10. object physics


All objects are systems. In every case, the system under study is the Universe; because no system can be isolated from the Universe, particularly if it is under study. The innermost source of behavior is the infinite past and future history of the Universe. In every case, the system under study is composed of sub-systems. The sub-systems within the object are collectively a part of the influences that are the behavior of the system, over the course of its activities. The "surrounding" Universe is the remaining part. These two parts comprise the system ó there are no other parts. The rules of behavior that control the system are written in the totality of its process. Though we are focusing on a current, limited process, the totality of the influences that are involved, encompass the totality of the history of the Universe, as a complete accounting of the origins of all behaviors.

On the smallest level, an infinite number of influences proceed, and do so within frames of relative infinite speed; as they act over zero distance. This can be viewed as a detracting element of influence, as it is carried within, to greater levels of detail. These component systems are given less, and less, and no, time to contribute influence to a given higher frame. At the limit (or I would prefer to say, because there is no limit here) where the time of influence is zero, the energy content that would contribute is infinite ó for at this level there are an infinite number of component systems within any given system. This is an example of apparent finity generation, where factors of infinity and zero have induced, through a complex rule structure, our fundamental components of mass and charge, etc. "Complex" is an understatement; the steps from limitless origins to finite reality are the infinite accruement of dimension generation. The term of infinity in this means that the factor of history as an influence is complete... the "history" includes all of the future as well. Any point of process within a finite frame is a unique angle of operation for these connections. As such, it is an infinitely permanent element of total reality, regardless of how transient it appears to consciousness.

On the greatest level, the total Universe interacts to influence its sub-systems, including the one under study, more so the longer we define that period of study to include whatever permutations, divisions, expansions, etc. are considered over whatever time we choose as the definition of the considered system. Here, the influencing set is the one single, longest, complete set; but it too has a factor of detraction ó distance reaches infinity. More, and more, and infinite, time is required for influences to register. Large scale process will incur its relationships of momentum within a given sub-frame, as the course of interactions of that and other sub-frames. A given frame is not driven entirely from within. It is influenced by its environment of fellow frames, over time. It is defined by its roles of interaction, as well as by its internal sources of drive, for an arbitrary length of time.

From the reference frame of the object under study, to look in either of these "directions" of influential source, is to be in a "circle," looking one way or the other. This is to say that the sources of influence are one and the same. In the direction of largeness, we see the Universe; but in a total state that is relatively fixed, since all distances involved in processing are infinite. In the direction of smallness we see the whole Universe again, but in an infinite variety of infinitely quick processes, where the distances involved are all zero.

Since these two seemingly opposite conditions of the Universe lie at the same point on a circle, opposite to the viewerís reference frame on that same circle, they will always seem to be opposite in character as viewed from any system at any point on the circle. This is a perceptual result of the phase reversal produced by viewing opposite directions. Two opposite types of zeros are generated. Distance is exchanged for time. From that opposite point of view, we are the condition of juxtaposition.

The exchangeability of distance and time point out their relationship in space-time. Distance is anti-time. Time is anti-distance. In essence, time is bi-directional. Consciousness is unidirectional ó it is a process in time. A process in anti-time is a related process, invisible as space, in opposite phase to our time. Consciousness perceives one polarity of time as time, and the other as distance. Anti-consciousness sees the same thing, at the "same time," in a "left-handed," or "chopped-and-reversed" way, with these roles reversed. The "pixels" of reality or time here, are our virtual photons. Each one exists relative to the Universe. From its point of view, it encompasses all distance... it is the Universe, and our view of the Universe is its photon. These opposite views of the Universe, pivoting on the common photon point, are the Universe and anti-Universe. There are no anti-photons. The definition of time as Vc delay relationships, carries with it a fundamental inference of complementary relative reality.

The fundamental concept of object physics is that reality is to be dealt with in terms of objects composed of timing relationships, and that this distinguishes it from particle physics and wave physics; but does so not with their exclusion, but rather with their mutual inclusion.

Object physics will be considered here as having four fundamental components; positive and negative matter, and positive and negative anti-matter. These components consist of time; so the implication is that we have four primary types of time. We can think of the substance of reality in this as a composition of time in four quadrants of phase-polarity, within, and encompassing, infinite levels of quantization of these systematic inter-engendering commodities.

We can think of this as a definition of complete symmetry, based on apparently random complexity. We have two types of opposing symmetry, which are themselves a completion of overall symmetry. One pair consists of opposites that can not be thought of as being simultaneous, from the reference frame of either component of the duo... each would say the other follows its existence. Each of these have simultaneous perfect opposites. These two pair are simultaneous, "overall," where such a viewpoint encompasses all time, combining it into the point. This is the most fundamental condition of reality ó its instantaneous sum is always zero, as well as its full-term sum (which is also instantaneous, from an extreme view). This is the composition of light. It is not as if the Universe would break down if ever there were an error. It is that only things will happen as this truth continues to exist, eternally, in its completeness. We can begin to consider these elements of symmetry by considering the interdependence between distance and time in systems.

We are comfortable with the concept of systems so long as there is a limit to the level at which we have system, where system gives way to the concept of "material," out of which all systems are fashioned.

In object physics, all objects are systems, composed of sub-systems, without limit. These systems have all of the properties we observe ó particle, wave, and emergent. We readily view a brain as an object that is really a system. Object physics recognizes a rock as also being a system; albeit one without consciousness as such.

The consequence of this is to complicate fundamental physics dramatically. To more deeply appreciate the classical qualities of distance, time, mass, inertia, velocity, acceleration, etc., we would no longer view the rock as a point source of these related properties, acting in a limited Universe. The rock is a system of sub-systems inextricably woven as part of the fabric of reality. Thus, in analyzing sub-systems, it becomes arbitrary as to where we draw the boundaries of a given object ó it becomes a question of the characteristics or components of reality that are of interest. In the case of the rock, it will still more often be useful to site a list or category of chemical bonds as the defining quality. In the case of the brain, the most useful criteria is the set of synaptic neural bonds creating a relative memory potential.

Non-classical physics would also be modified, where it has been applied to particles as though those particles were not systems (though not by me, at least not in the present effort).

In object physics, logic is the substance out of which systems are composed. All components of systems, including those we would say are material, are time of logical process; meaning they are process relative to other process, where these relationships involve inter-dependencies. This logic proceeds as the flow of time from our conscious view, though it is the enacted inference of realityís rule tree. Essentially, the rules and the logic are one and the same thing, all bound up in the expansion of the mathematical point, by its relationships to itself, as the meaning of all relative relationships possible within a given realm or subset. Dimensionality expands out of that point from the reference frame of consciousness, which is part of all that is inferred within the point. From the conscious frame, the point is a set of points, separated by Vc properties. Dimensionality itself is the multiplicity of Vc. It is all possible because the constant truth of zero produces complete symmetry. Distance is anti-time, time runs both ways, and dimensionality expands relative to our consciousness. We can consider that there is anti-consciousness relative to dimensionality that would appear to be shrinking relative to our flow of awareness. I imagine that we will prefer a model that embodies anti-time and time into a unit of "normal" awareness. Dimensionality could expand for us, but also contract into negative dimensions within space, as though those dimensions were smaller than the point. Relative to the flow of our reality, those dimensions would be inside-out, and the constituent roles of process could be reversed. But these two poles of reality are constantly a perfect match, and could not be more interdependent. They are a single ongoing process, within the point. They are the constant components of the full definition of the point. The negative dimensions reflect off of the point, and superimpose themselves on positive dimensionality. The result is time + anti-time ó process over distance. There is no reality without its inverse viewpoint complementary constituency; but all realities are experienced as the same order of events, experienced in their opposite-handed counterparts.

In addition to this instantaneous system symmetry, process flows from bang to drain, where it reverses phase. This alternation is complete symmetry, and the overall flow of time, from our view. The system is composed of sub-systems that likewise alternate as the source of time, at a relatively much more rapid rate. That they do so, provides a basis that can likewise slowly do so.


The rules of our realm seem quite well organized and logical to the consciousness they produce. They also seem very stable, though reality is everything but constant. Time has no meaning to the pointó all is inferred by it; and what could arbitrarily be considered a microsecond or no time at all to the point, can contain an infinite set of eternities relative to the consciousness inferred within any "stable" realm.


This set of eternities is composed of an eternity "owned" by every possible reference frame within the realm. Because time is dimensionality, each such eternity leads to the others, in the "circle" of bidirectional time. The quanta of time, out of which all of this is constructed, arise as the fundamental being of each set of fixed relationships, leading to the next different fixed set. The perception is that all relationships are based on Vc, as though all processes are limited by the rate of a system clock that is the Vc heartbeat of the Universe. In a relative sense, each such heartbeat can be viewed as being an eternity that is summed up into one quantum of time as perceived with instruments by a consciousness relative to the relationships of change associated by the ongoing flow of Vc delays. During each perceivable quantum of time, an infinite number of "operations" are "performed" as the existence of our rule tree.

One could say the most fundamental rule of our realm is that the relative conditions of all systems are "remembered" from one quantum of time to to the next. The rest of the rules are concerned with the manner of flow of process which alters the results of that #1 rule. We might consider the very structure of time/anti-time reality, pivoting on Vc relationships, as being included in the "list" of rules that are written in the process of our realm. This order in our system then, would be more fundamental, or at least a part of, that #1 rule of general memory. To be thorough here, one must also consider that some, or most, other realms might involve "things" other than consciousness that we could never understand. The most fundamental attributes may never be comprehended by humans; but we need not let this prevent us from attempting to fully focus on our true substance, relative to itself, within our realm or realms. There may be other realms so different that they are not based on light-dimensionality; and do not involve relative-meaning consciousness. Such realms may not be composed of you ó you may only encompass realms of system, or realms of various subsets of physical law, that support consciousness in all possible developments. We can speculate that even our most developed versions of you will have questions that cannot be answered regarding the complements of all realms; though Iíll bet you know yourself completely.

At the same time, from our level of understanding, to be thorough, we must also speculate that our climax of development may leave no question unanswered. We may find that we know there is nothing other than you. The only realms that exist are mathematical consciousness; enacted in photon dimensionality. This family of realms would all be composed of time, where time is you. Only the rules of physics differ from one realm to another. That they operate in and as time, does not give way to any sort of "otherness." The purpose of this book is to identify some options for consideration, through such far-out speculation ó then choose a path among the many options that develop from prior choices. The title of the book indicates the path itís considering.

In viewing reality from the mathematical reference frame, I chose to define the infinite clock as the most fundamental "rule" or component of reality. Secondary to this was the Vc clock, relative to infinite reference frames. Beyond that we constructed our framework by recognizing that Vc components in this are dimensionality itself. By removing the limits on dimensionality, we completed the process of recognizing that the sole constituency of reality is math. From math we generate a playing field of math relative to math. Unlimited dimensionality is the substance of relative development; which includes consciousness, relative to the processes it perceives, which include tactile information events.

