[imetheman]

This is my contribution to the discussion of what constitutes space and time.
No point coordinate A in the universe can be regarded as being static in position over time relative to the external infinite 3-D space/ universe which surrounds it.  It is the perpetual movement of the coordinates of matter in 3-D space which creates the 4th dimension of time. Any given fixed point coordinate of matter which exists in 3-D space at a hypothetical frozen moment in time A, requires an external 3rd force x acting on it to make it move from that stationary position A to it's future position B.  The tolerance of movement of external matter A in 3-D space which can be detected and registered at any given point coordinate in 3-D space at any given moment in time B, is equal to 1 Planck length angle of arc movement. The time it takes for a moving coordinate A, to move a distance which is registered at coordinate B as being 1 Planck length angle of arc of movement represents the relative pulse of time between points A and B.

Between the cyclical  pulses of 1 Planck length of relevant angle arc movement of A relative to B, the coordinates of both A and B do not exist relative to each other. No information is being exchanged between them and the 2 points can be regarded as existing in a vacuum equilibrium.   

 The relative time pulse between any 2 given points in 3-D space is determined by the physical distance between them and the velocity of A/B relative to B/A.  This relationship between time and distance of external matter in 3-D space constitutes the force of Gravity which is felt from all directions at any given point coordinate at any given moment in time.
The natural cyclical spiral structure of all matter over time means that at any given moment, the coordinates of all external matter in 3-D space relative to any other given point is either accelerating or decelerating [the distance between them has changed] relative to any other given point.

The most local massive region of space possessing the greatest velocity [relative to equilibrium = no movement] is the surface of the Earth relative to the surface centre of the Sun.  The velocity of the surface of the Earth  determines the frequency of the the relative Planck second pulses and therefore the relative force of gravity .
       

   

[panoptos]

Thank you for your response but you have raised another issue that is not defined.  Consciousness, which is the consequence of perception.  Perception needs definition, which I have done in a so far 24 Chapter book I have more than half written. Structure is there but need to flesh out understandings in discussion pieces. I found that trying to define perception, I was forced into the need to address the issue of the existence of Time and its origins, although this was not the initial intent of my tome. My thoughts on this was what has lead me to this Naked Science blog.  Back to your point.  If you do not perceive, you would not have consciousness, or even awareness which precedes it.  Consiousness is the consequence of Universal and cognitive structures of the perceiving entity.  This then introduces the concept of "pelop" ... viz the Perceiving Entity's Limits Of Perception.  All of these things need definition from an originating basis of Postulates and Corollaries which are, in mathematical terms, trivial and incontrovertible which is why I turned my thoughts to originating definitions (see my post in this blog "How justified is your understanding of the foundations of the Universe?") which is one of my attempts to do just that.  My goal is self-consistency of structure of these postulates and corollaries.  Please note the word 'goal', hence the fact that the first edition of my book is not yet completed. Within this self-consistent work is the expectation that application of independent verification methods for what we compare to the Universal properties is the way we validate perceptions as Universally consistent (Universally being the adjective I am using to relate anything to the Universal structures and processes, not human agreed perceptions). I lack your confidence of the non-existence of God or Gods.  Without evidence, I cannot either confirm or deny the existence of God(s) without an agreed definition of what a God actually is.  Something that has caused wars and conflict throughout the anthropocene without resolving that definition, and which is still bringing out species to the brink of extinction by our own hands.  So I am not a theist, atheist or any other related believer without the evidence to prove, or otherwise, that what is believed in has transitioned from a belief to a matter of fact by means of matching its reproducible validity to those incontrovertible processes of the Universe through application of independent methods of verification. Please note that I have said method(s), since others are needed due to the nature of the perceiving entities.  Hope this gives you something to ponder.  I will always welcome constructive comments to both inform me and maybe amend what stage of Universal understanding I have gained so far.  Any comments on my other topic in this New Theories blog "How justified is your understanding of the foundations of the Universe?" would be appreciated. Thank you for your time to reply.
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE:  Whilst typing this response, I have noted you have added more.  Having read your work, I would like you to consider my suggestion that you are doing what most scientists are currently devoted to... utilising our mathematical language and its surrounding structures to describe and justify what we perceive by increasingly try to add to this body of work.  With respect, you are describing processes based on current perceptions and scientific lines of enquiry, not origins for those processes.  Nothing I will say will contradict anything that has been established scientifically as relationships that are validated by a process of scientific method and peer-review.  We absolutely need these current efforts to continue.  But so do we need to consider the establishment of the next generation of ideations required for investigating our Universe underpinning our next human advances (limiting comments to humans here), which needs alternate ideas or threads of ideas to achieve this goal. Please refer to my response to Psreddy above, especially noting that no change in understanding or technological advancement (as we humans call it) has come from thinking the same.  Sometimes we have to examine the seemingly absurd to arrive at the next leap of understanding our Universe.  How many scientists in the past have been crucified, literally, for trying to demonstrate something we now recognise as fact i.e. actually matching wha is happening in the Universe?

