5. the physical universe
The Physical Universe is a reference frame of the Universe that is physical, relative to itself. It is the view of reality, by reality, that is fundamental to our everyday way of thinking; as our process deals with its various aspects. The many familiarities weíve collected as mental memory, are constantly stimulated into participation in the process. Weíve learned how to be careful, because things are generally "hard," and they can be sharp.
The conditions that mold survivability, preclude an approach to the investigation of physical reality, that would assume a fundamental nothingness to everything. Nevertheless, Universal Systemology eliminates the attribute of substance, even when the reference frame is particles. A particle is viewed as consisting of a dispersed collection of finer particles, which in turn, are of likewise composition; ad infinitum. This is not to say that nothing is hard, and weíre just imagining things. Substance exists relative to other substance, on the average, over time. When a bullet enters my heart, I am impressed by the meaning of its impact. Still, the meaning is actually a process of interaction. The components of that interaction are, themselves, a collection of interactions.
The physical Universe is composed of interrelating rules. The most fundamental level of this rule structure is the characteristics of electromagnetic interaction, over time. Below this level, we have the point.
At higher levels, we note a number of parallels in the features of the rule structure. The rate of damping decay of oscillation, for example, is played out in capacitor discharge and chemical diffusion, as well as the loudness over time of a plucked string. Its the same sort of curve that we use to describe the field strength of a radio transmitter, over distance. This strength over distance relationship is carried into other media. It also describes the loudness of sound relative to its source, and the amplitude of waves relative to the point where your rock hit the lake. The source of this parallelism is the common basis the various levels of rule structure have in the rules of electro-magnetism. Background noise, and quantum uncertainty, too, stem from the fundamental random/symmetrical basis that generates our reference Vc. Indeed, even the cherished reference rate of Vc can be seen to be composed of an average of slightly variant velocities, if you study light phenomena at a fine enough level of detail. This reference does not "travel" in perfectly straight lines.
In generating this reference, relative to our position in the rule system, space is generated also.
The General Frame
Our perception of space is projected by the point, through our mass; which is, itself, a projection of the point. Our perception of space is the relationships, in time, between our mass and itself. If there were no mass, there would be no relationships; which means, there would be no space for electromagnetic interactions, as well as no gravity or strong force. These are the conditions we imagine as the starting point of our big bang. In the big picture, these conditions could be a horizon, beyond which exists a complementary reality, impossible to view from its counterpart.
Light is the timing between related events, based in mass. Mass is the source of timing events... the source of time. It is more "developed," or more steps away, than simply being the point. The point is distributed within mass, but it is an infinite number of mass-space steps away ó within mass.
Within mass is more "territory" of the point. The sum of our mass is the sum of another level of three dimensional reality, just like ours, from its point of view; being generated by what it perceives of as its own constituency of mass. From our view, that mass is very much smaller than ours, distributed within our particles. Every particle with rest mass is such a port to the point. Every source of time consists of an infinite number of such sources, as the distributed point. The dimensions of this matrix are the continuous dimensionality of complete, infinite, reality.
Our space is not really three dimensional then, in this scheme. The flow of our reality consists of timing relationships, to which we attribute the characteristics of uniform motion, the change of that motion, and the order that exists as patterns of change of motion. These three elements of dimensionality are inseparable. As we do for our concept of three dimensions, we rely on simplification of dimensionality in our analysis of processes. We say that a sheet of paper is two dimensional, in the course of developing an analysis; though we know that it actually has a third dimension, or it wouldnít exist. We say that time is uniform motion. As such, it is an attribute of reality. But the dimensional attributes are inseparable. When analyzing problems, we isolate components of the system, in our mind, that we recognize as being involved in their related processes. When the problem is reality, as a whole, we must recognize that its constituency is its relationships, in all of their dimensional aspects. Uniform motion does not exist in isolation; all real cases of uniform motion exist relative to other cases. All have relationships involving energy. All of these energetic relationships arise from, and produce, patterns of quantization of energy, over time; into particle relationships, and celestial systems. Isolation is purely a mental concept. It is a necessary part of analytical development, but a roadblock to comprehensive understanding, if taken seriously as an element of reality.
Time, energy, and patterning are a single "thing" we perceive of as the flow of reality in space. The space is the timing delays in the relationships within, and as, this thing. We could say that this thing or flow is our three dimensions then. It is what exists, relative to our consciousness, as the world of space and changing relationships. But to say that it is three dimensional is to ignore its source. The source of these relationships is the flow of their timing, which arises from our mass. Our mass is the next quantization of such a three dimensional thing, as generated by the point, distributed, again, within that internal framework. Our mass is our first three dimensions. From it are generated our 4th through 6th dimensions, that comprise our unitary reality. From the reference frame of our mass, it too is a world composed of mass, that is its source of time, and three dimensional basis. There is no limit to the generation of such relative dimensional levels of reality, by the infinite point.
For these reasons, I tend to use the term "time" to mean the flow of reality as mass-time; which is a set of three dimensions of time, derived from similar such sets, as their constituent source.
Gravitation is the natural flow of time from one polarity to the other. It takes the form of expanding process draining into shrinking process. After Vc, it is the second most fundamental tenant of reality. For there to be expansion of process, there must be a balancing shrinkage, from the viewpoint of the origin. Wherever perception develops, it will find reality to be composed of an expanding array of processes; and require that there be a seemingly impossible shrinking of space to account for gravitational interaction between its processes. Ultimately, the expanding processes drain into the black holes they create. This may seem to begin as an arbitrary trend; but it is the necessary continuation of the alternating polarity of time... necessary to maintain zero, once again; this time with respect to the full structure of dimensionality, as well as the balanced vectors of bang expansion. Those vectors must also exist in reverse, even though they are balanced already, in order to bring balance to the higher ordinates of process they support. Object Physics will show that the scheme of dimensionality requires this balance for the same reason that we need the fundamental balance ó those higher ordinates arenít higher, relative to the point, from another frame in Universal Systemology. All of the dimensions are dimensions of time. Your view of all of them makes three of them look like space. The expansion of processes, that most fundamentally defines those dimensions of space, appears to be canceling itself already, as a balanced set; but our active frame of process upon that, can only appear to us to cancel with a sequential inverse phase.
Gravity is a process that builds on itself, as a trend toward its own emptying into the black holes of its creation. We want to attribute the interactions of gravitational phenomena to higher ordinates of process, such as an imposed energy. Those ordinates of dimensionality are subject to the fundamental process of recycling it all. The fundamental mechanism that results in this flow of time through its phases, is very similar to the ordinate mechanism that balances internal time with external time in process interdependence. The recycling process is as fundamental as the balance in the expansion vectors; it just applies to the next step in the structure, meaning that, to our view, it will take the form of an alternating process, involving those vectors, in reverse. In this respect, gravitation can be seen as a three dimensional property of reality... but the three dimensions involved are both positive and negative, with respect to the origin. That is a span of six dimensions, which includes a relative factor of energy ó but its negative energy produced by the gravitation, not a required input for its induction. From our view, the fundamental geometrical structure swallows up all our stuff... it goes out of view. It apparently goes into negative volume, in reverse time, inside the black holes. Another way of looking at it, though, would be to say that it is all on its way back now, from a reverse bang implosion, in an inside-out relative orientation, running backwards in time. We are spared from trying to visualize this geometrically, by the simple fact that, when it has happened to some stuff, the stuff is no longer here to have to try and see it. Its perception will surmise that it is our phase of time that is impossible. The best way to visualize it, is simply to remember that it is all really part of the point. We can visualize our processes, relative to our phase of time. The other phase is in the point. The point knows that both phases are really concurrent; but since weíre in one of the phases, we canít see it that way. When we look at our atoms, though, our vantage point of the process is shifted in dimensionality; so we see more sides of whatís going on. We see the proton and the electron, as the relationships they take; and we can even conjure up the other two fundamental elements of Object Physics.
To generate our view of the General Frame, we will need to review the generation of reality from the point. We keep doing this over again to fill in some missing pieces of the puzzle. Also, it is admittedly a very strange course of logic, so it helps to start easy, and build into it with repetition. We started in chapter 3, using the development as a basis for time interdependency in special frames. In chapter 4, the generation of reality from the point was further developed, as a mathematical reference frame. There are still two more steps to take along these lines. The first will generate our basic General Frame. The last will fill out dimensionality, and account for all four elements of Object Physics.
