1

New Theories / Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?

« on: 26/06/2022 01:34:30 »

But if the watches are not synchronized, and can tick at different rates depending on their velocity relative to some imaginary fixed point in space, (which might not be a realistic possibility at all), can we just drop a flare there to mark the spot ?


I don't think so!


149929,

 It can work if universe exist and doesn't at the same time, divided by the plank scale, like a predictable future which erases and recreates that which it just erased constantly, that tic tac rate would be C.
 As for frame of reference, the frame of reference of matter it's always it's past, as it would be not a real static frame of reference, only the geometry of spacetime reajusting itself constantly at C.
 My frame of reference would always be the fields to which I'm submitted, always reference to zero when I'm my own frame of reference.

 It's an understanding about the cosmological limit, it's too much of a convince that quasars for example jets out matter at 99.999% of the cosmological constant.
 One of the feasible possibilities it's that: C it's not a moving speed, rather a quantification rate limit.
 A1-A2-B1-B2-C1-C2.... Towards infinity which would be... A1-A2-A1-A2-A1-A2 on a straight line distance following and seting the arrow of time.
 Each time A1 meets A2 the particle it's recreated there, but in between A1-A2 the existence of anything but spacetime was (0) for it didn't existed as a thing since nothing can't move trough nothing.
 What I mean by nothing can't move trough nothing (faster than C) it's the suggestion itself, that in between A1 and A2 (one Planck volume) "the thing" wold not be a thing at all, the update "speed" it's set and nothing cannot surpass it as "a thing".
 Matter seems to bypass this by offering a center for mass, still such reference it's only reference for itself while for space it is still zero.
 If the information was erased as a thing and recreated on the destination, with a C speed as the frame rate it would be virtually undistinguished from a moving object.

 Matter travel is to spacetime using the same means of the photon, if the photon requirements are to produce virtual photons In order to work, one can say that it's also true that nothing it's relative to nothing but spacetime.

Hmmm, I'll have to take a closer look at this, later.

 It's confusing but the concept it's quite simple.
 Particles cease to real while "occuring" in between a Planck.
A1 its the A side of the wire, while A2 it's the future exit of the wire.
 The particle it's real at A1 while "planking/traveling trough absence of time" the particle it's virtual all information being transported at C rate trough a sort of wormholing effect which we attribute as properties of the particles/spin, and becomes real while arriving at A2.

 Now the catch A2 and A1 are one and the same.
 But that can't be.
 Can if you introduce a direction anything bellow 45° from the real location would be impossible for light as it would represent being quantified backwards.

 How much energy one needs to make another current flow trough a wire in order to push backwards the incoming flow from the other side?

 If both meet at the needle you'd have "opositing forces", not different forces only opositing the arrow, guess that's represented by charge..

 Maybe the trick for matter is to "isolate" one section of the wire/tunneling effect, which it's indeed spherical and flat rather than tunnel like while on euclidian space.
 A star would be suitable for that.
 You can offer a center for it's potential, and as it starts to grow and spin it start to move all the gas particles which gives momentum to all matter nearby, and such momentum will be conserved in space.
 Meanwhile, sun now a real object(a reference of it's own still only for itself), starts to recieve the same mechanics that jumps light, but this time with a real object with mass, such object can indeed be said it's "moving with a speed".
 Suggesting the geometry of the planets and stars it's all but the electromagnetic force generated by that "section of the wire" isolated from the whole inside the innercore.
 You simple locked the low of electrons inside a single dot, and that was made by casualty and chance alone.

 So there's this gap, if light  it's not traveling with a C speed.
 But rather "occuring" from Planck to Planck with a absolute framerate C.

 First is physical, second it's mathematical/geometrical.
 First one moves, the second one pops in and out of existe.

 If A1 and A2 are but the same the initial state of light would be inevitable at C as it would be interference pattern.
 You don't need to move from A1 to A2 on a Planck volume, A1 its A2 and A2 it's A1, from there it's simple binary...1/0/1/0/1/0/1 each dash one single planck distance.

 If true, "nothing truly states" "objects made of matter" being unable to travel faster than C, for C would be no longer a limit speed for objects but a framerate for spectrum occuring "over the fabric".
 Matter doesn't need necessarily to care about space, it's it's own frame at all times.

 Just considering indeed the spin of the electron and the photon the source of everything.
 Perhaps even accounting how light and dense space/BigBang/innercores can turn space into matter.
 Trap it in there, let it's own electromagnetic field build the star and forge matter.

