Deputy Director for New Technologies "ELCO Technology SPb" ltd, St.Petersburg, Russia

Always when speaking about the basis of the Universe, one recollects numerous publications containing descriptions of search for the most elementary particles — building blocks from which the whole world surrounding us has allegedly been built. However, the main principles of construction of our world — the principles of the Universe Structure somehow have remained beyond the fields of vision of researchers.

This book is devoted to the search for such principles. It has appeared that the world has been built on the basis of the “triunity of entities” realization known since the ancient times, according to which all fundamental natural manifestations depend upon each other so that they are necessarily united into separate groups with three items in each group (a triad), and physicists express such fundamental dependencies in the form of widely known three-link formulae: E = mc² , F = ma, S = vt, etc. This is how the first principle of the Universe Structure known as the Principle of Equivalences is realized in Nature.

Unfortunately, the modern physics has not yet enabled us to understand unambiguously that the World surrounding us is the World of Processes. Giving the priority to a chance rather than to a cause, it mainly interprets this World in the static state.

In the book, an attempt has been made to depict a new pattern of the Universe Structure where it is the Causality and the Process that are dominating. Based upon this attitude, there exist Processes in Nature rather than Phenomena, and we apprehend these Processes as phenomena being realized as a transition from one quality into another, as a transformation of one category into another. And we perceive the essence of these “Transitions” and “Transformations” in the form of a great number of manifestations which we call Energy, Time, Force, etc.

One more principle has been considered, the second principle of the Universe Structure that is fundamental in the construction of a unified pattern of the Universe, according to which some natural manifestations only appear at the expense of changes of the other ones, for example, it is widely known that the acceleration is manifested only at the expense of changes of the velocity, the electromagnetic radiation — at the expense of changes of the charge, etc. Such an interdependence has been called the Compensation Principle.

However, according to the first principle of the Universe, such principles must be a part of their own triad; therefore, a third principle of the Universe Structure should also exist in Nature, but the reader will learn about it after he has read the book.

As a result, it turns out that these three principles of the Universe Structure are those three whales by which “the world is supported” — the whole world exists and develops only at the expense of their simultaneous realization!

 1. HISTORICAL CAUSES OF CRISIS IN PHYSICS

The historical causes have been given, which have led to the appearance of crisis in physics.

At all extent of science history (for more than 2000 years), naturalists were always interested in the problem of mass structure, but this problem was formulated only for one of its form — for substance. And it was formulated by the ancient Greek scientist Democritus (460...370 B. C.) who, for the first time, proposed an atomistic doctrine on discrete structure of substance, which actually has become a fundamental principle for the subsequent development of physics, chemistry, biology, etc.

However, the ideas of the second mass form — of field — have somewhat retarded in their development, though even Aristotle who lived at the same epoch (384...322 Â. C.) mentioned the ether as the most universal structure of Matter. And only Maxwell theory created in 1865 and confirmed in 1888 by the Herz tests on generating and detecting the electromagnetic waves has become the basis of practical investigations in the study of field properties and structure.

A tremendous temporal difference in 22 centuries between the beginnings of the study of the two interrelated mass forms has formed considerably different levels of knowledge about them, which has led to a psychological warp in their perception. For this period of time, we have learned infinitely much about substance and infinitely little about field. This has become a basis for the rise of a crisis in classical physics, which in 1905 inevitably caused the appearance of the theory of relativity and the formation, on its base, of an unusual relativistic outlook capable, as it seemed at the moment, to lead physics out of crisis.

But, unfortunately, as has already been noted, the present-day physics including the relativistic one has not made us understand clearly that the world surrounding us is the world of Processes. Giving the priority to the chance rather than the cause, it mainly interprets this world in the static condition.

Intuitively, the forefathers of relativism (Lorentz, Poincare, Einstein and others) mainly stood in the correct (procedural) original position.

However, neither they, nor their successors have not still understood that the true essence of relativism can be clarified by solving three main problems:

Theoretical combination of both mass forms into a single structural System.

The consideration of the Dynamics of the happening (in the present and not in the past time) process of any interaction obligatorily within the framework of the response of the combined SUBSTANCE↔FIELD system.

The construction of the general theory of interaction of the SUBSTANCE↔FIELD system on the basis of the dynamics of Galilean relativity.

