It's in a way about semantics too. Let's assume that a infinite gravity should give you a infinite speed, as per its gravity 'accelerating' you infinitely

And as we define both to information carriers telling the universe to behave in a logical way, we then should be able to define both to 'c'. Anything outside of that definition then becomes a singularity of its own, as tachyons, unmeasurable, solely theoretical. But using this logic, then defining it such as the event horizon is the place from where all ways point into a singularity, the event horizon also becomes my barrier between what is known physics, and what is unknown. And then anything inside this point of no return also should be a center, by a same reason as light have no way out.

=

There are so many ways to think about it Dlorde

It can drive one nuts actually. I prefer to look at the universe from constants, using them to define the machinery, nuts and bolts

of it. Then what isn't inside that logic becomes singularities. Doesn't matter how a tachyon sees the universe, or if it even would exist for such a entity. We exist anyway, and we define our universe. All ideas of propagation leads to imponderable conclusions, from what a 'photon' would see, to ??

Easier to look at it from a reasoning in where waves is a description over frames of reference, 'photons' a description of locality. And a field is okay to me, what's not okay is not asking oneself from where it comes, what its 'limits' are. Either we have a 'container model' in where we find this field, or the 'field' is what defines a container. Because the logic we use normally define motions, accelerations, and propagation, existing inside a 'room & time'. All of them able to be questioned, from relativity as well as from quantum mechanics.

==

One very simple description is Astronomy, and that link I gave earlier. It goes out from measuring on a existing room, from that and what we know of black body radiation defining a minimal life time to a photon. Dimensions also builds on a assumption of them being something primeval to me? Although I'm not sure how strings and loops really consider that, they all seem to presume at least one dimension to have to exist for them to have a existence. Maybe, just maybe, all of those assumptions are wrong. Maybe

what gives us any sheet, or plane, to build a room from, initially is without dimensions? And that would then be a 'field' defining itself, as measured from the inside. Pure speculation naturally.