While we are unable to describe the 3-dimensional physics of gravity we are obliged to accept the possibility of a 4th dimension of space in which our familiar 3D referencial is accelerated from the bodies’ centers of mass outwards. That would be the true gravitational acceleration, from which gravity would be a consequence and a manifestation.

This is necessarily a spatial dimension because there is a motion in that dimension, which we cannot perceive merely because our 3D referencial is invariant to it. We are in permanent motion relative to that 4th dimension.

It could also be logical to place other gravitational effects on 3D bodies in that fourth dimension, which would then be the dimension of existence of what we call dark matter.

In fact, when we say that matter distorts space, because we measure it as invariant, we know that this distortion does not affect the geometry of 3D space. Therefore we are in reality stating the existence of a fourth dimension of space. If the shortest path between two points in space is not a line, while we can still follow a 3D measured line, then that curvature only happens in a fourth dimension.

A straight line in a sheet of paper is invariant to distortions of that sheet beause its the whole sheet that is being distorted, making the 2D geometry invariant under any measurement carried in 2 dimensions. Its when we introduce a 3rd dimension that we can distort the plane while maintaining its intrinsic geometry intact. The same applies to the distortion of 3D space from which gravity is an effect. That distortion, translated to 3D measurements (the only ones we can carry out and explain) is an acceleration.

Another way to put this is that classical physics (and simple mathematics) can still explain gravity.

Time is isomorphic to a geometry when the measured process develops in space.

The assertions made in this post can be followed further in their implications.

Because the future structure already exists and because the past structure still exists, and since neither ever were pre-determined, it follows that every possible configuration exists at the same time.

Even if there were strict determinism, the structure would still be immutable.

That is, the Universe is perfectly static. Not a single breeze whispers in the Universe. Nothing new ever comes to being [2].

In fact, this principle manifests itself in the recesses of our very own reasoning. Nothing new can be deduced from previous assumptions and logical operations, that wasn’t manifested by those before.

It is therefore our conscience that moves in the Universe, or relative to the Universe [1].

The Universe is deterministic in that structural sense, but not our experience.

_______

[1] Conscience, as stated elsewhere, is a motion in the Universe. And as also stated before, in one of its variations, we are not a thing, not an object, but an operation. This operation was also before identified as an inversion.

[2] In particular, nothing new can be derived from the separation of a single thing and this is is accordance with nondualistic metaphysics.

[3] from what Sabine Hossenfelder explains here about the nature of light in the context of the space-time continuum, and based on my previous assertions on the subject, we can conclude that light is not in motion, it is our conscience that is in motion instead, and light is the only direct perception we can have about the structure of the Universe. That is, light is the most real approximation we are able to perceive about the structure of the Universe. We are in motion relative to light, its not light that is in motion; light is stationary in the sense that it is part of the structure of the Universe, a time-invariant structure, in fact, a time-less structure (hence light itself is not in motion). Another implication is that while we aproach the speed of light, we are in absolute terms (from the PoV of the Universe) slowing down to zero.

There is only one way of being.

And that is to be.

Plus some random dude.

It is interesting to note that the interior of the wall of this nest is stuffed with a kind of feathers that is very soft, silky, and warm and this can only come from the parent birds’ own feathers. Its visible as that grey inner layer in the pictures.

If we accept that a system tends to assume any possible configuration, which is consistent with modern physics, then we can demonstrate by induction the origin of biological life.

In order to demonstrate it we would need only a single instance in which a set of stable conditions of a chemical system resulted in a locally irreversible change in its configuration (more precisely, an decrease in entropy), regardless of the amount of time those conditions persisted.
By mathematical induction, all possible states of a system up to organized life would have been demonstrated, since we verified the base case and we ourselves constitute the inductive hypothesis.

This means that the origin of life could be the easiest thing to demonstrate by experiment, given a sufficiently large time frame. However it tells us nothing about how life evolved.

This would also mean that life is not an agency per se, but the direct expression of the action of certain laws on certain configuration states, that is, it is not life that evolves but instead the conditions in which it exists that evolve. This is “isomorphic” to a non-dual metaphysical perspective.

Another way to put it, is that if we remove time from the equation things pop in and out of existence without explanation, the same way we cannot perceive by our senses (but only by the intellect) an explanation about phenomena that occur at sufficiently large time scales. In fact, in this situation the universe behaves at the macroscopic level in the same way as in the quantum level, since in both cases there is no time referencial, that is, no causality.

Feel the sweet academia vibe while we study together 😉

Feat. Haydn’s Sonata in E flat performed by Rob Wright

ps. Its a parody but its also an important result in modular arithmetic. Now get back to study. And don’t mind the shirt, its my favourite.