Relativity is in the Essence

Reality: The physical conditions is by accidence a rudimentary nominal we interpret as the Universe

If space quakes in the grid are a thing - as suggested, it could be interesting whether these violent processes we sense as a weak pulse in the space's grid tensor leave the space-time changed and curled up like a kinetic pile of entangled space, or the energy rolls across the scale like a wave in a ruler with the effect that the residual potential constitutes.

Cosmos is the actual collections of objects it is representing, archaic phased informations going past our limits for processing time as a ruler.

Things and ideas confirmed by gravitational waves

Two things that would make scientific life much easier was if gravity was an actual particle and time and Space a thing in the Universe. But even we make a strong case out of it, the gap between objects and the related duration is accidental through observatory methods, not by physics.

Truth is, that we still are left to exploit the fact that the EM light is the institution of coherence in the Universe, but the stunning idea of gravity waves is just as mind boggling as the Big Bang.

All the problems of meaningfully vowing an essence of time - to have something to begin at the Big Bang - into the fabric of Space to the thing called Space-time, just got a little easier with the possibility to link EM processes to phenomenas in the "fabric of Space".

Gravity affects the shape of space, both in the world of the very big relations and very small, relativity is in the essence.

In general relativity, time and space are inextricably linked in space-time. Space-time actually is a four-dimensional theory. If space-time otherwise would have a flat geometry, it was equivalent to having no gravity.

That gravity waves is energy demonstrate that there is a coherent accidence in space - even across courses in a cosmic time scale. It suggest evidence of the idea of the hybrid space-time, and confirms that the Big Bang took place. Coherent physical phenomena also make space a universal state, which confirms that space is more than the gap between objects.

The stunning idea of gravity waves is just as mind boggling as the Big Bang. All the problems of meaningfully vowing an essence of time - to have something to begin at the Big Bang - into the fabric of Space to the thing called Space-time, just got a little easier.

It is more than 100 years ago that Albert Einstein - in the theory of relativity - predicted the existence of gravitational waves, a phenomenon explained as oscillations in time and space, which according to the general theory of relativity occur when masses accelerate rapidly relative to each other.

The general theory of relativity basically is a theory of how gravity affects the shape of space itself. It can almost be described by imagining space as an elastic super-thin medium, stretched out and tightened with a grid-like tensor, all performing the invisible job of adding Space to mass and vice versa.

In general relativity, time and space are inextricably linked in space-time. Space-time actually is a four-dimensional theory. If space-time instead had a flat geometry, it would be equivalent to having no gravity. In other words, gravity affects the shape of space.

In Einstein's theory, gravity is thus in fact merely a consequence of the fact that space curves in the vicinity of a heavy object, and that objects in the vicinity move in a curved space. In Newtons mechanical Universe gravity causes an apple to fall to the ground.

In Einstein's theory, it is a consequence of space curving in the vicinity of the Earth's large mass, and the fact that things are pulled down towards the Earth is due to it being forced to move in a curved space.

By the way, the earth is of course also pulled up a little towards the thing that falls, but it is really in the small things department.

In the general theory of relativity, we love to mess around with singularities, black holes and the invisible connection between light and gravity. The idea is to add similar properties from our concrete world to Space and let mass and energy curve space-time, almost like a bowling ball will bulge a recess in a mattress.

If a significant impact on space-time happens, such as if two massively heavy objects collide - e.g. a neutron star and a black hole, the process will release so much energy that space-time, in its elasticity, is pulled out and expands explosively as the energy rages out of the objects, causing shock waves that spiral out of the epicentre of the collision.

This process of rapidly accelerating heavy objects generates a lot of energy, which deforms space and time around it and then moves at the speed of light into the universe.

We therefore here use the example that two black holes that collide will give rise to these fluctuations.?As a curiosity to the theory, Einstein further predicted that we would probably never find them.

As this so-called Space-time is run on a rubber-like thread - acting grid-tensor in the scale of the Universe - this new found feature - relativity in the essence - is the reason that scale is keeping Space balanced even distance is running away.

If gravity waves are acting in a similar fashion as an instance of echoed shock wave in our planet, we can, by learning to decode the data, unravel knowledge from the deep hidden secrets of the Universe.

Any system - that similar to radar systems - combine mappings from different sources in a grid-like fashion to decide occurrence and deviation, would be helpful to map Space.

But in case we had the opportunity already, we would have similar difficulties to determine 3-dimensional depth as with distance in radar ground data.

The reason you can map to a grid, is that you have ground radars positioned in a grid of 10 nautical miles.

