[Fredrick]

I am, too, Aaron, and I agree with all you are writing. I have no problem with using 3D, not only because everyone else does it, but also because it is the shortest way to pragmatically deliver a position. But you correctly show the crux of the matter when using 3D: there is no super framework to place every possible coordinate in an overall related position. Possibly, our universe could turn out to have features that makes coordination possible, such as our earth spinning, creating a North-, a South pole and an equator in the process that make for a coordination system. Naturally, the location of the zero-meridian (Greenwich) is arbitrarily chosen, not on grounds as found with the enlightenment, but on who had the most power at the time the convention took place.

Important to understand how and why I am communicating here on this three thread on the TOEquest site, is that I want to deliver the/my toe, and my words are all about the toe. I want to communicate about the basics, and your remark that 3D misses a super structure indicates vital information. 3D is not a delivery that is in concordance with our quest to find the toe, because 3D is ultimately static (even when placing time as 4th D in the picture); the toe must — at heart — also incorporate the non-static aspect of our universe if it is to be used for describing the toe. 3D cannot be used because of the mentioned flaw.

The two fields I used in my reply to Dipayankar contain both the static and the non-static aspects, and the basics of our universe are brought back to the smallest amount of possible parts. Both fields are indeed static, yet the overall picture is not static because both fields also contain the non-static spin (either of B or of C). Again, just one field is fake/art, but two fields together are our reality in a nut shell. I do not know if you noticed it, but there are some nice QM qualities to this picture.