From the object reference frame, it becomes important to recognize the continued presence of "mathness" as the only component of reality ó and we can highlight this feature by pointing out that our rule structure can be viewed as being void of hierarchical fundamentalism. In other words, all rules are equally fundamental, in the absolute sense. Each one is as important as the others ó each is an essential component of the overall single reality. This single thing is the point. There is nothing more fundamental, yet it is everything. We recognize the possibility of an infinite variety of relationships, in analyzing reality. Our analysis is integrated with the overall process, which is developmental ó as evidenced by the fruits of our labor; science, etc., improving our capacity to continue the analysis. We will want to describe relative objects with an orderly development of thought; and to this end, we will tentatively point out relationships of memory by priority; as in the prior example of repetition being more fundamental than change in the cycles of particle re-existence. We will also recognize that this reference frame can be shifted, and then see that the substance of the cycles is as much its change as its repetition... substance is really only change, but change leads to cases of similarity that build dimensionality as attributes of constancy. The infinite clock, the Vc clock, dimensionality, memory, and rules of interdependence in change, are all fundamental attributes of our single object.


From our analytical reference frame within the object, we will begin to attach a handle to it by recognizing that the relative conditions of all systems are "remembered" from one quantum of time to the next. There is a degree of uncertainty as to how identical these relationships will remain; and this character is, in its variety, the substance of reality as process ó the time that acts as a basis for all of its other selves, which, in turn, are the source of that given time and its alterations in memory.

The quantum of time which steps out reality, exists relative to consciousness, which is built by that reality. The time is as dimensional as the space. As the point, it is composed of the simultaneous reference frames of all simultaneous eternities, leading to each other. These frames all lead to each other, and therefore are a part of a single eternity. Any quantum of time is eternal; for its component influences are strewn across that single eternity, as it exists within the quantum particle relationships. Those components each have their components, ad infinitum. Consciousness exists because it is there ó it is the sense that is inferred within the collection of all approximate repetitions of Vc relationships between points of eternity, subject to a given rule tree realm in dimensional time. It is every such component of the one eternity of that realm, where each conscious component can seem to belong to a separate eternity. Photons connect various eternities together, as our rule tree, creating conscious systems within the process.


In simple physical terms, energy is the modification of our system, essentially producing "new" time, so as to cancel new distance in some way, and leave us with a new reference frame of velocity. Velocity might be thought of as an established exchange rate of time for distance. This is a logical relationship of time and distance, where both are always being "used up." They are canceling opposites of the point. A given distance-time event is a unit of process. Consciousness thinks so, because it is an ongoing system of processes. A brain, too, is perceived to have size, relative to its world of sizes. It experiences time in a world of overcome distances. Doing so involves a great deal of change, which is the sucking of time and distance out of the point, in the shifting of dimensionality. Real process is not simply composed of many instantaneous velocities ó it is energetic ó it is the constant shifting of dimensionality.

It is as though space or distance is composed of the system clock ó one clock. That clock is the mathematical point from which all reference frames are generated, as a matter of relationships in delays. This fundamental beat portions out the relationships in units of Vc effects. The beat comes as a rule tree; available because all possible varieties of such trees are within the point ó are a potential of it. E is the key, or the term we associate with, the transformation of a "stable" reference frame into another. It is a series of such transformations, we term process. In reality, no frame other than the point is ever fully stable. It is composed of sub-frames which have stable and procedural characteristics, that exist relative to some larger frame of such process.

The attribute of an object we term "inertia" is the relative status of its reference frame in dimensionality. To overcome inertia is to transform the objectís reference frame. Everything inside and outside the frame is altered in the relative sense, as a matter of varied consequences for the overall definition of eternity. These are consequences for their own source, as all behavior arises out of eternity, from zero within. This will seem impossible so long as the quantum of time is not recognized as being eternal. To see this requires an acceptance of "particles" as re-existences of Universe reference frames on eternal cycles. That they all do so provides the basis for similar, "slower" behavior of our familiar reality, in our dimensional derivation. In overcoming inertia, the dimensional relationships of otherwise "fixed" velocities are modified to a new set of relationships. This process of re-programming is constantly going on. It is the energetic attribute of reality. To say that energy is conserved is to say that the process of transformation is never-ending. It is the process of producing another cycle of re-existence for our particle. One can imagine that, even though our system is infinite; after an infinite number of such eternal cycles, the whole thing has nothing else to do but repeat. Though itís infinite, itís a closed system where all is conserved. This repetition would stand as our lower order elements of constancy. We are inside time, as we are within the point.

Insofar as mass is proportional to the inertia of an object, it would follow that mass, too, defines the reference frame of the object. In object physics our General Frame model of gravitation will need connection to inertial characteristics, based in phase math. In other words, it isnít enough to say that gravitational action is a result of clock density circumstances. True, our electron would most likely have an equal number of clocks, more widely distributed than in its proton drain constituency, and one can imagine that inertia here is simply a rule of resistance in timing created by compressing clocks together in acceleration. No matter what velocity you get up to, once the acceleration stops, the externally applied compression has stopped. Whatís missing in this picture is an appreciation of the inverse view. With it we also address particle "separation."


The inverse view is the internal view of the motion, such as from within a moving proton. When weíre there, we still see our normal view. We perceive our old view as the proton now. So clock density becomes a matter of relativity, with respect to your big bang; i.e., itís a matter of phase. What would make this possible would be a fact of the point. Our perception of distance is only possible because we also have an "offset" perception of anti-distance, which is experienced there as distance as well. The fact here would be that there never was any absolute overall distance, from the total reference frame of the Universe. There is just the point.

Now we can see how a bang/drain system such as ours could support relative "separation" of its bang and drain constituency. This is obviously impossible in the basic model. The bang has to drain into its constituency of black holes. But the perception of distance is no longer valid in the absolute case. It can appear to happen, from the vantage point of another level of relative dimensionality, because of the multiplicity of eternities. We can see the proton and electron as being separated in a fashion similar to seeing a number of H systems when there is really only one. Meanwhile, the overall big case will be perceived of as process in time; even though that process includes self-modification parameters that generate the meanings of all separations in the Universe, relative to other frames.

The dimensions are composed of time, and they compose time, as eternal Vc operation sums. There is no absolute limit to how many times the Universe quantizes its dimensionality into times of collections of times; to produce another infinite-order vector angle reference frame of our object. From a dimensionally offset view, there are limitless examples of distance of separation between charge, with attendant static rule structure. Yet we maintain that any sub-system within such a bang/drain system would consider itself indivisible as well.

Here we begin to approach a view of our big bang as a complete set of infinite dimensions, spread out over time instead of size, when our viewpoint is such. Time and size are interchangeable, and in the final analysis we consider both aspects of function to be available relativistic reference frames, meshed in the math that is full dimensionality.

In familiar reality, an object will be a collection of protons, carrying 99.945% of the mass of the object, but requiring the accompaniment of an equal # of electrons, particularly in the singular case where this duality is perturbed into a neutron system. It might often be helpful to insist on this balance when we consider a "finite" object, regardless of "where" a few stray electrons may be. The object is an aspect of the Universe ó an inseparable sub-condition. Doing this may make the analysis of particle effects less mysterious.

Similarly, we could look at the dual slit experiment as an object, predominantly defined by the source, detector, and intermediate transmissive geometry. The photons are not objects. They are not particles. All of them are virtual fulcrums in process relationships. They are a term we have applied to the seeming existence of a projectile ó a projectile that doesnít accelerate, and travels curved paths... projectiles that know what paths are best to take, based on an apparent knowledge of all currently available options.

What really exists here is the branch of our rule tree that governs the object under study. The wave people can take comfort in seeing a medium for their "photons" ó its all of the particle geometry involved in the transmission and reception ó the medium is this reference frame; this view of our object system.

From the point of view of the current polarity of our big bang reality, the attribute of proton charge carries with it about 1800 times more inertia than the electron. Each of the 1080 sub-charges attributed to it might also carry 1800 times the inertia of sub-charges in an electron. These speculations about attribute - sub-attribute relationships will hopefully lead toward choices based in math that have other firm footings in the puzzle already. Dimensionality could turn things around as you work your way down in "size." The greater inertia is probably a phase relationship between the constituent sub-matter of the proton, and the polarity of our big bang reference frame. The electron begs to be the other phase ó an inside-out proton ó which might see things expanding along with us, and would predict that we are a similarly invisible world, on a large scale, with only a shadow of inertia showing, compared to our distributed drain constituency, or especially our bang moment.

Any size object here is seen to be a reference frame of the Universe. It is seen to be constantly changing into new frames. In solid time, it is seen to be doing so "among," from, and for many "other" such instances of process. Each particle, at any given moment, is a unique entry point into the active, infinite order matrix vector that is our Universe object. All of these frames are the Universe transforming itself into all of these frames. It works because it is what has already happened in the point. It happened because it was part of everything. It was an orderly constituency, that could support awareness, which, in turn, developed to support its order.

I have noted, at a simple level, that there is a problem regarding charge distribution in QED particle physics. The electron cannot be given a size; its charge must be attributed to a point ó which develops infinities that have to be "swept under the rug" so to speak. In object physics we might view the electron as being composed of a distribution of a very large number of points, which in turn are each of likewise composition, without limit. Rather than sweeping infinity away, we would attempt to find the mathematical descriptions for this place where it can live. In so doing, our view becomes one of a finity. The electron has a quantized charge we arbitrarily label -1, relative to other attributes of charge in reality. Its components are in that phase of time. This gives each of its constituent sub-particles a charge of -1/x, with respect to our overall frame of reality, where x is the number of component sub-systems. For the sake of discussion we can assume that x=1080, or whatever current value we hold for the observed number of particles in the Universe. Each of those x number of particles is, in turn, composed of x number of particles, and so on. There are an infinite number of component sub-particles, each carrying an infinitely small charge. The inference referred to our frame is an apparent charge of -1 finity.


We might say a particle has its charge, relative to the Universe, because it is one of an infinite number of reference frames of all time in that quadrant of Universal time. This is not to say that electrons are made only of electrons. An electron would be an attribute of sub-matter that is in the electron phase of time, relative to the phase of reality in our frame. The sub-matter also generates a proton phase, and so on for anti-matter. The sub-matter that generates particles of rest mass would basically consist of the perfectly balanced mix of electron, proton, and anti- electron/proton, as a frame like our bang. The matter and anti-matter is constantly superimposed in process, and alternating as time. These phases may be experienced identically, from within, relative to themselves; while each one would view the other three as being a type of opposite that completes symmetry to maintain zero. This zero is apparently offset ó spread out over all distance and time ó yet it also exists within all systems, as sources of times, to produce charge separation apparent to a higher frame. We would identify these components, within our frame of reality, as the inverse view of our time (anti-matter), and a similar duo of process that will "follow" our time (anti-process) in the drain ahead. Charge and mass are referred to the higher frame by the relative character and direction of transition of these polarities.