 Trapped "space seems weird" but it's just like the early universe, only that the reproduced one occurs isolated from the euclidian one, inside stars and planets.

 Sort of trapping space, isolate it from the exterior using matter, wonder that such portion of space inside planets and stars would make contact with the exterior.

 Five years, I mind till this part a picture it's forming but at this point the whole explanation it's a mess...🙄

 Photon gain mass and looses it cause it's restored at each Planck.
 Since A1 and A2 only distinction it's the arrow of time it's quite obvious that photons would simple occur at C and unable to stop, it's not a speed, it's a rate.

2

New Theories / Re: How does time dilation affect matter?

« on: 06/04/2017 01:22:38 »

Time dilation is an effect and not a cause. As such it cannot affect anything.

 But if the objective is to "affect matter", time dilatation being cause or effect is sort of irrelevant as a mater.
 A cause can affect a third parties as much as an effect, as long the cause or the effect are not occurring in function of matter.
 As it is I not sure what's the correct answer except to consider "interaction" in between distinct time dilatation to create a unbalanced constant.
  So my best guess, time dilatation of object A can only affect time dilatation on object B, but at the same time, on the local frame, A nor B objects can effectively affect their own time dilatation for they are the cause of their own effects.

3

New Theories / Re: All fields are the same , a new theory on field.

« on: 19/12/2016 01:24:56 »

It's more likely the quanta of the photon is absorbed by the already existing electron on the panel, the infusion of energy on such electron would make it jump away from the atom on another band, ultimately the electron has to keep existing as an electron and the only option is to expel the plus back into the medium as spectrum, that for its turn will be able to both, infuse already existing electrons with their own quanta, or even if necessary to cumulative in order to form a necessary electron or proton, depending on the stability of the atom they are serving...

  I mean that the reality seems to be that electrons does not absolve that available quanta, but instead otherwise, where the constant attempt of the spinning quanta wants by any given instant to join with the electrons, sharing their own spin(mechanics of space) with the whole structure...
  I do not believe the quanta of the photon can be absorbed by the solar panel walls but instead that the collision of that quanta with the stable matter, is causing entropy gain and loss, over matter(silica) that has a lower threshold, that causes a lot of entropy on the environment...

 Se the reality behind my poor resolution?
  The truth seems to be, that for broke down completely one cannot improve relativity over corrections, one like Einstein, need to have a "happier tough of their life" and figure it out on a clear instant by guessing, and than do the math over it...
  We can't change already existing explanations for now different from back there, the alternative paths are parallel one with the other, you can't change relativity without explain quantum mechanics, and vice-versa...

 Einstein could figure it out, for he was able to visualize the mechanics, and foreseen the whole 4D picture of the universe he predicted in real time, a skill that hardly can be learned, and even if someone does there is still the necessity of good relationships and background...
  The only viable way humanity has to achieve this goal is to share all available information and improve their own calculations over someone else work...
 Even Einstein struggles with math, lucky he asked for help, and he only received it, for he had foreseen the correct frame, otherwise the math would have being abandoned on the first part...
 In reality, as many here, I believe that everytime someone record a unedited footage of a U.F.O. they are in fact recording the result of the private work of governments over censored data, I mean have you turn own the TV on 2016? Starting with chemtrails and many more lies, front hat point on is to imagine that relativity was figured out decades ago by some...

 If you can visualize a way to express you theory into a practical way that suggest evidence it would be questioned, and that's a good sign for any theory... Newton, Einstein and many other genius have already took over the visual proves, as measurements of the orbits, relativity, quantum mechanics... What we are missing is practical devices exercising functions that may sustain proofs for inconsistencies, or a complete happy tough over the universal mechanics and why...

 Take in consideration, we should not be this far, this is the sole reason behind our mind struggle to comprehend, we are only this far, for Einstein gave us a unnatural jump back there, and was only possible to achieve that by a combination of preparation and special trained mind... As if he was someone that relativity was intuitive to him, the only struggle he had was how to put in mathematical terms so we could understand...