Where we last left off, in developing reality from the point, light was a reference by-product of the fundamental infinite clock rate of the point. That infinite speed is a given, as it exists relative to no other reference or limiting factor. It also lends itself to the production of substance, relative to other such substance. The higher dimensions of reality are constructed as the realm of this self-relating substance. Here, the apparent existence of finities is generated, as such relative substance. The most fundamental component of this finity system is light. From our viewpoint, light is the basic reference of reality, and not an infinite clock rate. Instead of that infinite rate, we will perceive the point, at the heart of all matter; distributed therein, in infinite detail.
Our light-based system is one of order. This is to say that it is culled-out of infinitely fast eternities, into higher orders of dimensionality. This process develops order, based on the apparent finities, that are based on our Vc reference. Now we must note the consequences of obtaining such order. It was easy to say that the order was simply a development of higher dimensionality, obtained by "waiting" as necessary, for the right process to proceed, relative to a given rule tree. Our tree only gets what its rules say itís composed of; the rest of the process ends up going mostly into other trees. Each tree exists because it is an available, inevitable viewpoint, generated by the infinite point. A tree holds definition in orders of dimensionality that span our past and future history. This is the power of reality to hold rules over itself. But what does it mean to say that each tree waits for its contributions? It means that Vc may be quantized into a progression of relative rates, for the progression of dimensional reference frames.
Vc is decelerated with the expansion of dimensionality; and everything that rests on it perceives it as a constant reference of process; though a fixed view sees the trend as producing processes over greater distances of space. Wonít it stop? Not when itís a product of a true infinitely fast time base. We must remember what it means to use the term infinity. You can decelerate from infinity forever; and you can do it all over again an infinite number of times. Your reference will always appear to be good old Vc, relative to the infinite clock.
Vc may decelerate, incrementally, because it is the basis of order. Order is factors of dimensionality. This is to say that it is exponential. The necessary waiting incurs inverse exponentiation to the reference time base.
We perceive, or anticipate that, the expansion of dimensionality in our model here, would entail greater and greater volumes of space. Remember, this is all going on within the point. What is causing this perception of increased size is the dimensional factorization of Vc. Our big bang appears to be expanding at about 60,000 MPH. This rate is interestingly close to÷c. Could the shift in dimensionality make our expanding geometry look like Vc timing within our "big atom?" This data might fit into a complex picture here somehow. Perhaps its an average of acceleration.
The world that our model has us imagine, within particles, is a very fast and tiny one. Here , we might guess that Vc has a velocity, relative to our Vc, of c2 or c3 or c4. At such rates, the space between very big events, generated by the point, will appear to us to be very well shrunk; to be on the order of that used by a proton. It may seem like things are going very haywire here, and they may, but as our model of the General Frame is developed, we may find the need to define transition velocities between Vc, and the infinite clock rate of the point. [A more imaginative variation on this theme would even involve the continuous relative deceleration/acceleration of Vc, at the various levels. The attraction to this view is possibly limited to a gut feeling that such a curve of reference might better generate apparent finities. Even more far-fetched, is an appendage to that, possibly involving a new view of the relativity of clocks, that would describe gravitation as an effect due to the actual acceleration of the size of mass. Space would also be expanding, but at a fixed, slightly slower rate of acceleration, as compared with a particle of mass. This might be a variation on the shrinking space of General Relativity. The main problem here is that Jupiter should look like itís getting ever more bigger, for example. The new relativity of clocks might involve an interface between mass, space, and mass again; that would render our view of other bodies constant, by converting the relative factors of acceleration to relative factors of velocity. Without these interfaces, your reference frame accelerates. If youíre want to ponder the ridiculous (and most people would say you are, if youíve gotten this far into this book), this seems like a fun one to play with.] [As for the development of Special Frames, I have offered some tangential notions in the course of developing the chosen path. These probable errors tend to generate families of thoughts that might include useful concepts.]
Even within the subject of physics reference frames, the model we develop here, finds it necessary to show that special frames are not all too different from the general frame. They are yet another example of how reality is composed of different viewpoints of the same overall thing. The properties of reality, generated by the origin, are seen to be the source of the general frame, as well as of all special frames.
It is a given that we will have a point, since it is nothing and everything simultaneously. Likewise, it is a given that the point will come and go, since this too does not alter the status of nothing or everything. It is, however, the most fundamental step toward the generation of reality, to have our point come and go, relative to itself. The pattern thus created is totally free of restrictions regarding timing of its alternations. This attribute of fundamental time generation is, to the pattern of alternation, as the existence or non-existence of the point is to its effect on the status of there being nothing or something. The point must remain a single, uninvolved point; and as such, it will infer all reality, to include relative meaning and perception. It must remain as nothing, relative to all process of substance. To be nothing as a basis of timing for processes, its fundamental timing is totally free. Yet, as a basis, that random timing stands as the reference sequence that generates higher orders of time. All other patterns of process are built on this basis. The higher orders of process interrelate, on the perception and assumption that the fundamental timing is essentially perfect with respect to its constancy. The result of this is the inevitable generation of all rule trees. The rule trees are not books with all-powerful enforcers that insure that our processes follow the rules. The rule trees are the natural flow of reality that composes each tree, built by times of times. Rules are not imposed externally. They exist as process. The relativity of the rules is the relativity of the process. The relativity of process is reality.
The fundamental timing of the point generates a fully dimensional grid. The grid is not a medium. It is the timing relationships of processes. The fundamental aspect of the grid, from the point of view of our processes that it generates, is that those processes rest on the basic timing relationships we refer to as Vc. The Vc grid is the framework of full dimensionality. Any three dimensionally oriented direction can support Vc relationships. These, and all higher dimensions, are themselves, factors of Vc. This is the everything side of our nothing/everything point. We mostly view reality from the everything side; but it becomes necessary to appreciate the nothing side as well, when dealing with fundamental questions of reality. The nothing side insists that nothing ever happens to it. This is necessary as a point from which to infer the everything side. The everything side will find that its processes are interdependent, and that conservation is all pervasive. Energy is neither created nor destroyed; it just gets passed around, and changed from one high order format to another, or to our fundamental format of Vc responses. The everything side sees a self-composition of energetic processes, where there is a fixed sum of energy to its overall definition. These everything-side systems of viewpoint could not be generated by the fundamental nothing-side point, if there were not a balance that brings that total energy composition to zero. The nothing side must generate as much anti-energy as energy, from its point of view. It must see nothing, so that it can distribute itself symmetrically into separate systems of time, where it can see everything. From the point of view of any of these systems, there appears to be the generation of dimensionality. From the point of view of their true origin, there is always nothing; yet it is that point that experiences everything. The point is nothing and everything simultaneously.
For there to be anything, there must be an anti-anything. If there is three dimensionality, there must be negative three dimensionality. If there is time, there must be anti-time. If there is energy, there is anti-energy. If there is reality, there is anti-reality. Being reality, relative to itself, it wonít matter which polarity of reality youíre in; the other pole will look backwards. It will look like it starts where you end, and that its future precedes its past. It will not look sequential like this to the point, however. To the point, time is a different thing. To the point, all time is present... all time has already added-in with all negative time to stand perfectly as nothing. The realities inferred by the point support the experience of sequential time. From such a point of view, it will appear that time alternates with anti-time. To understand special reference frames, we needed to recognize the existence of the origin, distributed throughout the matter of time. We begin to see the interdependence of systems as we recognize their common source of time, and the balance that the origin maintains between inner and outer process, in order to maintain a constant overall amount of time-mass. Now we must carry this attitude through dimensionality. We must, at times, be able to recognize that, in order to maintain balances, our complete stretch of time must be thought of as being simultaneous with its inverse version, even though our model is going to draw our attention to an alternating sequence.
Our reality is expanding, because it is an ordered reality. Expansion is a dimensional product of ordered reality. It develops consciousness because its past and future history are dimensional aspects of its overall definition of order. We do not see pure chaos, because pure chaos cannot see. It does not act with order, which is the dimensional attributes of consciousness. Chaos is an unconscious reference frame.