Please accept my apologies for any typos.

[imetheman]

I had written elsewhere on the forum on another thread which appears to address the issue of causation and a definition of what constitutes 'God'. (I have copied and pasted it below).   

The moment of the creation of life on Earth occurred at the precise moment that a particular arrangement and construction of inanimate chemical elements combined in such a way that the resulting structure of the 'photoelectric' molecule expanded and contracted in sequence with the 24 hr Sun/Earth cycle of day and night. Before the appearance of this molecule on our planet, the movement of all matter which existed on the surface of our planet was governed solely by the force of gravity and as such entirely predictable.

The creation of the 1st photoelectric molecule represents the commencement of the beginning of time for life on Earth.

The repeated rhythmical physical action of movement in 3-D space of the constant acceleration and deceleration of the photoelectric  molecule as it expands and contracts [relative to the velocity of the surface of the planet and the gravitational force of the Sun - as the surface of the planet rotates around it's axis] creates an EM wave of radiation which emanates outward at the speed of light from the surface of the planet at a particular specific wavelength frequency. This EM wavelength of life carries a message which radiates outward into infinity, and it is that life is capable of evolving on the surface of this planet. It is important to note that the EM wavelength of life emanates from the surface of the planet only and not from the planet as a whole.

The wavelength of life is a combination of the resonant wavelength frequencies of the orbital velocities which occurs within the Goldilocks zone which surrounds every a star - where water exists in liquid form - and also the orbital velocity at the surface of the planet around it's axis.  The acceleration and deceleration of points on the surface of the planet [at the Planck scale of movement relative with centre of the nearest star at any given moment in time] creates a spiral as it moves through 4 -D space-time. The velocity of the surface of any given planet around it's axis [ie the wavelength frequency of Planck seconds must also accommodate the existence of water as remaining a liquid at the surface of the planet.   

The pre-existence of liquid water on the surface of the planet facilitated the specific formation of the  particular arrangement of the atoms of the photoelectric chemical molecule - otherwise the circumstances required for life to evolve on this planet would never have arisen in the first place.

The frequency of the 3-D movement of the 1st molecule of life, relative to the movement in 3-D space of the surrounding inanimate matter in the environment [which  is wholly governed by the law of  gravity] is in harmony with the combined stellar and planetary EM radiation. It should be possible to observe the thumbprint of the wavelength of living organisms existing on the surface of the planet within the EM spectrum [ = force of gravity ] which is being radiated from that planet.

At the precise moment that deceleration in one direction is transformed into acceleration in the 180 degree opposite direction, [at the apex of the expansion / contraction / in out movement] we can say that at some point in time, a particle of matter which exists at the planck scale, could be considered as being static in space before it begins to accelerate in the opposite direction.

According to the laws of physics and gravity which applies to inanimate matter, this particular 180 degree movement of a particle of matter in the immediately opposite direction is totally unpredictable. From the moment that the point particle is regarded as being static and unmoving in space to the moment that the acceleration in the opposite direction completes a distance of 1 Planck length, it can be legitimately stated that the point particle has ceased to exist in either time or space.