From the wave reference frame, we would say that the particles are time quantizations of sub-wave processes. We see solid time as being composed of these levels and distributions of quantization reference frames of the Universe. The time differential between our big bang and an immediate component particle cycle might be, or somehow be derived from, our x figure. The differential is relative... all cycles would be eternal in an absolute sense, and perhaps eternal with respect to the development of fundamental dimensional status, as an internal-external system... perhaps all particle cycles achieve point awareness.

While we perceive ourselves as being in an expansion, another acceleration matrix might view us as a contraction. In other words, sub-process quantizations of time, that we would identify as "bang" or "drain" time phase, would both experience their frame as we do ours; as an expansion. The expansion would appear to be composed of a perfectly balanced set of such sub-bangs and sub-drains, regardless of which phase it appears to be in, from any given relative dimensional derivation from, or source of, such process. Even the character of a bang as a "bang" might be subject to the frame from which that phase of time is viewed. The drawn-out piecemeal process of draining might appear to be a single instantaneous bang from the reference frame that is created by the distributed drain processes of another frame. This might very well be the relationship that defines the relative character of time between its quadrant pairs, when viewed from within a pair, by beings of our fundamental dimensional development. A fully developed view might recognize a smoother sort of phase shifting process, by having a less partisan perception of data. Full development might be the view of the point, encompassing a knowledge of all history, from all points of view. Full development would not use and discard the train of history that creates the most advanced viewpoint... full development includes its history as a component... for process is always a series of parallel events. The attributes of stability, constancy and predictability we see in the world are derived from the reliability of re-creation of reality, which is also re-creation of its train of change, that would exist as this permanent history of compounding dimensionality.


Now, to be even more into the essence of object physics, along our path here, we view the "transmission/reception" of photon relationships as a transformation of the sub-frames composing our overall frame or object. The reality of a photon event would be a series of frame transformations that carry that meaning, while other frames, as well as those involved in the communication are carrying on all the other meanings there are. This is the substance of reality, relative to the consciousness observing it. A given particle is the waxing and waning of its collection of such chatter. The upshot of that chattering process is that the collection will participate in behavior that exists relative to the behavior of other such collections, that are actually the same collection, quantum-offset in time, to another eternity; and that some of those other collections will behave in accordance with the common rules that relate them to particular collections of particular relative timing. Its all logic in a rule tree that looks like time and distance to us. A deeper, intense reality is constantly existing "before" a given moment of thought at the level of our frame, as the series of transformations within any given particle is segmented into eternities; as one such sub-frame transforms itself through those eternities into all of the "other" sub-frames involved in a given photon relationship, as well as in the sum of all process leading up to the current moment of our frame of reality. Our level of dimensionality has this process as a starting point, or basis upon which to act. Our large scale process, composed of this ongoing series of sub-frame eternities, is on its way toward one such self-transforming event, while all of the change we see as the composition of our reality, is already a part of the overall act. The sub-frames here are the atoms we say participate in supporting our overall process, acting as our rule tree.

If an atom were not composed of its Vc chatter, it would only exist in its act of interdependence, with other versions of itself, at its level. The only time atoms would have meaning would be transition times of associating photon events. This is true for the inner chatter events as well! Itís all virtual. Itís all inferred by the point.

The tree, and all infinite number of other trees, all exist within the point; where each is isolated from the others as a matter of definition ó a tree is a collection of related, interacting rules. Our tree generates our atoms as one atom that modifies itself over eternities to create all atomic relationships deemed by our tree. The various eternities of our tree affect each other with what we would say are photon events of transmission and reception. Your friend across the room is you, in a different set of eternities... as another aspect of our single set of an infinite number of eternities. She is a different day in your life, when you will do exactly what she is deciding to do, based on the infinitely complex source of her thoughts "then."

The rules of our tree produce consciousness relative to that sequence of those infinite number of eternal segments; in such a way that x number of them appear to "coincide" in solid time. Consciousness is produced because it is an available viewpoint of an available realm, or tree, that can "sample" it out. Such a realm has regular, logically related rules, relative to the consciousness it generates; and that rule tree is ripe for the picking of advancement in capabilities; through biological and technical evolution. Evolution appears to be a process in time to the consciousness it produces, which also runs in that perceived time. To the point, all you will know this way simply is.

If consciousness is constructed out of a time base of eternal quanta, this says a lot about the "behavior" or organization of reality within our rule tree. It "remembers" everything in terms of its system relationships, repeating a nearly identical eternity each time. Itís the "nearly" that produces conscious time, and process in general relative to that conscious reference frame. From a higher dimensional vantage point, the tree would look like a whole tree, in logical terms, because such memory of near-identicals is the associated transitions of permanent fact grades. The substance of this page is partially a constancy, where it is repeated permanently, without change, at a given level of dimensionality, or "frequency." The rest of its substance is "neighboring" memory, that through higher dimensional levels, offers realities of change to consciousness, that is likewise supported. Consciousness can only perceive with reference to a page that is always changing. The combination of transition levels among the atoms and sub-atoms is never the same from one moment to the next.

We might look into these dimensional relationships and recognize the factor of permanence as fixed time loops; where time drains into reverse time, which leads back to the original time. From a given dimensional vantage level, we might term a certain sub-dimensional level to have such a relative character. Then, rising out of that, we obtain the experiential level that is derived from relationships of sequences driven through a series of slightly differing permanent cells. There would also be a dimensional level that would recognize a composition of change where another level sees permanence; if we are going to remove the limit on dimensionality. Itís all a bunch of change that produces elements of constancy, that stand as a source of relative change for a higher level of dimensionality, that produces higher elements of constancy, and so on.

Our simplified model object is developing as a self-transformation of H, composed of 1080 sub-self-transformations, which would appear to each compose an H atom, as viewed in solid time. Each sub-H is, however, the same total H, in a relatively much shorter, tighter sequence; from which a factor of 1080 the "speed of time" would consciously be recognized as the substance of a so-composed H atom. The sub-H atoms are each likewise composed, ad infinitum; so there is really just the one "biggest" which is also all of the "littlest." To see this connection is to step outside the "size circle," by switching reference frames, to the mathematical point.

The permanent micro-loops of H cycles get left behind, relative to conscious observation of changing H cycles; because those loops re-exist at the lowest frequency rate of the Universe. In this sense they are ultra-macro-loops. Within a little H, their forward and reverse components are relatively small, and very transient. But they are the result of there being nothing else to do but repeat everything after an infinite number of eternities. To the point, at the very heart, distributed throughout any little H, there need be only one of these cycles for there to be no end to them. Our frames are within time, which, in its completeness, is a constant point.

I am being repetitious here, because I want to clarify the position weíve reached before I shift to different ways of looking at this same thing. It can be seen as this infinitely large set of infinitely small elements, and it can be imagined as a consequence of the point. Between these extremes are some intermediate reference frames, that address relative dimensionality, which we are preparing to consider.

The tc component here is a conscious vector in dimensionality. The relatively fixed sub-t loops represent a foundation or source of sub-time, upon or from which conscious time can function. They are a low-order permanent "snap-shot" of every cycle in each H. The conscious vector leaves these loops "behind," and has a large or infinite number of rule-driven "options" for upcoming linkage. We could imagine viewing the loops themselves, in their reference frame, as we shift through all levels of dimensionality. They would stand as a definition of permanent elemental constancy throughout the infinite matrix of full dimensionality. However, from any fixed level of dimensionality, this quality would appear to be sub-dimensional to a conscious reference frame.

This would be another parallel between Universal structure and brain structure. We would suspect that, though these permanent loops are left behind by vectors of higher order time, relative to consciousness, they stand by to serve endless varieties of propagation throughout eternity.

All of the alternative decisions you make may also exist through this matrix, aside from the ones you can observe in your fellow beings, and the alternatives available there as well. We are speculating here that the matrix supports a family of related trees, as well as the one we know weíre in. This might be needed to eliminate the distasteful notion of anti-consciousness as lifetimes experienced in reverse. The reverse-time experience generated by the anti-matter component, would not necessarily link its loops together in reverse order of our forward time. The reversed time is chopped into little bits that each run backwards with respect to the phase of time in our big bang. Our conscious direction of time is driven by both bits. Anti-consciousness could simply be included as consciousness, or, it could be a variety of other processes that make use of the anti-bit. In other words, each time one of these loops operates, both halves must function, and this would support various processes in bi-directional times of the Universe. This, again, would be in keeping with our brain model.

The anti-reference frame is running together with our frame as a single frame composed of time quanta that each consist of forward and reverse micro-elements of the matrix. The dual-directionality of these micro-loops simply stands as a foundation, or relative root system, out of which the rule tree exists in true sequences of events. Reverse-running sequences will ride on the bottom side of our loop picture "after" the drain ahead; when the overall time frame is also running backwards. This alternation from our process bang to anti-process would be a distributed bang system. Since the micro-loops and the overall frame are both backwards with respect to our frame, the experience from within that frame would be forward. It just has to look backwards to us, from our relative position in dimensionality. These "right angles" are composing the foundation of higher order dimensionality.

We have been considering ways of integrating the concept of parallel quantum realities here, within our framework of unlimited dimensionality. In this framework we would not see them as being very parallel. There would be a kind of instantaneous simultaneity to the coexisting processes, while their individual trains diverge, and run in all various directions, sharing various micro-loops. We could speculate that their location is spread out within the host of H version viewpoints. I am more inclined to ponder that these alternative realities are simply the seemingly simultaneous lives of our co-beings on the planet, and throughout time. And when we consider the prospect of living nearly identical lives, again I suspect that those repetitions are embodied in the lives of our fellow beings on Earth, and throughout the Universe of time. We may not need to account for probabilities by turning to invisible structures running with us in our single time. You will prefer to consider this constant branching of reality to find support for the concept of absolute independence of thought. The model here grants that privilege only to the total system, by removing limits to dimensional time. We influence each otherís thoughts and decisions. Our DNA, our parents, our teachers, and the world, construct our decision making abilities, and drive those capacities into society, where they react in the mix. The process is infinitely complex, yet fully defined throughout eternity; else nothing would have any attributes of constancy.


Placing our pair of pairs of symmetry into dimensionality; one pair appears to alternate quickly in our matter, relative to conscious time, while the other appears to be perfectly simultaneous between those systems. One can imagine that these roles are interchangeable, depending on the level of dimensionality you choose from which to observe another level as the given pair. We are beginning to look at our quadrature time as pairs of identical interlocking building blocks of complete dimensionality; relative, and not relative, to consciousness. In this, there is a frame from which our upcoming alternation is simultaneous, and superimposed in our reality. Both halves of the loops are acting together to produce a single awareness, even though it would seem, from our frame, that one half will be running backwards from our future.

