SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2508.12810

The Geometry of Motions, Vol. I: Mechanics as Geometries

Abstract

This work presents a group-theoretic interpretation of the historical evolution of mechanics, proposing that each fundamental theory of motion corresponds to a distinct geometry in the sense of Felix Klein. The character of each geometry is uniquely determined by its Inertia Group-the group of spacetime transformations that preserves its privileged class of inertial motions. We trace the three major epistemological ruptures in the history of mechanics by translating foundational physical principles into the unambiguous language of group theory. The analysis begins with Aristotelian mechanics, where absolute Space and Time are shown to be homogeneous spaces of the Group of Aristotle, defined by its preservation of rest. The second rupture, driven by the relativity of motion (Bruno, Galileo), leads to the abandonment of absolute Space and the construction of the Galilean Group, which preserves the class of uniform rectilinear motions. The final rupture, precipitated by the crisis in electromagnetism, results in the dissolution of absolute Time and the emergence of the Poincar\'e Group, preserving affine lines and the Minkowski metric. Central results of this approach are theorems demonstrating, with mathematical certainty, the non-existence of a Galilean-invariant "Space" and a Poincar\'e-invariant "Time," where invariance is defined with respect to the action of the corresponding inertia group. This geometric framework provides a unified perspective on the transition from classical to modern physics and allows for a rigorous distinction between 'primary' epistemological ruptures, which alter the Inertia Group itself, and 'secondary' ruptures, which introduce new formalisms for the management of dynamics within a stable geometry.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Patrick Iglesias-Zemmour. 2025-08-18. The Geometry of Motions, Vol. I: Mechanics as Geometries. https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.12810

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Perspectives on the unit distance problem

This is a survey on an old open problem in combinatorics called the unit distance problem, and the field of mathematics around it, called incidence geometry. What do we know about the problem? Why is it difficult? How does it connect with other parts of math?

math.HO

A Categorical Approach to Euclidean Ratios and Proportions

A categorial approach to the non-metric geometry in Books V and VI of Euclid's \textit{Elements} is presented. Specifically, we introduce a diagrammatic syntax that can be overlaid immediately on his diagrams, thus bridging intuitive presentation with fidelity to Euclid's arguments. This syntax makes complicated definitions like V.5, and indeed the arguments throughout books V and VI, including arguments about similar figures, intuitively clear. We show in an appendix that this syntax can be used to solve a puzzle regarding ancient mathematics. Finally, we offer evidence that this approach to Euclidean diagrams is rooted in the Aristotelian tradition itself, and that a similar syntax was utilized, in antiquity, for related questions of numeric and proportions. Thus the syntax is plausibly faithful to Euclid's own thought-world, and not an outside-imposition.

math.HO

Some Early Results by Tutte Regarding the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture in 1948

OpenAI recently announced a proof of the Cycle Double Cover (CDC) Conjecture. Most media reports have characterized it as a 50-year-old open problem. In reality, according to a 1987 letter from Tutte to Fleischner, the Cycle Double Cover Problem has been open for at least 80 years. Two early results regarding the CDC conjecture were established in one of Tutte's 1949 publications.

math.HO