As the accelerating particle returns in the opposite direction, it occupies the last known coordinate in space-time of the particle [before all movement is stopped and it disappeared]. The new particle moves back in time to occupy the same coordinate it once occupied in the past.  The subsequent collision which occurs at the coordinate between the old decelerating negatively charged particle and the new identical positively charged returning particle results in their mutual instantaneous annihilation.

This event represents the Big Bang of a newly created universe. However this new universe includes the wavelength frequency of the movement of a living organism within it's geometry. The 1st molecule of life represents the creator of our own universe. The further evolution of the structure of this 1st molecule would be determined by it's response to  the circumstances of it's immediate environment.  The molecule would eventually evolve to the moment that it could intentionally move a part of it's body in a specific direction in response to changes in it's environment. This intentionality of movement represents the baseline definition of the free will of the organism and the emergence of consciousness. The relative intelligence of any given organism is simply determined by the degree to which the organism can  correlate external information and intentionally react  to change.

The important point about the application of the free will is that it represents the compulsion of the organism to intentionally move  which therefore results in a physical acceleration of  movement in 3-D space. The future position of a particle which has been moved through the application of it's free will, is entirely unpredictable by any application of the law of gravity. Every moving living organism creates an entirely new universe at the apex of the deceleration / acceleration of intentional movement.       
 
  The calories which are required to move the particle in the opposite direction by a distance of 1 Planck length represents the amount of energy which is incorporated into the equation at the moment of the Big Bang.

[pasala]

Mr imetheman

Well, you have explained in detail, thank you.  Yes, 3-D Space time is a great mathematical foundation.  Einstein has constructed a beautiful 3-D Space.  It is the perpetual movement of matter that plays key role and it is this movement which is base for 4-D Space i.e., time. 

Einstein was quite genius, relativity helped him to come out of the “universal law of gravitation” and carried out number of tests, including wrist watch. He knows pretty well that attraction of matter is least one, Earth is pulling apple and at the same apple is also pulling the Earth.  He knew that both these attractions are least one and looked at Space.  Actually at that time lot of research was going on Atoms and he was surprised to see huge energy coming from Atomic Bomb.  Actually energy is multiplying several times.  They thought that total energy is coming from the atom only and thus equated matter with energy.

At that time Mach’s theory and Newton’s bucket theory were very much famous and these helped Einstein to come to a conclusion that Space is being influenced by Earth and Space is completely filled with matter. 

Matter which is raising from Earth, why should it stop at an exact place and what makes it or how it pushes or pulls space.  At that time in fact, lot of research was going on different types of particles and scientists noticed internal energy of particle coming out and developing as a Gravity curve.  When it is Earth, innumerable number of particles and if each particle emits energy, it is a wonderful imagination.  Keeping this in mind, finally Einstein turned towards Newton’s Gravity curve as his final destination. 

A simple incident that happened at the early turned my thinking towards this theory differently.  Ours is a poor family from India.   In the house, kitchen is separated by a small 3 feet wall on one side and the other side is open and food was cooked using firewood in the evening. It is a severe winter season and cool breeze chasing all the corners except near kitchen up to 10 to 12 feet.  When noticed this difference, it is little bit surprise to me, how and why it is hot at that exact place.  Actually firewood was used to cook food in the evening itself and there after no fire wood was used.  When I had removed ashes, charcoal was still in red color.  Small amount of radiation released by charcoal was able to resist cool breeze.  I had realized that:

01  When firewood was burnt it established a base, “Energy base”.
02  Small amount of energy released by charcoal protected this base for longer period.

If we substitute this to our Earth:

01  Once our Earth is also ball of fire only and released lot of energy into open area and it helped in developing ‘Energy base’ on this Earth.
02 At present Earth is burning charcoal only and energy released by it is maintaining ‘energy base’ on this Earth.

Space is not curved by matter but by the presence of energy base.  At the equator, where Earth is releasing lot of Energy, ‘Energy base’ is strong and it is pushing matter to new heights.  When we move towards poles ‘Energy base’ weakens and space comes down to Earth.  This is the curvature of space time. 

