The_Right_Stuff

:shrug: A complete explanation of Special Relativity does not seem complicated if it is properly understood ! If on the other hand one chooses to use mathematics to reach conclusions, then the math itself takes the place of thought processes and thus prevents complete understandings.:eek: Thus the understanding of the structure of reality should be achieved first. Converting this understanding into equations becomes a step two verification process.:doh: The funny thing is that many people feel that " Special Relativity " is complete and thus whish to go no further to find the cause of Special Relativity. :hyper: They are happy with saying that " It just is ", and then proceed to bust their butt to shoot down any complete explanation, and do so by any and all means if necessary. If their is such a thing as a God, then just think about what this means. God supports truths, Satan wants to bury truths. If you have complete understandings, then you see the truth. If you whish to bury(shoot down) any exposure of truths, then who's side would you be on ! But most people would not take this statement seriously since seriousness brings one close to truth. Thus they would say that this is another subject altogether. As usual they carry on keeping their eyes on one specific subject at a time such that a complete understanding is never achieved. But anyhow, many many years ago, prior to having completed grade 10, I figured out the basics of the structure of reality, and then I proceeded to convert these understandings into equations. Years later I found out the my equations were identical to those known as ... 1) Lorentz Fitzgerald Contraction Equation. 2) Time Dilation Equation. 3) Lorentz Transformation Equations. 4) Velocity Addition equation. .... and then I was shocked to find out that an explanation that produces the equations listed above, is immediately rejected by all with the exception of one person so far. It was kind of weird. I was speaking to a fellow who lived in my old apartment building. We got into talking about physics, and as I explained my understandings step by step, he would say " Yes ", " Correct ", " That's right ", etc., and so I stopped and said that I was surprised to be able to talk to someone who could understand what the heck I was saying. It turned out that this guy was a physicist.

I have said no such thing. I am saying that there is a foundation which is responsible for the creation of what is called Special Relativity. Thus the structure of reality itself must be observed, and not just what occurs due to the form of such a structure. Based on the description of constant motion of all objects present within the open 4 dimensional Time-Space environment, and the rotation of objects within Time-Space, which occurs as one changes ones direction of travel within that Time-Space environment, measurement instruments, clocks, rulers, etc, will all be effected in such a manner that any measurement of light will always give the same results no matter what velocity ones measurement platform has across Space. As the result of this, there is no way in which we can determine if one is at rest in space or not. Hence we are left with nothing but Relative comparisons between different so called frames of reference. But the fact that our measurement instruments change accordingly, thus giving us the same measurement of the speed of light no matter what our velocity is relative to another body, nor relative to light light itself, this reveals our own constant motion, and that the magnitude of this constant motion within Time-Space, is equal to the magnitude of motion of a photon's motion across Space. Further descriptions are available at. CONSTANT MOTION

Talking about the " eye of Ra ", here is a video that is a mix of physics and religion. Although, this " PART ( 4 ) " is mostly about the simplest derivation of the Lorentz Fitzgerald Contraction Equation, the Time Dilation Equation, and the Lorentz Transformation Equations. YouTube - TRUTH OVER BELIEF - PART ( 4 ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Nn12EsAMFA ( Ignore the first 48 seconds )

Actually, my ideas are complete.

Nothing at all is moving faster than light. There are two kinds of events. One is a real time event, and the other is a Holistic event. Space-Time exists. It is complete, it is real. Objects move within it. When an event occurs it can be an event which was governed in real time, or from the across time holistic point of view. Imagine that there were particles that had a spin property, and that these particles moved across space. The actual path that theses particles leave behind as they move across space, is a corkscrew like shape. Now if these spinning particles were to interfere with each other in real time, then they will just interfere with each other as particles that were in specific places in Space at certain points in Time. However, if these individual events were NOT monitored individually, then this would allow a huge Holistic event to occur instead. From the Holistic across time point of view, the entire corkscrew shaped path of the spinning particles would be seen all at once, thus in this kind of event a complete corkscrew shaped path interferes with another complete corkscrew shaped path. The end result gives the impression of a kind of wave behavior, rather than a particle like behavior. Now since a holistic event could extend across any time period at all, then it can give the impression that information is being transmitted faster than the speed of light, when in actually fact particles involved within the holistic event were moving across space and so the holistic event not only extends across time, but across space as well.

