Motion in space is impossible

One thing it is of vital importance to understand is that when one moves from “here” to “there” in space, one is not actually moving in space; rather, one is moving in time. When I arrive “there,” “there” is not the same “there” to which I determined to move when I was “here.”

Let me explain in detail. Let’s say I am standing at a position X at 7:01 PM. We’ll combine this to read X7:01, a timespace position. I determine that I wish to move to position Y (perhaps Y is a spot across the room, over by the sofa). I do so, arriving at Y at 7:02 PM. Y7:02. When I look back to X from Y7:02, I am looking back at X7:02, not X7:01. X7:01 is now in a part of a space which I can no longer see. It is part of the past. Likewise, when I was standing at X7:01, looking across the room and deciding to move to position Y, I was actually deciding to move to Y7:01. But instead, I moved to Y7:02. I did not move across the intervening space from X7:01 to Y7:01. I moved across the intervening time from X7:01 to Y7:02. One can never be in two spatially contiguous places at the same time. I can never move from X7:01 to Y7:01. Nothing can ever move from X7:01 to Y7:01. Motion through space is impossible, without also moving through time.

Indeed, the part of me that determined to leave position X7:01 never actually left it. Even as I arrive at Y7:02, that other part of me is still there at X7:01. When I stand at Y7:02 and look back at X, I do not see that part, because I am looking at X7:02, not X7:01.

How are spaces connected in time? What velocity is necessary to move me from one moment to the next, from one position in time to another? I don’t mean spatial velocity, the force I need to achieve to propel myself from X to Y. I mean, what force, what velocity through time, is necessary to move me from X7:01 to X7:02? Because a force, a velocity, must be required, whether I am moving or stationary in the spatial part of timespace. We are all of us being propelled through timespace whether we wish it or not. Some velocity, some force, must therefore be exerted upon us to propel us from X7:01 to X7:02, in addition to the force I must exert to move from X7:01 to Y7:02.

Post 4

In dealing with reference frames, and claiming that no reference frame is preferred over any other, that is, that all reference frames are relative and there is no absolute reference frame: if we, say, choose a rocket in uniform motion as a reference frame, there is obviously space external to the rocket, so how can we not say that the rocket’s reference frame is inferior to that external space? The rocket is demonstrably, entirely contained by that external space, so the reference frame attached to that external space must necessarily be superior to that of the rocket. By this reasoning, since any possible reference frame we might choose is contained within the universe, then all reference frames must be inferior to the universe as a whole. Therefore, there is an absolute frame of reference that comprises the universe as a whole, and any measurements made relative to an inferior reference frame are correct in thought only, and we will be making an error if we attribute any real, physical significance to such measurements. It doesn’t matter that we cannot pinpoint the universal reference frame. This inability to pinpoint it does not mean we may ignore its existence in physical theory.