4

New Theories / Re: video discourse 3 , the twin paradox

« on: 09/12/2016 09:52:57 »

Perhaps the "physical" answer for the question, lies on nature itself...
  Animals with slower metabolism usually are those who live longer...
  Surely the brains entity are not self aware of that, but DNA and time are in correlation to, resulting in evolution when in correlation with an environment...
  If speed up anything/synapses "on" any living being, would result in a longer longevity "in time", everything would be pre-conditioned to do so, those would than live longer...
  May sound silly but DNA is amazing, it's capabilities seems to be able to with time, surpass any environment, by learning the rules, otherwise we would not have come to live...

  They talk about the twin paradox, which is clearly untested "yet", for now every single time I tend to picture the metabolism of an prehistoric being that barely evolved since than, and compared it to a still evolving species... My irrational clue to the twin paradox also stick with relativity, if not for the explanation it provides, than for the very fact that reptiles whe compared to many mamals live much longer...
  A alligator cannot travel at C, nor a human, but surely looks like that those species, had time to find a way to work around that limitation, by reducing their own synapses...
 If the speeding up was a viable way to counterpart time and aging, DNA would have already found a way use that...
  Than subjection and fantasy comes to mind, and also the visualization of a Dolphin with a self-developed sonar, along with an persistent Eal that have developed means to produce high voltage current on itself, tardigrades and more...
   If speed and kinetic energy, that surrounds us, would be of any use to an environment being as humans, since day one we would have evolved to absolve energy from space itself trough our skin to feed our bodies, but we did not, anything did not... 
 We may not knew that earth is traveling on a space that is at C, but DNA surely did, even evolved eyes that psychically calculate light and C, something that we do not even understand yet... For so if something sounds to good to be true as counterpart age by existing within an accelerate frame, is most likely that is not...   
   I believe that the most simple and practical answer for the paradox is:
  The traveling twin(for the earthling perspective) aged too fast and died from complications just after the beginning of it's journey(even if for himself that journey had take years)...

Interesting you relate ''time'' to metabolism. I  believe in decay, things decay and degrade over ''time''.

I do believe in reality the Caesium has any relationship with real ''time'' , arbitrary time is quite meaningless.  So when the rate of the caesium slows down, I do not believe this is relative to the human metabolism or ageing process.
To me it is on par to saying that if a dripping tap slowed down the drip, time slows down, again it would be unrelated.  I do not think we are made of Caesium atoms.
However I do believe that space and time are interwoven , I would even be so bold and say that space and time, is ''god''.
My premise is that nothing can exist without a space to exist in, there can be no motion if there is no space and time. There can be no events without space and time.

 Surely, I relate time with anything that exists, on the case of DNA even more, for it evolve to deal with the environment, and the environment is also submitted to time...
   The same reason behind the development of any organ on any living creature...

 I'm relating the existence of "this" metabolism "now" as a product that emerge from a constant experience of time... That's why I suggested that if acceleration of anything was good to longevity, we would have also developed an organ to absorb that, or bypass it...  If one believes to be impossible to DNA to achieve a "necessity", just stop and look at all living creatures, anything seeks to slow down...
  I'm just suggesting, that the twin traveling would die at a faster rate, and will come back to earth only to rotten at an usual speed, along with his brother...
  We "happen" at the frame we encounter ourselves, but there is "threshold" on everything there is, the paradox seems to be ignoring any possible threshold to achieve a virtual result, not possible....
  Decay, is the key factor on the proposition, and the reason why something decays(time, any time being it faster or slower, doesn't matter)...

5

New Theories / Re: I think space must have a physicality!

« on: 21/11/2016 10:29:13 »

|Space seems to behave like the esptiness between the electron jump on the quantum level.
 Much as higgs itself trating those spherical objects as if they were single atoms, and different from the particle jumps that seems to occur instantaneously, we have speeds and time...
 Time being a product created directly on the quantum realm by this expansion on the higgs field, a delay on C...
 And anything that is able to delay this world of C, such as matter, or anything that do not behave like a gosht as light does(for photons are from this fabric) causes friction on this medium, therefore anything that does that, that delay C "recieves" proportional mass...
 Mass and dilatation being in correlation, a area of displacemente, where the higgs field present on the particles of the object itself, starts to grow in size and cause an expansion on macro scale on the constants(sppin), anything on macro scale (when in correlation to this universal expansion) can't spin as fast as C, and anything that can't nullfied their mass using own acceleration, as particles or blackholes, are fated to grow big(dimenssions) untill a certain point, where the mass matches this period in expansion along with the contant C, there a singularity would occur: A particle size planet that was the logical result higgs field was trying to achieve...