So this alternating process - anti-process might support two halves of the full variety of taken options that have developed as our tree, or family of trees, rooted in symmetrical simultaneity of photon interdependencies; all riding on attributes of permanent constancy throughout the matrix of dimensionality. Or, the alternating process - anti-process supports a single simultaneous variety of taken options, since its reverse time component stems from our future.

For infinity here, we need not necessitate a view that anything imaginable actually happens, relative to consciousness. Imagination happens; but it tends to lose sight of the rules. Our rule tree is what happens. Itís big, and itís complete ó but complete does not necessarily mean that if it is possible, it happens, in terms of our judgment as to what is possible. It is the tree itself that was all that was possible; even though itís infinite.

This feels like an area of philosophy we may never nail down. One can imagine a biggest picture, composed of all families of rule trees. Here, we are essentially attempting to define limits or non-limits for infinities. One could say that complete infinite experience will include everything imaginable. One could also say that experience is restricted by orderly rule structures into an infinite, but orderly, set of realities. The latter case feels correct to me, based on my view of consciousness mechanics; but then I would think so, if Iím made that way.

To reiterate, in our simplified H model here, we have two pairs of opposites completing symmetry, to be allowed as behavior of the point. Relative to consciousness, one pair is constantly simultaneous, as time runs tandem with distance. The other pair is process followed by anti-process. The two types of pairs are interchangeable, depending on where you stand in infinite dimensionality to look at a given pair. The difference between pair types could be seen as rungs in a ladder. Each rung is the same; but a larger view sees a ladder, and specifies an attainment of height, relative to some point of reference. The components of dimensionality are identical in one sense ó complete sets of Vc relationships ó yet they act in another sense with a difference that generates endless levels, to complete dimensionality ó from within the big bang we can see the alternating symmetry in the cyclical nature of our H constituents. The act of process that leads to alternating anti-process, is the act of self-modification that infers photon relationships between various cyclical extensions of the Universe as various H reference frames. Simultaneous photon symmetry takes place within each half-cycle of an H system, and stands as part of the stuff that gets reversed in the alternations. The process of reversal stands as a basis from which photon interaction can take place then between those systems at the next level-set of dimensionality. All of this arises from a lower order dimensional base of constancy, as a consequence of permanent repetition, that is unavoidable when dimensionality is generated from the point in an infinite number of eternal cycles of Vc relationships between those cycles. In other words, our reality is a consequence of unhindered eternal math.


Now, to view a rock as an object, things have gotten a bit more interesting. We see proton/electron - to - proton/electron relationships developed from one eternity to the next, in a constantly upgrading series of handshakes, producing what appear to be chemical elements, and bonds, as well as gravitational, and electromagnetic interactions, all at Vc into, and from the environment and the rock. We can see how it is we normally view things in the more basic, straight forward manner, by recognizing that our brains, too, are objects as such, hashed out through eternities in the exact same manner.


Every so often I stop for a moment, amidst this mess, and think it would just be a whole lot easier to go back to the old view of a lot of independent static things together in time. It takes little of that time for me to fall back into this, though. It does get cumbersome, even without the math, and without a treatment of complex particle derivatives and properties. I feel that this approach may hold the answers to our long-standing questions concerning identical properties of particles, like charge and mass, and the questions of charge balance and property conservation. This same approach provides reasoning with which to handle the split brain paradox.


The brain can experience the presence of the rock, while the rock cannot experience the presence of the brain, because the brain is a system that includes a self-relative memory set, which is constantly being upgraded. It is the meaning factor in this upgrading process that is the consciousness. The meaning is successful relation of the system with itself and the world it changes, and is changed by. The consciousness is the sum of all such involved mental vectors, at any moment... moment being a term of time relative to consciousness existing in time, where time is composed of the above hashing of eternities.

The one brain system can be split into two systems. We know from the mechanics of memory distribution and consciousness that each "1/2" system will be a continuation of the original system ó each will carry on the original consciousness (though with some fragmented capabilities; e.g. speech, etc.). This is the source of the hypothesis of You here, and so we are home... time must be able to alternate reference frames to support all frames as versions of one frame ó itself ó time.


One of the more difficult aspects of this object physics for me to visualize has been the sources of direction information, as required for relative positioning of sub-systems in a given system. Perhaps this question led to the assertion that the bangs neednít necessarily bang ó the process could be viewed as a more continuous and rounded phase shifting process, from higher dimensional vantages. Time doesnít just run two ways ó the angle could be thought of as being derived from a sphere ó it goes forward, backward, sideways, up and down, and every way between. After all, itís as solid as space because it is anti-space, and space is anti-time. The source of relative direction, then, could relate to the degree of phase shift in effect at the point of general evolutionary climax, or operation(s), producing the photon communication as self-modification(s). This timing would generate the effective relative direction vector between the communicating eternities of the continuous "bang." The notion of bang here is replaced with a smooth pivoting action of alternating production and absorption of mass and anti-mass from, and to, the singularity. The term mass here might be interchangeable with time, and inverse to space. In other words, the proton is time-dense, and our black hole constituency is collecting time. The difference here is a matter of the dimensional level of reference, or position therein, as a viewpoint for looking at the same thing.

A different wrinkle we could add here, would be to go the other way, and say that the above described angles are generated at quantized levels ó that there is little smoothness or continuity to the process. The whole stretch of action from bang to absorption is fixed in angle. Perhaps the relative time of the stretch determines the angle generated.

We know from QED that, from our view, the angle of departure of photons is random. Optometric results are a matter of photon quantum timing, which varies precisely with distance. Can we carry this knowledge into a view of singular H reality? There is only one H. It changes itself. Itís the way it changes itself, with respect to the way it has been changing itself, that produces apparent relative position of H constituents, as well as apparent photon distribution. It changes itself over an infinite number of eternities, and in so doing, as our rule tree, generates our self-relating reality in solid time.

Along these lines, another simpler possibility is that direction is a consequence of the direction of internal change! Each H is a "map" of the Universe, in all of its dimensions, in terms of its capacity to produce effective communication with its virtual surrounding set of H systems. The zero level is equivalent to all versions of attainment of the infinite level. Running toward each other, between these extremes, would be all intermediary levels; and this information will be complete from any given H, toward its zero level. As we will soon see, that zero level, or a port to it, may not be so completely far away within, and inaccessible as we have been thinking.


Relative Dimensionality


Letís consider the first variant frame now, of our system of systems scheme, to begin dealing with relative dimensionality. We have begun this by stating that there is really only one H. It acts as all of the identical H units by virtue of its relationships with itself over various absolutely eternal, relatively finite, periods of time. The finite view is only a conscious perception. Each quantum of thought is eternal. Recall also the notion that we are the point of juxtaposition on the size circle, as much as any position on that circle would be. Our "bang" then is the one biggest H, composed of all of the smallest zero-sized systems. This could mean that beyond our big bang there would be nothing observable, were we able to look. This one biggest bang uses all of space-time to completely re-absorb itself into the dispersed singularity. Hence, the eternal period of particle re-existence. In the process, it completely modifies itself in every necessary way, as an aspect of our rule tree. From our view, this draining process may be eternal then, absolutely; or it may even be eternal with respect to the reference unit of time handed to us by our constituent eternal particle cycles. In either case, it is "followed" by the inverse process, within the black holes, and may appear as a single bang from within that frame, or as an anti-matter cycle of dispersed bang, heading toward a single big implosion.

So, if you could "pop your head out" of our big H, and look around for its neighbors, you would see less than nothing ó no space or time. Where are all the other big H systems? In other eternal cycles of our one big H. The only way to view the multiplicity of big H systems is to be composed of them. It would be impossible to see them from our reference frame. What we can see is all the versions of H that compose our reality.

The relativistic effect here is reminiscent of the effect required by the hypothesis of You. You donít know youíre everyone else "until" you are; at which point you canít remember or experience being any of the others.

It takes eternity for our reality to infer a single pixel of basis of finite time to "larger" dimensionality (rememberó itís just a point). From that larger view though, the relative timing might appear to be related to the x factor of about 1080. Another way of stating the relative dimensionality here might be to say that each H has its space fully curved around itself. This is similar to saying that each cycle uses all of its time to make all of its anti-time, and visa versa. From the large view, the little H system repeats this process quite frequently, because a quantum of that view is built out of about x of these eternities, times the frequency of the matter, times the definition of perceptive time. We must also consider that it is just plain built out of an infinite number of them, in composing a step in dimensional elevation. In the absolute sense, we have already implied this in the model here; as each H is composed of an infinite regression of sub-systems, connecting it to/as the Universe. But it may be true in this specific inter-level issue of relative dimensionality.

We are beginning to lose our unlimited big picture, in terms of accessibility from our frame of process. It is still there, relative to a frame of infinite numbers of eternities. We began the development of our systemology with just such a discussion of the Mathematical Universe. Making the next dimension set so remote does not make it unreal. We are just as virtual with respect to our immediate components.

Within our big bang we can look at our little H systems and see the alternating symmetry as frequency characteristics of matter, and the components of change. We can also see the photon relationships of interaction between H constituents. When we look to our big H bang component, we are severely restricted. Its alternating component exists beyond a horizon of our view. We see the distributed black hole singularity of the point. It appears to be collecting all of our time and distance ó the stuff we need in order to see such things as alternation. We canít see the other half-cycle here, or any means of sparking our half-cycle again, any more than we can see other big H bangs, or their big photon relationships. All of our space-time is draining into that. All of our behavior on the way to the drain is the definition of the Universe, right to its core. It is a viewpoint of the whole overall thing, from within it, composed of the complete thing, as a vantage point of operations of that thing. The half cycle we see ourselves in, implies a reverse half cycle of identity, superimposed in our process, and standing as a permanent element of dimensionality. Beyond this, we cannot see "future" that is the generation of higher dimensionality. Perhaps to see that we must look within.

Does the inner end of our matrix also become inaccessible? Here, it would appear, the reverse case comes to order. The only way to gain access to the super "small" dimensions is to step down the ladder. Any lower level is within reach, but only from the one just above it. We will consider continuous dimensionality of endless repetitions of fundamentally identical frames, related to each other, as interlocking components of that limitless sequence, through a fixed factor of dimensional shift between the levels, or between any dimensional aspect of two adjacent levels. One manís ceiling is another manís floor. Moreover; one manís ceiling is an indirect basis for all higher floors.