Well so far I have been insulted, called a raving lunatic, and idiot, an delusional nut case etc. at Discussions - sci.physics.relativity | Google Groups , and they said that my theory was just a load of " utter crap " . Another forum banned me from that forum because they said that my theory did not relate to the standard Special Relativity Theory, and thus they said I had no right to even speak of it. And so I can not answer your question because honestly I think they are out to lunch.

From what I understand, this magnitude of motion, known as the speed of light, is the only magnitude of motion of which all matter moves. If an object is at rest in space, then this magnitude of motion is now directed across the dimension of Time only. See CONSTANT MOTION to have a look at my point of view.

The link between genius and madness. The link is that the average Joe Blow can't tell the difference between one and the other. Here, prove that this guy is crazy and pick up the cash... THE MARKS OF GOD, JESUS, AND CHRIST, AND THE MARK OF THE BEAST. ... or prove that the average Joe Blow is crazy.

I my case, due not having any education in physics, I was a bit puzzled about Motion. I used to sit back and think about Motion, and did so until the questions that popped up were answered. See --> CONSTANT MOTION The idea of constant motion came into my picture. I analyzed it, converted that which I understood into geometric form, and then used this to convert my ideas into equations. Years later, I found out that my equations were identical to those known as the Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction equation, Time Dilation equation, the Lorentz Transformation equations, and the Velocity Addition equation. So far, everyone has said that my CONSTANT MOTION theory is .........

My papers describe the basic analysis of motion. The outcome produces a simple understanding of the structure of the mechanics of reality, and it also produces the equations known as the Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction equation, the Time dilation equation, the Lorentz Transformation equations, and the Velocity Addition equation. With this being the case, it is highly unlikely that such a theory is in error. See http://www.outersecrets.com/real/work_pdf_text.pdf

I have been writing a page or two to try and get my point across. It is still a W.I.P. , but most of it is done. If you get the time, tell me what you think of it. http://www.outersecrets.com/real/work_pdf_text.pdf It starts out looking at motion, and analyse it step by step while assuming that motion is a universal constant. By this I am saying that all matter is in motion constantly, and does so with the same degree of motion as a Photon has across space.

Some of you have missed the point. If someone does not have the skills that can be acquired to fly a plane, yet does so anyway, this simply means that what IS available is not being taken advantage of. However, the complete understanding of reality is not yet available in today's universities. If the present understanding was a correct understanding, then this would produce an immediate domino effect that quickly leads to the complete understanding. However, if an error is present, then a barrier prevents the domino effect from occurring, and instead the path to complete understanding is lost in darkness. Therefore if one attends university and loads the mind with the information that leads one down the road of darkness if one persues complete understanding, then a fresh perspective from outside of university mind programming, is perhaps useful after all. Just because many believed that engines run by forcing a piston downward and that's that, it did not mean that someone else could not think of a Wankel engine design. There is no need in sticking to just one frame of mind. In fact I came up with a design that makes engines more efficient. The same principle can also be applied to a bicycle. When applied to a bike, when the left peddle is down at the bottom position, the right peddle is already rotated ahead of the top position by 30 degrees. The same applies to the left peddle when the right peddle is positioned at the bottom. Under normal conditions, if one peddle is at the bottom position, then the other peddle is located at the very top position, and this can lead to a stall condition. If the bike has stopped, you can apply plenty of downward force to the peddle that is in the top position, but still will not get you out of the stall condition. However, if the top peddle is always rotated ahead by 30 degrees when the other peddle is located at the bottom position, then this stall point is bypassed along with a 30 degree area on inefficiency that also has been bypassed. If only I had cash to put the design to use. Oh well.

