Michael: very interesting!
My understanding is: God IS "Existence" IS "Love" IS "Three PERSONS in ONE" of who Jesus Christ is one. That's what Catholicism teaches.
I made a lot of discoveries re: how physics may work, with more ideas just in recent days; but will have to come back and post fuller details.
Here are some (quite a bit) of the details:
Acceleration: speed is actually acceleration!
(Thanks Aurino for a comment that reminded me of some "scientific heresy" I wrote once. On revisiting the idea I realised it was right. Wouldn't surprise me if it turns out that Harv and Aurino were both right in their debate- this might help resolve the unfortunate 'interference' they seemed to get with each other's ideas and the subsequent fall out! Hope both realise their value at this forum!)
Speed: distance per time.
How do you know that your clock isn't speeding up (accelerating)? How do you know it has EQUAL intervals?
Because you always use an imaginary reference clock (eg. your watch isn't speeding up because the same NUMBER of seconds goes by for each revolution of the Earth. So ONE INTERVAL of your Earth clock MATCHES so-many intervals on your watch.
All use of CONSISTENT, non-accelerating (and non-decelerating) clocks actually involves taking an EQUAL, CONSTANT interval from comparing TWO clocks. (Hence Dr. Stafford's result that you take a proper time (interval) from clocks).
It requires two clocks so you know the interval or difference between them is constant (a constant RATE OF CHANGE between two clocks).
Your watch goes tick tick ...tick; the Earth does one rotation: TICK; a constant number of watch-ticks per Earth TICK gives you a reliable double clock. But a constant rate of change betwen two clocks IS possible acceleration of one clock!
So when you measure SPEED, you are measuring speed per time per time: the potential acceleration of time. (Concept of potential energy possibly explainable by this).
(One "per time" assigned as "imaginary time")
("per time" as one world, other "per time" as shadow world).
To measure an accelerating object, requires that you apply EQUAL intervals to it so you can tell that it is accelerating. So you need a constant time-speed to measure accelerating objects, and you need a constant time-permitted-to-be-acceleration to measure constant speed objects (or how would you know the speed was constant?)
You need EQUAL to see NON-EQUAL; and you need NON-EQUAL to see EQUAL.
You need SYMMETRY to see ASSYMETRY; you need ASSYMETRY to see SYMMETRY.
You need CONSTRAINT to measure FREEDOM; and FREEDOM to measure CONSTRAINT.
Permitted-to-be-acceleration is a choice, freedom. Constant-time-speed is EQUIVALENCE, a CONSTRAINT, needed to measure (allow) acceleration (gives freedom to have the acceleration choice).
A choice contains a constant: do this or do that has a constant WHO is to do this or that! If there were two- people: the one PAIR of people need to do a deal (make a meta-choice) as to who shall choose this or that. They might choose to appeal to a third party (agree to let others take a vote say).
Maybe you can't measure acceleration per acceleration; as it just COLLAPSES to a single quantum of acceleration (from the superposed accelerations).
Choices of choices may also collapse to an initial starting choice.
Look closely at the double clock. How do you know that THE PAIR OF CLOCKS isn't speeding up as a group? You may know there are 60x60x24 watch ticks per Earth rotation TICK; but what if your watch AND the Earth were both speeding up?
So you need a third clock; to compare the pair of clocks to; to re-create a double clock (of new-clock versus the clock-pair). (Already the solution to Schrodinger's cat/ colapse of wave function puzzles is implicit in all this).
BUT, you could suppose that the new clock, and the clock-pair; are all speeding up in tandem!
And so on when you keep adding clocks!
You might keep adding clocks, to be sure to check that the clocks you have already summed are not all speeding up together! What if you then added the ORIGINAL clock?
(This scenario is like in the Dr. Seuss book: "The King. The Mice, And The Cheese". He was overun with mice wanting his cheese. So wise men introduced cats to scare away the mice. He was overun with cats; they brought in dogs. No cats now, but overun with dogs! Then lions, elephants- and then they brought back the mice to scare the elephants! Back to square one! So the King and the mice did a deal to get along together after that!).
If you added the ORIGINAL clock, you have now got a circular situation; your biggest clock (the universe) represents a big jump from your watch! So you are left with a circular situation (EQUIVALENCE) and a JUMP (NON-EQUIVALENCE).
But to EXIST at all, "A" must be NOT-EQUAL to "B" in some way or it would be "B". So there is a non-equivalence or jump between everything. The circularity (EQUIVALENCE, SYMMETRY) is that everything EQUALLY has at least one quantum of difference! So EXISTENCE is the beginning and the ending; the Alpha and the Omega.
You may call the SUM OF CLOCKS the SUM OF SELF-REFERENCES (or sum of histories or sum of futures); or call it the wave function or quantum state!
When you make an observation (bring in a new clock), you collapse the wave function (you prove that your acceleration-superposition of clocks is not speeding up in synch. with your new clock)
You get a NUMBER of ticks of your constant-interval between CLOCK:sum-of-clocks, and new-clock. (just as if only have two clocks, your watch and the Earth; or you and your watch).
