Space-Time Physically a Single Function and Axiom

  Whatever disagreements and misconceptions some may have about the physical function of time I discussed, the one thing most will agree with is time measures change. What can be gleamed from changes we measure over time that can also be directly observed? Take a look at some of the changes we measure with time such as driving in a car, humans as we grow and age, Earthly erosion, plate tectonics, or even its position in the solar system. What is common and at the core of all those?   For a moving car its change of position is obvious, the Earthly changes happen over a scale of distance and time that is difficult to notice in a short-term direct observation; the same is true for the growth and aging of a human. Yet, over longer time scales the physical changes of position in space of human cells and their functions, or the plates that ride on the mantle is as obvious as a moving car. Science compares these changes of position in space to a device that measures consistent incr...

 I've had discussions where some people have misunderstood what is indisputable via a direct observation, therefore I've added this addendum. Anyone can question an interpretation, or what might be considered beyond what is directly observable. In this addendum I whish to add some clarity and insights to the observable physical functions I discussed.   For the Earths rotation , the pendulum swing of a grandfather clock, the oscillation of a quartz crystal , etc., they are all observable physical processes that happen in time and are used to define a unit of time. That observable process is not disputable, it is that they change position at a relatively consistent speed per distance. We equate that physical process to a unit of time.   What is absolute for distance to have any physical relevance is also indisputable however, I’ve known this aspect to be more difficult to recognize. While I stated it requires in some form a change of position of energy, perhaps that mi...

  For an accurate context and explanation please read the posts in order starting with the first 1st:    https://acopais.blogspot.com/2025/08/before-i-start-with-main-topic-i-should.html 2nd:   https://acopais.blogspot.com/2025/08/i-want-to-demonstrate-that-both-time.html For this third post I want to demonstrate how space/distance [1] is the same physical phenomenon as time, why they are inseparable and a single phenomenon. Due to how I perceived the world, and what I was taught, the singular physical aspect of distance that is also time was much more difficult to recognize.   As explained in the second post, if time is the change of position of energy [2] then distance must be the same phenomenon if that phenomenon is to be singular and they are inseparable. That might be, if most of you are like me, at first perplexing to see how it is possible. At first glance space or separation other than being malleable due to relative motion and gravity, is not a phy...

For a accurate context and explanation please read the posts in order starting with the first 1st:    https://acopais.blogspot.com/2025/08/before-i-start-with-main-topic-i-should.html I want the reader to see that when directly observed both time and space individually in any physical sense exists only as a single phenomenon. While imaginations and mathematics can separate them, as a physical function the observable is only one phenomenon. Physically, they only have relevance as a single function.   For me it was easier to first to recognize the physical function of time. To better understand time I started to look more closely at various types of clocks and the ways we measure it. The rotation of the Earth as a day, our orbit around the Sun being a year, mechanical clocks, quartz oscillators (the most common time device used today), and atomic clocks (specifically cesium-133 based atomic clocks), our most precise measurements of time [1] . Anyone can easily see the c...

  Before I discuss how space, and time are empirically inclusive as only a single physical function, I want to give some context and make some disclosures regarding this blog. One reason I wrote it is human nature; it's our nature to stick with what we know, and continue believing what we thought we already knew. We tend to build on it no matter what, if there were existing errors that can compound them. Scientist too are not immune. I think it’s a reason why Newtons laws of motion stood strong for over 200 years in spite of being troublesome for electromagnetism , and other physical observations it couldn’t exactly explain for a long while before Einstein. While there are a few things I brought up that are outside this next context. Consider when I refer to "physical", as that which can be seen and verified in a direct observation or experiment.   While we tend to  believe contrary, in reality most of us have a hard time completely removing pre-existing bias and ...