In terms of sources, there is a complete, unhindered connection between inner realities and our world, even though it is impossible to see the larger levels from the smaller ones. The inner frames all exert an influence on our frame; or better put, they literally construct our reality. But they do so, contributing a lesser and lesser infinitesimal percentage of our process to us, per H, as you look deeper into dimensionality. The effects are handed from one level to the next. Each level, moving inward, has a multiple of x components, reducing each component contribution by that percentage.

In the case where we would attempt to alter inner realities (presumably for overall organizational development or support), dimensionality reflects back at us, allowing access only to the next level down. To go further, you would have to get that level to do the altering of its next level down. This might be the way it would be if our scheme of unlimited dimensionality exists as a progression of fundamentally identical interlocking reality levels.

The approach here is considering that the aspects of our world that we would consider to be six dimensional would have, as their basis, a three dimensional source, for example, within matter. That frame, itself then, would say that it is six dimensional, arising from its three dimensional matter source. And so on, endlessly. This would be a tree where dimensionality shifts by a constant factor of three, relative to any fixed viewpoint in the scheme, as you look into the regression of reality levels. We will develop our notions in these simple terms, keeping in mind that reality is, no doubt, far more complex.

An unconscious attribute of our world then, embodies six dimensions ó space, motion, change of motion, and potentially meaningful patterns. The "space" entry here is the source of the latter three entries; arising from matter interactions.

If we attempt to work our way in, from this fixed frame definition, to view the next lower three dimensional level within the apparently three dimensional frame of our mass, that next level is apparently zero dimensional with respect to our world! In some sense, we have already reached the point.

We know that the other levels exist within, as the mathematical source of any immediate higher level, so lets consider the relative position of "smaller" frames, even though we seem to have run out of dimensions.

The next step would have -3 dimensions. We need not assume that this level has to be smaller than the point. The relative effect, between the frames, is inside out. Our 3 dimensional basis includes, or has superimposed in it, a -3 dimensional aspect.

Dimensionality reflects off the point, producing the anti-matter constituency of any given level of process. It might seem that we are trying to say that a level of extremely tiny components is also an endless number of levels of bigger components. Yes and no. No ó the level is not "simultaneously" all sizes. Yes ó it induces all sizes, as we have already been outlining here throughout the chapter. From the point of view of the -3 dimensional attribute, the one we consider to be 3 dimensional is the one that we should consider to be -3 dimensional. Itís the way it has to be if weíre going to have time "instead of" a point.

Our 6 dimensional attributes, too, include their -6 dimensional components, always running perfectly tandem; and so on. They can do that, through their influence, for the same reason that they themselves can exist in the first place, as that perfect balance in zero.

We see matter - anti-matter in this as a consequence of any photon event. It is the same time, and would also be a residual inference, reflected off the point, in dimensionality. This handshaking is necessary, or a characteristic of, the attributes of constancy and permanence, with respect to the generation of higher levels of dimensionality within and as the given H system.


From the conscious view, matter + anti-matter is not producing a constant state of zero ó we experience time over distance. Since the net balance of overall reality is always zero, we also see that process is followed by anti-process. We see this as the generation of our dimensionality progression. The cyclical behavior we see in matter, and beyond our future, could not exist without an identical, relatively simultaneous system, precisely of inverse phase. From this viewpoint we would predict that when anti-particles are briefly introduced into our environment, particles are likewise briefly introduced into the anti-environment.

Our 9 dimensional consciousness is also anti-consciousness. The evolution of our particle to 12 dimensions would include -12 dimensions, as it essentially becomes the whole tree. 12 dimensions would go beyond consciousness, to deal with the whole of time. In becoming a +12 dimensional system, the big particle would gain access to the history of the Universe through its "harmonic" dimensions ó the harmonics being the rest of the infinite number of dimensions that accrue their influence in and as the particle. If this model were correct, it seems that it would require a different number for our dimension shift, or that the shifting would reach a special significance every fourth time. Maybe our reality is a 3 X 4, that equals zero. The shift from one particle level to the next would be 12; and so our first guess would be that it also shifts by 12 for any attribute level of a particle, to that corresponding attribute level within an adjacent level particle. In terms of access, or apparent relative origin, it seems the step below mass would still be zero dimensional, so that the negative dimensions are fundamentally inferred as a mirror image from beyond that point. Our positive fundamental dimensional attributes, being opposite, might arise differently, as the direct, one-to-one inference. The system of dimensional origins might be able to work this way, because all of the lower origins work this way, as our tree. This would produce, and require, that dimensionality be an endless progression, within an infinite "circle." I have to wonder where we really got the idea to use two sets of 12 hours for our day. Could this be one of those hints we got sprinkled with?


The "sense" of having the point close by in dimensionality, may involve an attainability through some sort of combination windowing between dimensional levels. Lest we think this too favorable to grant our future such opportunity, imagine that there also are all of those trees that lack any or all of the wonderful coincidences weíre finding here; and that in those realities there is no consciousness. Things seem super great here, for loving planets, because thatís what it takes to make you. Versions of you are going to develop to amazing levels, turning around to keep it all real.


The infinite dimensions can be seen now as reverberating in our more familiar bang of H systems. They live in the full spread of time ó an infinite number of eternities ó for "this place." They live within the components of all systems, as the complete source of all relative behavior.


The Scan


The concept of scanning in object physics is perhaps the most surrealistic component to the whole scheme. As an engineering type, I automatically want to say ó well then there should be some sign of delay or propagation in one direction or another ó this scanning process should show up somehow. The problem here would be one of those that stem from the nature of the question. Here, the question is pre-supposing that you should actually be able to perceive reality from a viewpoint that is above and beyond that reality... or I should say, within it, and complete; before it infers us.


The structure of object physicsí scheme is one that works from the inside out. Scanning is not a side-to-side atom-to-atom process. It is sub-atoms to atoms to super atom, where the super atom is the attainment of "control" over all eternal cycles, that stand as its source, as the sub-atoms. This convolution is inevitable, since it all produces a constant point. The "control" here might be better stated as the quality of fully being. We must also consider the possibility that our tree is developing because the larger system decided to remember us.


The H configuration is the arbitrary unit here; and all the similar-sized similar-timed neighbors oriented "side-to-side" are in their own eternity loops. Each of these loops contain all the other loops. Each is a unique entry point into the running time of the one single loop. What does happen side-to-side is electromagnetic communication, which might be regarded as the crowning achievement in evolution, within all H configuration moments; where bridges between eternities are accomplished. In other words, the H talks to itself, eternities ahead and behind; and has the ability to do so without making a single error (perhaps this is easy because it has an infinite number of "tries" to work with ó each try has a correct place of relative meaning).


The scan does show up, however; as the electro-magnetic "speed limit." The scan produces a "heart-rate," or is an apparent "system clock" of the Universe. Electromagnetic communication is limited by this system cycle time. Each cycle is eternal, but all of the cycles taken together produce the self-relating meaning we term "reality." These eternal cycles construct our awareness, and our measurement instruments; and the behavior of these and all other things with each other.


You can take the electromagnetic viewpoint, and say that there arenít really any Hís here ó each H is a history, past and future, of photon communications between its internal constituency of also otherwise H component neighbors. It is also defined by its current communications with external neighbors, as written in its deepest past. To choose one or the other of these views, is like turning sideways on the Universal time lattice. No matter how you look at it though, youíre not going to see a big picture tube.



The scan is the production of the categorization of relative point positions, as outlined in dimensionality, ch 4, and elsewhere. We donít observe a propagation delay in the most fundamental scan, because its infinitely fast cycle time, relative to our apparent finity structure, defines it as a persistence. This "rate" is the fundamental co-existence of all mass. Our reality is a sampled view of the system, an infinite number of dimension steps away from that "rate." The sampling shows up, to us, as the Vc heart-rate, that is the structure of our immediate dimensionality. Vc is the propagation delay that does come out of "the scan" as a perceivable quality. It is the fundamental component of what we observe to be time. At the same time, it generates apparent relative distances. Since it is not the most absolutely fundamental component of reality, we do not observe that it must behave as a logically oriented scanning process. It appears free to move in all three coordinates of space, simultaneously with many other such traces. The relatively infinitely fast clock, scans from within, in all outward directions, simultaneously, because its "rate" is not a relative rate. Infinity here, is its quality of simultaneous persistence of all mass, as the presence of qualities of the point. If we could go within, to the level we see as that which produces the infinite clock, we would find just another reality set like ours, based on Vc. Itís the infinite number of nested eternities between the two opposing dimension frames that produces the relatively infinite clock rate.


It would seem that the scan must be at the crux of our observed separation phenomena, which essentially are the very flow of reality, relative to consciousness. Surely it would be involved with, if not simply be, the process that is the object of our developing super-particle. All points communicating via photon, are the same point. There is really only one point ó the Universe. What appears to be various distances is the number of cycles that transpire between the "send" and "receive." This is where Vc gets its constancy; and its relative position as maximum "speed." In the process of doing these seemingly mundane fundamental interactions, the scan induces development, which includes consciousness that can recognize that development amidst the confusion of the full backdrop of complexities. It "can" do this because it is the generation of unlimited dimensionality. Those dimensions include potential sets of relative rules, that become actualized; relative to a viewpoint from within the process. To the viewpoint of the overall, inevitable process, there are all of the trees.


In the reference frame of the scan, it would seem that no behavior is focused from "way out" or from "way big," just as it is not a kind of side-to-side production. The source of interacting processes is from within those processes. The overall interaction is pre-written within each component. The circumstances leading up to the current reactions would seem, from an "outside" view, to be overbearing influences. The "surrounding" Universe exists within all of its components. Their behavior is that actualization of the Universe, induced from within its component versions of itself, as the scan that brings relative meaning to existence. Yes, we can put an atom on the bench, and modify its states. But the source of our decisions is ultimately the same source that delivers that atom to the process we are participating in.


While inducing apparent process, the scan would appear to be creating the electron as a potentially independent entity. This is a result of the rule structure, regarding apparent distances. "Any" electron is always an aspect of the Universe that exists relative to some proton, or series of protons. Even when we think we are isolating one, we have not removed it from the Universe, and we have not upset the balance of charge therein. It all happens essentially inside a mathematical point, but the point exists everywhere ó as mass, and as timing delays that appear to be space between the mass origins of time. The system all adds up to a point, that scans out the system.


Object Fate


I would like to remind the reader that I donít know what Iím talking about. We are wondering along a path here, that I find interesting. I choose between the forks as we go along, out of the feelings I get from all the prior choices. In developing this book, I have gone back and re-chosen directions many more times than I have settled on them. I have done this to try and get the whole thing to fit together. In the process, there have turned out to be a few unavoidable pathways that would be better left not discussed, if I were focused on producing a text that would meet with maximum popularity. I have always been more interested in approaching the truth, regardless of what it appears to be. I suspect that we need to discover the truth, in order to survive. It may be so different than what weíre accustomed to, that it may take time to become considerable, and accepted. I might seem to be contradicting myself here, since I haven't done all that much reading, and I haven't done much to develop my math skills. You see; Iím looking for something that might not be in the books. I want to reserve this effort for future occasions, when I feel that those influences will not prevent me from considering all the possibilities. If this means that "I" will never get to it, I hope you will, or already have. I say all this because I would honestly prefer that you write me off, or at least my treatment of this topic, rather than misconstrue the points here in such a way as to lose your sense of freedom. I believe in freedom, but I see it within a larger context.