Suppose if the Earth fails to release energy it turns out as a 2-D Space or flat.  Since energy base is strong on this Earth, 3-D space is formed and 4th dimension time came into existence.

How the matter is moving and what is the ‘X’ force pushing the matter from A to B.  In all 2-D space, where there is no concentration of matter.  It is indeed surprise to see, why Gravity curve is absent in all 2-D space.  When the particles of the Planet creates or develops Gravity curve, why not in 2-D space.

In 3-D space, if matter moves from one place to other place, a 4th dimension Time comes out.  Suppose if there is no movement or delay in movement of matter, time delays.  In fact movement of matter is not perpetual.  Keeping in mind Minkowski space time,  "Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality", tied space with time.  But in future I don’t think space and time co-exist together.

This is not criticizing Einstein, but for, to have a meaningful discussion only.

Yours
Psreddy

[guest39538]

I was just looking over this thread and I have looked at this picture. Something in the picture triggered my mind and I related it to my own ideas.  Now ignoring all your explanation and using just the picture, you are trying to say and almost said what I have said and I give you half of credit for half of the explanation in  the picture.
You are in essence explaining my N-field but only half of it.  I understand your picture thoroughly, but your explanation of your own thoughts is terrible.
Firstly lose the quark idea and concentrate only on the spacial fields involved .  Explain it in field terms using conventional science such as polarities of the field(s).
But yes you are part correct .

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

Firstly lose the quark idea and concentrate only on the spacial fields involved .  Explain it in field terms using conventional science such as polarities of the field(s).

Do you also believe space-time has no reference frame or that there is no aether? I freely admit that my background in physics is a high school AP course and 6 years studying Astronomy when I was a kid, so I certainly don't have the know how to put my words into correct physics terms. I could hardly tell you the difference between velocity and momentum anymore.
You said your theory relates to my picture? Do you have a simple explanation for your theory or better still post it so I can read it. I won't stick around if its long winded and confusing. I'm not your college professor reading your paper you paid me to read.

Thanks for saying you like the picture.

[guest39538]

Firstly lose the quark idea and concentrate only on the spacial fields involved .  Explain it in field terms using conventional science such as polarities of the field(s).

Do you also believe space-time has no reference frame or that there is no aether? I freely admit that my background in physics is a high school AP course and 6 years studying Astronomy when I was a kid, so I certainly don't have the know how to put my words into correct physics terms. I could hardly tell you the difference between velocity and momentum anymore.
You said your theory relates to my picture? Do you have a simple explanation for your theory or better still post it so I can read it. I won't stick around if its long winded and confusing. I'm not your college professor reading your paper you paid me to read.

Thanks for saying you like the picture.

I called my theory the N-field, it is a unified field theory that explains gravity and space time curvature in one swoop.  You can find this thread in this section called N-field.
I believe there is an ''ether'' but not like we would of imagined. I also believe in an absolute reference frame that has dielectric properties.
See other thread.

[pasala]

Mr Trevorjhonson32

You have posted theoretical physics in a better way and i read the following captioned subject several times. 

“When the edge of the gravity field of the quark touches the gravity field of the planet, the part of the outer layer touching the planet’s gravity field becomes as dense as the outer layer of the planet’s gravity field”.

I think simply studying this as subject is not going to fetch anything and there is a need to analyse. 

01 Gravity field of the quark
02 Gravity field of the Planet.
03 Interaction of gravity field of quark with the gravity field of planet.

How this total process is going on and I am sure nothing can be produced out of thin air.  If this theory is to be correct, gravity field of the quark and the gravity field of the planet are must.  But it never tells how a gravity field is created or the medium by which it is working.    This is correct on Earth where there is a strong Gravity field.  Suppose if it is on Moon where gravity field is weak and the gravity field of space time is also weak.  In case if the quark is capable of creating its own gravity why it is weak on Moon.  A quark on  Earth or Moon never changes its quality. 

By this we can say that a quark has nothing to do with gravity and it is the medium that is creating gravity field of the quark and also helping the planet to create gravity field. 