To map the Universe, geo-stational data need to be supplied by both physical probes to add the depth to the data sets - and not at least a deeper understanding of the Space, eg. a grid-combination of positions, constellations and gravitation to asses the questions of depth.

As gravitational waves reads out as frequent interferences in the grid it's still just sparkles, and in terms of depth, its a bit like to explain nuances of turquoise in the terms of contrast.

To reasonably attribute data we must be able to confirm that deep space data sets isn't deviating by probing through comparable sources in different environments to filter out noise.

I would say that the waves it self has no interference - at all - as they are variations of a bouncing system-wise grid-tensor.

The tensor variation is driven by a duration of gravitational imbalance rippling the grid, causing local bouncing as the currently (passing) shock effect whips the fabric of space, like when you throw a stone in the sea and a ring of wave is spreading over the surface.

More importantly, it tells us that Space has no depth but is wide and ocean-like, that curvature and gravity is an illusion or that gravitational waves is something else than we think.

The idea of Space as a thing - and not just an unattributed gap between things - allow us to regard this nothingness - as time and distance (which by this point is the same) and wether you at some time observe something at distance, or by going a distance observe something - even you move in a straight forward manner, the thing you observes will have curved Space, and even by being in Space you will your attract fabric in and around your self.

This means that even space is flat - what makes it Space (as a gap) also makes it curve.

As though gravitation is pulling mass together, Space still is expanding, and this confirms that forces are in play that bend, attract and expands - all at the same time - and the force that hold everything together equilibrium-wise, making up a continuum of space and time and wrap the Universe together, is this grid-tensor - some what like the surface of a soap bubble - space being self-contained and finite all-in-one, simultaneously with an ubiquitous negative gravity causing the grid to expand.

Relativity is in the Essence

The phenomena of gravitational waves is whopping the grid-tensor, like a splash in the water sends out energy in all directions rolling the stack of water body without moving anything, but the local vector.

The idea of sending laser beams in ping pong over long distances can, when the total distance becomes significant enough (currently approx. 1000 miles), register whether we experience "space quakes" or gravitational waves as we also call it when physics causes that the scale of Space fluctuates.

Assuming that the fluctuations due to gravitational waves of potential energy are scattering in space, and possibly passing an observational spot, the question is to which extent this data makes us wiser on space and manages to deepen our understanding of what space is apart from a gap between or around a lot of other things.

Positions and shapes, starting points, continuations and continuity characterize everything we have found so far.

If space quakes in the grid are a thing - as suggested, it could be interesting whether these violent processes we sense as a weak pulse in the space's grid tensor leave the space-time changed and curled up like a kinetic pile of entangled space, or the energy rolls across the scale like a wave in a ruler with the effect that the residual potential constitutes.

The geometry of this universe with 3 (2-like) habitable dimensions and 4 time- “directions”: Imaginary (space-time) and the real-time we can comprehend. Is a mathematical model, that enables the possibility to deal with e.g. singularities and black holes that else would be impossible to model smooth calculations about.

Lines can be "infinite" twisted and size-independable in 2 dimensions closed like an inverted or M?bius plane - or so called Minkowsky space - smart thinking like that leaves the universe with no end or beginning - there then are no singularities in the imaginary-time direction, because the absence of boundaries.

This absence of boundaries also means that the natural laws determines the state of the universe uniquely, in imaginary time. And if the state of the universe in imaginary time are known, one can calculate the state of the universe in "real time". These insights follows Hawkins thesis, that beautifully makes Einsteins "fabric of space" edible.

The intertwined space-time. Distance and time in one.

Running Einsteins theory of relativity down to the smallest extreme leads to The Singularity, it then turns out that Space once was infinitesimal smaller than tiny.

Nobody in their right mind expect that to be other than running theories to the extremes. But this is the extreme of our model, and what we to relate to and from where Space has inflated.

The world becomes from understanding - insight regarding natural contexts makes knowledge plausible, and it is by demonstration of coherence in between assumptions, events and constraints models are sprung.

The empirical layer of hypotheses makes it probable that reality has a character which follows the model that makes it evident. Evidence can only be regarded as general and universal without context-dependent conditions.

There can be many reasons why we choose to make interrelationships more likely to be true. It can be the only option to include a necessary condition impossible to obtain evidence about based on the nature of the conditions, or it may be unlikely that it will be possible to demonstrate the relationship directly.

When we choose to base models on the basis of axioms, theorems and constants, it is because it is not possible to directly confirm it:

The speed of light is constant

Before Big Bang there was only a Singularity

The World was created by the Big Bang.

After all, science it is about understanding, insight and probability, and evidence then grows out of how well the theory is anchored in reality to confirm the hypotheses.

Theories, hypotheses, models and the underlying proof of the models is then confirmable by observations from the real world.

Hawking popularized the concept of imaginary time in his book "The Universe in a Nutshell".

-, “One might think this means that imaginary numbers are just a mathematical game having nothing to do with the real world. From the viewpoint of positivist philosophy, however, one cannot determine what is real. All one can do is find which mathematical models describe the universe we live in. It turns out that a mathematical model involving imaginary time predicts not only effects we have already observed but also effects we have not been able to measure yet nevertheless believe in for other reasons. So what is real and what is imaginary? Is the distinction just in our minds?”,-

In the theory of relativity, time is multiplied by i, as a feature of the relationship between space and time, or it may be incorporated into time itself, as imaginary time, and the equations rewritten accordingly...

In physical cosmology, imaginary time may be incorporated into certain models of The Universe as solutions to the equations of general relativity. The Big Bang, eg., appears as a singularity in ordinary time. But when modelled with imaginary time, the singularity can be removed and the Big Bang functions like any other point in four-dimensional spacetime.

The physical standard model is relativistic by nature, holding ground from presumed constants and predictable contexts, the outcome of events will often appear to be inevitable.

But just as observations are likely to confirm the hypotheses that underlie the model - in theory - practice will often show the given answers, and as in most scientific constructions, the models consist of both theoretical constants and elements that describe developments and at the same time also provide the framework defining the limitations of the premises, by which they describe reality.

Causality is key to explainability

Science is predictable - this is exactly what characterizes science. Observations will confirm hypotheses and data confirm the models that are prerequisites for our view of reality.

By arguing that the singularity collapsed out of an undefined (out of scope) imbalance makes it subject for becoming the natural origin of this place we call The Universe, as explanation a rather clever invention because it then becomes an unprovable prerequisite.

This also means that the laws of physics as we know them by structural design has become in place after the Big Bang, as it requires a strange set of conditions existing before time where The Big Bang established this universe.

Normally we forward time just past the Big Bang to see a lot of stuff happens.

But still - this is not how everything was made - only the model event that define the start of this universe. In fact the physical standard model really does not have any good answers to how a singularity is going through a momental Big Bang and become this universe.

The explanations from the physical standard model leaves us with more questions than explanations - ie where does the energy come from? How did it turn out to prepare the forming of particles?

Logically we could argue that changes like a Big Bang would requires more than “one thing” - at least a Duality to imply changeability.

This is why the explanation can't just be it all came from the singularity and ended up in a big bang forming this Universe.

An oscillating universe is though a possibility - imagining the effect from an infinitesimal small dimension collapsing in an inverted plane could easily fuel both the expansion and collapse of a model connecting an oscillation of The Universe.

But today we more or less agree that the Universe originates from a Singularity.

To locate a any point in correlation to another it requires 7 points in 3 dimensions, to correlate to a “cosmic” value with duration we necessarily need to know where we are in relation to BB, in-calculate the stretching scale pretty accurate - from the BB to now in ordinary time, this of course presuppose that we know the geometry of space - which we don’t - and can account for how any region in space has developed across the theoretical “distance”. To any given point a shrunk distance can be designated from these informations.

Are we seeking the distance from the point of origin, we get by design that the distance is 0 at the Big Bang, so the answer would be the age of the universe - this far away: 13,8 billion years ago - a brake in eternity…

Splitting the theory into essence and accident - inherent and derived resultant properties, EM is not a minority force in the universe - but an essential (keystone) force that enables both energy / matter transcendence and balanced cosmic synthesis distributing and disperse energy across deep gravitational zones and almost empty space.

By taking what scientifically already is confirmed know to it's extremes, searching for a path of development without hidden mysterious particles in the dark - we explain phenomenas by essence and through accidence - to a nominal description of nucleosynthesis - there is no need for invisible buried particles like DM to explain the physics of galaxies.

The built-up in proximity of galaxies also develop a coating shield of decreased expansion by grid-tensor fixation.

The gravitational effect responsible for this is a secondary to interaction with photons by the spin of the moving particle causing a weak gravitationally pull differential to the next fermion (a chain of vectors) - like a polarised local gravity field binding to the Higgs Boson - independent to the photon (since it is mass less) and by that way amplify gravity by magnitude outside the detectable EM field.

?The field dependant binding link fermion particles to the Higgs scalar field, explaining the "unwillingness" to cluster, yet by the abundance able to cause a strong gravitationally constraining effect.

As it explains why regions with high mass density (and stellar production) does not expand.