[N0B0DY]

Not sure which one of us would be guilty of copyright violation, Michael, but there's nothing I would disagree with in your above assessment.

What I'm after now is the reason behind the illusory motion that is observed. We can't just pull things out of a magic hat, but must logically extend observable laws to the absolute point where those laws cease along with all logical concepts.

I try to follow scientific, both theoretical and empirical, implications in order to fit them together, and as it stands the "commonless center" that would essentially be required to be in continuous motion doesn't work in my mind.

If there is a common center, then many of the proposals would work without a problem with regards to motion, but in that case there arises an exterior spatial problem. So eradicating both spatial and temporal problems is a tough task that I thought RP might be able to solve in a literal fashion so we can make things real.

What he offers is still lingering, and I'm not sure if it would work or not. His references to the Golden Ratio got me thinking, but then got me thinking of numerology, astrology, the reason that .999... equals 1, etc.. For me, there is a difference between what is defined as finite, what is undefined as infinite, and absolute "one" and "none."

If we consider the Fibonacci sequence: 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55... you'll notice that 0 + 0 does not equal 1. If we use 0, unlike any other number, carrying throughout: 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0... you'll notice that 0 + 0 equals 0. This is the absolute carriage I was referring to, as opposed to Zeno's concept of motionlessness which is based on infinity instead of absolute carriage.

Similarly, 0/0 can represent both the above absolutes, "1" and "0," and also any fraction in between (representative of infinity) because 0 multiplied by any number equals 0; and any number divided by itself equals 1. No other equation works, and it creates a problem for thinking in terms of a literal absolute.