In other words, such a theory should be able not only primitively evaluate the consequences of the passed action of the Motion upon a trial body, but also disclose certain causes leading to such consequences. And it means that any theory can be considered as “correct” (formed) only when it acquires the capability not only to describe but also explain and predict the results of any interaction process.

However, this has not been the case with the current theory of relativity. Therefore, in spite of 90 years of efforts, relativism torn away from the consideration of the SUBSTANCE↔FIELD interaction process has not yet been able to satisfy the needs of physics.

Moreover, the absence of any harmonious scientific search method which is substituted by the total mathematisation of any physical problem, i. e. the substitution of physics by mathematics, causes a new higher wave of crisis of this science.

If one evaluates the developed situation, then an impression is being created that the impossibility of finding a way out of the protracted crisis by means of present-day theories is connected with the preservation in our consciousness of the above mentioned psychological warp hampering to combine both mass forms into the single one and the absence of the scientific search method. We need a certain simple combining idea which is able to get the problem of the complex cognition of the surrounding world “off the standstill”.

It is not ruled out that such a combining idea can be the idea of the existence, in Nature, of the Third fundamental principle of gravitational equivalence (3rd FPGE) published in the collection of reports of the IV International Conference “Problems of Space, Time, Gravitation” as well as the new unusual method of scientific search.

The new principle of equivalence is based on the interrelation, discovered by the author experimentally, between the elasticity in substance and gravitation outside substance, i. e. it assumes a dependence of the intensity of the internal gravitation field not only upon the magnitude of mass of the given body but also upon its stressed-deformed state. Such a state is always realised with any material object at its interaction with other objects, but which manifests itself only in the process of Motion.

Therefore, the declared interdependence can be considered universal and should refer to any Process.

Let us consider how the proposed procedural approach can help one to move forward in understanding of such manifestations of the surrounding world, known long ago but still incomprehensible, as energy, mass, gravitation, relativity, etc.

Lets us use a new scientific search method for this purpose.

A new scientific search method has been proposed, according to which one detects unknown (new for us) laws of Nature by means of the analysis and synthesis of known laws. Such a method has been called the “method of equivalences”. An example of the use of such a method has been given, in which it is shown that the analysis of the known Newton's second law enables to detect a new fundamental equivalence between gravitation and elasticity, which has been called “Third fundamental principle of gravitational equivalence”.

For some of us, Nature seems to be a gathering of unsolved riddles, for others disposed to analysis — an inexhaustible field of activity, a source of unusual information which always surprises people, not all of them being the average ones.

But why do scientific discoveries happen by chance? Why is there no search method for laws of Nature yet? Well, it is because we are not aware of those basics, of that foundation on which Nature builds its laws.

But what are these basics? Perhaps it is the complex of 4 forces known from numerous “single field theories” or something else?

However, at the thorough consideration of cause-effect interrelations a very curious situation manifests itself in any Process. In the first place, change of any physical parameter is sure to lead to the appearance of another physical parameter. So changes in speed give birth to acceleration, changes in intensity of electric field generate electromagnetic field, etc. And changes of the alteration, which has already taken place (as if it were a derivative of the passed changing process), in turn, again give birth to a new physical parameter, i. e. they lead to the next higher stage of manifestation and so on.

This is necessitated by the structure of interconnections between natural phenomena. It is so that an invisible chain of evolution of any natural system arises, which gives rise to the infinite variety of natural phenomena visible to us. Nature as if compensates the change of one parameter by the appearance of another one, and the change of this one — by the appearance of a new one. This peculiarity of behaviour of interrelated real processes has been called the compensation principle which is, in essence, a more general manifestation of known conservation laws. We usually use these laws at the analysis of elementary processes, i. e. in the links of the whole evolution chain of the system being studied. In each such link, an equality of action and counteraction is established with their subordination to any of the conservation laws. However, such an equality gives evidence of the equivalence of these characteristics, though each of them, by its character, differs from the other.

The compensation principle manifests itself, first of all, in the well-recognised Newton's third law (action equals counteraction). The experience of present-day development of science has proved the universal character of this law irrespective of what kind of phenomena we deal with. Therefore, one can say that the compensation principle is a universal principle determining the development of processes in Nature. Any description of processes by means of mathematical equations in physics is the use of this principle for the analysis of phenomena and their interrelations.