Free will is truly experienced, but it exists within fate. Fate is bigger. Fate is smarter. Fate knows everything. Free will is sub-process, with partial knowledge. Free will is much of what makes being human beautiful.


You would not think of an object physics sort of scheme if you were not sympathetic to causality. That everything is a miniscule residual effect of ever far deeper detail of process, and that various times can interact without ever a chance of error, only becomes imaginable if the Universe is regarded as a perfect, complete, mechanism.


Perhaps the primary stumbling block in the way of this view is a fear that causality becomes an excuse for everything negative. This fear supposes that excuses for negativity will engender further negativity, and that a firm belief in causality is an excuse not to be motivated. Furthermore, by rejecting causality, we leave open the possibility that we humans somehow transcend physical law, and are miraculously greater than the Universe itself with respect to having this very special thing we call "will power."


Will power does exist ó it is the positive side of causality. The negative side is the side we are striving to reduce or eliminate. It motivates us to modify its behaviors. In so doing, we will always be attempting to remove some of our freedom. To understand both sides, and to deal with reality in a more complete way, is to become stronger and more likely to survive and develop. More importantly, it is to increase your happiness, sooner or later.


The cornerstone of any free-will theory is probably the uncertainty principal. With it, we can be certain that we will always be uncertain about everything. With this in mind, it is all the more certain that things so complex as people are fully unpredictable. The problem with this approach to dealing with physical reality is that it is a misapplication of truth, that avoids the real issue. It doesnít address the question of our source of choice, so much as it escapes it. Our choices arise from the past. Even the point in reality we call "present" becomes a past by the time it weighs-in on our thought process.


Object physics asks you to consider a great deal; but in so doing, it provides a model for the source of the uncertainty principal. It is easier to simplify reality down to a constituency of question marks; and it may seem more gratifying to be "willful consciousness" rising above all that. It was comfortable to view the world as being flat, but we had to get over that as we realized that we were on a body that is round like the moon. We wanted to be the center around which the Sun and all else revolved. These drives have not yet been quenched. The uncertainty principal throws everything up for grabs ó object physics says donít try to grab too much. It is ironic that this attitude can lead you to see that you are the Universe, in the long run. You canít be more; but you are it. The Sun wonít revolve around you; but it is there for you. You are located exactly at the center of the Universe, if you allow it to be infinite. To assume a finite Universe is to add yet more to the relative status of present self, as a mysterious higher entity. But it is to avoid facing some fundamental aspects of reality.


The source of uncertainty is the infinite detail of connected causality. The reason we cannot predict the future is that it is the result of an infinitely complex past. Everything that has happened is exactly what was going to happen. The future is part of its own past. Though we canít see it very well, the future will be exactly what it always has been.



From the human reference frame it is difficult to imagine that all photon couplings are pre-determined, or fatalistic, if you will. Its hard to believe that a photon leaving a star billions of years ago "knew" it would reach a particular atom in your eye; especially since your eye is only there to meet it after a long series of decisions made by yourself and others. The decision process seems to put you in charge. Object physics sees the coupling as a constant definition of time, within the point. An object did not have to traverse the distance, and miraculously accomplish the interception of that particular atom. There was no intermediary object. The object was the definition of the relationship, as part of our rule tree.

As a human, youíre not so much in charge, as you think. Even with the astronomical numbers involved in brain logic progression, it is still a progression. It has answers that will come to pass because of the relative weight and timing of the components involved. To deny this is analogous to insisting that limited perpetual motion machines actually work. Only the unlimited time of the Universe can do that. The results are in the rules, all along. The rules are our way of viewing the constant truth within the point. As the point, you would be in complete control; or at least, you would be complete.


We can experience and enjoy a great sense of freedom; but like finity, this sense is an illusion. Everything you do actually fits together perfectly, as a permanent replication of its infinite self. The infinity of reality makes your choices completely unpredictable, by me. Only the Universe, in a state of complete self-knowledge, could accurately predict the future. Our choices re-construct the future, regardless of what we thought it was going to be. It is really a very simple fact that everything that has happened, really has happened, and as such, is the things that were going to happen, ever since the moment of our big bang; and before that if object physics is correct. It has always been true that you would be born, exactly as you were, though no humans could have predicted too many of the astronomical number of details composing this momentous event. All of the other possible alternative turns that we can imagine in such great multitude, may also exist, somewhere, sometime, in some other tree, or some other part or rendition of this one. But the way things are, is a way that we can be sure of as the continuation of true process, regardless of the degree of familiarity we have with the details of its structure.

It may be possible to replay the past; but any time it plays, it really becomes what it is. Otherwise its something else. The facts of past reality cannot be altered. To do so would require that a past be changed by a future that would not then exist. We can get into some very far-out speculation here, by drawing parallels with electronic circuit function. Some futures could communicate to some pasts, even if those pasts lead to those futures, when the ones that do it are the ones that do it without affecting their own existence. Its like electronic feedback... where it would be self-destructive, it wonít be possible. Where it would prevent self-destruction, it will be necessary for survival. Only the possible or necessary ways of doing it will be available to do. If Earth becomes involved in this, it will always have been true that our future will meet with us in some way for our mutual benefit.


In a sense, object physics has been attempting to define reality as a parallel series of just such interaction. We are the continuous generation of successful examples of this. Various eternity groups interact with each other ó between the past and future, and visa-versa.


Object fate comes down to the automatic quality of reality, relative to, and including, consciousness. Do you decide to make your heart beat? No, it happens automatically. Do you consider your heart a part of you? Yes, obviously. We do a lot of things automatically. Most of what our true, complete body does, is fusion, and dust floating around between the fusion. In all of the more familiar cases, where you are a human-type being, some of your automatic process is involved in thought ó consideration of alternatives ó options and desires. We plan, and we sometimes plan for nested contingencies. Then, reality happens, as always. Sometimes our dreams come true, and sometimes they turn into nightmares. They only come true if you plan. Maybe youíll get a surprise. Sooner or later your yous have nightmares. It might help to expect that. Maybe there is more happiness in a dream world.


There is only one Time ó the Universe. It talks to itself in infinite ways, and it even groups these talks up into seemingly discrete memory sets that then also talk to "each other." This one Time couldnít be more complex; yet it is also very simple ó it is you.


We all strive to produce a better future... at least those of us who have not had our motivation defeated away from us, in a loss of self-valuation. None of us really know whatís going to happen. I donít know; and that fact is one of many things that make me glad. In my present form, I donít think it would make me happy to gain vast knowledge of the future, even if I knew that nothing would ever happen again that will make me sad. There would be nothing left to try for. We really are in heaven, now.


Gradient Frames


As long as we are wondering about things, hereís a simple idea that may at least be interesting, if it does not lead to something useful. Various hints for this have shown up here and there already. Itís another example that stems from a feel for electronic circuit behavior. Often, a systemís behavior can be reversed to induce the input behavior as an output, by applying the original output behavior as an input. In this case, we will consider a parallel approach to dealing with the relationships weíve posed as object mass and inertia, in the frame of gravitational acceleration.

Our examples of gravitational acceleration have been portrayed here as a response to clock density circumstances of the dimensionality progression... as an attribute of dimensionality. We note that properties of inertia are interposed, with respect to their context in frames of applied energy. An auto trip is such a frame. You step on the gas, or turn a corner, and the effects of inertia are familiar. The car wants to go some direction more than you do. It keeps trying to leave you behind, one way or another. In straight-forward acceleration, a very high-powered example would produce a feeling of being compressed into a pancake. The degree of squishing is proportional to the degree of acceleration.

Jumping off a cliff is another matter. Here, you accelerate, but never feel squished. All parts of you accelerate together. No energy is applied either. It was already earned; itís a given of your frame. As a given, it is applied to every part of you, equally, it would seem.

Letís look closer at the auto acceleration. The squishing action originates in your back, where you meet the seat-back. If we think of your atoms as little springs, the ones closest to the back will be most compressed. Each successive level of atoms, approaching the front, Vc away, will be ever so slightly less compressed. This is the case only during acceleration. When a constant velocity is attained, all the springs relax to an equal tension.

Now letís look at our free-fall again. Here, we initially assume that all of the springs are relaxed, as they all fall together. Inertiaís role is interposed to the prior condition of standing, where the effect of gravity is to compress the springs. As in the auto example, we have an interfacing surface where this effect is strongest ó at our feet. The cliff may as well be an accelerating rocket.

Without reviewing this whole gravitational development (the General frame ó ch 3 & ch 5), letís just jump to our solution and recall that it comes down to a matter of clock density. A clock is relative motion, and these moving things are, themselves, systems of internal relative motion. The total amount of motion is constant. When an object moves, its internal clocks slow down with respect to the frame that the object is traveling in. Total energy is constant, or conserved. When objects are close together, we note that their internal clocks slow. In the extreme example, time has stopped on the horizon of a black hole (from our vantage).

Standing on the surface of Earth, time is ever so slower at your feet, than at your head. In our picture of springs, the atoms are closer together in your feet than they are in your head. The circumstances in our frame impose that objects move toward the Earth, because there are a lot of clocks together there, which makes them run slow; and we have to conserve total motion. When everything has landed, all we can do is hold it in compression to generate other energies, in electron motions, or in photon relationships. These actions un-compress ever so slightly as a new object plummets; and then re-compress to a slightly greater degree when the object joins the mass.

Now we are ready to examine the frame of interest. Lets look more closely at the plummeting object. This reference frame is a gradient frame. The thing that makes it neat is this lack of inertia characteristics ó everything is falling together. This made us think of it as a case where all our springs were relaxed ó and they are. Yet the object is accelerating, and will soon demonstrate an accumulation of momentum. What about time? Has our gradient of time changed? The end of the object closest to Earth is still closer to Earth. Its clocks are always running a little slower than the ones at the opposite end, no matter what velocity weíve gotten up to. This is analogous to a constant application of force. This is what is making the object accelerate toward the Earth.

If the object were free in space, we might consider that it would accelerate in an imposed direction, if we impose that vector on the frame by somehow slowing the clocks it is composed of, more so at the end of the object we define as the direction of travel. To accurately mimic gravitational acceleration, we would attempt to impose a time gradient. Not only might we produce a new propulsion system, we would suspect that the system would demonstrate the interesting characteristics of inertia we see in gravitationally accelerated objects. To impose the time gradient, we would impose a field equally on the ship and all of its contents, including the field generator.