It is agreed by many that today there is no room for another Einstein in today's universities. Today's universities are focused upon pumping knowledge into minds. Einstein was more interested in understanding than in knowing, and so he tended to sit back and observe rather than accept into his mind tiny chunks of data known as units of knowledge. As the result of such behavior, some of his teachers stated that Einstein was a " Slow learner ", a " backward child ", etc.. I was amused to see a university testing some Joe blow to see if he would qualify to enter that university, and basically all the tests he was put through were speed related. In other words, the focus was upon fast reactions rather than looking for someone who could think something through thoroughly as Einstein would do and did do. And so, some of those amateurs of today, are in actual fact the Einstein's of today which are NOT allowed to enter the universities of today, hence are not recognized for who they truly are. Computers can store vast amounts of knowledge, but show me a computer that can understand. Do you understand what I am saying, or does it not compute ?:)

When growing up, one sees time as something that goes on around you, meaning a single time that ticks. Therefore it seems impossible for time to be both ticking and not ticking at the same time. If this did not occur to you at some time in your life, it simply means that you have accepted that it can happen, yet did so without the need to know of the reason behind it, meaning the cause. Most people these days put up an enormous fight to reject the cause of an effect, but a the same time defend the truthfulness of the effect, thus insist upon the acceptance of half a truth. And so, one person might say something like " How is this a paradox? It is happening all the time! photons experience no time at all but still manage to traverse the entire universe un-paradoxically.." , but have had no personal interest as to why such a thing may occur, that is suffice enough to push ones self to figure out the cause by oneself. It becomes nothing but a " I know this " and " I know that " rather than achieving understanding. The first skill acquired by man was to collect knowledge. The second skill to evolve was the skill to understand that knowledge. Many people are still quite happy staying in the simple world of knowledge, rather than working hard and moving into the more advanced world of understanding. Now concerning Photons, they actually move across Time with the same degree of motion as they have while moving across Space. Maybe some day you too will figure out why that is.

Funny you should say that. I have presented my view of the construct of reality and how such a view is in complete agreement with all tests and experiments that have been performed up to this date, and all I get in response is all cases is responses like... That is kind of amusing since it was said that I had swallowed some idea. In truth, I have no background in Physics at all, and my parents had pulled me out of school prior to me having entered grade 11 due to my way of thinking not being common enough such that I would fit in with a majority. Instead, my understanding of the structure of reality was achieved by spending plenty of time lying down in the horizontal position wondering how motion, and variable magnitudes of motion, were possible when it was obvious that both were ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE. It boggled my mind as to why no one else that I could see, had managed to notice that motion was absolutely impossible. I eventually realized what was possible, studied the idea with the help of performing a simple geometric analysis, and then used this geometry to create equations from such a structure to see if my understanding related to that of any others, since math seemed to be popular in the world of physics. I was tickled pink to find out that my equations were identical to those known as Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction equation, the Time-Dilation equation, the Lorentz Transformation equations, and the Velocity Addition equation. I was even more impressed when I started reading about Albert Einstein and found out the reasoning as to why there were no equations known as the - Einstein Contraction equation, the Einstein Time-Dilation equation, the Einstein Transformation equations, and the Einstein Velocity Addition equation, despite Einstein's popularity. In short, he had a little help. In my case however, the only help I had was having heard of the statement that light was the fastest speed of all, and so all of my achievements were done without any other information being known of, and all done while on my own lying down on my bed with a smile on my face wondering how and object can go on forever in no time a all. I was thinking about how motion contained two variables, Speed and Distance. Variables range from zero to infinity, or in this case of course the variables range from greater than zero to infinity, since zero itself would obviously mean no motion at all. Now if we were to set both of these Variables to the point of infinity, the outcome would be as follows. 1) Traveling across an infinite distance --> To continue to travel without end. 2) Traveling at an infinite speed --> To travel across any distance without the passage of any time. Note: If it takes time to get from point "A" to point "B", this means that you can still move faster and use less time to get from point "A" to point "B", therefore you are still traveling at a finite speed, not at an infinite speed. Only if no time at all occurs while moving across any distance, is the speed actually an infinite speed. This combination of infinities produces a paradox because, 1) + 2) = To continue to travel without end, and all done without the passage of any time at all. Or a more amusing version..... TO GO ON FOREVER, IN NO TIME AT ALL ! That statement went over and over in my mind until I eventually realized that I was quite correct in saying that variable motion is absolutely impossible, but that instead it could only occur in a relativistic sense. In other words, I understood the basic mechanics of reality and that variables only existed if you were limited to being exposed less than the completeness of such a construct of reality. For instance, if you hold a pencil horizontally in front of you, you can look at its complete length. However, if you rotate that pencil, the appearance changes, but you at the same time are aware that the pencil is simply being rotated and that nothing about the properties of that pencil have changed. On the other hand, if the axis of space that extends in front of you and behind you, was a dimension that you do not have direct access to and were therefore unaware of, then instead it would appear as though the pencil was magically shrinking in length as one begins to apply certain forces to it. In this case a variable would have been introduced as the result of the subtraction of the awareness of one dimension. By applying certain forces, the length of the pencil could be changed, or so the case seems to be to the observer, even though the length of the pencil has not changed at all. Subtract the view of one dimension of the complete structure and all of its dimensions, and variables are then born. These are therefore Relativistic Variables though, and are NOT Absolute Variables ! And the beat goes on......

