John C,
"If universally the reality is that all of creation seeks to be both flat, smooth and static; and at the same instant (for want of a better word) curved, variegated and dynamic..."(network)
The point I keep making about time, that our linear perception of a sequence of events, with the "point of the present" moving from past to future, is an effect of activity changing the configuration of what is, creates this effect, by the "future becoming past." Potential, to actual, to residual.
So then what we are measuring is frequency. Such that as an effect of action, it is similar to temperature, which is amplitude en masse. Now we think of time as fundamental, because this sequential effect is foundational to our rational perception, the linear function of the left brain which is the basis of narrative and thus history, as well as cause and effect logic.
Meanwhile we think of temperature as emergent, the effect of all those energetic forces bouncing around and exchanging energy, yet they are seeking a state of equilibrium, while as a linear effect, frequency en masse is static/noise. What would be called "chop" by a sailor. That is why we have to isolate out a particular frequency and define it as the measure of time, yet it has to be extracted from that larger reality, just as temperature is an expression of the larger reality. So we see temperature top down and time bottom up.
Newton said that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. What he didn't say is that the reaction is naturally non-linear. Basically a dispersal of the energy and this creates feedback loops throughout the entire system, which serve to balance that particular action and so those particular, linear actions and the sequence we experience, are part of the larger whole of thermodynamic activity. It should be noted that the non-linear, emotional and intuitive right side of the brain amounts to a scalar function, like a thermostat, or pressure gauge and that is why emotions are often referred to in terms of heat, or pressure, while intuition emerges as a cumulative effect of one's knowledge base.
So now if we take away time and treat it as an property of activity, this leaves space. Yes, the three dimensions are a coordinate system and no more foundational to space than longitude, latitude and altitude are foundational to the surface of the planet. They are mapping devices and as such are descriptive, not prescriptive. Like frequency and amplitude as descriptive of waves, not their cause.
So if we remove all physical properties from space, this leaves the non-physical qualities of neutrality and infinity. Since neither are physical, they don't require physical explanations.
While infinity might seem obvious, the interesting aspect is neutrality, ie. equilibrium. General Relativity implicitly assumes this by using the speed of light as its constant. Basically we could conduct an experiment, based on GR, by placing clocks around in space, until we find the one which runs the fastest and that would be closest to the state of equilibrium of space. Literally the foundation of reality inherent to all space. So then we go back to temperature and how it is energy seeking that state of equilibrium. Since space is infinite, energy disperses infinitely, but because space is infinite, energy lost from one area is replaced by energy radiating from adjoining areas.
Still trying to model it beyond this, but since no one seems willing to even consider this, I don't get any feedback.
Regards,
John M