In reality, we always have a certain change of a physical parameter, which is accompanied, due to the compensation principle, by the appearance of another physical characteristic connected with the first one in the equation by means of a certain dimensional proportionality coefficient which characterises the realisation of cause-effect relations between these parameters. However, since Nature has been built as a result of continuous interaction at the realisation of the compensation principle, any phenomena that we observe in Nature are the result of the continuous evolution, development and changes, i. e. of the continuous universal Motion.

So it turns out that the Compensation Principle being considered here and its continuous realisation are the first of the target Basics of Nature existence.

But what number of such basics does that Foundation, upon which Nature bases its laws, consist of?

In scientific publications, the term “equivalence” is often used; in most cases it is interpreted as equal value, equality in magnitude, etc. However, the notion of the “principle of equivalence” has not got a wide spread in scientific literature. Moreover, some scientists generally try to avoid it, not suspecting that it can contain a deep cognitive meaning.

The first principle of equivalence was stated by Newton who, using Galileo's observations of free fall of bodies and swing of pendulum, had guessed (postulated) that there is an equality between the inertial and the gravitational masses. It is this fact that has enabled Newton to formulate the basics of classical mechanics. As a result, such a principle has appeared to be a foundation, on which one has managed to build the whole classical physics.

So no sooner had the first principle of equivalence been formulated than it immediately became a foundation of the whole classical physics. In his famous work “Mathematical principles of natural philosophy”, Newton underlines the special value of the formulated principle of equivalence and draws our attention to the importance of the question whether the ratio of the masses being considered is constant and equal to unity.

The general theory of relativity is based upon the postulate that this ratio is always the same. Having called the First fundamental principle of gravitational equivalence (1st FPGE) “Weak principle of equivalence”, Einstein formulated on its base, using the Poincare ideas, another principle of equivalence — the equivalence between gravitational field and the so called “acceleration field” that is usually illustrated by the impossibility of an experimentor in the moving cage of a lift to determine whether he is influenced by the gravitational field or by the “acceleration field”.

The second fundamental principle of gravitational equivalence (2nd FPGE) has been called by Einstein “Strong principle of equivalence”. And this principle has become another foundation, upon which one has managed to build the whole present-day relativist physics.

All this shows how great the value of any principle of equivalence can be in the cognition of Nature, and, therefore, one should pay the most thorough attention to the establishment of new equivalences. It is the search of a new equivalence and its analysis that this chapter is devoted to.

It is necessary to underline that, in the first place, many philosophical categories are always considered in pairs, and, in the second place, their functional interconnection (for example, the transfer of quantity into quality) can unambiguously be considered as a natural realisation of the compensation principle, as a reflection of specifics of the logical thinking which was born with the man as a result of the natural evolution process.

It is known that the dialectic laws act inevitably in Nature. One of them is the law of unity and fight of contrasts, which is expressed in the fact that Nature is liable to dualism, ambivalence, i. e. the availability in it of though related but antagonistic phenomena. For example, motion and rest (but a relative rest can be a joint motion), force and acceleration, acceleration and inertia, etc. and last, the whole world is divided into female and male halves.

Perhaps it is difficult, and maybe impossible, to find an example, in which a phenomenon would not have a similar pair.

But it seems likely that each pair of this kind must obligatorily have one more related manifestation — another equivalence which connects them with each other.

On this basis, it is assumed that the analysis of one known phenomenon can lead to the cognition of another unknown phenomenon which is certain to accompany it, as all phenomena of Nature are interrelated and do not manifest themselves in the “pure form” being isolated from each other. It seems that the dialectic law of the unity and the fight of contrasts is a philosophical expression of the generalised physical Principle of Equivalence. Such an approach enables to use widely both philosophical and physical generalisation methods, which can lead not only to the derivation of new information about the known Nature phenomena but also to the detection of new unknown ones. And we will show it in our further discussions on one specific example.

Let us pay attention to the fact that the fundamental physical laws known to us are always expressed by interrelated equivalences and represented by the simplest relationships and, as a rule, by three parameters, for example, F = Ma, E = Mc², S =vt, i. e. by the three-link formula, in which the mathematical operations of multiplication: F = Ma, or division: M = F/a are used.

At the implementation of any fundamental physical law described by the three-link formula of the type a = be, for example, the second Newton's law F = Ma, we always really see a certain change of one physical parameter (F), which is accompanied, due to the compensation principle, by appearance of another physical characteristic (a), connected with the first one in the equation by a certain constant dimensional proportionality coefficient (M). However, all three parameters in such an equation are so interrelated that change of one of them cannot occur without changes of the other two.