If one is at rest in Space, then one is at rest with respect to the dimensions of Space itself. If one is at rest in Time, then one is at rest with respect to the dimension of Time. Space-Time is an open area that one moves across. A different Time, is simply a different location within that Space-Time. With all objects constantly on the move within Space-Time, and doing so with a magnitude of motion that is equivalent to the spatial motion of light, all objects are constantly moving away from their previous positions, and after any given time period, all objects are at an equal distance from their previous position. Some may have moved mostly across Time, other mostly across Space, and others a mix of the two, but all have moved an equal distance across the open multi-dimensional area known as Space-Time. Because of this, even though one man's clock may tick slower than another's, and hence one man ages slower than another, the two men are not separated from each. The two men may eventually once again stand side by side even though one may think that one man should be separated from us because he has fallen back in time by not being able to keep up with the rest of us as we move quickly across time. No. Because everything is in constant motion, and it being an equal degree of motion, everything stays together as a group. That is what the " Present " truly means. And so, if you were able to step back-over to the position of which all objects were located a moment ago, you would find nothing at all, for all matter has been relocated, and is always being relocated due to all matter being constantly on the move within Space-Time. A simple understanding of a geometric structure that produces the equations that are identical to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction equation, the Time Dilation equation, the Lorentz Transformation equations, and the Velocity addition equation, and correctly predicts all that has been tested to be true to this date, would also seem to merit a credit or two, would it not ? Where is the logic in rejecting something that is in complete agreement all events that are known to have occurred within reality up to this date ?

Views often disagree with facts.