Order is more fundamental than energy, from our reference frame, so we see development. Order is most fundamentally defined in the dimensions of our reference frame as the process of gravitation (all levels of dimensional frame are generated by the electromagnetic timing relationships between particles). Of the 4th through 6th dimensions, only the 5th, energy, appears chaotic. Then the 7th through 9th are the primary definition of higher order development, via memory, which sustains our object relationships over time, with rules that span time. The basis from which this imbalance, in favor of order, stems, could not be more fundamental. It comes from the symmetry of motion, required for there to be any motion, relative to the origin. Only such motion is generated. That there must be this symmetry, is that there is a fundamental basis composed of random and ordered qualities. This might mean a little more than just that, however. The fundamental coexistence of order and chaos has an inherent further definition of order. In other words, if there is order and chaos, order is more completely defined, because the coexistence of the two things is, itself, a further definition of order. Order has a fundamental logical impetus to bloom. Chaos has no means of dealing with order. It averages itself out, helplessly, in the long run. Order develops as it converts chaos to order. It has the advantage of working from a higher level of dimensionality. It is the inevitable existence and creation of higher dimensionality. The dimensions of order extend beyond our past and current efforts. They have included this, and they include the future. They have provided the elements of our framework of reality, that we take for granted... atoms, stars, planets... life.
Vc alone may not be able to infer a system of finities to itself. We can speculate that this perception system arises from the deceleration of Vc. For our reference to constantly take a slower rate, relative to its prior rates, is to generate a reference frame of space finities. The systems composed within this overall system, can relate to each other at a rate that appears not to be infinite because, relatively, itís not. The Vc reference is generated as a finite product of the deceleration of our true infinite clock. What space really is, is timing relationships that, relative to each other, are not infinitely fast; though in the absolute sense, they are. The fundamental timing relationship is Vc, because all points of "space" are being separated, in time, by the apparent creation of space from the point, at Vc. All points in our three dimensions, are expanding in three dimensions, at Vc, virtually, as timing relationships within the point.
If there is a reference frame that is produced by sampling our infinite clock into a rate of deceleration, there is a complementary frame that works in reverse. Relative to our view, that frame will generate negative space. We can also imagine frames where positive space is generated in much greater "quantity," at a slower rate, than is the case for our immediate frame. These various rates could fill out Universal Systemology. When dealing with the Universe at this level, where we recognize the generation of Vc from an infinite base, we also recognize the possibility that other frames of other rates of Vc could exist.
Vc might need to be decelerating, while appearing to be a constant reference, in order for it to stand as a basis of finite qualities. If this is so, then corresponding complementary or dimensional alternative rates of acceleration or deceleration might not appear as such to the reference frame generated by our Vc ó those other frames may also appear to have constant, though different, references. Perceivable acceleration or deceleration may then ride upon these references as dimensional attributes of the apparent finities created. It might even be conceivable that these inherent qualities of exponentiation are involved in such things as the ever-present inverse square law; in deriving our view of the world from the expansion of the point.
While mass can be thought of as having three fundamental dimensions, relative to our frame, the dimensionality of gravitation is more complex.
The three dimensions of our space are not the same three dimensions of mass, though both things appear three dimensional relative to our frame. The former is a projection of the latter ó a residual by-product, or after-thought, so to speak. The process that appears over our space is a generation developed out of three dimensions of exponentiation of spanning time over the internal time that is the consistency of our mass.
The dimensions of our space are gaps in the timing of the events that compose the flow of reality in our frame. These three dimensions follow the three dimensions of mass. The dimensions of mass operate as its space of process, within the particle system.
Mass occupies space, internally, and operates over space externally. Our reference frame is the external one, here, in terms of time. That is, our time is references of uniform motion, involving mass over distance, in our space. Mass itself is time. Furthermore, it is time that keeps perfect balance with our time, external to it. The more motion we generate across our frame, external to mass, the less motion is possible internal, within, and as, that self-related system frame of moving mass. The moving frame must relate to itself more slowly, as its motion in our frame increases. In this way, the total motion remains constant.
When this balance is stable, it defines time in our reference frame. To be more precise, all attributes of stable momentum, over any distance, comprise our full definition of time. This time is the standard linear one (though its composition can be viewed as being infinitely complex). Its total dimensions (as a fundamental thing) are mēc, or c4.
To alter this balance is to "impose" another dimension, "temporarily." In reality, energy comes and goes in a constant stream of process. We like to say that we are controlling reality; so we use such terminology. (Reality is actually a complete flow of past and future history. I know this is a very unpopular philosophy, but it becomes redundantly apparent as you piece the puzzle together. Without this concession, your philosophy cannot obtain our pervasive, everlasting rules; or a description of split consciousness. If itís any consolation, in exchange for total freedom, you recognize that it is really You, at other times, that have done everything.)
The extra dimension defines an energetic aspect of reality. The balance of time is being shifted from the internal system mass, to its external motion. Here we say there is a balance between energy and inertia. Whatever energy is involved, exactly overcomes the inertia of the mass. The change in inertial status is the process of shifting the balance of internal/external time.
Energetic processes wax and wane. We approach a description of reality when we recognize that it is a complex system of sub-processes, where energy is constantly migrating through various media. The modification of energetic aspects is the patterning of energy. This next dimension of process is a primary fundamental component of the order we see in the Universe. Time, energy and energy patterns compose the fundamental dimensions of time-process in our frame; and correspond to the three dimensions of time internal to mass, as its reference frame. In our frame, our three dimensions are the 4th through 6th, projected from the 1st through 3rd, from within all of our mass. Within the frame of mass, the same arrangement of dimensions proceeds. But between the frames, where the balance comes in, dimensionality shifts. From our view, the dimensions of mass are a basis upon which to build the higher dimensions of time. They rank with space in this relative sense. They are the source of our time, as it operates across our space.
At the risk of being redundant, let me re-word this, as I have no idea how understandable it is. The dimensions of space are gaps in the timing of events. This is saying that the space is that timing ó that it is the relationship between those events. Our "bottom" three dimensions are the dimensions of time, within mass, that are the source of time, of our processes. The space of our frame is apparent due to the timing relationships of processes ó all based on Vc timing. The fundamental dimensions of our processes are built upon their source of time, internal to mass. Our three dimensional space is really six dimensional, if you view it as process in balance with mass that is its source of time. Three of our six dimensions are well-shrunk, residing in our mass.
These six dimensions are the fundamental components of gravitation. Gravitation is relationships of mass. Those relationships involve motion, energy, and the fundamental framework of order in reality. In gravitation, however, the motion and energy are "called for," or induced, from within. When our world, external to mass, calls for new motion, weíre saying that the dimensionality of that process is fundamentally +5. Our frame imposes new motion on mass, and derives time from the interior of the mass components of the moving frame. It then follows that time is derived from the Vc relationships between the elements of mass, as a moving interdependent system, or object, as well. We derive time from the complete chain. We derive it from the source of time. In gravitation, the moving frame of mass is inducing the motion; it is producing energy. This is negative energy, relative to the usual description of energetic processes. Mass has an inherent tendency to produce the energy of acceleration of gravity. In so doing, we note that the balance of time is still kept. Time is slower in the presence of greater mass. Our model will speculate that this relationship between time and motion is the fundamental motor of gravitation. It works for the General Frame in the same way as it works for the special frames, only in reverse. The "need" for gravitational motion is an attribute of the requirements for the existence of mass, due to its rate of time, under the conditions of its density. A new element in our frame is the factor of density. For our model, we will speculate that the source of time is more "available," within any reference frame generated by the point, where there is less demand for the use of that point, over the distance it generates with the gaps in timing between, and within, its patterns. We can speculate that this is due to the apparent finity of Vc, as it acts to limit the availability of the source of time, over time, in its role as a fixed fundamental reference. Another possible way of looking at this slowing of time with density of clocks, is as a limiting factor arising from the derivation of time as "somethings" from nothing.
Gravitation is the primary balance between external and internal motion, in the Universe. All those spinning galaxies of yours are each coming together upon themselves, because they are all flying apart, with respect to the origin, in an expanding set of groups. This is another avenue of balance required by our origin, for it to be a point. As with inertial mass, gravity brings about a reduction in internal clock rate. This model, then, suggests that our rate of expansion was, or may be, in acceleration; as spirals, stars and orbits were being defined. The motion of expansion need not be in acceleration if gravitation defines as much angular motion as would balance the slowing of time within the mass of the forming systems. Another possibility is that new mass was, or is, being born to take on the excess time.
The mechanism thatís driving this model, exists in infinite detail, within its particles. It is taking place within them, in a relatively fast, miniature form. An infinite number of levels proceed as larger process; as well as at faster, smaller levels. The source of gravitation is the source of time, within the particles of our frame.
The rates governing the process of attraction arise from the availability of time. We have already made use of this concept in our handling of special frames. For the General Frame, we must add, that increasing the density of mass involves a decrease in the rate of time as well.
