[humanbydefault]

DAVE WAS RIGHT! All that they claim blamed as a result of alleged changes in the topography of an assumed existence of something called "SPACE-TIME" was a misundrestanding from the very beginnings, but I think that there is more we can say about this particular issue and discuss it among those here interested in the subject at hand:

WHY was space "married" with time in Einstein's mind back on 1905?

I have dealt with this issue for a long time trying to find an empirical explanation... a good reason why he decided to link a physical and real "entity" of our universe with a "relative-virtual and human-made" one [time]. I know that put it this way it may sound a little weird but I'll fix this up in a moment:

How many of you here have dedicated time to analyze what time actually is? I've reached the conclusion that we have [fortunately or not?] given to what we see as time in our equation a highly especialized and universal meaning.
Think about this! Time is defined by the increasing magnitude of a human-made "measuring unit" classified in decimals and multiples of one second. "A millisecond lapse..." "In a millionth of a second time..." "A biilion years process..." Even a billion year could be expressed in seconds with a lot of zeros or exponetials couldn't it be? right!

So... Tell me if you know of any country or group of scientists that have a different unit for measuring time. I tell you what, there isn't one!
However spatial dimensions enjoy a wide range of units... all different and sometimes with not an exact proportionality to say the least!
Inches, meters and nautical miles... etc. Humans have been too careful in dealing with time and that maybe to blame in our unconcious inconsistence about its internal structure.

I wanted to begin with what's coming next no before having this small clarifying observation rigth. I think now we could continue with the analysis of the "arranged marriage" between both in a second.

It's true that to describe an event in 3D space we needed a 4th coordinate with the info about when the given event took place in the past, present or will take place in the future.

The problem with this issue is that we don't have and never will have [for that matter] a perfect prediction of how the eather will bee in a particular future tense. Assuming I am right in describing the eather as the actual density energy-mass in a 3D region of space [be that the atom's core, the chain of a protein molecule or the solar system...] the status of that density depends on many factors among them the process taking place inside the sun and the actual position of the planets spinning around the system,etc.

The past is much easier since that has already happened, but we are missing a lot of knowlege with respect to the eather and its nature still.

The E.P.R. experiment [Einstein's last attempts to prove quantum mechanics incomplete] brought up an important question linked to this conversation of ours:

"Is physics local or non-local?" If I want to be honest with you in this question I had to admit that physics is both "local" and "non-local" depending the scale of the analysis.
The locality of the physics world as I have mentioned in the first posting depends and it is conditioned by the boundaries of the given scale where the event is taking place.

Let's assume that we are going to analyze the decay in heavy atoms, just to make an example. If we were to find an explanation why heavier atoms decay, then we have to include [no doubts about it] the status of the entire universe and the rate of evolution of it and its local or regional influence in the especific atoms we are observing. However if we were to explain the actual process occuring inside the atom when decay occurred we had to consider the internal process as a "local one." Why a local one? because we are observing something that occurs in a local eather>>>> inside the harmonics and/or standing waves produced in the very core of the atom. If we start considering each scale and therefore each level of the atomic structure as a different eather with its own equations it will be a trully and complete science.

It's weird that I chose to title this thread as "space-time" and I'm here talking about the internal structure of atoms... but believe me when I say that there has to be a comprehensive and holistic view about the whole issue before we could start talking about a theory achieving the explanation of everything.

I don't really have much time today to continue with this amazing discussion but I'll get back to you with more as soon as I can.

Allow me to finish these ideas with some interesting puzzles:

If we assumed the eather to be LOCAL in nature and structured in scales from the very small to the very big across the universe.... could "c" [the speed of light] be physically faster than 300,000 km/sec. >>> here the seconds again!<<< in those internal regions of matter?

In other words.... If we assume that the eather is "connected" with the answer to why the speed of light is a constant [in our macroworld of course...] why a different and local eather (one we have no access to with our instruments) very deep inside matter, wouldn't be "capable" of accelerating any scattering taking place during decay or after particle collisions inside "atom smashers?"

What's the status of the eather during the E.P.R. experiment? Is it responsible for allowing what we have called "entaglement?"

As you see, my friends, there is a lot we must discuss here and I intend to in my next meeting.

regards to all!

HUMANBYDEFAULT