Ok, let us see with a simple example.  Suppose let us assume that you are in a house and it is completely covered by darkness.  If you light a candle, light start spreading upto certain area and in case if you lights up more candles, more light and it start inter acting with the roof, walls and the things in the room.  Here we are comparing quarks with candle.  A candle is after all candle only, unless it is lighted up, it has no capacity to give light and a candle by itself  cannot inter act with other things in the house.  It is only when you lights a candle, energy comes out and turns as a light and this light inter acts.

In normal conditions, a quark by itself and space by itself has no capacity to create gravity.  When there is no gravity, there is no question of interaction.  These things are possible in existing gravity field only. .

Actually total process is going by a simple medium, it is creating gravity field of the quark, it is creating planet’s gravity and it is also interacting with both of them.   The same medium is extending and interacting with other planets and Sun.

Yours
Psreddy

[guest39538]

Mr Trevorjhonson32

You have posted theoretical physics in a better way and i read the following captioned subject several times. 

“When the edge of the gravity field of the quark touches the gravity field of the planet, the part of the outer layer touching the planet’s gravity field becomes as dense as the outer layer of the planet’s gravity field”.

I think simply studying this as subject is not going to fetch anything and there is a need to analyse. 

01 Gravity field of the quark
02 Gravity field of the Planet.
03 Interaction of gravity field of quark with the gravity field of planet.

How this total process is going on and I am sure nothing can be produced out of thin air.  If this theory is to be correct, gravity field of the quark and the gravity field of the planet are must.  But it never tells how a gravity field is created or the medium by which it is working.    This is correct on Earth where there is a strong Gravity field.  Suppose if it is on Moon where gravity field is weak and the gravity field of space time is also weak.  In case if the quark is capable of creating its own gravity why it is weak on Moon.  A quark on  Earth or Moon never changes its quality. 

By this we can say that a quark has nothing to do with gravity and it is the medium that is creating gravity field of the quark and also helping the planet to create gravity field. 

Ok, let us see with a simple example.  Suppose let us assume that you are in a house and it is completely covered by darkness.  If you light a candle, light start spreading upto certain area and in case if you lights up more candles, more light and it start inter acting with the roof, walls and the things in the room.  Here we are comparing quarks with candle.  A candle is after all candle only, unless it is lighted up, it has no capacity to give light and a candle by itself  cannot inter act with other things in the house.  It is only when you lights a candle, energy comes out and turns as a light and this light inter acts.

In normal conditions, a quark by itself and space by itself has no capacity to create gravity.  When there is no gravity, there is no question of interaction.  These things are possible in existing gravity field only. .

Actually total process is going by a simple medium, it is creating gravity field of the quark, it is creating planet’s gravity and it is also interacting with both of them.   The same medium is extending and interacting with other planets and Sun.

Yours
Psreddy

Yes , but it is not a gravity field, it is two opposite polarity fields merged into one to create a field of solidity relative to other fields. The polarities of the merged fields  being the cause and effect of the solidity of the field.  In Trevor's drawing, he has left  a radius between fields, the actual radius between fields is r₀.   In the drawing he also put the underlying ''field'' as being space time.  That would be incorrect, the space-time is the bodily fields, the underlying field is an  absolute reference frame and  is timeless.
Space-time and relativistic affects occupy absolute space.   I believe the sky is blue because where the fields touch each other is applied pressure according to Newton's 3rd law.

[pasala]

Well, thank u Thebox and you have not used word 'terrible for that also. It is true that you are having very good knowledge over the subject but please come out of the existing subject and think beyond. In a dark room, if you light a candle light start spreading upto certain area and if you light another candle and light spreads upto certain area.  Light coming from both the candles start meeting at a different place.  This is the method and way by which fields are created and inter-acts.

Without base, polarity field of particle and the polarity field of planet how they inter-act with each other and merges. Please remember it is not the question of Newton's third law and the way by which both the fields interact with each other  but how they are created.   Please come out of the existing subject and think beyond on how these fields are created and the medium by which they interact and merge.