In the special case, we observe a balance between internal and external motion. We also are aware that a great deal of potential energy exists within mass ó far more than we ever observe being converted to motion. To accelerate an object considerably, is to have little reducing effect on its internal clock. The mechanism is reasonable, and doesnít ask for much; and what it asks for, it gives back. We can operate it, in simple form, along a line, and recognize that it consists of the relationship of timing events between points on the line. Time that would be spent switching points within an object, now must be spent switching them in the direction of its motion. (To bring on new motion is to add a dimension ó and we can see that adding a dimension is to bring an element of order ó motion has become more directed; it has gained a common attribute.) The balance that is kept, essentially maintains the overall use of points at a constant. That constant is the metered output of Vc, derived from the infinite clock; which is the primary constant. These are the fundamental constructs of the frame that generated our consciousness.
Special Frame ó
For the General Frame we must recognize a similar sort of quality. There is a factor of constancy, and apparent finity, along our line, in the form of density of points, as well. Here, again, we recognize the source of those points as being a fundamental reference ó free to behave as it will; while generating a perfect reference for the frames that follow from it. While those frames shrink infinitely, as they likewise increase in number, they also define a finite aspect of point availability; by distributing the sources of time into a finite number of groups, within a given particle, at a given level of dimensionality. The groups are related with the apparent finity of Vc delay, as well, or by their version of Vc. The particles of a moving body in our frame, too, are related into a unit by our Vc. The source of time, through the levels of dimensionality, also follows delays at Vc, as the behavior of a particle is the result of its constituent sub-processes.
General Frame ó
balance of motion includes gravitational components,
that compensate for slowing of internal motion,
proportional to the density of that time, in time
The relationship of particles on our line, now, can affect their internal clocks, by virtue of their relative position, as well as motion. To see significant effects, a great many particles would be involved over a limited range, or only two particles would be involved over a very limited range; as per the fundamental relationships of our points, based on the synthetic finite quality of Vc.
We now have sufficient information with which to begin an examination of the simple workings of a mechanism of gravitation, though we will discover the need to further refine our revision of the random/symmetrical model of our source of time. We will look at gravitation between a pair of arbitrarily defined protons. To simplify the discussion, we will treat the protons as entities that each have an individual quality of unity, that arises out of relationships between an infinite distribution of the point source of time, within that unit. It is not my wildest hope to offer a credible picture of the structure of order and relative dimensionality within the proton. I make a meager starting attempt at this throughout the book, and in presenting a sample model of Object Physics.
[Quarks are observed, and mathematically anticipated, as a special set, within the proton for example, by "scanning" that particle, at high energy, with another particle ó also made of quarks. The mechanism for viewing this, may be more what weíre seeing than the quark system. Within the model here, one can imagine that we are seeing a reactance between the dimensional relationships composing a system of fast little big bangs, and another such system, with a significant amount of its time being converted to external motion. If this model should so happen to be valid, imagine the advantages weíd gain from being able to look at astrophysics with a birdís eye view; as we gaze down on the atoms. Likewise, we could appreciate our view of the atom from the inside, as we look out at the heavens.]
If we view space as a constant Vc grid, evenly distributed; then we might suspect a mechanism of reduced rate of time for a given frame of volume of increased density of mass. Space is the timing delay between Vc events. When a significantly large number of systems of timing events are crowded together, between a given delay area, then the effective finite quality of Vc carries its character into this issue of density. From calculation, we know that the effect is minimal for two protons in open space. We also see that it becomes everything at the opposite extreme. This is to say that the effect of slowing time is not one that is simply dependent on the proximity of particles. It is also dependent on their number, relative to a large reference frame. One might imagine, however, that given this trade-off, significant effect on time could be produced by intensive concentration of particles in lesser quantities. Such relationships may be involved, for example, with the strong force. I am completely unequipped to deal with such subjects... itís just a thought... a time wall. If you push some protons over it, you get the kind of glue we see as a black hole; but the dimensionality of the reference frame is shifted. Both phases of sub-time interact, as our sampled phase of time is generated.
Fundamentally then, our picture of two protons is a picture of two sets of dots. The proximity of the sets is a definition of density for the total number of dots involved. The important thing to notice now, is that the density of dots is greater between the facing sides of the sets, than it is between the opposite sides of those same sets. Time runs slower toward the middle of our picture.
A gradient of time is defined between the particles. This gradient may call for a corresponding motion. We will speculate that the rule of availability of time, versus density, is generated with independence, to some degree, from the availability of time for motion. The source of motion is random, and requires a symmetrical complement. This does not require symmetrical density of our moving time sources. Likewise, density can be symmetrically defined, and involve differing motion. These are examples within a line-frame of bi-directional vectors, with respect to their origin. A long one going one way, can be canceled by the sequential generation of two separated short ones going the opposite way.
The nature of our random/symmetrical basis is being developed a bit further here. You could say that we are relaxing the requirements of motion generation some, and perhaps, loosing some status of order in our symmetry. Symmetry is still being defined in attributes; but no longer has a mirror image form. Instead, we get gravity! Sounds like a good deal to me. To boot, now our anti-reality can be a whole different chain of events; though it still runs in reverse, relative to our frame.
The persistent problem I first had here, with respect to the General Frame, was that our model does not seem to generate a directional component for our gravitation vector. We obviously have a time gradient, pointing the way we want to go; but how is gravitational motion initiated? What is directing the motion toward its own compounding? It is easy to say, but not very satisfying, that we are simply viewing the fundamental existence of gravitation as a shifting in the phase of time.
Each point in our picture is composed of a subset of points. The resolution of our grade is infinite, even between two protons. Ultimately, the points distributed across the frame are the point.
There is everything to see in this picture, except the answer to the fundamental question, "why do things come together?" We know that time slows down with gravity, and we see more gravity between the facing sides than the opposite sides. But this picture doesnít really direct or incite the motion. So far, it really only directs that there shall be more external motion around the facing sides, than the opposite sides. The sub-particles within our particles must move in some direction, to compensate for the slowing of their clocks, as per Special Frames.
Perhaps the answer will involve remembering that the array of dots must also act as a single thing. The sides are well "connected" by the internal Vc relationships, that actually compose them. The array composes a system of time ó a quantity of internal time that must balance with external time, as a unit. Now when we see our gradient within that unit, we see that one side needs to move more than the other. Since the sides are connected, the unit moves in the direction that is less opposed ó away from its own component definition of lesser motion. Almost.
Perhaps we should analyze a bit more deeply. The starting condition of increasing density is one that calls for the creation of external motion, on the part of a unit of systems. A unit can move more easily if it moves in the direction that calls for that movement. It cannot as easily fulfill its requirements for existence if it moves the other way. Perhaps the reason for this is the fixed, finite Vc relationships within, and between, the two units of systems. The motion might be undirected if this information was transmitted instantaneously. The delay times create the conditions that repel the motion away from the end of the particle with faster time. That end opposes the needed motion by lagging, due to its greater distance. Perhaps the requirement for existence also involves Vc as an available window width. By moving apart, the requirement for motion moves away, and out of, that window. It can move into it by moving toward the source of the requirement. Vc distance plays a part, within and between; as well as in density distribution over distance. Weíre getting closer.
A necessary ingredient for this General Frame, is a deeper analysis of motion. What is motion? So far we have decided, for the model here, that motion in our reference frame can be ordinate, or inordinate. Inordinate motion is the departure of a body or object from zero velocity, with respect to the originís definition of total motion. This definition is distributed within all of the ordinate motion of expansion and spinning. For a departure from this, we recognize a sensible mechanism by which we can account for the slowing of clocks, with motion relative to the surface of the Earth, regardless of the direction of travel. Time is transferred from within mass, from its internal processes, to the motion of the frame containing that mass. That frame, whether it be a proton or a football, is a collection of processes, tied together as a definition of our rules, which are based on the Vc timing relationships between, and of, the processes. Those processes communicate their definition a little more slowly, as their overall frame defines an element of process in time for our frame. That frame is a source of time for our frame. Its external momentum is its contribution to the definition of process in our frame. Its attribute of constant velocity is a definition of time in our frame. If it reaches escape velocity, it will continue away at a constant velocity, covering a regular distance with reference to a clock. When energy is no longer defining the process, it no longer accelerates. It has become a clock. During acceleration, time was being transferred from the interior momentum of process within the moving frame, to its exterior, as a component of time in our frame of three dimensions of process. Now, back to the question, "what is motion." We are modeling it here as a definition of time. As such we are saying that it is the relationship of change in the relative positions of objects of uniform motion. We have also been defining the constant distance relationships in our world as timing of the Vc relationships between objects. Whether the objects are moving or not, they are defined by the relativity of timing between their constituencies of sub-processes, all of which appears to rest on a basis of Vc. Its all timing. Its the timing between the timing of the timing... of Universal Systemology.