In Feynman quantum electrodynamics, the adding of "arrows" (probability amplitudes) represents the adding of clocks to pair-clocks and triple-clocks and quad-clocks etc. to get the overall clock per your new clock (the one you call "time" in physics, which is a pre-collapsed wave function).
Well, there is much more to say: how complex numbers actually work; why the universe seems full of traffic jams at angles to each other; how you contain the whole universe; why speed of light is constant (it's a constant interval between two potentially-accelerating clocks- since c is the clock of the observer and the observed, then c is not effected by relative speed of observer as an acceleration between the clocks is permitted!); mandelbrot aspects of this; C.M. Langan aspects of this; Dr. Stafford aspects of this; role of the idea "PRESS"; why space looks 3D; why "NOW" seems to disappear behind and re-appear in front of us; stereo-projection of reality by double-clock view that sees a third clock; how any one of the three could be the third clock; imaginary time cubed; how "force" is "fractal dimension"; how wave-particle duality works; quantum jump as a gift, as giving, creation- God is Love; how gravity may BE quantum theory; where gravity comes from; and more.
A word on "why objects fall":
Suppose you draw clock 1: dash dash dash dash
dash dash dash dash dash. (9 intervals)
Clock 2: megadash, megadddddash, megadddddddddash.
(3 intervals- made these unequal but idea is that either clock could have unequal intervals: a CHOICE here)
Clock 3: subtract clock 1 from clock 2 (which was accelerating by comparison. (Have CHOICE could have subtracted 2 from 1).
The first two clocks are constantly (equally) non-equivalent) and you get that constant difference of dash (i.e. a length of four letters) between the clocks turning up as the clock 3 result (using letters as a measure of time unit length here).
Note have actually a 3-way CHOICE as any clock could be accelerating, and either of the other two could be paired with the accelerating one to give a CONSTANT difference.
3 starting choices; then 2 orders available for each starting choice (eg. choose 1 to start, can have 1,2 and 3 is the difference; or 1,3 and 2 is the difference); six choices total. (Quarks: 3 colours, 6 flavours?)
Now a constant speed will mean space-dashes (equal-distances) will match those constant dashes of clock 3. (You may claim they can use 'constant' clock 1 in this example; but in reality you supposedly know only that a constant difference comes out of COMPARING the two clocks- you don't know which of clock 1 or clock 2 is accelerating or decelerating).
So a constant speed is length per second and a constant PRESS of time (acceleration of imaginary time).
Acceleration of object: time-view: Hold double-clock time constant: increasing PRESS of time so contraction of space per unit time (when you go faster your watch-tick squeezes much more distance into it than when you go slow).
Acceleration of object: space-view: Hold double-ruler constant (as ruler-argument can be made like clock argument- how do you know if your ruler isn't growing? Need two rulers, both free to be the one that is free to be growing; the two give a constant DIFFERENCE which is your real ruler. Every ruler implies imaginary space.).
So have accelerating object gives decreasing PRESS of space so expansion of time per unit space (when you are faster your watch-tick gathers much more distance into it than when you go slow).
Traffic jam: a line of cars slowing down, a section of stopped cars, then gradually speeding up cars. So a line with decreasing intervals between cars then increasing intervals.
Can draw a linear traffic jam at right angles to the first traffic jam- so it can be plotted as a line that extends out to each side from each car in the first traffic jam. Fill in the diagram for all positions so each car in one jam is carrying the line of the right-angle jam with it: looks like an x-ray diffraction picture of an atom or something (possibly more than coincidence).
Plot position of one car moving through both traffic jams: you get a classic physics graph.
This 2-D car is a complex number. Time and space are at right angles to each other because when you take a measurement you hold one constant. i.e. you collapse the double clock to 1 clock or you collapse the double ruler to one ruler. Thus 4 becomes 3.
Superpose more traffic jams at right angles to each other and you get what looks like an electro-magnetic wave; you get a spin-number of jams when you get enough rotations of jam-angle to arrive back to the original jam (but superposed, so more massive), etc.
Objects fall because the smaller the distance between two objects, the greater the PRESS of time. Viewed from a constant-time point of view (EQUALITY viewpoint) space is not-equal (accelerating or decelerating). Stop squeezing time (make it constant) and you squeeze space!
So to us space is squeezed, constantly! So gravity is a result of our viewpoint?
Accelerate time (go back in time by looking at distant galaxies) and you get a view of apparant expansion of space!
So the further apart two objects are, the further back in time each is to the other, so the less squeezed space is to each other (weaker gravity).
Far enough apart and each other appears to be at edges of an expanding space. Further apart (to edges of universe) and space-expansion seems to accelerate!
Blackhole: fractal dimensions (gravity) add up to 1 (singularity); time is 3-D in a blackhole, space is imaginary (another universe?). The blackhole has effectively stereo vision of another time dimension.
I rushed this; have to write out properly; left plenty out of this!
anyone get any of this?