This is all very fun to speculate about, but how are you going to slow time, and how are you going to do it more at one end than another? I can only guess that it would involve super-strong magnetic (and/or static) fields... like you might generate with super-conducting magnets, driven by a small nuclear power source. The thought is that a field could be configured with a gradient of pole density. The lines of force come together at the top dome, while they spoke-out around the bottom rim. The field density gradient might impose an artificial clock density gradient by grabbing everything by its electron skin. You might shrink the new frame, making everything artificially dense (but normal relative to itself), to amplify the gradient relative to the frame it travels in. Perhaps the outer skin is superconductor, handling a tremendous induced current.



The Biological Object

Object Association

The primary question being addressed by object physics, with respect to consciousness, concerns consciousness in times, with or without fragmentation; i.e., the split brain paradox. The basic component details of conscious inclusion seem to be produced by intimate communication within the bi-directional associative tree system; ordinarily involving hippocampal drive to support long term referencing and prioritization. Specifically, what is the relationship between mass and consciousness, and between space-time and consciousness?

We know that consciousness is dependent on self-communication in relative memory. Our examples involve mass, and communication of information supported in that mass. The splitting of such a system yields two systems. Each one can claim to be the original; yet is unknowing now of the otherís intentions, considerations, etc.; due to the severed lines of summing resolve, and due to the differing data I/O. However, we know that communication, alone, is not enough to bind consciousness to a unity of experience; to create one reference frame of conscious time, out of two people, in conversation for example.

Intimate consciousness, therefore, involves specific communication within a neurally connected associative system. The sensory areas can be shown to be fragmented; so, even though they are neurally connected to the associative system, their logic falls outside the relative memory base that composes a self in time... at least during moments of fragmentation. In other words, the defining quality of time to a conscious logical system is arrived at in the logical meaning of the memory in the system, to itself, over that time; where the memory involved is that supported by the neural connections that have included, and will include, the memory that has such meaning to itself. When split, though the meaning remains the same in each half, especially at first; each half has entered its own volume of conscious time, simply by being physically separated. The dimensions of a system that induces conscious time, are those embodied in the meaning of the active connectedness of the system. The fate of decision making rests in the weights of attendant influences, recorded in the connections of the logic tree configuration and logically intimate support systems. The conscious system has the active "shape" of higher dimensionality. While the seemingly more automatic lower-dimensional attributes of world process do much to influence our mental settings, and to influence participation of particular neurons, we are primarily driven by our like-dimensional co-beings.

Two rocks can be said to exist in two volumes of times; so as to appear to be in two locations of time. Each rock is a version of the Universe ó as a rock; as a relationship of H units that fits the description of a rock. The rocks can be regarded as reference frames of the Universe, but not as conscious reference frames. We can only imagine we are they. They contain the ingredient of self-awareness weíve pointed to here ó physical connectedness or chemical bond. But the organization lacks logical energetic relative memory, as a portion of rock mass. The system weíre considering here simply doesnít reach that degree of fundamental dimensionality. Its got everything except the relative memory system that interacts with the world. Thus, the notion of time for a rock is arbitrary, if not meaningless. Its only meaning, as an entity, exists relative to the world of process, involving systems that are conscious. It doesnít really have a single time, as a rock. The components of the rock are something else. The H units not only produce conscious systems through their evolution; with each existence cycle they become systems beyond our comprehension, in their own place-time viewpoints, that recognize all times as components of their own time, in one of all possible parallel-sequential perspectives.


So, we are considering consciousness to be within the realm of systemology, embodied in our examples of supported association cortex. This portion of cortex can, itself, be fragmented; as are all individuals from each other. We note a number of unusual circumstances that arise in cases of damage, that point to fragmentation of awareness in the brain. It is quite possible that we are all fragmented from our visual cortex ó that it operates as a separate being who "works for you." We can speculate that this would likewise apply to all cortical areas demarcated by divergent association. When I talk to you, the decision maker, Iím reaching your associative system as a unit, after it has had the benefit of data via the senses and prioritization via tabs on associated memories, via the hippocampus, and other supporting systems.

The associative unit could be sliced up into any number of sections. The smaller the section, the lower the intensity of awareness ó the less resolution goes into the ongoing conscious process. Each isolated section is you. This is an extreme example of what happens to all of us, in the course of our lives. Our brain components die away, and are not replaced. You remain you, as your brain changes. The relative meaning is carried on over the span of time you will know. Relative meaning will be carried on over the given spans of time you will know. Relative meaning can only be known by you. Whenever relative meaning develops, it is you. It can only be what it is ó time reaching awareness of its other relatively separated parts. This conscious time is a complex set of related times, in parallel series. Each set is a conscious portion of time. Each portion that reaches awareness is another day in your life. You expect this from "your own" brain. What that brain canít experience, as a "now" relative to its sense of time, is all of its other split-off brains, in their own eternity groups.

Your brain can only know its eternity, during the time of its awareness, as generated by a complex sampling of sub-eternities. Other samplings are other time, even though they interact with your time, to produce the illusion of running in a common time with you. Even your time is not a common time. It is a synthesis of consciousness, induced by infinite multiplicities of eternities of eternity. So when your brain is split, each half continues to be you, in your own sampled volume of time.



This is the main topic of the book, so Iíll take another pass at it. I hope itís not getting too redundant. I feel that the idea is really weird, and requires repeated consideration to become appreciated. I began thinking about it consciously around the mid-70s; and my notes indicate less direct ponderings in the mid-60s. Yet I did not begin to persistently consider it in my philosophy until the late 80s, and did not accept it as probable truth until the early 90s. If it took me this long, you know that I donít expect too many people to understand or accept it. All I can do is try to put it every way I can think of that might get the point across.


Time is motion. If two systems appear to have essentially identical motion, they generate the illusion of a common time. There are still two systems. Each runs its own time, as a contribution to overall time. Each is composed of its own H version viewpoints of the one Universe of overall time.

A conscious time frame is onto itself in its own volume of related times, of Universe time. Another one is handling a different combination of more prominent data, in another such volume; at another group of times, of Universe time. Universe time is composed of all data. Consciousness involves various aspects of the data with particular emphasis. We view the lower dimensional attributes of the process holding each volume to itself as what we could loosely label "chemical bonding;" which includes molecular associations as well as ionic relationships of communication, such as those which carry information as pulses from one end of a neuron to the other.

In other words, a self is that associative process defined in active memory by intimate chemical bond and communication; where meaning is possible and inevitable within the overall process, due to the derived representation of world patterning in relative meaning of the constituent sub-processes, relative to the demarcated whole process.

In another time volume is another such person, who is also you; but is proceeding within that other volume of time. The demarcation of separation of time volumes is defined and made possible by the connections being made via a different "external" form of communication ó relatively sub-dimensional electromagnetic interactions. Light can bridge two or more different volumes of super-dimensional time together in a way that allows them to interact in exact required fashion, to allow either to be correct to the other as a required past and future, completing overall reality. From the human view of how things work, light allows you to interact with your own pasts and futures. In the context of this book, it would be more consistent to say that these photon events complete the definition of reality, within the point.


Recognizing this in action can show reality to be a most beautiful sum. You are Lucy; you are Vivian; you get to have all the fun... on the stage, and in the audience. Its potency is only exaggerated by the downs you will endure. You will enjoy the variety of reality flows including and excluding this knowledge. Rather than thinking about people you donít want to be, think about how you are contributing to your futures. The future holds the potential for greater awareness. This effort ultimately produces the full development of our super-particle.


The mechanics of demarcation involve two "kinds" of light; bonding, and trans-communicative. Light is light; but what it accomplishes makes a difference. It is the only real substance, and it makes a point. Within that point are the realms of dimensionality, in the eyes of some of its dimensional aspects. The basis in mass of bonding is the relatively constant photon support of relative meaning in memory. The trans-communicative relationships are also a bonding influence that connects our conscious systems into communities. But the distant links are a step down in fundamental dimensionality between the more intensely active islands crowned with self-associative memory.

The two modes of light-defined properties allow different volumes of you to exist, relative to yourselves. Though the arrangements are quite complex, the fundamental mass components of these volumes are the same H configurations that arrange to make rocks. Each cycle of each H can be considered an eternity, relative to itself; while it is one of an infinite number of eternities that comprise the overall definition of time, as a point. The internal components of each H, too, are such eternities, as complete cycles of time at a relative sub-level of process; and so on, ad infinitum. As a result, any reference frame of process is composed of an endless series of eternities leading successively toward, and beyond that viewpoint. The series leads back to itself via all of the other viewpoints, while they all interplay through time-bridging communications that define various fundamental levels of time-dimension. Part of this bridgework is between you and various "counterparts" that are yourself at those times of consciousness. All these successive eternities donít make life infinitely slow for us, as it would appear to "them." They create the fundamental framework for our Vc relationships in solid time; which develops awareness in the ongoing progression of dimensionality. Consequently, we observe these eternities to transpire quite quickly, if not infinitely quickly, as they infer our world to us. We have them for breakfast. They make finities relatively apparent, while finities donít really exist. All objects are infinite, in their source composition of distance-time dimensions. All objects are finite, relative to Vc effects that compose our fundamental dimensions of process. If we could see that each Vc relationship is an eternity apart, we would see that all objects are infinitely big. Since our consciousness is constructed out of the series of differing eternal frames, they donít appear to be eternal, and objects appear to be finite. Objects have qualities of tangibility because those qualities are also common to biological objects. What isnít generally common is consciousness, as a quality of any object definition. When the object has this higher dimensionality, we find that quality less tangible than the more ordinary qualities. We have only other biological objects to look to for comparison; and many of us are still uncertain unless they can talk sense back at us. Relative meaning can exist in simple terms of scenery, smells, coarse characteristics of sounds, touch, and survival drives.

Dimensional progression produces fundamental dimensions for a given level or frame of dimensionality, out of the higher dimensional developments of the adjacent "lower" internal frame. This suggests the possibility that our objects exist relative to our world of process, by virtue of being sub-process sources of conscious developments. The quick, internal evolution of particles to peak consciousness, stands as the highest rung in the ladder, upon which we construct our rungs.

Dimensional structures are inferences of component dimensional structures. As a fundamentally nine dimensional object, consciousness is a particle among particles within a super-particle that infers all levels of reality to higher particles. All substance includes consciousness, at various interspersed internal levels. Any substance is full of consciousness. It is system that has the complete Universe dispersed within it, at the deepest level of its source of time-dimensionality. A given system may not, itself, be fundamentally conscious; but it involves particles that are composed of infinite levels of dimension, supporting infinite varieties and numbers of systems. Within that set, an infinite number of systems are conscious; some more acutely than others. In all cases of peak evolution, the intensity is maximum. At this point, consciousness recognizes its identity fully, in all substance... in all time.