To analyze this, letís create a simple model of motion. There are two reference objects that are stationary with respect to each other. A third object is moving, without variation. The references consider this a definition of time. Our model includes processes within these objects that are, themselves, complex sets of motion. These sub-systems define the existence of the objects in our simple model of motion. We must now recognize that it is the behavior of those internal processes that is defining the relative location of our three objects. Where those processes exist, at any moment, relative to all other process, is the source of definition for motion. All of the "wheres" involved are a matter of timing, from the distributed origin; from the source of time. Relative changes in timing constitute new definitions of relative locations of systems. Where these changes occur, we observe motion, because the objects involved are existing in new locations, with respect to each other, in terms of the time delay between their sets of system timing.
For there to be uniform motion, the internal frames will have a fixed balance of time with our frame, that defines the relative trend of where the processes will exist, relative to where they have been, in terms of apparent Vc delay, or space, between objects, over time. "Over time" is, itself, a collection of reference distance events, of Vc delay. The motion is a definition of timing patterns within the point. It is perceived by similar such systems. From our view, we can say that a moving object, or stationary object, is allowed to exist as repetitions of itself, over time. It exists as heartbeats of itself, where it exists. As such, it is some definition of time, regardless of its overall motion. Its heartbeats come to us as apparent Vc relationships, but ultimately, they are derived from the infinite point. Things move because they have been defined as time of momentum, where their existence is heartbeats that return at a different relative location. In complex reality, there are infinite levels of dimension contributing subtle factors to all vectors. The result is the flow of all interrelated rules as complete history. From our view within this, we see ongoing development. The "errors" are as important as the results they were involved with.
In our simple model, the moving object is perceived to re-exist regularly, with a trend to do so in a fixed direction, relative to the references. The references perceive themselves to continuously re-exist at the same location. In our line-vector model of balance of motion in the Universe, we would say that the re-definition of the moving object is the points of the line that compose its vector. The stationary references could be single points, anywhere in the line. Whenever the moving object is re-defined as a new point, the references are also redefined at their original positions. Whether things move or not, the reality of their existence is the Vc communication between the objects, and the similar such talk going on within them, into full dimensionality.
In reality, it would appear that a single origin is capable of re-existing everywhere, simultaneously. This would not be possible if its heartbeat had a finite rate. Relative to our assessment of reality, its rate is infinite. The fundamental heartbeat of reality places all mass relative to itself simultaneously, because it requires no time to "change" locations. It simply is everywhere all at once, as the point. The change becomes apparent as it develops out of the infinite levels of dimensionality, available for generation by the point, as relationships with itself. We are an infinite number of levels of generated dimensionality away from the point. Yet it exists right here, within all mass. It is "Vc away" from You, everywhere you have mass. The communication between our mass and itself takes place within all levels of dimensionality, as relationships of Vc delay. We might think of the Vc of a given level as being accelerated at each step, as you approach the point. Or we might say that Vc is constant, and each level deals with a finer grain of point relationships, as you approach the point. In either case, the distances involved approach zero, relative to our world. The former choice might lend itself better to an explanation for the effect of mass density on time. The latter case might utilize an effect of dimensional transition, to incur the density effect on time, as well as the apparent reduction of heart-rate from infinite to Vc-delayed.
Though the mass is all really a single point ó the origin ó it alternates at an infinite rate, producing patterns, that develop meaning to themselves. The pattern might remain zero dimensional, if it werenít eternal. Being infinitely fast, and having forever to act, places it in an apparently magical position, relative to our world, of its creation. What those relative advantages amount to is the generation of dimensionality. An infinite number of eternities are generated in an infinitely short time, relative to our position of capabilities. Our viewpoint is an infinitely small piece of that big picture. What we perceive of as this scheme of infinite levels of dimensionality, was all built instantly, and is maintained permanently, by the infinite clock. If it had only generated a single eternity, it may have remained zero dimensional. But an infinite number of such cycles contains relative meaning that amounts to perceivable dimensionality. The geometrical relationships are the fundamental dimensionality of a given reference frame within the scheme. The ability to perceive comes with the products of higher relative dimensionality ó the power of time to repeat itself in identical, and nearly identical ways, an infinite, or "nearly infinite" number of times ó and to continue this exponentiation of overviews to include all available order in processes.
The infinite numbers of patterns that go into any moment of time, are only viewable from reference frames contained therein, of sufficient order to support perception. Such order is based on constancies, which are based on a fundamental constant. In our case we call it Vc. Its the apparent time it takes for one location to communicate with another location. Itís actually a relative number of steps that are taken, through infinite dimensionality, to the point; and then in reverse to the point of "reception." [A more complex view might say that the steps also side-step the point ó the deeper you go is the farther you communicate, when you turn around to come out.]
Now lets look at the moving object again. Its heart is an infinite collection of the origin. The relative timing of these heartbeats determines the existence of the object, at a location, relative to the other objects projected by the origin. Our reference frame is one where the dimensions of time are developed by higher dimensions of time, that span our time, with rules of memory. Because of this relative location within the patterns of the point, we perceive that objects have qualities of stability, including momentum. An important factor in the fundamental order of gravitation, is the definition of a motion vector as a balance with other motion vectors, in a balance of time; where such motion is a trend of re-definition of location for that object, with respect to the re-definition of the other objects. Time is a trend of re-definition of relative location of existence of the source of time within, and as, a frame of uniform motion.
In our special frame, weíve defined a requirement that motion shall accompany a balance between the time within a frame, and the time that is defined by the motion of that frame within a larger frame. For gravitation, we require that an increase in the density of systems will accompany a reduction in the availability, or rate, of time within each component system. The reduction of time was not to balance frames of motion ó the cause was this independent factor of density. However, the independent density factor has reduced the rate of time within that frame of density. This would exist as an imbalance to the special frame it is within. It calls for motion. Where conditions lead to increased density of clocks, there will be increased motion, or motion vectors, upon the re-definition of existence of the relative objects.
Now we can return to our simple model of gravitation between two protons, with a means of defining the vector of motion, to include the observed factor of direction for that motion.
Our two protons are a collection of sub-systems of sub-systems, etc., leading, at Vc, to an infinite collection of the point, and back again to "other" infinite collections of the point, in terms of definitions of order that relate the collections. For this most fundamental basis of order, we need only the requirements set forth in our simple model, however.
For the sake of simplicity, letís think of one proton as the source of gravitational "draw," and focus on why the system has an attribute of attraction that calls for the other proton to be inclined to move toward that draw.
If there were no draw, the two protons would spontaneously re-exist at approximately the same relative locations. We observe this "approximately" as the uncertainty that arises from our random/symmetrical basis. We recently conceded that this basis may be yet more random in character, to speculate that density is independent of motion. At the same time you may be coming to recognize that the "random" element is the complexity of relationships between the infinite degree of interdependencies of processes within, and between, the levels of dimensionality. The "noise" is an infinite variety of ordered reference frames. Nevertheless, to any given frame, the bulk of the other frames constitutes a random basis.
Each of the infinite number of the point is moving around within the proton. On the average, the proton has a "center" of location. At any instant, it is somewhere near that center. Its constituent sub-particles are defining the particle with their communication of relative location. Through infinite levels of this process, we derive a certain constancy, and a certain degree of random character, as to the location of the particle, relative to all other particles.
Each constituent sub-particle is attempting to re-exist at a slightly different apparently random location, while the communication between those same particles serves as the definition of how they compose a unit particle.
Each sub-particle then, is a sub-clock, with a certain degree of random motion, relative to our draw. Some of them would arbitrarily be re-defined toward the draw, while others would move away. The ones that are re-created toward the draw are placed for greater movement than the ones that move away, in fulfilling the simultaneous requirement of compensating the slowing clock with external motion, or force. The ones that move away from the draw set up a loss in requirement for their motion, due to the relative increase in the rates of their clocks; as they define the opposite condition of reduced density of clocks. While these factors of motion are developing, the collection of sub-clocks is still very much a collection of relative timing relationships, that holds itself together, as such, as a unit. The net result is that the re-definition of existence includes a definition of direction, in the requirement for a vector of motion, due to increased density of clocks. This is another example of a factor of fundamental order inherent to our random basis.
