[N0B0DY]

Lloyd,

I've done a few low-temperature experiments and a few high-energy experiments, like the one in message 1, and you seem to gloss over my statements that agree with your position to a localized point. Perhaps, judging by your statement: "good thinking," you just want me to agree with everything you say.

The one-degree of freedom is pulled straight out of a magic hat, Lloyd. I'm not kidding. Empirical and theoretical science can only take us so far, where we then have to use philosophy to extend evidence to render logical conclusions so that science can remain as self-corrective as it is. So your continuous proclamations of absolute reality being a result of the logical freedom of infinity to produce finiteness has no affect on me.

If you can explain in detail exactly how your mechanics can localize a universal center within an infinite model, I'm all ears. Otherwise, you're just wasting your time because I know what you mean by contraction, it's not like you're explaining a complex concept in Chinese, and the in-wave mechanics don't work. There can be no in waves first because there can be no first to the absolute. Perhaps when you get your philosophy straight, you will see that I have my physics straight, Lloyd. There is an infinite difference between the infinite and the absolute.

Infinity pertains to space and eternity pertains to time, and both require localized motion to be measured; the absolute is motionless because it is non-local and as a result all points become the same point, or more accurately all points are the same point. And since that absolute point doesn't and can't ever exist, spacetime and localized concentrations of mass/energy must remain illusory abstractions.

Perhaps you might consider studying the zeroth law, zero-point energy, and zero rest mass more thoroughly to grasp the context of this thread, Lloyd.