There is no other possible source for gravity but the electron cloud of atoms. Its appearance must be in sequence with the atomic spectrum as the finishing. It is that space has a preform that is made up of units of energy, in their innate state . This is not the energy you know normally. We can use space as a polestar for describing it with the way we determine its functioning to be- non interpretive of our motivities and the motivities of objects- we see ourselves as, and the life of objects as, ambivalently hosted energetic existence. We naturally think that we take place in space, but we need to understand that space is a far more capacitous physical structure ( saying that there is only one space per se ) than hard reality. The motivity based portion of reality does seem inadequate as a real spectrum. Construction and deconstruction does seem simplistically straightforward. Its exact position relative to materiality is not known . We couldnt imagine saying something like materiality and space share a positive imprint in reality. Surely these two portions do not have the same position whether we positing that there is an overarching physical context for space and matter , or that there is no more than space and matter together constituting the entirety of reality . So they must be relative overall, in a way that never changes regardless of how motivity Looks to be intense at any point in time. They must be relative for any theory of a reality to accompass logic. We cant assume them in the same position or positional type . How would we be able to judge and reference our own motivity and the motivity of object if they were. So relative we are that space is in us, but so complexly connected as a whole that it has to go through all the atoms in our bodies, as gravity , as the strong force; and then we are now observing the elementary particles again. How exactly are they seperate from space we ask . Well, energy is natural motivity, that imparts a spatial pro- efficiency, meaning that motivity appears to innately grasp direction , only slightly less proficiently than space itself. Energy cannot demark and alternate coherence to coordinate symmetry. Energy can never find a wrong direction so to speak, and this is remarkable because it is innate . We could assume two things here, one: this is a clear indication that energy might be an emanation of space that occurred at the release of the point, space immediately predicating energy in time does seem optionable , but space can only be misdetermined with descriptions of motivity in which we have never observed it being involved( Gravity is a spatial reaction to matter purely), so logically we cant say that space is the motivity that actively facilitated the impetus of a release, which is a physical capacity synonymous with energy based matter We simply do not observe space displaying such properties. Second, we could assume that they both come from a single source that encompasses the facet of motivity, and the natural predication of three dimensional direction, that is the noncentral sphere: motivitylike for the energetic conduct of motivity indicates as such, and dimensionallike as indicated by the relation of space to matter being a possible one. We find ourselves now logically beyond space and matter predicatively.
Posted on: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 06:37:04 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015