The trend of motion is set from the outset of our model. Gravitational motion is an attribute of the definition of existence of the particle system. From here it has nothing to do but compound itself in that same direction. Furthermore, we can now see that the mechanism will also operate as a very subtle factor within a complex vector. It participates in essentially unrelated events, as well as in the orbital motion of gravitational systems. It may be involved in circulation of molten metals in the interior of planets. It is the factor of pressure there, that gives rise to communication of heat vibration motion. When the vector cannot define the fundamental component of motion direction, the required motion vector acts as an influence in the mix of forces, that take available avenues. The everyday avenue is a balance in force between the fundamental direction vector and a slight displacement of electron distribution. In other words, most everything is usually stuck to the planet.
This may be the mechanism that supports, or generates, the shift of time through its phases. This is a more detailed view of the flow of timeís phase. This is the behavior of the point source of time, from our dimensional vantage.
A falling object can be taken as an example of an inertia-less frame. While this is not true to anyone who gets conked on the head by it, there is a hint of something going on here. By removing influence on the object, it is accelerated effortlessly. It had the inertia before you let it go. It may sound as though Iím trying to say that gravity is magic ó but Iím not ó at least not beyond the fact that the whole big deal is magic. The behavior of a freely falling object may be offering a peek at an important mechanism within the relative behavior of objects. The free falling object is accelerated effortlessly, from the source of each constituent particle system of it. We say that the object is gaining inertia, due to the increase in its velocity, and its mass. Note that it is being accelerated evenly across its entire point source definition, with respect to the ordinate motion of the surface of the Earth. Accelerating an object with inertial mass is supposed to compress it, in the direction of new motion.
When an object is accelerated in space, it will impose its mass as inertia, against the constant force, that is felt as a compression in the direction of motion. The falling object is an opposite example of inertia, due to acceleration. It looses its inertia. The compression is felt before it falls. When it accelerates, the whole thing accelerates together, in the direction of motion. If the source of this draw were to suddenly switch directions, the inertia-less frame of the object would instantly follow. Everything in the frame would immediately "fall" in acceleration, together, in that new direction. No one would get splattered on the wall, and the craft would hold together. Our final look at physics reference frames, here, is taken up in Object Physics as Gradient Frames.
The Particle Universe
This topic is not as short as this section... the whole book is an attempt to describe particles. When most people, who think about particle physics, think about particle physics, I think you think about accelerators and the first millionth of a second of the big bang. I think about everyday life. Therefore, the particles Iím most interested in are not exotic harmonic perturbations, taken out of their standard context. I think of all process as involving harmonic relationships and multiplicities of hydrogen with itself. This is the bulk of all process, and the source of residual process. It is even possible that the very different reality we perceive, through calculation, as the first moment of the big bang, could be a relativistic illusion. The process could be continuous, and always look like a big bang started some billions of years ago.
It is conceivable that a perception of the general framework of our reality is starting to come into focus here, thanks to a lack of intensive study in any one specific direction. Instead, I get a headache trying to figure it all out without really knowing anything. That lack of detailed involvement frees me to put the pieces together, in a compromise; without favoritism along a particular vein ó without as much specific pre-conception about how the big picture should look. Obviously, there is some limit to how far you can go with this.
I donít mean to imply that I am so dumb that I think accelerators are a waste of time. They obviously are our primary means of investigation devoted toward understanding the complex workings of particle relationships. These mechanisms constitute the coarse and fine structure of the rules of reality. It is not the purpose of this book to delineate much of the rules of reality. The focus here is on the overall framework within which those rules can exist. We have been working without a framework to support a few fundamental issues. Why does the charge of the proton exactly cancel the charge of the electron? Why is the electronís mass so relatively low? Why do all protons have the exact same rest mass as each other; as do the electrons? How do such similar components give rise to diverse systems such as the human race?
In the particle reference frame, we view the Universe as being its particles. What is a particle? The intensive mathematical approach has yielded a variety of pictures. To account for properties of relationships, the descriptions involve dimensionality, and numbers like i, that produce an item that cannot be visualized in everyday terms. Yet, we have pursued the topic with the hopes of finding a most fundamental, and simple, smallest particle. We want there to be something hard at the heart of all this stuff. We want to find the "smallon." The smallon is so small that we no longer have to be concerned about what itís made of. Yet, its properties will explain everything.
The smallon is the point. Itís hard because itís infinitely fast. It explains everything, because it is everything.
We have seen that particles can generate sets of lesser particles. If we try to impose a limit on this, we are left with a question of what it is that composes the substance of our smallest particle. Reality is filled with examples of substance having lesser components. What is the substance of a minimum static object? What are its "walls" made of? We would have to say that it is a magical source of minimum definition. Itís a magic marble. Its substance has no components. Its substance exists purely as relative phenomena. Its substance is relative logic. Its substance is its interaction with other units, just like itself. Its substance is temporal. It is an object consisting of a relationship in time, between other relationships in time. The minimum particle is the lowest energy photon relationship event. Even that, if it exists; if it is real; is a product of the Universe. It fits into the equation. It brings reality into balance. It completes the total definition of the point. It was an aspect of the point. If we observe it, it was an aspect that participated in conscious aspects.
When we think of substance, our thoughts are guided by experiences of relationships. A mug sits on the table; it doesnít fall through. The mug and table are actually made a whole lot more of space than stuff. The particles should just mesh together fine. And why should the mug want to fall anyway? Why donít we just have a lot of stuff floating around, and passing through each other effortlessly? Rules. Itís all a bunch of rules. We call one rule electron repulsion or the exclusion principal, and another rule gravity, or the curvature of space. The next time you think of substance, think of two magnets opposing each other. Substance is the same thing. In place of the magnets, we simply have the sum of our related rules. The rules develop out of the availability of Vc as a reference, from the point.
The Split-Light Paradox
The parallels between the physical Universe and brain function excite me. One of the best examples of this is the analogy that exists between split brain life and the results of the dual slit experiments. In both cases, by splitting a fundamental given of the Universe, we learn surprising things about the definition or identity of those givens. You can become two yous, with a common identity; yet having gained independence of thought, decision and action, from two reference frames. And light, it turns out, somehow "knows each other," after you split it into separate pathways, and operate those pathways independently, at different times.
We commonly think of light as the characteristic of reality which supports our vision. Getting more technical, we understand that it involves incredibly fast alternations of a sub-character, that results in our perception of different colors. We describe that "vibration" quality as a wavelength, analogous to ocean waves or sound waves; except that light seems to be its own medium ó it can propagate in space. These various wavelengths, then, not only produce the rainbow of colors, but invisible "colors" such as infrared and ultraviolet. Taken further; slower, longer waves support radio function; and these frequencies can be taken all the way down to a few cycles per second, or less if you wish. At the other extreme, X-rays are light; and beyond that, cosmic rays are light of such high frequency that their energy ascribes to them a significant mass.
These waves of light have an inner composition, in terms of time. They are composed of light quanta, which are minimum units, or "packets" of energy, called photons. Photons are "emitted" by atoms, and "absorbed" by atoms. They never "bounce off" atoms. They can pass by, or "through," many atoms before finally being absorbed; but they never bounce off to reflect light. Reflected light is absorbed by atoms, and then emitted later. We say that when you see, photons are being absorbed in the rods and cones of the retinas in your eyes. On a bright day, there are a lot of photons exciting a lot of atoms, which in turn are emitting a lot of photons; some of which find their way into your eyes.
Atoms can transfer more or less energy from one to another, with a given photon. There are very specific amounts of energy contained in photons. The particular type of photon produced is a function of the particular atomic or molecular configuration producing it, and the current energy level conditions in the "neighborhood." When an atom emits one of its stronger types of photons, another atom is going to receive that greater quantity of energy; and will be made heavier in mass by that amount. Only one atom will receive that quantum of energy ó but it will "pass it along" in one form or another; all at once, or spread out in time with several lower energy quanta emissions, as per the conditions of its configuration and neighborhood.
