Space Physically being the same Phenomenon as Time

 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 physical motion. That’s how I've known it to be written in mathematics and how we naturally perceive it. To recognize this part, it is of utmost importance to remember we are talking about the ongoing existence of distance having any physical relevance in our universe, not as we can imagine it, or write it. 

Simply put, distance has no physical existence or meaning without the change of position of energy. It is an axiom that space has no physical meaning, cannot be observed, or be interacted with in any way without the change of position of energy. To put that another way, without the change of position of energy any distance you imagine or write on paper would be infinite, that is not our physical reality. Because in my experience this is often hard for people to recognize, for the price of being redundant, I’ll state using different words; a physical distance can only be observed via the change of position of energy, it can only be traversed by a change of position of energy, it’s existence can only be determined by a change of position of energy. Writing it, or imaging it as static is not a physical existence.

Considering that physically time can be observed as the change of position of energy, that distance is only physically observable and relevant with a change position of energy; one can see they are one phenomenon that we can think of separately, yet only observe in a single function. Perhaps this physical function can be applied to Einstein's spacetime and it malleability?

It might pose some questions for distances describe to be space-like; but such questions are for physicists to consider. I mainly want to convey that which is fully observable and empirical in this post.

 In summary, at the most fundamental level, the universe is continually changing due to the change of position of its energies. That fundamental function is without pause and ongoing. Observable change attributable to time requires both space and the change of position of energy in that space. Physically that is a single function. Space, time, space-time are the single phenomenon that is the change of position of energy. Our units of time are a defined quantity of that. We use them as a reference measurement of it. This is no different or more complex than a using a quantity of mass as a reference to measure against other masses. It is a simple observable axiom in any manner one could make a direct observation. As such it holds strong promise being a fundamental foundation for theory's that describe physical processes.


[1] Space, distance, and separation will be used herein interchangeably, all refer to the separation aspect of space-time.

[2] Energy of all forms inclusive of matter.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Context and Basis

  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 ...
Read more

Time as an Observable Empirical Function

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...
Read more