 Space is physical for me, altough it started within all the hydrogen atoms in the universe, not small but big, one singularity occured at the center it when universal nova, expanded great part of the matter trought outside the universe(that was already there/space) and as a odinary black holw such singulatiry started to put momentum within the structure, from inside out(nova), twisting and triggering many other singularities, that started to do the same process. Why and how I do not imagine.
 But the point is, empty space should be an illusion, its not part of the original universe, it's simple C...
 Two objects seems to atract each other, but if remain still on place and start to sirink the objects would appear to be still, the opposit would occur if you grow up in scale...

 What I wonder is happening is that such singularity (bigbang as they say)  is still there at the center, and this universe seems to be infinity cause space was already there, same as we looking to any other galaxy, where is the end of the space of any galaxy? where is the edge of any horizontal plate? See my point?
 Space is but an illusion, it is what was in the exterior of the universel star and started to permeate it as soon as it (somehow) whent nova, now C, C is the acceleration this central motion puts on everything, butis not located here...
 C would be determined by wherever the galaxyes/universes are orbiting.
 That structure is what controls higgs and all the universal constants, we merily exist within this plane, not another dimension, but the same as we inside the heliosphere, claiming that pluto its the edge of the universe and that there is nothing else, simple cause a supervoid is srrowunding this entirely univese of ours...
 The expansion sees not to be on space (Einstein) original idea, for me space is static, the thing expanding in proportion are the planets and everything else in function of this atracctor, its it that is in control of C and C is in control of the sigularities that deffy the sppin of everything, every particles, and consequently planet, its it tht controls C
 Now C got to be contant on this universe and probably elsewhere, but C and be any constant, it can be variating sicnethe beggining of time, and we wouldn't know cause we are to young, we could meassure the sppins but we are also to clouded to figure out if it is even real motion...

 What control C is not visible to us, but universe and space are both two different things, we were born inside of it, but whos in control of the systems "seems" to be higgs field, a twisted, impredictable, but contant interaction of different proportions, leading to order and chaos out there, when in the quantun scale everything works just fine for quantun is space enegine and is not affected by macro, altough it's the existence of objects in big scale that is disrupting this perfect constant and for different interractions, forcing quantun to looks like be based on possibilites, the interaction of different constants is what causes this impression for nothing is istantaneously, but space uses a trick to be "it set itself on A and B even and before any interaction of different field have taken place", this is instantaneous, and surpass any other vector including C.... Of course always considering that could be none of that, and many other possibilities, its just that make more sense than an explosion over nothingness...

 To become easy to visualize the whole concept assume that universe like a galaxy, one that has no more stars or ligth beyond of the horizon(edge of the sphere/arms). There would be a super void surrounding it, and different from inside the universe, time would consistent vanish from existence as further one moves trough C away from universe, away from gravity, there would be no more point of reference on your body to keep your molecular structure organized. You would star to accelerate towards C on the quantun level and at a certant distance from the universe, when dark matter influence(mass) wouldnt exist anymore) you probably would cease to exist as matter and become light, your energy would travel as photons, that isprobably the only thing that remains outhere, and possible the only thing that can travel to outhere, along with wave length frequencies, radio, gama etc... No matter is possible to exist outside universe, for do so you need return the field to pure light and force light to colide and converge on a single spot to do the impossible possibility that would be create a blackhole using light, there would be another center, a considerable self-stanable slow down in the would of C, causing a delay and expansion on the higgs field proportion resulting on this delay, at the end of the events a blackhle is needed in order to produce a galaxy, as something similar(to the eye of a hurricane, is needed to keep C and higgs...
 Mess up with the higgs particle and you'll not be able to calculate the consequences over entanglement, spooky at distance, if one particle is in coorelation with another, they got be conected by a bridge, that bridge would be their "place" or origin on higgs field, forever attached to that specific location on the fabric, even if for us seems to be only empty space... Quantun level has no time, but the existence of different fields and proportions interracting maybe somehow producing different "infinite probabilities" but this only to our observation and concepts and patterns, everything on the quantun level no matter how chaotic it seems to be, know exacly what is going to happen on a event, knows the outcome before the outcome itself, its like math, higgs field are diverging, interracting with different volumes and speed, but nonentless is still the same constant C, so no matter how messy one situation can get, and no matter how many path a determinated particle should follow, higgs always knew the outcome....
 Its like if the great atractor, where like a rupture within two verses of the same universe, like two conic shapes fliped upside down, or more like two umbrelas one over the other... At the center one should have something like a ring that i contantly pulling the (already existing space"  pulling higgs field inside o it along, pulling the lines that forms space itself, but is doing this from both sides, so one universe does not need to be oposit to the other, only existing one very very far from the other (physicaly existing) as if you travel futher enough trou the super void beyond this universe you would enterinto another, and both matter in both universes are adrifting on the flow as this ring (rupture) kepps pulling space itself inside, and on this act seting space to the C state we know, and also allowing the existence of gravity and other linear forces as light, basically allowing everything that's not space)

