12

But both the electrical and gravitational fields remained, and if they were material, the matter as such remained, too, it only has transformed into another state.

I think this example to be enough to understand the above thesis. If not, one who wishes can consider a mental experiment in which a charged body is put between two plates; one of them is massive and the other, having a small mass, is charged.

Thus we cleared that there must be some material substance by whose excitation we can obtain all types of known (and possibly, of yet unknown) fields. In the view of dialectical materialism, such substance is named ether. With it, dialectical materialism in no way insists on its definite structure - this is the matter of physicists. It insists only that the ether exists as the fact. And materialism does not insist that ether is some final structure - again, this is the matter of physicists. But if it is revealed, between the elements of a new structure there also must be ether as a material substance (if the investigators are anti the same name, they can name this new as they wish, but they have to keep the principle of its materiality).

Finally, return to the Born's statement concerning the electromagnetic field as a convenient mathematical category. Though we considered after it a field as a material substance (just for the case “should… would…”), it is worthy to point that, regrettably, Born

13

has expressed not only his personal opinion but the common opinion of all relativists. So the Readers are encouraged to think of the following paradoxes arising in the case of fields materiality:

- a motion of a neutral particle in an EM field;

- a motion of a charged particle in a gravitational field;

- a motion of an EM wave in a gravitational field,

etc. All these and like cases will lead you, dear Reader, to the situation in which the classical physics appeared in trying to reveal the body motion through the ether as a material substance. Consequently, the abolition of material substance between the elements of weighty matter was neither a fiction nor an unclear formulation but was a well-considered conduct. Therefore this construction will inevitably reduced through Machism to the idealism: “The point of idealism is that the psychical is taken as the primordial point, the nature is deduced from it, and then from the nature - an usual human consciousness. This initial ‘psychical’ is so always a dead abstraction concealing a diluted theology” [2, p. 220].

It follows from the above that the ether as physical reality is one of the forms of matter existence. One of ether revelations in our sensations are different types of fields as excited states of ether that determine the between-elements interactions of weighty matter. And any attempt to think the space without ether as a material substance will come to a dead abstraction, which inevitably leads the gnosiology to the idealism.