I disagree. If one assumes that all objects in Space-Time are constantly in motion, and that the magnitude of that constant motion is the same as the speed light has across space, then all the pieces fall together. If this is the case, then all that can be done to any object present within Space-Time, is change the direction of its constant motion across that open Space-Time. If an object is at rest in Space, then its entire motion is across Time. If its entire motion is directed across Space, then it is at rest in Time. If an object is at rest in space, the object extends across Space only. However, if you change the direction in Space-Time in which the object is traveling, then the object is also being rotated in Space-Time which also means that the object begins to extend across the dimension of Time, and now extends less across the dimension of Space. If one performs a geometric analysis of such a four dimensional structure of Space-Time, along with all matter being constantly on the move within it, it produces equations that are identical to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction equation, the Time Dilation equation, the Lorentz Transformation equations, and the Velocity addition equation. . . .TIME . . ..( L ) ._____ ... . .^. .. .. . . .|. . .. . .. .. . . .|. . .. . . . .. .. . . .|. . . . . . . . .. .. . . .|. . . . .. . . . . .. .. . . .|. . . . . . . . . . . .. .( L' ) .. . . .|.. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .|.. . . . . . . . . . ... .. .. . . .|.. . . . . . . . . . .... .. .. . . .|==========>----> . .SPACE . . . . . . . . .( v ) In the vector diagram above, if the object, say a train, is at rest in Space, then its entire length ( L ) extends across Space, and its entire constant movement is across Time ( t ). If the objects direction of travel is altered such that it now has the velocity ( v ) across Space, the object now partially extends across Time and extends less across space than previously such that its new spatial length becomes ( L' ). It is also to be noted that the back end of the Train is ahead in Time, and the front end is behind in Time. If this Train was 75,000 km long when at rest in space, then it were in motion across space at 260,000 km per second, based on the above geometry, it would then be reduced to 1/2 of its previous spatial length. Also, at this spatial velocity, the Train would extend across the dimension of time by a total of approx. 0.2165 of a second, and any clocks onboard the Train would now also be ticking at half speed ( t' ). A clock positioned at the back end of the Train would be ahead of a clock positioned at the front end of the Train by that 0.2165 of a second. If we were to send light from the back end of the Train to the front, it would take approx. 0.933 of a second for the light to complete the trip due to the velocity of the light relative to the Train being ( c - v = 300,000 - 260,000 = 40,000 km per sec. ), and the Train spatial length having reduced to from 75,000 km ( L ) to 37,500 km ( L' ). If the light were sent in the opposite direction, it would take approx. 0.066 of a second for the light to complete the trip due to the velocity of the light relative to the Train being ( c + v = 300,000 + 260,000 = 560,000 km per sec. ) in combination with the Trains new length ( L' ). Now as previously stated, the clocks onboard the Train are ticking at half speed, and so, the 0.933 sec. time period will be measured as a 0.4665 sec. time period, and the 0.066 sec. time period will be measured as a 0.033 sec. time period. Now since the clock at the rear of the Train is ahead by 0.2165 sec., this also means that the clock at the front of the Train is behind the clock at the rear end of the Train by 0.2165 of a second. And so, if the light at the rear end of the Train lit up at 0:00, and the clocks were previously synchronized when the train was at rest on the tracks, then at that same moment the clock at the front of the Train will read -0:00.2165 . Therefore if the 0.4665 time period of the light moving from the rear end of the Train to the front is measured at the front end of the Train, then the outcome would be ( 0.4665 sec. + (-0.2165 sec.) = 0.25 sec. ), which equals a 0:00.25 clock reading. If the light was sent in the opposite direction, and the light at the front end of the Train lit up at 0:00, then at that same moment the clock at the rear of the Train will read +0:00.2165 . Therefore if the 0.033 sec. time period time period of the light moving from the front end of the Train to the rear is measured at the rear of the Train, then the outcome would be ( 0.033 sec. + 0.2165 sec. = 0.25 sec. ), which equals a 0:00.25 clock reading. And so in both cases it appears to those onboard the train as though light has traveled from one end of the train to the other in either direction in 0.25 of a second, meaning at the expected speed of light. ( 75,000 km / 0.25 sec. = 300,000 km per sec.). Meanwhile, the speed of light relative to space, is always c. Thinking four dimensionally, one realizes that the axis of a spinning object begins to extend across both Space and Time as the result of the objects change in the direction of it's constant motion across Space-Time, and that this will reduce the objects spatial angular velocity due to part of the complete rotation now being across the dimension of time as well, and therefore less across space. And so if that spinning object throws off a Photon, then because of the axis is no longer only a spatial axis but extending across Time and less across space, the Photon will be thrown at a slower speed across Space, and at a speed that is slower by the equal amount of the object's new measure of motion across space. The release speed of the photon becomes ( c - v ) rather than c. The final spatial speed of the Photon then becomes (( c - v ) + v ) with v being the spatial velocity of the object that had released the photon. In the opposite direction, the opposite occurs. It becomes (( c + v ) - v )). The outcome, relative to space, is the the speed of light always turns out to be ( c ). And there you have it ! Due to the geometry being what it is, there is no true way to determine whether or not you are at rest in space, and with this geometry and its effects upon measurements of space and time, you can also keep adding one velocity upon another, and all seems fine, but in actual fact your total velocity is still less than ( c ). Gee, that sounds familiar !