The brightness of light is a function of the energy level of the photons received, but is more a function of how many photons are received. The color of light, or the frequency of a radio station, is a function of the rate of modulation of those numbers of photons. In other words, frequency is not attributable to individual photons ó the frequency of light is the rate at which the photons increase and decrease in numbers. (There is a striking analogy here to neural data transmission resulting in brain waves and muscle waves.) The ability of any given atom in an antenna to emit photons is a function of the length of that antenna versus the rate at which you control the production. Thatís a big neighborhood, involving some 1025 atoms. The key relating that neighborhood, is the speed of photon "travel" ó the speed of light. The frequency of light, that can be transmitted or received, is not a function of the type of metal atoms in the antenna ó it is a function of this geometrical relationship between physical dimensions, and the Vc delay time so defined. Yet, each photon emitted is a communication between a single atom in the antenna, and another single atom, beyond some space of time. Somehow, each atom knows how long the whole antenna is; so that it will be excited at the given rate of repetition. This function is within our rules of process, that are involved as this system.
Now we are ready to start splitting some light. We set ourselves up with a light source, and a light detector. Letís give that source a visible red frequency, and then, of course, our detector must be sensitive to red. Letís say that the detector receives about 1% of the photons emitted by the source, at the distance set between them.
The first thing we do is to discover the photons themselves, by turning down the brightness. We make the red light very dim ó about one tenth the brightness necessary for human vision. Our detector is much more sensitive than the eye, however, so it succeeds in registering the energy events; at the same 1% level, compared to the current total output of the source. This will happen even if we turn the brightness down to where we detect only about one photon event per second! I find this, alone, very interesting. The overall system retains its status as a red emitter/detector; as though it still knows what it was set up for, even though the usual definition of red frequency can only be getting ever so sparsely represented. But the fun is just beginning. We are entering an area of realityís composition that evolution has not considered to be a necessary part of our perceptive playing field. The result is that we seem to discover illogical attributes of reality.
We place a partition between the source and detector, so as to successfully block the light transmission. Now we poke a hole in that wall exactly in line with the source and detector. No surprises yet; we get our 1% detection back. However, if we close that hole, and poke a new one off to the side, we still get the 1%! It doesnít matter exactly where you poke it either, within reason. The straight-line geometry indisputably indicates that these photons travel a curved path to get through the hole.
We can place feed-through detectors behind each of two holes, and determine that photons affect only one detector at a time. The distribution of effects, over time, is spread evenly between the two holes; but only one hole is affected by any single photon. With this in mind, the following data cannot be explained if photons are regarded as moving objects.
We remove the two hole detectors, and resume detection at our original point, beyond the partition. Now you can alter the detection from 0% to 4%, depending on the spacing of the holes; even though a single photon is processed once per second! No matter how the holes are adjusted, if you close one of them, the detection returns to 1%! The overall geometry of the system acts to draw or repel the quanta toward or away from the detector, even though they are extremely fast events separated by a whole second; involving a single-atom emitter, a single-atom detector, and only one of the two holes at a time.
In performing this experiment, it is important that the feed-through detectors be removed, from behind the two holes. If this is not done, a constant 2% detection rate is produced, as hole spacing is adjusted, instead of the amazing 0% to 4% range. The holes donít count anymore, as geometrically related points of connection between the source and detector. Now, each hole has been converted to a source. These sources simply produce a sum at the final point of detection, and we get what we expected to get in the first place.
You get the same kind of results when you replace the photons in this experiment, with electrons. Electrons have been characterized as essentially being a pair of photons, chasing each other around in a tight circle. Whatever their system, however, they show a smidgen of rest mass in their behavior as well ó about 1/1837 that of the proton. All particles are seen to have timing properties that give them some characteristics in common with photons. In other words, the geometrical rules of timing that govern photon events at Vc, carry into the relationships between mass, regarding the change in those relationships due to motion.
Whatís The Deal With Light?
Many puzzling aspects about photon behavior can be eliminated, if the concept of "something" traveling Vc is replaced with things are relationships separated by Vc delay in time. Now we can add velocities of various moving objects, and Vc will always be Vc, from any point of view based on Vc. The relationships will even transfer the inherent intelligence of momentum to the apparent Vc vector. The momentum of a moving emitter imparts this relative quality to the direction of its communication. Momentum represents the timing offset, at any instant between the "source" and "destination" of the Vc timing relationship. It cannot alter Vc itself, in the fore or aft vector component; but it stands in the timing of relationships to bring the appearance that photons have a kind of mass that provides for momentum. When an element of communication is perpendicular to the motion of an emitter, the point of "reception" moves with the point of "emission." This is the inherent offset in the timing relationships of objects moving together.
Science has developed quite successfully, as a method of recognizing problems, dealing with them, discovering solutions, and applying those solutions to our benefit. We do this, thinking that we approach the problem open-mindedly; but within exacting limitations. It is necessary to develop some pre-conceptions, in order to have a systematic approach with the problem solving effort.
To the extent that science has been unable to answer a few very fundamental questions, the school of thought has had an errant fundamental basis of pre-conception. In other words, we have taken some ideas as being fundamentally true, or self-evident, without really checking them out. Then when something like the dual-slit experiment comes along, we are ill-prepared to fathom the reality of it.
One such harmful tenant is such a misapplication of the simple concept of individuality. We are socially conscious, or sub-conscious, of this quality in people and economic interaction; and we automatically apply it to the particle Universe. Evolution has molded us into a system that survives as a balance between competition and cooperation. The skills weíve developed in this, rest on fundamental concepts such as the individuality of objects. We want to simplify reality down to components, and attribute the behavior of those components to characteristics that arise completely from within the individual object. The object has mass ó it would have that particular mass even if there were no other particles. It has charge ó the same charge it would have if it were the only particle. A particleís behavior may have been influenced by a few other particles; but for a while now, itís going to be its own man. What it does has much more to do with what it basically is, than how it has interacted with the Universe; as though these were different "things." A photon should behave like a bullet, and not care about what any other photons are doing, nearby in time.
Careful, detailed studies of light have indicated that it is evidently time to guess again. The statistical distribution of photon behavior may look this way, but the individual photon events reveal a deeper character to reality. Photon events are components of systemology that actually relate to each other over a span of time, in order to produce the effects we expect to see "on the average." Experiment has proven that they act as though they were aware of the behavior of their neighbors in time. They are aware of other temporarily uninvolved geometry, that is related to their process by rules. The rules, that guide photon relationships, are concerned with a bigger, longer lasting picture, than the geometry that is immediately involved with individual photon events.
What this means is that the scientific approach must readjust its basis, so as to deal with a reality that involves its rules a little differently than we thought. The Universe has rules that apply over time to sum effects of particles. The rules relate particles to each other. It isnít that far-fetched; after all, the rule of gravity relates particles toward each other; and it even takes time to effect. All of the rules have to do with the relationships of various aspects of systemology with each other. Its just that now we have to accept a mode of rule application, partaken by the Universe, that concerns itself with the behavior of groups of events, spread out over time. An event, it would seem, is not a thing in itself. An eventís contribution to reality can be taken by reality as being only a component part of a longer-lasting "thing," whoís status takes precedent in the rules.
The thing is not the photon. The thing is the series of events.
We have wanted to believe that all rules ó especially the rules of physics ó apply to static conditions. To deal with complex problems, we have analyzed them into a series of static conditions. Then we view processes as having these specific components, that are the sole source of cause within the system, leading to the effects which serve as further causes in the system. This perception is related to our self-image, and our sense of self-determination. We will things to move. Everything was willed by someone, or something, to move. Physics has these rules governing movement of individual objects; but they are always applied relative to other objects. In the real world, the rules of physics always apply to interactive processes. The rules can even govern the long-term statistical results of a process by affecting the short-term behavior of seemingly individual events... the rules can see the forest for the trees. The individual event was not so individual; it was part of a greater true reality.
Nowhere would this characteristic of reality be more prominent than in the constitution of reality as a scheme of Universal Systemology. Here, a series of events actually defines a particle; which is, in turn, a participant in such a logical series of events.
With rules like these, it is easier to see how reality is supported. The rules lead to all behavior. All behavior perpetuates the rules. All behavior is composed of the rules.
Time is regularly quantized into the components of reality we refer to as particles.
Things donít work quite the way you probably think they do. For example, most of us are comfortable with an analysis of mirror reflection, involving an image being bounced off the surface, the way a ball would bounce off a wall. Light arrives on the mirror at a particular angle, and reflects off at an equal but opposite angle. Somehow, the atoms of the mirror surface are able to act "flat."
We can use this analysis constructively, and get away with it to the point of accomplishing marvelous things, such as building telescopes. There is a great deal of optics mathematics, based on this view, that works just fine. The only problem is, that atoms do not reflect light... they absorb it, then spit it out later. How do they know which direction, then, to spit? Timing. The relationships between particles are a matter of timing... extremely precise timing. The rules of reality consist of this relative timing. The structure of our dimensionality is the organized viewpoint available among all of this timing.
