No Time, No Gravity, No Beginning, No End

No Time, No Gravity, No Beginning, No End.

Each one of these words defines a concept that prevents us from understanding reality.  Indeed, as the title would imply; I firmly believe none of these things even exist. I believe that in reality, they cannot, for if they did, we would not exist at this moment.

If you want to go on this journey with me, the only way to get something from it is to try and let go of everything you know about those four concepts.  Just completely open you mind as much as you can and do not try to rationalize everything you read here with what you already know or believe.  Try to let it go, and let it be, for only a moment.  If you are not willing to do that, then you have already rejected it.

We should start with the simple ones first; Beginning and End. It is not possible that our solar system, galaxy, and most especially our universe, have an end, or a beginning.  This would imply a state of nothingness at some point, and there is no such thing as total nothingness.  We know this because if there were, then we would not exist. This is pretty simple, right?  

If the universe we see now exists (and we know it does), it can be implied that it always has, because if not, we cannot explain where it was before the beginning. If you define a beginning, you are implying; that at some point, there was a state of only nothingness. But this cannot be true according to the laws of physics we used today.  The conservation of energy prohibits any physical matter from being destroyed. If this is true, then it could not have been created; it must have always existed. If something cannot be destroyed, then it cannot be created either.  There cannot be one without the other.  There must be something to be destroyed or not be destroyed. Again, something and nothing cannot exist without each other.  Only something that was never created cannot be destroyed. Indeed, we were never created and can never be destroyed.  

Just think about it.  How can there have ever been a state of total nothingness when we know something exists at this very instant?  The fact that we exist is evidence enough that there cannot have been a beginning or end, since there must always been something, to define nothing.  We can’t have started at any point because that would imply something came from nothing at some point.  We must have always existed which means, we always will.

What we see are cycles. We are in view of several cycles of a living organism that is the infinite conscious.  I do not want to discuss this particular notion at this particular juncture because it’s not my focus at the moment.

More important is how I arrived here through deduction along with mechanical predictability. It is mechanically predictable that we should not have a beginning or end. These concepts have no value to us, even if we were to somehow define a part of the cycle and assign it the identification of beginning or end.

This concept of beginning and end is our interpretation of something we simply cannot understand or rationalize. It is very difficult for us to let go of these concepts. We hold on to them because we need them.  We need these concepts to rationalize the world around us and to negotiate what we see, as it relates to why we see things dying and being born to continue time.  The 3D matter here on earth has its own unique cycle just like the stars and groups of stars. All of the cycles are the same in a sense, but we will see our cycle differently here in the fourth dimension, because it’s from this one, we observe ourselves.

Another way to know is; there has always been something, because you cannot define nothingness without it, so therefore there was never a beginning. If we choose to look for one, then we will certainly find something, but it really isn’t needed. So we should ask ourselves, what value does this add if we define a beginning? To me it is self-evident that this discovery adds nothing to our understanding.  So what should it benefit us to continue pursuit of this? Have we created a subject to study that may have no relevance and may even be acting as a substitute for real knowledge?

I would suggest that this is the case.  We should not be looking for a beginning to what we see; instead, we should be looking for what we know cannot be seen.  Even though we cannot see it, we know it is responsible for what we do see, and therefore we can know much about it.

Next, how can there be no such thing as Time?  Well, let’s be clear.  What we think of as time absolutely exists because we invented it and we defined it, but it’s not really responsible for the effects on our 3D bodies like we think.  This is from the pressure of the fourth dimension. I call time the fourth dimension just like everyone else, but it’s not. Time is not the fourth dimension, but rather the effects that we observe experiencing the third.  The fourth dimension is pressure, the same as all others.  Each dimension is a container for another and contained by another, forever, and it has nothing to do with our notion of time. We do experience time, but our measurement of it adds nothing to the study of our physical world outside of this planet and solar system.  At least, not as it is being applied currently.  And our measure of time is most certainly not the definition of a dimension.

We use time to measure our lives.  Without it, we will have just “existed” and we cannot accept this as a complete answer for things. But in reality, it’s true.  I submit to you that because there is no beginning or end, there is no time.  It is only relevant to the observer at that particular instant, in response to a particular problem.  We live in a continuous instant without a beginning or end and without what we think of as time. But we are fickly creatures and we want to organize things, so we use time to do this.