Personally , I don't think that there is such a thing as Time Dilation. The description " Time Dilation " is perhaps a backward way of looking at the actual situation. It is very tricky to disclose the actual circumstances, because these are perceived as the " YOUR THEORIES ". There is only one " TRUE " fact, therefore not theory, that explains all, but it in the minds of the many it is just another one of those theories that fits into the " YOUR THEORY " category, which is why as an unfortunate consequence, " THE TRUTH " is presently banned on almost all physics forums. Therefore we must speak of truth in a hypothetical nature. Imagine a theory that is extremely simple. The theory starts by examining reality from scratch and progresses in steps that can be no smaller, such that nothing is missed due to nothing having been stepped over. Lets say that this eventually makes it clear that all objects in this reality are constantly in motion within the reality itself. If that constant motion was across Space only, then it would be recognized as being the speed of light. If the constant motion was not across Space, then it would be across the dimension of Time instead, and this would be the maximum possible speed of motion across Time. In other words what we have is non stop motion of all objects that exist within Space-Time. Just like one can envision the open dimensions of Space, hence open space to move across, one also must envision the openness of time and thus perceive the openness of Space-Time itself of which all objects are constantly in motion across while within. A simple geometric analysis of this hypothetical structure of reality, produces equations that are identical to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction equation, the equation that predicts the degree of slowing down of the rate of the ticking of time (Time Dilation equation), the Lorentz Transformation equations, and the Velocity Addition equation. Based on this hypothetical idea, the dimension of time never changes. It simply exists, just as space exists. However, since all objects are constantly on the move, how fast time ticks for an object simply depends on what percentage of its constant motion is across the dimension of Time only, hence what direction the object is traveling in while within the openness of Space-Time. If you have a train for instance, and it is at rest in space, then it extends across space and its entire motion is a cross time. Now think of that Train and its endless possible directions of travel across the four dimensions of Space-Time. If we now change its direction of travel in Space-Time, then not only does it begin to move across Space and have less movement across Time, but the entire Train is partially rotated and the Train itself now extends across a certain distance of Time rather than just extending across Space. But most importantly, we begin to understand how clocks that are positioned at opposite ends of the train are no longer truly synchronized due to the Train now extending across the dimension of Time, and that if using the Train itself as a measuring instrument to measure the speed of light, these time offsets, in combination with that fact that both clocks are ticking at a slower rate, and the fact that the spatial length of the train has reduced, the end result always gives the impression that the speed of the light measured is always 300,000 km per second despite the fact that the relative speed between the light and the Train is not actually 300,000 km per second at all. However, to those onboard the Train, the change of spatial length of the Train is completely unknown of, and so its original spatial length is taken into account when the train is used as a measurement instrument. This means that an actual variable, is perceived to be a constant, and in the long run another variable, being the relative velocity of light relative to a moving body, is perceived to be a constant even though it is not. But for all of this to take place, light must be a constant relative to space, meaning that the velocity of light relative to space must always be 300,000 km per second. Now if we continue to hypothetically think four dimensionally, and we picture ourselves throwing a ball as we are at rest in space, we see the ball moving across space at a particular speed. If however, we have been rotated in Space-Time, and we proceed to throw another ball, then it would move at a lesser speed across space in comparison the previous time, and the remainder of that application of force will result in the ball moving across time instead. This also applies to Photons. If a spinning body that is at rest in space throws off a photon, the photon will move across space at the c velocity. If however, the axis of the spinning body was rotated across time rather than it having simply a spatial axis, then if it throws off another photon, that photon will not have the same degree of spatial velocity but will have a lessor degree of spatial velocity, and a greater degree of time velocity. But meanwhile, the spinning object that has rotated, and hos thrown off that photon, already was in motion across space, and that spatial velocity is equal to the degree of motion across space of which the photon had lost. The end result is (( c - v ) + v = c ). Therefore, no matter what speed an object moves across space, if it releases a photon, that photon will still move across space at the c velocity. And so, hypothetically speaking, it appears that " Time Dilation " may be not be the proper description of the event, but it may be similar to how man used to think of the direction of current in an electrical wire, which was caused by passing the wire through a magnetic field, was going in the opposite direction than it actually was and still is.

