inigmatus

"realized time" aka the present. in short, the present is all there is. there is no existing future or existing past. only the present exists. "gravity is 'realized time'" is essentially saying that gravity is the present physical manifestation of time itself localized in space. CraigD, you and Eclogite are correct. The equation is dimensionally inconsistent, but this because the variables mentioned and compared in the equation are currently expressed in physics within the terms of dimension you posted. This theory may require dimensionless definitions (or definitions expressed in expanded dimensions up to the 11 dimensional limit supported by M Theory) for the the variables listed. I have not worked out the math. I only present this theory here in the hopes that it might lead to a ToE.

Essentially: Time can only exist if there is energy or matter. Gravity can only exist if there is matter. Time then is a function of - a result of - the existence of energy (or matter, which is essentially realized energy). Gravity thus is understood to be "realized" time, just as matter is "realized" energy. The realization is then expressed as space. Therefore space is an expression of the existence of energy and time which has been realized as matter and gravity. Time therefore is a localized (relative) illusion in space wherein motion is observed within, but all possibilities of motion realized without. It is an illusion brought about by the potential of unrealized energy as it could relate to its gravitational exertion in space if such energy were cooled and realized as matter. This unrealized energy is what has been hypothesized as dark energy and it exerts its influence on space by space's attraction to it (since space wants to return to its original state: energy). Since space itself can't convert directly into energy (without itself being twisted into the singularity of a black hole), it is forever attracted to that which can never annihilate it. This attraction causes spacetime itself to warp into and stretch into multiple dimensions, where at its greatest extent of stretching it finally finds its equilibrium with energy in what I can only think can be described as negative space - a universal sum of dimensions where space, by sheer lack of matter which can no longer exist beyond that point, annihilates itself back into energy.

Rather than seeking the existence of gravitons that disappear into other dimensions or multiverses such as string theory predicts in order to account for the unexpectedly low value of gravity in the universe, what if the reason the expected value of gravity fails observations is because we fail to take into full account the relationship between gravity and time. In other words, perhaps we should take into account that gravity and time are not just related, but rather two sides of the same coin, that is just as synonymous with each other as another duality in our universe: matter and energy. Since matter is related to gravity by the force it projects in spacetime, then perhaps matter itself is the the unifying factor between gravity, time, and energy. The equation could be as simple as: g/t = m/e In short, what if gravity itself is merely a physical representation of time in a three dimensional observation frame of reference with time itself equating to the uncertain and indeterminate force of energy and gravity equating to the certain and determinate force of matter - the conversion in 3d space of which produces reality as we know it, with the strong nuclear, weak nuclear, and electromagnetic forces of matter corresponding to mathematical relationship of gravity to matter, time to energy, and energy to matter in that order. This would also explain why quantum mechanics relies on uncertainty to reduce equations to a simpler form, and also helps explain that uncertainty itself is merely an illusion in a three dimensional frame of reference, whereas in time (ultimately infinity -1) the uncertainty always reduces to zero. This would mean that we would not find the existence of gravitons, but rather we would instead find evidence observed for bubbles of relative time (thus quantum mechanically certain), and conversely be able to mathematically prove waves of objective time that are unobserved (quantum mechanically uncertain), with the bubbles of time measured by observed effects predicted in a mass collision at the transformation reference point of matter to energy (into quantum uncertainty) and back again from energy to matter (quantum certainty), the observed gravitational loss from one state to another and back being attributed to the duration of time mathematically predicted to have taken place between the certain planes of mass conversion into uncertain energy and back again. If a gravity detector could detect the destruction of matter into energy, and then the construction of energy back to matter in the effects of a multiple mass collision, there should be a loss of mass and thus of gravitational force if the final resulting mass post-reconstruction equivalent to the expected loss of gravitational equilibrium converted to the relative time that passed between planes. ______________________________________ / Time /| Gravity / /_____________/_|_____________________/ | | conversion | | ____________|_|_______________________ / Energy | / Matter / /_______ _____|/______________________/ infinite observer http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/7863/gtmei.jpg Since quantum uncertainty itself is an illusion that is always ultimately resolved in time according to this theory, the only explanation for the certainty of the existence of anything at all, is that everything has been “observed” by the infinite. Thoughts on this approach?