Unfortunately, this measurement adds nothing to our understanding of the physical world. To know that we are instead; contained, by the fourth dimension, would allow us to ignore our current understanding of time. Our concept of time is only relevant to us in our solar system.  Once we discuss beyond, the concept of time must be removed from the equation.

I understand how hard this would be to accept, everything we do has time connected to it. Time is so interwoven into our thinking, this concept I present can only be understood by pushing everything from your mind you already know and believe.  It should not be lost on us how our most important attribute is found on our gravestone as the amount of time we were here. It is the information we feel most pertinent to leave behind. We have the date we were born, when we died, and how many times around the Sun we made it.  This is all for us, we invented it.  It is our measurement.  Saying time exists is like saying 12” exists.  It is true that 12” may seem to exist, but in reality, it is just used to compare the size of things and give us a tool for negotiating our physical world.  The 12” is a just a tool for reference, just like time.

It was Fibonacci all along.  I knew there was a force holding us together.  I knew there was a reason we do not explode with all of our atoms separating from each other with infinite speed.  There had to be a pressure, a force, a dimension.

If we live inside another dimension, then we should see the result of this dimension.  Instead, what if we use everything we see, as the result of this dimension? If we can, then we will learn something about it, and that something is; we are contained by it.  Everything is contained.

We live in this containment and push through as we grow with direction inside of it.  The energy we see as a result of the pressure is time, but time is not the pressure, it is a specific function we measure.  What you think of as time is really just the result of a force holding together 3D matter and containing its life cycle. Everything we see as 3D matter living in 4D space follows this rule.  All 3D matter moves through time, we grow through it as a helix defined by the Fibonacci sequence.  Plants and animals travel through it this way, and so does our sun and solar system.  The fifth dimension can somehow be measured with this information.

If our fourth dimension is flat, as we see with our solar system, then we can deduce the force creating this is planer.  A helix moves through planer forces.  A drill cuts through wood or metal. A hurricane is pressure above and below (planer).   The same is true for our solar system.  The pressure is above and below. It is these pressures that cause the rotation of planets and moons and all other debris.  It is creating a cutting pattern through the fifth dimension using a helical motion.  When you combine the movement of the sun in a wave pattern for its orbit around the center of our galaxy, along with the rotation of planets around it, it would result as a helix described by Fibonacci and seen everywhere else in nature.

Plants and animals cut through the 4^th dimension with a Fibonacci helix, our solar system cuts through the 5^th dimension with a Fibonacci helix, galaxies cut through the 6^th dimension with a Fibonacci helix and our universe is cutting through the 7^th dimension with a Fibonacci helix.  There is no way for use to see this helix because it is the singularity. We would have to be in the 8^th dimension to see this and that is not possible given our view from earth.

If planer forces influence our solar system and are responsible for the motion then it is my contention there is no such thing as gravity as we know it.  At least not the (G) constant we use for celestial bodies.  Now, of course there is gravity on earth. But is it really gravity?  If our solar system is fueled by planer forces as the potential energy, and not a magical attraction by mass, then maybe there is a motion causing the force of gravity on earth.  Then maybe it’s not necessarily a magical force of attraction that we call (g) constant. Maybe that constant is centrifugal force from the orbit of our earth?  What if we were in essence walking on the inside wall of a centrifuge when we walk on the earth?

Again, I would submit this is more mechanically predictable then a magical attraction based on mass.  I contend there is no big (G) and no little (g) as the result of two objects with mass attracted to each other like we think.  The little (g) constant has been empirically proven but its source has not.  It is just as plausible (or more so) that what we think of as gravity is actually centrifugal force of the earth being part of the centrifuge wall of rotation that created it.

This is what we see.  We do not see attraction, we see motion. We see a centrifuge.  How is it we cannot admit it?  Instead of using what we can see here on earth and knowing its mechanical predictability, we choose to invent a magical force of attraction, but I’m not 100% sure why.

There you have it.  No time, no gravity, no beginning and no end.  These are the concepts that keep us from understanding our world.  We have used them since our earliest memories; we couldn’t imagine life without them.  Since we began to contemplate we have used these concepts without question, and quite possibly before.

DKJR