[N0B0DY]

Pat,

It could only be an apparent insight because you'll notice that RP refers us to an apparent static field, whereas I refer us to an apparent expansion. It is the gist of our argument, but I can lean to his side based on how I interpret his explanations on gravity; there would be an exponential increase between the variable densities of the macro/micro systems while the densities can never be permitted to change, otherwise the observable stuff would disappear from under our noses.

What I don't agree with is the reference to a priori spacetime and uniformly distrubuted "matter" existing just because it is observed, so I focus on the relative process that essentially creates an infinite number of isotopes or atomic configurations with the condition that only a finite number of relational spacetime configurations are observable. There can be no literal expansion of a finite universe because existent space can't expand into a non-existent void; and in an infinite universe, space can't expand into itself in any direction because it would expand in every direction, the effects of which would exactly counter any possible expansion/motion.

So the only way I see us having our localized spacetimes is if we arbitrarily extract our timeframes from the absolute frame. We then go from zero intervals, to one-second intervals, to two-second intervals, etc., and space is created proportional to these intervals. The same would apply regardless of the length/size of the intervals also, whether they be reduced to planck units or infinitely less.