Attempts to unify relativity with QED, led to objectionable infinities. As with General Relativity, I have not dealt with QED in mathematical terms. I do appreciate what it means, on the surface of things ó it explains almost everything, in terms that account for atomic interaction. In view of the philosophy presented here, I have to suspect the possibility that some, or all, of those infinities are not a bad thing. Infinity is your friend. Itís all a matter of how you look at it. Perhaps when infinities crop up, we have switched to an absolute reference frame.
Sooner or later we need to deal with the examples in relativity that appear to be instantaneous, such as spooky photon pairs. It is also possible that these events, too, are understandable if placed in the context of timing relationships. Perhaps there is additional use of the symmetry in our basis ó these examples involve that aspect of the basis. The question here, concerns the possibility of direct, or more direct, timing relationships between the point and itself... a zero- or sub- dimensional attribute of reality.
Field is the potential for particle interaction. The potential is distributed as the field; but there is no field in actual existence ó what exists is the statistical behavior of particle interaction. Field potential is like prediction of the future, and depiction of the past. For example, a gravitational field exists where many particles are together. If the particles were not there, we would not view the space as having a field. The field is the rules of particle interaction. The substantial element of reality that we want to attribute to space, and call a field, is the relativistic interdependence of particles. Their timing affects each other, relative to distance.
Along our vector-line model, the attribute of static force, for another example, is simply an offset between the timing relationships that define a predominantly positive frame, and its complement. It has one less dimension than energy. It is simply this gap; a quantity of time, between complementary definitions. Like a definition of time in momentum, a degree of static attribute is created with a temporary degree of energy. Vc relationships of the flow of reality, act to set these balanced relationships between interdependent complements of time. Static discharge corresponds to deceleration, in terms of timing relationships in dimensionality.
The Wave Universe
In the reference frame of the Wave Universe, we are still in the Particle Universe frame ó itís just that we are viewing our particle relationships in terms of groups that act as waves. Groups of particles are relating to other groups of particles, over time; in patterns of combinations of sine wave participation. And, of course, the particles themselves are systems of process of relative timing relationships composed of such waves.
In the wave Universe we become concerned with the transformation of energy through media. All media have an electromagnetic basis. In this frame, we can consider the basic electromagnetic components themselves to have a wave character. The transformations here are within the relating systems of two single atoms or particles. Though these processes are infinitely complex, as they propagate to the point and back, they also stand simply as single "letters" within more complex wave relationships, involving huge numbers of other atoms and particles. These "words" are the spoken language that is reality.
In the wave reference frame, we might consider the electromagnetic timing relationships within mass to be cases, relative to our frame, where the frequency of light is faster than its apparent propagation. Its wavelength is negative. We might imagine that light is turned inside-out; or that it runs backwards in time. An arrangement of symmetry is called for, with four quadrants, to relate mass, time, and charge into descriptions of our fundamental elements of matter and anti-matter. In this, we might recognize that mass is a kind of tiny black hole, where everything is working this way. Within that frame, the relative flow of process is straight-forward.
Our view of that picture might say that the Vc there is c2. Things respond there so quickly, that they happen before they are instigated. In our frame, Vc is the basis of our view that it will take eternity for processes to repeat themselves. Our view of the internal mass frame might consist of a recognition that these cycles are going by "in there" at a tremendous rate of repetition, giving that system its relative particle character. Where time becomes negative, zero is eternal. Once again, however, the infinite clock is not the one we see. Our perception is built on timing that renders it a horizon. Here, our sample is a Vc where Vc=c2. [Perhaps thatís the electron, and Vc=c4 is the proton. Whether Vc gets to be other than our c or not, the electron and proton probably occupy different quadrants of timeís phase-polarity.]
Putting It Together
It is all timing. It is all a bunch of rules. It is all a bunch of timing rules.
Though the fundamental goal here is to gain a picture of how it all fits together, a major part of the puzzle is a recognition that the Universe itself is a process of putting it all together. At least, thatís the way it has to look from within the process. It has to look that way because the deeper basic overbearing reality is that it is all really together already, all along. We are available viewpoints within the constant point. We enjoy a wonderful sense of freedom, because the point infers infinitely complex relationships onto themselves. Within that are our systems of relative meaning, that exist in terms of apparent finities. From this viewpoint, it is impossible to predict the future. It is this limitation that supports our sense of freedom. We predict events, and plan for contingencies; but even when everything turns out as expected, we know that we can decide to change our plan at the last instant. We could do this simply to gain satisfaction from experiencing that variety of control. Yet, within this process, is the ever present mechanism of reality. There was a motivation. The motivation won, over other motivations. They had their relative strengths. You do what you do because you can, and you want to. You want to because you can, and because of the infinitely complex relationships of reality that built your desires. You can also decide not to do anything, to some extent. Again, this fulfills a motivation to prove a point to yourself, or simply a desire, or need, to rest. Whatever you do; it will be the thing that it was going to be. It has been true from the moment of the Big Bang, that You would be born, and live the life youíve lived. Every such truth will come to pass, and contribute to the composition of total reality. Everything happens, because it already always has, in the point.
There are numerous physical examples of how the future fits together to become its constant truth. The most basic, ever present mechanism in this is photon communication. The peculiarities of photons go away when you realize that there are no photons. The photon event is a relationship, characterized by Vc delay. Our vantage point is built of, and upon, these timing delays. Yet, we know that the fictitious photon is a viewpoint where time does not pass. From its point of view, the sending point, and the receiving point, co-exist together, as the photon event. The photon is this definition of relative co-existence; not a projectile.
With this attitude in mind, we see field as a whole new thing. A field only exists where it defines its relationships. A photon is only "emitted" when it already knows where (when) it is going to be "absorbed." Photons are pre-determined events, defining the relative existence of reality.
When a probe is placed anywhere in a field, we observe the inverse square law of field strength, with respect to distance from the source of that field. We are measuring the definition of relationships between the source and our probe. We assume that something is present, everywhere, because we assume that the source is constantly producing projectiles; and that they are subject to any unforeseen contingencies we might impose upon them, at any distance.
The stream of relationships here, would work a little differently than that. When there is nothing around, near or far, not even our probe; the source is communicating with greater distances than we are considering. The connections might be light-years away. They may involve incredibly complex relationships, at both ends. The two streams of events converge at this definition of relationship. All of reality is a constant flow of such communication of definition through relationships of the point with itself. The reality we enjoy is a product of this basis, as fixed as its basis ó a sub-set of its greater self ó a sub-set that supports apparent finities, as it supports perception. Perception is supported as an ordered sampling of the point. We perceive the basis of this as Vc. It supports process, which includes perception. Process perceives process.
Physics has produced graphic examples of how the Universe puts itself together in pre-determined sequences. Particle characteristics of reality have been studied extensively. We know that certain things will happen when particles are smashed together in collisions. Certain types of collisions yield certain types of results. A particular collision will have a particular family of possible outcomes.
It is common in this , to produce offspring particles with extremely short life spans. In some cases, the outcomes will involve anti-matter. The anti-world appears to run backwards in time, compared to our world. A "normal" collision might look like a "Y," where one particle hits another, and two new ones are created; heading away from each other. They continue for a short time, then usually decompose into photons (i.e., act as an energy attribute, to re-define a status of some relative point in the environment). When ingredients are right, an anti-particle is created. The anti-particle does not depart from the point of collision, and head away from the other offspring. The anti-particle is created at a distance, beyond the point of collision, before the collision. It heads toward the point of collision. It meets that point perfectly, at the instant of collision.
If nothing else can, "spooky action at a distance" should convince us that the Universe already knows what itís doing. Complementary photon pairs are an example of this. Two distant points "receive" photons from a common "source." The reception points determine a characteristic of photons, that can be detected as a characteristic of reception. The characteristic is random at the point of emission. This characteristic can be mirrored perfectly between two distant points of reception, by the emission of a pair of photons. The events transpire at Vc. There is no time for one reception point to tell the other what it has to do, to produce the observed symmetry.
In this, Vc is a characteristic of the information that reaches the process of our consciousness, relative to the process under investigation, after the facts of process. Photons really only exist where they are "received." This case proves that; and simultaneously shows that our underlying reality is a single connected point. In this case, Vc can only relate the source event to the reception events, with the usual delay time, when the fictitious photons know where they are going, and that they will be there, as required, in order to exist; as the actual relationships between matter, that they are already. We have found another way to view the truth contained in the point.