All this suggests an idea of the possibility to establish the symbolic representation of such a general interconnection of the process parameters in the form of a “logical triangle” whose three sides conditionally embody the values of three interrelated parameters. The process of construction of such a logical triangle and studying it enable to carry out the simplest analysis of such a complex and even reveal its new unknown features, i. e. a new scientific search method is proposed.

Similar schematic representations of interrelations between separate natural manifestations were also used before — let us remember the Feinman's logical diagrams, the structural chains of organic chemistry, etc. In this case, it is proposed to reduce the description of certain natural phenomena, first of all, the physical ones, to the schematic establishment of their connections (equivalences) with other related phenomena.

When considering the principle of equivalence, this point of view assumes the availability of continuous chain of interconnections between different elementary acts of Nature. It is such an interconnection that can be represented schematically in the form of spatial grid, each cell of which maps the sum of three elementary interrelations (equivalences) between separate Nature manifestations. The most elementary cell of the grid is a triangle.

It is such a cell that, for the first time, was used by the author as a basis for the construction of the elementary equivalence methods.

Let us show how one can use such methods. As an example, we shall represent the logical triangle for the second Newton's law (see Figure 1).

We know that the interrelation of process parameters in the elementary act (of the type F = Ma) is determined by the compensation principle. It means that F exists only so far as there exists a response, a reaction in the form of the multiplication Ma, for each element of which F is, at the same time, the common measure of equivalence. Though both F and Ma are of different nature, their joint changes, due to the compensation principle, give rise to new phenomena; the equivalences between them can be represented by new “logical triangles”.

Figure 1. Logical triangle representing the second Newton's law (F=Ma).

Thus, the force F is equivalent to elastic stresses, the mass M is equivalent to motion and gravitation, and the acceleration a is equivalent to gravitation and something that we have not revealed yet. All this taken together can be reduced to the system of 4 logical triangles (Figure 2).

Therefore, the collective bonds (equivalences) can be seen in such a system; they are represented by a grid of logical triangles; in addition, an unknown equivalence denoted by the question mark, has appeared in the lower triangle of this system.

The answer to this question is derived automatically at the reduction (convolution) of the plane system of logical triangles into a volumetric figure “tetrahedron” shown in Figure 3.

At such a “convolution” of the plane system of logical triangles, the side of the upper right triangle denoting elastic stresses closes up with the side of the lower triangle denoted by the question mark.

It turns out that we have detected, by means of a simplest method, the equivalence between gravitation outside the body and elastic stresses inside it. It seems that without using any mathematics we have found a new regularity in Nature that was unknown before.

Let us call the system of logical triangles (Figure 2) and their integrated interrelation the “system of equivalences”, and the method of their construction and analysis — the “Method of Equivalences”.

The logical triangle schemes being considered enable to assume that one and the same natural phenomenon, in the simplest form, should be explained from not less than three different positions. And though each separate explanation will be correct, it will be far from complete. That is probably why we are never satisfied by only one separate explanation of any phenomenon. A sufficient completeness should manifest itself only at the simultaneous consideration of not less than three related factors, i.e. in any case, a peculiar triad of equivalences should be considered.

The real result obtained here prompts us that the whole procedural world is built on the basis of realisation of the tri-unity of phenomena and essences. Namely, besides the mathematical language, a simpler conventionally logical language appears. Using the logical triangle schemes of such a language as well as the dialectics provision that there are no isolated Nature phenomena, one can approach the detection and the elementary description of many unknown physical laws on the basis of analysis and synthesis of the known laws.

We can already say that we have a sufficiently complicated pattern of interrelation of many (if not all) phenomena, though their basis is the only common simplest mechanism for all natural processes — the change of position of any system element. The element type and the character of the position change (longitudinal displacement or rotation) will lead to different classes of processes and phenomena. And one can imagine all this on the aggregate as a certain “tree of knowledge evolution” whose branches grow as the new pieces of information appear.

It is quite probable that there exists a clear hierarchy among the fundamental Laws of Nature, and this suggests one an idea about a possible general universality of both the compensation principle and the principle of equivalence. And if the universality of the principle of equivalence is confirmed using the logical triangles, then the creation of a complicated system of triangular schemes will enable to carry out an attempt to build a rational systematics of the Laws of Nature by means of development of the above-mentioned Tree of Evolution consisting of the complicated system of logical triangles, tetrahedrons, etc.

