[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by N0B0DY;37927I won't say you contradict yourself, but you are being inconsistent with what I remember you stating about the FS which you state again here: "...[I though I do think the void is FS in random linear motion[/i]..." You just seem to not want to believe it, so you proclaim both geometrical spacetime as separate from natural laws and FS as representative of spacetime.

There are no inconsistencies in the above, Nobody. We can not, with knowledge, express the space before first star with geometry, yet we can know through decay mechanics math that just such a FS field exists, without rules/laws, before quantumization, by realizing quantum decay, through total finite universal decay, into its FS. This would be the same background-independence Einstein's deeper theories allude to...

Originally Posted by Nobody With your random linear motion as synonymous to expandable and contractible spacetime, allowing your aerodynamics and thermodynamics to function.

Got a better idea, for space/void before finiteness/quantumization...? The missing laws of physics allow it to be an open game/model...

Originally Posted by Nobody Again, although I see what you're driving at and agree with you for the most part about your contractive quantization method, Einstein stuck by his illusory remarks for a reason. As above, spacetime - past, present, future - are illusory pre-requisites to the conditions and laws you claim are separately real.

No Einstein illusions Nobody, just the facts. Deep relativity is an independent measure system of the real universe's motions of real substance. Einstein fully realized, at that time, humankind did not possess the knowledge, or a-priori logic systems, to see further back, to the total vision of what background-independence truly means. We now possess those abilities, which I have mentioned too many times to repeat...

Originally Posted by Nobody So what type of field model did Einstein advocate?

Time changes the geometry, which also fundamentally interprets into, distance of motion changes space geometry. It's just no-one is realizing the drastic change of space geometry, at the universal event state... Try, and you'll see what I mean...

Originally Posted by Nobody If we take Einstein's words for what they say, and not discard them as him claiming certain things when having a peculiarly bad day, the necessary modes by which we think are the necessary modes by which the conditional fields are built upon.

There's nothing wrong with Einstein's ideas, it's just our wrong interpretations of them. Most all scientists/physicists make the mistake of adding a false space-geometry background, that Einstein never used, i.e., the std. models' ridiculousnesses...

Originally Posted by Nobody I'm more newtonian than einsteinian and smolinian, but it is very easy to incorporate the new-visionary models by quantifying absolute space without altering the absolute state - like a simple white piece of paper contains every possible picture imaginable - all that is required is differentiating the wavelengths, which also explains red-/blue-shifting.

This is fine, as far as it goes, but it doesn't include the massive change of space geometry, at the universal event state, from our background-dependent ideas, to the universe's background-independent reality, before the universal event...

Originally Posted by Nobody It is subconsciousness that quantizes motion, creating our infinite light spectrum. Of which our finite consciousness is limited to the finite visible portion of that spectrum.

Subconsciousness quantizes no motion, unless you choose to be that limited in your theoretical visions. Open your eyes to the larger reality, of two space geometries, and you'll quickly see the forest, for the trees... Again, over and over, the finite visible portion of the spectrum___CAN BE A-PRIORI LOGICALLY, EMPIRICALLY & MATHEMATICALLY EXTENDED, WITH DECAY MECHANICS, INTO ITS TRUE BACKGROUND-INDEPENDENCE FIELD, OF RANDOM LINEAR FS MOTIONS...

The background-independence rules,
Lloyd