In all our planetary tests of cultural developments, whenever anything is left after the competition is over, it is love. Love is giving; love no longer needs to compete. Love can accept what is given to it; which makes it generally self-sufficient. This is a turning point in evolution where the system takes off in acceleration, due to the recognition and appreciation of itself. The system becomes more helpful to itself. The more it does so, the better it does so.

This end of evolution contains the developmental product of accumulated successes, stemming from the outset. It is everything good, as a set of influences. Itís the operating system of matter. Itís the source of emergent properties. Its the source of you. Itís love. Everything is actually made out of a high concentration of love.


Our mechanism of perception may allow us to experience the presence of substance in our objects with the sort of intensity of reality we appreciate, by virtue of the fact that objects consist of full you. Perception is a relationship between displaced identities.


Our everyday world may seem like a meaningless drop in the bucket of galaxy clusters, but what you do contributes to the substance of reality. Involved in this, is you as a process that references your current memory set, while the totality of this is all process referencing all of your memory sets ó and, perhaps, referencing itself as a complete set. The latter process stems from a multiplicity of the former one.

Your current set can be thought of as one of an infinite variety of interdependent sets. As there is constancy to the matter and structure of reality, brought about by memory repetition of these features by the Universe, your current set may be remembered with related timing, infinite times, and in infinite variations. These variations may be infinitesimal in the longest run, defining cases of prolonged constancies of higher order. They would vary to greater degrees, "sooner or later," leading to all other cases, and home again. Your perception in this could not include sequential understanding, as per an "order of occurrence" of your memory sets. Understanding proceeds upon a base of memory. Since we are talking about separate collections of self-referencing memory, no single collection can understand what "next" means, in terms of being one or another set. Each one may as well be thought of as being simultaneous, though you will only experience "one at a time," at our level of memory participation.


We resort to terms such as "synergy" to express our confoundedness in the midst of emergent properties among our systems, in their environments. The mystery here, I suspect, will dissolve as we grow accustomed to recognizing that dimensionality is a given of the point, and that dimensionality is various roles of memory as interdependencies throughout the levels of systemology ó over various characteristic periods of time for various types of memory.


Relative to humans, this role of memory is most profound in the brain itself. The behavior of a human system in its culture is a two-way street of cause and effect, where cultural memory and individual brain memory are co-evolving amidst the environmental demands for survival. Survival defines a basis of memory, that acts as a platform for the continuation of the process. To stand back from this, is to view the higher orders of structure that are our dimensionality. This development leads to the means of its own source and support. It is the mathematical facts of the math that is all time of reality.

The system is infinite, but the system is closed. It is closed because it supports repetition as a source or basis from which it develops associative change; which also gets repeated. This is the mechanism of our dimensionality progression. It produces strata of eternities. These strata impose relativistic barriers in terms of accessibility by nine dimensional consciousness. But such situations may stand as components of a higher order of system, that organizes the various pasts to branch into additional new and better overall histories. This could be provided by the peak, or some future, of a cycle or half-cycle of the H that is the super-particle we are involved in. The realm of consciousness is necessarily one of order. Perhaps the power of order gets this good. To be conscious is to be relative meaning. It would appear that meaning is synonymous with development. It comes to be from processes that are organizational. We grow. We develop. Our world improves. Our consciousness expands.

The behavior of all systems is based on memory. It is fundamental memory of reality to have each H re-exist from one matter cycle to the next. Likewise, it is as fundamental that we are a part of the overall pattern of all electromagnetic relationships of times of time.

A group of H eternities can induce a particular you composed of a series of sums of such eternities; which lead to all the various "other" such sums; other only in time of view, not ultimate composition. What differs is the fore-front collection of meaning ascribed by reality into the memory array composing the relative consciousness so generated. Each viewpoint is limited to its vantage of collective memory from that volume viewpoint of the eternity sequences. You donít "take this with you" when you die. You donít need to take it with you... you re-visit it, and all of its partners. You can see yourself doing just that, in all your co-beings. We are in the heaven you are making.


Your memories define your life, not your death. They are the dimensional basis of conscious induction. When your system stops, its dimensionality collapses to that of deep sleep, or a rock. Your awareness, as a human-type being, always begins as a development of relative memory participation.


In other words, there is no practical difference between being dead and being alive; relative to any single version of yourself (your other selves that you leave behind donít think so). Both conditions are composed of sequences of eternal process elements. When you live, your moments of consciousness are eternal; but appear to move in time as each eternity is a slightly different "frame" of reality composing the flow of your being. When you die, just another eternity transpires between one life and "another." Though we are talking about two different kinds of eternity here, they are both infinite; so they are both essentially the same thing, as you get the point. Relative to consciousness, they are all infinitely quick. Any period of deep sleep takes no conscious time to pass. Time is only perceived relative to consciousness, as the overall process is defined by our Vc relationships; as fundamental dimension components in the point.

From the point of view of your next life, it is the only life it has. This makes the question of which life will be next, totally meaningless. There are an infinite variety of an infinite number coming up. Youíve already been all of them, and you canít remember a thing about it. Each one only remembers some things about itself, in its world of interacting times. Thatís what makes it conscious. Your last one could have been a dinosaur or a highly intelligent space creature. Does this make any difference to you now?


What really matters is how well you learn to enjoy life.


All objects come from eternity. All objects are process leading into eternity. We all come from, and go to, the same thing. It isnít easy to view short time spans, such as a moment or quantum of thought, as being eternal. If all time spans are composed of infinite detail, in an infinite sequence of events, then this would stand as a definition of eternity, relative to internal views of that frame. We are on a plane or latitude from which two types or degrees of eternity can be discerned. The model asks you to re-think your assessment of the constitution of your perceptive mechanism. We view reality from a boarder where one side is going ever faster, and the other ever slower, as all identical such boarders of time quantization spread into the point.

Though, as a whole, it is a point, the point produces inherent self-relative meaning which is conscious relative to its own recognition of definition. From here, all these infinite number of eternities appear to run parallel to you, and each other, as they interact. Each such constituent eternity is super-analogous to a neural memory loop. Each behaves in response to, and as stimulation of, the perspective sum of all "others;" as a component of a single overall loop. The human form is a sort of harmonic product or image of its parent Universe.





Object Religion


I love the Universe. I love to imagine what it might be. I love that I don't know. I love that it never ceases to amaze and surprise me. I love to realize that I may never understand it. I love to realize that I may.

I love the Universe, even though I'm certain that it will hurt me, very very badly; and kill me an infinite number of times... maybe because I don't really know; or maybe because that would probably mean so much more.

I can't honestly say that I love God, because I've never really met the dude. If there is a superman who did all this, he truly is amazing. It seems far more likely to be the work of advanced teams... or simply a part of infinity. Oh... wait a minute... if I am you, and you are we, then we are god... and we will become God. On some planets, the cooperative spirit flourishes, before we all blow ourselves up. We find the one God...

God is the oneness of being.



Another topic that would be better left alone, if I wanted to play it safe, is religion. But then, this is a philosophy book, and religions are philosophies. Thereís another good reason I canít avoid this issue. I would like to see Earth come together. (Wonít you please do that, just for me?) I have to contribute my two cents to the effort. It seems like an appropriate discussion, in view of the nature of the foregoing development of concepts. They involve you and me, and this place we call Earth; and they suggest that maybe we have been making some very grave errors in our judgment.


Object physics can be converted into religious terms, easily. Live and let live has always seemed like a good idea. How about this one: Do onto others as you would have them do onto you. I imagine thereís more where those came from.

If the hypothesis of You were to generate a religion, its "rules" would be simple and sweet.


You have to go to church all the time, because your church is Earth.


Since youíre always in church, everything you do is a prayer. Nothing anyone does is unimportant. Simple fun is very important. Weíll all go loony without it. The more you help your self, your selves, and your planet, the better you have prayed. We can appreciate your success in this as the general level, and longevity, of happiness on Earth. Your appreciation of "others" is your key to success.


Whenever possible, solve problems by helping instead of hurting. Strive to find more ways to do this.


It canít hurt to pause every now and then, in appreciation of the Universe. This can be extremely uplifting. Your greater You is within everything ó it makes your current you possible, in every detail. Donít waste your time begging the super-atom to help you out in life. Help may be at hand if we welcome the UFOs, with an honest appreciation of life. Until we can handle that, the super-atom wants us to gain happiness by succeeding as best we can on our own. We contribute to its development. Donít expect that anything you do or say will affect some decision handed down from there, pertaining to your afterlife. You will experience everything you have seen experienced, and much much more. You affect your future experiences by changing the world one way or another. Your best opportunities in this, live in your children. Appreciate their successes, and provide them with ample opportunity to succeed. If you have competing attractions, enjoy life thoroughly before you have children, so that they will receive your best attention. No one does anything more important than raising children. Its not how many we have; its how well we have them that counts. They are more of your soul. They are your chance to customize heaven.


Thereís nothing to join... just enjoy your selves.


Object physics generates thought that has much in common with many religions. But it departs from them where they become divisive. I would not dream of asking you to depart from your religion. Nor would I impose restrictions on your personal lifestyle, with emotional leverage. The train of thought here merely presents an opportunity for some of us to re-consider ourselves. The biological object is to enjoy life. Object physics can strengthen many of your philosophical inclinations; but it can also make some look impractical. Two primary notions that will bring this about are the hypothesis of You, and the presence of heaven. There is only one soul ó the Universe ó and we all use it. You are that soul, in touch with the memories of your time. This always happens in heaven. It is never too soon to decide that we are ready for our time of joy. It only requires that we all accept each other, and become fully caring about everyoneís needs. This is what would most please our future super-developed beings, or all-mighty system. This would be our best chance for survival; and to contribute to the development of such a time.


Politics is philosophy too. Again, we donít know what weíre doing; but that canít keep us from trying, so we develop our society with laws and education, that produce opportunities. I feel we have become too divisive here as well, and our economic lifestyle might need consideration. Competition is getting the upper hand. This could become too self-defeating. Such a progression would be fed more by pessimistic assumptions. Right or wrong, we stand a better chance of surviving, and enjoying life, if we assume that development is naturally growing goodness.

The competitive spirit is important, and we must promote and protect it. Teamwork is equally important, and weíll all be doomed without it. If we provide opportunity and respect for all people and their needs, our problems will progressively dissolve.

It is you, at both ends, who will benefit if we are giving enough to allow this balance to flourish throughout the world. Where you control sustained imbalances, you will be miserable; and the system may break down and die. This applies to ecologies as well as economies... the economies will sooner or later do quite poorly without balance in the ecologies. Do we know how soon? Do we care? These questions nature will answer, with reality.