The systematics itself can occur on the basis of simple selection of the built tetrahedrons which will form a spatial grid of more complicated figures closing up by single-meaning sides. And it will be so up to infinity, gradually filling the “logical space”, because the variety of natural phenomena is infinite and the equivalent bonds between them are infinite too. Each new step in this hierarchy of equivalences can characterise the appearance of laws of Nature that had not been known before, though each new step can be constructed out of the laws and phenomena known long ago.

Using our methods we have learned that the well-known Elastic Stresses and Strains which arise inside any material bodies and which always manifest themselves at any power interaction, including the gravitational interaction, are an equivalent (a “relative”) of the Gravitation itself.

If one takes it as a postulate, then it is possible to build a new hypothesis based upon the assumed interrelation (equivalence) of inter-n al elastic stresses and the î u t s i d e gravitational field of the same body. When constructing such a hypothesis, we should clearly understand that gravitation always leads to elastic strains and, therefore, to elastic stresses in the body, and, in turn, the elastic stresses arising in the body are certain to lead to the appearance of an additional gravitational field near it. In other words, we have closely come to the possibility of solving the gravitation mechanics problem that was formulated by Newton but has not been solved as yet.

Moreover, there are grounds to assume that the equivalence that has been found is a new fundamental feature of Nature. Therefore, in order to underline a special importance of this fact, one can consider such an equivalence as the Third Fundamental Principle of Gravitational Equivalence (3rd FPGE).

In order to understand what it is, let us analyse the distribution of the internal gravitational field around bodies that are acted upon by the Earth's gravitational field (Figure 4) at different distances from its centre. We shall see that the higher the elastic stresses in the Earth's thickness, theless intensity the internal gravitational field has in this region. It turns out that the interrelation between them is inversely proportional, and this can mean that the outside internal gravitational field always has the maximal intensity near that part of the trial body where the internal elastic stresses are minimal.

Figure 4. Intensity of distribution of equipotential lines of gravitational field around trial bodies located at different distances from the Earth's centre.

Moreover, as the acceleration of a material body is sure to be connected with its elastic deformation, one can assume that at these moments an increase of its own gravitational field occurs (see Chapter 3). Then the centrifugal accelerations of a revolving body (or system of bodies) should lead to the constant gravitational radiation.

Such is the mechanism of realisation of the proposed Third principle of gravitational equivalence. In the subsequent chapters we will show how it occurs in Nature.

Let us remind that the First fundamental gravitational principle discovered by Newton was called Weak, and the Second one declared by Einstein— Strong. The equivalence, which has been found, also needs to have an exhaustive name. The new principle of gravitational equivalence that has been found is an extremely important feature of Nature, and it is realised literally in all its real power manifestations. Therefore it will be quite justifiable to call the Third principle of equivalence Real.

So using the proposed methods of equivalences as well as the dialectics provision that no isolated Nature phenomena exist, one can approach the detection and the description of many unknown physical laws on the basis of analysis and synthesis of the known laws — we have demonstrated it using the example of the analysis of the Newton's second law.

The equivalence between gravitation and elasticity that had been found is not somewhat unique in Nature and only for physics, and one should look for similar equivalences in other fields of knowledge too — chemistry, biology, sociology, etc.

In addition, it is necessary to underline once again that the principle of equivalence itself is realised in Nature on the basis of existence of equivalences that seem to be separate but are always interconnected and which, in turn, exist (manifest themselves) on the basis of realisation of the compensation principle, i. e. these two principles are realised jointly, and so they comprise a single system — a certain foundation, on which Nature exists.

But such a system, as we already know, should consist of three parts. Therefore, besides the compensation principle and the principle of equivalence, one more principle should exist. The procedural approach to the consideration of the scientific search problem will surely be such a principle. In other words, the logical triangle explaining the structure of the above mentioned Nature foundation should include the COMPENSATION, the EQUIVALENCE and the PROCESS, with the Process being reflected in the Galilean relativity.

As a result, it turns out that these three principles: the Compensation Principle, the Principle of Equivalence and the Principle of Relativity are those three whales, on which the “world stands”, i. e. the whole World exists and develops only on the basis of their simultaneous realisation!