 The ring something as indeed resambling a black hole, bt much more eliptical and with a horizon so vast that the two sides of the objects(sides as on north ans south) are not simple only sppining as a spherical hole, but due some eliptical alongated flat shape, the both halfs are also spiring as if it was rolling space itself like pusshing space in, rolling space in as it continuous to spin on the horizontal, forming both effects, the horizontal spiral movement stretching the cords(the hggs field) from linear static, to sppining, perhaps even propagating this waves patterns trogh the fabric defining the spping of the particles or anything that has mass proportional to their size, and at the same time as it sppins both halfs keeps rolling space itself in, like a hope.
 Stretching its paterns, given it the C state, expanding it form all dirrections...
 I know that space seems to be expanding equally in both dirrections but at the end, what do we know about beyond the universe itself, we still believing it is the end of everything there is, including space itself, and even if partiality correct about this for being the reason of the inclination of the galaxies(should I say, inclination of this whole universe) towards a specific area within a void...
  I do not imagine how much fabric is there, but this cloud have a limit, where things would be so far away that would start to move so fast, and eventually even space itself would finnaly shatter, perhaps when this happens thee or those grat atracctors where the universes are existing within their fields of expanding C, they may explode too, much like big bang theory, but not one for creating only matter, but one that creates everything there is including the field...
 or maybe both of the sides of those hyperparables are interconecteds at the edges, like that experment that twists a sphere from inside out without making corners or edges, maybe the the same corda pulled in are liberated on the horizon, and the behaviors of particles and solar systems, only miniature reflections of such patterns, ...
 Something that is pulling in higgs field, stretching it from 360° at C towards all dirrections and at the same time, on its horizontal plate (as a galaxy) all mather is gathered and particles are absorving this rotation spping at C...

 Maybe the edge of the observeable expanding universe, is the expanding horizontal plate area of this imensurable ruppture, that is messing with the once frozen universe, messing with fields, promoting C...

6

New Theories / Re: What exactly gravity is?

« on: 21/10/2016 03:10:03 »

Jerrygg:   Photons are energy configurations which are linear planar with spins. The same stuff when in spherical type configurations have mass. Photons becomes mass and mass becomes photons. It is all geometry How this violates relativity I do not know. Of course to me relativity is a good mathematical analysis of space time problems but not the solution to all things.

 I read it all twice, my first thought is, he knows...
 Let me ask you something, to see if I understood your ideas correctly, more specific in relation with the photons...
  Something like photons being a construction of space, most likely a spiral "shape" that is constantly happening wherever the light is present, although when on the absence of dense atomic structure/matter(absence of macro mass), the light(photons) remain possessing a special configuration, that enable the energy to be carried at "C" trough space?
  One rudimentary and simplistic assumption, you do not say it loud: Light is the source of gravity?
 Or better, the way space reacts to the energy(spectrum), creating (photons) on itself eventually forming waves and colliding with macro mass, there on the presence of the macro mass the photons, constantly colliding at "C" against the macro mass, start to re-adapt their structure, in resonance with the atomic structure. Photons traveling at C, photons rearranging their configurations, rebounding one back over the other, mixing configurations, source of dark mass energy/space energy?
 Reading your description, I'm wrong to assume that the constant rearrangement and rebouncing of this photons, from light on space, to mass on dense atomic structure, as being the true source of the interaction that results in gravity? Light photons, interacting with mass photons, the constant for behind "C"? Also photons as being a shape/configuration of space(itself) in the presence of light, the rebouncing between spiral light at C, against "photonic mass?!", the reasons for behind the dilatation, when near massive objects?
 I'm not presuming, only trying to glimpse further on your concept, is occurring to me that state that mass is able to dilatate space-time, could not be more incorrect on your suggestion, when infact, and I'm simple wondering that, (mass) is (photon mass), mass is the dilatation of itself?
 " Mater have never directly produced mass as a source only as a calatizador, when a planet is causing dilatation on space-time, what's really happening is that the refraction of photons against matter is changing the configuration of "light", releasing the energy from the spiral configuration of light, directly infusing it on the surroundings, resembling and aura, this process of reconfiguration of light, the true source of mass( dark energy?!), and mass not causing dilatation of space, "mass" being the dilatation?
 Cause if photon is a shape, a carrier (on space and of it) able to change configuration ( I did not knew that the configuration could affect the behavior), will one end up with something like (Gravity/mass/motion) "everything was the light"?
 I would really appreciate if I'm diverging to far from what your idea of photon/mass, are leading to?