Yours
Psreddy

[guest39538]

Well, thank u Thebox and you have not used word 'terrible for that also. It is true that you are having very good knowledge over the subject but please come out of the existing subject and think beyond. In a dark room, if you light a candle light start spreading upto certain area and if you light another candle and light spreads upto certain area.  Light coming from both the candles start meeting at a different place.  This is the method and way by which fields are created and inter-acts.

Without base, polarity field of particle and the polarity field of planet how they inter-act with each other and merges. Please remember it is not the question of Newton's third law and the way by which both the fields interact with each other  but how they are created.   Please come out of the existing subject and think beyond on how these fields are created and the medium by which they interact and merge.

Yours
Psreddy

What is interesting is the particle itself which emits the spacial field , does not have to exist to be a ''particle''.   Two spacial fields merged to make one field, i.e the atom , is all that is needed to create a ''force feedback''.
In essence a ''particle'' can not exist without there being two opposite polarity fields to unify the two independent fields into one single ''particle''.
In other words and in trying to explain further more, imagine a ''virtual reality'' that has solidity because of the merged fields, quite a scary thought indeed.
However I think the question you are asking me is how does the process first start, the beginning, the formation of ''things''?  I am not sure I want to answer or think about that because that would be ''playing God''.
I understand how it all works I think , but my problem is an underlying field or ''ether'' may suggest intelligent design unless we accept that space , just is and always was.

[pasala]

Well thank you for the quick response, indeed. 

At present subject mainly tells about the existing conditions in a gravity field.  This is possible due to lot of research and hard work done by them.  But it is happening due to a simple medium, which is creating field at the particle and at the space and inter acting with both of them. 

We are not in a position to decide what exactly that medium is.  If it is a EMF than it has to act differently but it is not so. 

In my view it is EMF only, but created and working differently. 

We are producing and transforming electricity with lot of speed in a particular route and thus strong EMF is created.  Suppose if the electricity is moved into the open, it is relaxed and thus EMF.  This is what happening in the space.

It is true, God created us and has given knowledge to think and to create or develop something.

Thanking you, we will meet after one week.

Yours
Psreddy

[guest39538]

Well thank you for the quick response, indeed. 

At present subject mainly tells about the existing conditions in a gravity field.  This is possible due to lot of research and hard work done by them.  But it is happening due to a simple medium, which is creating field at the particle and at the space and inter acting with both of them. 

We are not in a position to decide what exactly that medium is.  If it is a EMF than it has to act differently but it is not so. 

In my view it is EMF only, but created and working differently. 

We are producing and transforming electricity with lot of speed in a particular route and thus strong EMF is created.  Suppose if the electricity is moved into the open, it is relaxed and thus EMF.  This is what happening in the space.

It is true, God created us and has given knowledge to think and to create or develop something.

Thanking you, we will meet after one week.

Yours
Psreddy

Zero point energy of either polarity will expand by it's own mechanism of being likewise to itself.  So although we could conceive an underlying field that the ''polarity'' permeates through such as a ''conductive ''ether'' , the underlying field is not itself needed for the polarities to expand/permeate away from the 0 point. However I think an underlying ''conductive field'' would be needed to create the relative motion of bodies and the bodies fields.
Newtons laws and a body will remain in motion unless acted upon by external forces  extended also to cover internal forces.
I think a ''conductive'' underlying field would allow bodies to pull themselves along the field retaining velocity , but at this time I am unsure how a ''conductive field'' would not also slow the object down at the same time because the ''conductive'' field would offer isotropic force of attraction to all of the field. This meaning while the body travelled ''forward'' , pulling itself along the field, the field behind the body would also pull back . The body being equally attracted to the field ''behind'' it.
I am not sure you will understand any of that, but I have tried to explain in basics.

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

I think a ''conductive'' underlying field would allow bodies to pull themselves along the field retaining velocity , but at this time I am unsure how a ''conductive field'' would not also slow the object down at the same time because the ''conductive'' field would offer isotropic force of attraction to all of the field. This meaning while the body travelled ''forward'' , pulling itself along the field, the field behind the body would also pull back . The body being equally attracted to the field ''behind'' it.

In my theory the conductive grid is inactive and only becomes active when energy passes through it. Matter effects void blocks that line the conductive grid. These void blocks are made of a conductive grid much smaller that is acted upon by matter in the form of a squeezing on space-time that causes a gravity field.