Based upon the above, one can assume that the exhaustive physical definition of any natural manifestation can be given only in the case when a procedural approach to the problem in question is known (is accessible). And one cannot exclude that it is such an attitude that will enable to give quite a suitable definition to such physical categories, which have not been defined as yet, as energy, time, mass, motion, gravitation, etc.

Let us see how the proposed procedural approach enables to solve the problems formulated.

It is shown that with the increase of the trial body velocity, an increase of the mass of its own gravitational field and a decrease of the mass of material occur, but provided that their sum always remains constant. It enables to define energy as a “process of substance transformation into field”, to get a very simple explanation of the relativistic mass increase and at last to decipher the formula E = Mc² , which everybody knows but no one understands.

In spite of the fact that the word “energy” first appeared as far back as 1620 in Kepler's works, no exhaustive definition to this term has been given since.

In present-day physics, the term “energy” is understood only from a pure philosophical position as a “measure of momentum”, but it is clearly insufficient, as such a definition does not reflect its physical meaning.

Usually we perceive energy as something material, and we regard this word as a noun, though the notion “energy” is first of all based upon an action, a process, therefore, we should perceive this term as a verb or at least as a verbal noun. Let us see how one can understand the physical essence of energy from this procedural point of view.

So it is known that any material body consists of substance and is surrounded by its own gravitational field capable to interact with the same substance of another body. In addition, it is known that field, the same as substance, also has mass, i.e. one and the same quantitative measure of assessment.

Therefore, the inertial body mass M₀ can be considered to consist of two parts — the mass of substance M_s and the mass of its field M_f .

Though it is believed that the mass of gravitational field is infinitesimal, we unambiguously perceive the magnitude of the internal gravitational field of any real body as the measure of gravity according to the known Newton's law of gravitation, which tells us that the gravitational field of any body of any size, however small, is quite real and cannot help being considered.

It is known that to evaluate the momentum of one and the same revolving body, the following formulas can be used:

and

The famous formula (2) first proposed by Heavyside, 15 years earlier than Einstein, is considered universal; it is known even to non-physicists but somehow very few people understand what physical meaning it contains.

The formula (3), on the contrary, is very transparent, it expresses the kinetic energy of a revolving body and is called “mutual” by physicists.

The formula (2) expresses the maximal value of energy, which the hypothetical material object of the mass M capable to move at the speed proportional to the speed of light can have.

Some authors suppose that vacuum is such an object. But most probably such an object is the internal gravitational field of the mass M_f belonging to the body in question.

Then the formula (2) can be written as follows:

Let us try and make the understanding of this hypothetical mass in formula (2) more definite. In order to do that, let us use the technique, which enabled Laplace, as far back as two centuries ago (in 1796) much in advance of the conclusions of the future theory of relativity, to predict the existence of “black holes” as well as to calculate the gravitational radius of the Sun and of all planets then known.

According to Laplace, we just equate these energies (E₁ and E₂), having in mind that both the formula (3) and the formula (4) express one and the same energy — the energy of a revolving motion of a body. In other words, the kinetic energy of one and the same body of the mass M₀ can be expressed either by the magnitude of its field M_f (in formula 4), or by the magnitude of its velocity V (in formula 3).

If, as we have agreed, E₁ = E₂, then the right-hand sides of the formulas (3) and (4) are equal:

and the field mass follows from it:

i. e. the mass of the internal gravitational field of the body is proportional to the product of its inertial mass M₀ times the motion velocity squared and inversely proportional to the speed of light squared. As it follows from (1) that Ì_s = Ì₀ - Ì_f then the mass of substance:

Thus the formulas (6) and (7) enable to distinguish the inertial mass into the mass of substance and the mass of field as well as to evaluate their magnitudes depending upon the velocity of the body.

The analysis of the formulas (1), (6) and (7) enables to come to the following extremely important conclusions:

1. With the increase of the body velocity (in the course of acceleration, under which its elastic deformation surely occurs), an increase of the mass of field and a decrease of the mass of substance take place.

2. Based upon this, one can give the following definition of energy of the body in question:

But any rectilinear motion can also be represented as the rotation with a very large radius, therefore, the definition obtained is quite suitable for the generalised understanding of kinetic energy.

3. At any velocity of motion, the inertial mass M₀ that is always a  constant sum of two mutually transformed masses M_s and M_f will always remain constant i. å.: