Supplemental Material

The idea that something as "obvious" as motion may not really occur, even in a cosmic sense, is so shocking and counterintuitive, any reasonable person is inclined to reject the idea outright. However, careful consideration of the nature of our existence, and reflection on the nature and meaning of time, coupled with experiments which show the "Geometric Universe" to be closer to observed reality than a model based on forces and motion, should make us reconsider our first "knee-jerk" reaction! Rob Boylan, who edited this site is a well trained scientist with an undergraduate degree in Physics. He expressed his feelings and Sam said:

Hi Rob: I picked up your question in the text last night...the one we talked about. I'm not in any way trying to convince you of anything....this site describes a model, but following are a few thoughts:

1. The Geometric universe sounds shocking and profoundly counterinruitive, but the concept on which it is founded is "old hat" in Physics; According to the laws of Physics I can just as correctly state that the universe is moving by my car, as that my car is moving through the universe. Mathematically, the laws of Physics can adequately describe the universe either way!

The really shocking thing we need to understand is that the Newtonian model of gravity, which describes gravity as a force, and us moving through the universe, has been experimentally shown to be incorrect! It cannot account for actual astronomical effects such as a 43 Seconds of arc precession of the orbit of Mercury per century, and many other observations as well. The "backwards" Geometric model, in which the observers frame of reference is fixed at the center of everything does account for that 43 Seconds of arc per century- and the other observations which deviate from the Newtonian model! Since our perception of movement through the universe has been shown to be wrong, we must infer that the reality we perceive- as "real" as it is, is in some way illusory and less than half the total of reality.

[Rob said]

I have struggled with this carbon atom example fot a couple hours, literally. My conclusion is that I don't believe your assertion that the carbon atom did not move.
[Sam said]

So far as the atom is concerned, the universe changed....it did not move....and every other frame of reference has the same reality...which in GR is found at each frame of reference. This creates what we can observationally confirm to be a geometric hypersphere.
[Rob said]

How are you defining a frame of referenece in7-d? What do you mean by motion or the lack thereof? What is a changing condition and how is it different from a movement?
[Sam said]

I sit at the Village Restaurant and eat dinner. I do not move one inch. I watch the "sunset", people come and go, food is placed before me, it gets dark, but I sit there. That's what I mean by changing conditions around a frame of reference. My "movement" is a measure of my (very considerable!...talk about "thowing ones weight around") ability to influence the universe, and in that measure is the miracle of life as a servo mechanism. When I drive a car or walk, I am still a fixed frame of reference, but (within certain well defined limits) I have the power to change the universe around me so as to protect the dynamic conditions which define my existence.

I was impressed with entropy flow on this side of the universe as a child...and equipped biologically by the universe to cope with it- and continue being alive. I step on the brakes or turn the wheel because I can "sense" impending chaos if I don't.
[Rob said]

I have no trouble believing that the frame of reference did not change. It is a fixed point in a coordinate system. But I don't understand how the carbon atom remains at this fixed point throughout the entirity of your example. Is time a coordinate dimension in 7-D?
[Sam said]

Time, energy and space in GR are in a periodic flow or momentum which creates changing conditions at each frame of reference. Frames of reference in the model are themselves geometrically independent of Time, Space and Energy-(eternal), but they are none the less influenced by the presence of these things and the nature of the latter (the photon). "Life" embodied in Photons and their compacted forms not only is influenced by, but itself influences the periodic momentum of T/S/E....individual, collective and cosmic "creation". Frames of reference are time-less, immovable (invariant) and eternal in GR. (This all relates to the true nature of the Photon, mass and gravity; (see paragraph starting "all frames"). Remember what I said about gravity being a kind of "ficticious" force, an acceleration?...of microscopic singularity "gathering" in space near "massive" objects....and at the big crunch rising into the macroscopic to envelop all frames of reference in an entire hemisphere of the 7-D model momentarily?)

Check the recent work I refer to in the appendix of this site on the geometric universe where it has been recently shown that the precession of Mercury's orbit around the sun (off by 43 Arc Seconds per century in the Newtonian model, but perfectly accounted for in GR) can be equally well explained if the sun orbits Mercury!....This finding strongly implies a geometric universe.

All frames of reference in the GR model are Photon based, and therefore in some topological way share the characteristics of the energy of which they consist. RN Kiehn is going about this problem very aggressively with work on set theory in topology. Essentially, since a photon does not experience time, and we are made of Photons, neither in cosmic reality, do we. Since a photon from its frame of reference is everywhere and immovable, so are we- and the Carbon atom. Time, space, movement, all these things which seem so real to us are not only conceptually inadequate but confuse us when we try to use them to describe the eternal cosmic condition- but they are important at our frame of reference.
  Appendix A  

 

© 2000 Samuel Cox