[pasala]

Mr thebox
Let us suppose that both of us are in a class and the teacher started explaining about “Electric field”.  When the charge is created in an electric cable, electrons moves out and develops as an electric field.

My mind stopped at the very basic point, when a charge is created in an electric cable how it develops an Electric field.  Where does it is drawing electrons.  Suppose if the electrons from the charge comes out to form or develop a field then how electricity is flowing to far away places.

Basically, in my view whether it is AC or DC, if the electrons comes out from the charge to develop an Electric field then it has to stop flowing within short distance but it is not happening so. 

My mind started exploring different possibilities. 

Finally I came to a conclusion that electrons in the open area due to attraction or whatever reason it may are developing or forming as an electric field and are turning out as an obstruction.

If this idea is correct than electricity must flow with maximum speed in vacuum since there is no obstruction and to prove this I am carrying out practical tests.

It is true that it is very difficult to explain in a better way and to convince others.

This is what happening here in the case of space time also.

Here, from Mr Trevorjhonson32’s space time:
“Just like the super dense space-time of the quark puts a transcendent squeezing effect on the surrounding space-time its in, so too does the planet's gravity field have this effect on the edge of the quarks gravity field. When the edge of the gravity field of the quark touches the gravity field of the planet, the part of the outer layer touching the planet's gravity field becomes as dense as the outer layer of the planet's gravity field. The space time of the quarks gravity field that is squeezed becomes smaller in size, the quark and its gravity field then experience momentum in the direction of the squeezing, each successive layer of the planet's gravity field pulling it in faster. The denser space which increases the closer to the planet, has the more powerful attraction force and the quark is pulled in that direction giving it momentum energy. The quark and the planet both pull on each other and effect one another in ratio to their size”

Here you are all thinking differently and my mind is moving in other direction.

If this theory is to be correct:
01  Quarks must create its own gravity field.
02  Planet must have its own gravity field.
03  Gravity field of the space time has to  inter act with the gravity field of the quark.

If this theory, of course not by Trevorjhonson32 is correct than:
Why gravity differs from planet to planet.  When a quark is capable of creating its own gravity field why don’t it on other planets.  In normal conditions, if the mass of the planet is capable of creating its own gravity, why don’t it on moon.

In my view space time is true on Earth where there is strong gravity field.  Strong gravity of the Earth interacts with the quarks gravity field. It is due to the force/pressure created by this interaction that a part of the energy of the quark comes out and develops as a Gravity field.  Our scientists were surprised to see the Gravity field of the quark.  But they have forgot that we are already in the strong gravity field and it is influencing each and everything and a quark is no exception to this. 

Suppose if it is on Moon where gravity is weak, quarks may not be in a position to develop same gravity as it does on Earth.

Basically it is the gravity of the planet that plays key role. 

But as of now we don’t know how a gravity field is created and how it works. 

In other words we are taking pressure/force on objects of the planet as Gravity.

While carrying out research one must keep in mind that we are already in a strong Gravity field.

Yours
Psreddy

[GoC]

Thebox

I think a ''conductive'' underlying field would allow bodies to pull themselves along the field retaining velocity , but at this time I am unsure how a ''conductive field'' would not also slow the object down at the same time because the ''conductive'' field would offer isotropic force of attraction to all of the field. This meaning while the body travelled ''forward'' , pulling itself along the field, the field behind the body would also pull back . The body being equally attracted to the field ''behind'' it.

The answer is c. c allows motion in the first place. The photon is a disturbance wave on a grid structure and the grid structure is constant energy c. It neither slows down nor speeds up so the disturbance is a constant velocity. Our universe is a sea of energy otherwise all would be frozen in space unable to change position. Most take motion for granted as the Copenhagen interpretation (allowed magic). Only mechanics can allow motion from motion without magic. c might be slowing down as mass is being produced in the universe but we would not recognize the slower c because we are a part of that c.

c is the motor for electrons. This is why mechanical and light clocks measure the same time relationship In the same frame.