TODAY'S certainties become tomorrow's rejections. People are constantly certain that what is believed to be correct today is to be correct for ever, even though time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time history has proven this to be wrong, an so TODAY'S certainties become tomorrows rejections. To understand what schizophrenia actually is, simply understand everything that surrounds it. That way you can achieve a correct degree of certainty because your understanding of what schizophrenia actually is, becomes supported from all possible directions that surround it. If you are unaware of all that surrounds it, then you have an open loop condition. This is somewhat like not being able to ever see the completeness of a ball, no matter what methods you attempt to use to do so. If this were the case, then in our minds a ball would never be a ball, since we would never see the completeness of a so called ball. Or, one could be a so called jackass, and say that one knows what this mysterious thing is that you have now classified as a " BALL ", even though you can not see it for what it truly is. This is basically what has occurred concerning that which is classified as " Schizophrenia ". People say that they know what it is. Knowing what it is, means that one can see or know of its completeness. If one knows of its completeness, then one can see what it is attached to. That which it is attached to, is that which supports it and makes it occur in the first place. Therefore, if one knows what " Schizophrenia " actually is, then that same person also knows of its cause. But thanks the complete stupidity practiced by the majority of mankind, people " BELIEVE " that schizophrenia is a mental illness, and that the people who suffer from from it, are those who experience delusions and hallucinations. IN SHORT, PEOPLE HAVE ACHIEVED COMPLETE CERTAINTY AS AN OFFSHOOT OF THAT IN WHICH THEY ARE NOT COMPLETELY CERTAIN OF. This, of course, can only occur if the mind that does it, is a defective mind. THIS DEFECTIVE MIND THEN PROCEEDS TO CLASSIFY ANOTHER MIND, AS A DEFECTIVE MIND. IS THIS RELIABLE ? OF COURSE NOT !

If you think of space as open space, then why not do the same for Time. In other words, Space-Time is a fixed environment that we move through. In fact, even if you are at rest in Space, you are still in motion across Time. If you were at rest in Time, then you would still be in motion, but now across Space. This implies that all objects are constantly in motion across Space-Time, but that the direction of travel in that Space-Time, can be changed. A geometric analysis of this theory, leads to the production of equations that are identical to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction Equation, the Time Dilation Equation, the Lorentz Transformation Equations, and the Velocity Addition Equation. So it can't be that bad a theory ! The dimension of Time is at a standstill, but we move through it, just as we can move through Space !

IN A WAY, YES. Infinities in this reality, only exist relativistically, not holistically. But I guess I might get into that later on in a future post.

Hi, this " The_Right_Stuff ". I picked that name because I choose to always be on the right path. My background has been in the electronics field, and I have been working as an Electronics Eng., but I am mostly self taught. I have also been interested in the mechanics of reality. The examination of " Motion " got me interested since it had some peculiar properties such as containing two variables, speed and distance. I thought that if both variables were set to infinite, the outcome was odd. 1) Traveling across an infinite distance --> To continue to travel without end. 2) Traveling at an infinite speed --> To travel across any distance without the passage of any time. Note: If it takes time to get from point "A" to point "B", this means that you can still move faster and use less time to get from point "A" to point "B", therefore you are still traveling at a finite speed, not at an infinite speed. Only if no time at all occurs while moving across any distance, is the speed actually an infinite speed. And so the outcome was basically 1) + 2) = TO GO ON FOREVER, IN NO TIME AT ALL ! That got me started, and I eventually had an idea which in the long run led to an awareness of length contraction, the slowing down of time, Transformation equations, velocity additions, etc. Later on, I was happy to see that they were basically the same as the Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction equation, the Time Dilation Equation, the Lorentz Transformation Equations, and the velocity addition equation. Not bad for a grade TENer. Like I said all my electronics background is self taught, just like my Physics knowledge. See you later.