One other question, about parallel universes, I do not tend to believe o that, but from your perspective on one simple example: A solar system, could be interpreted as a universe, although this "universe" is existing (inside?!) a larger universe (galaxy),. The question is could this mechanic layers be interpreted as what they suggest as coexisting parallel universes? And if it is possible, could this correlation of opposite charges, existing on different dimensions, that do not interact, have as possible being result of a correlation between light and electromagnetism?
 Could the jump of the electron, from inside the heliosphere, be different from the outside, but here it is, where is inside the galaxy and where is outside heliosphere? Both are not the same, although both are coexisting, could this sort of parallel coexistence, take place over "hidden dimensions"?

7

New Theories / Re: Space and matter concept

« on: 17/10/2016 10:23:15 »

On reply #29
No offense, but I think we should refrain ourselves from making aggressive and impulsive comments and find a more polite manner to reply to issues. I appreciate the simple interest in folowing my post even though statement might not be correct. Your comments are very appreciated as well but I suggest not offending other persons. Sorry for this.

Sure, wherever that suppose to mean, no problem at all, and thank you for answering on his place... Although, is rare to me to ask a direct question to a specific member, for more that I respect your opinion as much as my own, after being following his work. I sincerely do not believe that we both together have the clarity of mind that he does about GR on all its aspects, for that very reason my curiosity still remain despise of anything...
 To not extend this much further, I'll submit a PV to the specific user, do not worry wherever it was, wont happen again...

all the luck...

8

New Theories / Re: Space and matter concept

« on: 10/10/2016 03:01:33 »

    ... So now we have a definition of time = to motion and fundamental motion is c through space.

    Your particles of space have to be the cause of relativity not just work with relativity. My personal understanding come from thinking about relativity for most of my life almost to the point of being an obsession. To the logical mind mechanics has to rule physics that include mathematics. Mathematics of the observations of relativity have been applied so this suggests an understanding of ratios using the speed of light. Without mass this is a very simple concept. That fundamental motion is uniform and c. Its only when we add mass that we have light, magnetism, electricity and the wavelength spectrum.

     Where does mass mechanically receive the ability of movement? From c of course. Any other direction moves us away from the cause of relativity.

My model  shows that local time relates to local c. For an object, Locally c0= dx0/dt0; but for an object close to a bigger mass space is shrinked and also locally, c1=dx1/dt1. dx1<dx2. Always dt0=dt1. Then c1<c0. However they define as c0 and c1 their own causality speed and cannot be exceeded locally.

The particles of space are not quite particles because their motion is limited by how much space stretches and contracts. The source of relativity is the space itself and the time between two adjiant points which is fixed but cannot be measured since it is infinitely small.

I think, I need to change the definition here. I had something else in my mind. The time of transfering information from one point to next one is fixed, not the speed.

 As for an example, a river is flowing, and in the middle of this river is a rock, the rock will be influenced by this river it will start to move, but if this rock had so little density that it could litteraly ignore the water flowing, than from a tirth perspective, when observed by someone that is still influenced by the river flow,  the rock would seems to be moving at the river's velocity, when from the river perspective, the rock was simple stood still on its own, with the only reference as being the point of origin (A) and the destination (B)...

  I can relate with your perspective, specialy with "the time of transfering information from A to B is fixed (adrifting), not the speed (does not posses acceleration on it's own)...
 Intristing point of view, can you tell me, "I'll consider the awnser only as especulation", the question is, do you consider that, the light, has a speed when in reference to space, if so, witch number would describle this speed of light, our current one, or if not so, to be something (concept) totaly different from "speed of light"?