What's the Fabric of space made out of?

Hi Trae. I assume your question has to do with time, relative to space, space being the thread topic. I'm sure you've heard the term, "time and eternity." Imo, time is the finite measurement of any given segment of eternity, and like space, consists of nothing and is made of nothing, but different from space in that space is existing area in which things exist.
Time is temporal and finite, whereas space is infinite and boundless, as per the buzsaw hypothesis.

My warehouse takes up a finite measurable three dimensional spatial area. Inside my warehouse is a three dimensional apatial area in which I store my things. I call this spatial area space. Time is the universe's 4th dimension, the time dimension, which measures the proportion/segment of eternity which the three spatial dimensions of my warehouse, i.e. warehouse space, are occupied with existing things of mine. Does that help?

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

Like time relative to eternity, designated areas of space can be measured, but imo, the space of the universe is boundless and immeasurable as to it's totality.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

Thanks Razd, for the cool physics 101 lesson. So I could've simply said:
'My spacetime warehouse has a single time dimension and three finite spatial dimensions.'

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

Please understand that I do much appreciate the answers and work you've gone to to explain the issues. I'm aware that you've certainly gone to a whole lot more work and study on physics over the years than I who am a beginner/novice. Imo, it may be good for you higher physics buffs to have some logical problems brought forth from the street laity since you don't likely have to deal with some of these logic questions in the science arena.I have definitely learned much from your work and hope we can continue to dialog on the issues that come up. Thanks much!

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

Mmm....then nonsense is cool with physics? Seriously, imo, the problem with too little regard for both common sense and logic is that these babys sometimes get thrown out with the bathwater in assessing claimed evidence.With that in mind, would you consider my Message 63 to Sylas as a logical proposition or a common sense proposition/problem? I'd be interested to see what you and others here would have for a response to Message 63. Changed "message 63" to "[msg=-63]", which actually takes one less character - try it, you'll like it! --AdminThis message has been edited by Admin, 03-12-2005 13:12 AM

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

I think you missunderstood my winkeyed observation, Ned. It was you, not me, who at least implied that nonsense is ok with physics, was it not, when you said, " thinking that physics has to make 'sense?" I took your comment here as to mean physics doesn't have to make sense implicating, imo, also, that what doesn't make sense implicates nonsense.Then I asked that you address my post 63, which has somewhat to do with common sense and logic, and which nobody seems to want to do. My realplayer takes a long time to load up in my slow system. I'd like to listen to it if I can get it up and will respond if and when I can get it to work. From the topics however, it didn't appear to be addressing my post problem directly, since photons are not a factor in the problem which I posed concerning space void of everything. It appears that it's beyond what you can address in your own words. Is that the problem?In the mean time I'll see what I can do to get my realplayer working.Thanks to Sidelined for the link.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

Thanks Razd. Unless I don't have something set right, it appears that's what I will need to do.However, I did get it up and painstakenly listened the best I could for about 35 minutes. My realplayer staccatoes, or maybe a better word is skips it's way through the lecture and you get a partial word, skip, then the rest of the word, et al. I got much of what Feynman was saying but would really like to hear him better. I see what you mean by if for no other reason than to see what Faynman was like. He definitely appears to be an interesting, as well as an entertaining, lecturer, easy to listen to (with proper apparatus).As the titles implicated, however, what I heard, the lecture didn't address my post 63 space problem, perse. Rather it was about things and forces existing within space.So as I understood what I could decipher from my distorted realplayer message it took about 20 years from the time the theory of quantum electromagnic concept's introduction to any measurable understanding of the concept/theory and as of 1979, he uses phrases like, "......It's just a theory,.......... I don't understand it either, and ".....realize that nobody understands it." He did say that much progress had been made from 1948 to 1979 and I'm sure much has been added to the theory's progress since the lecture.I guess the bottom line remains in my mind that from what I'm getting here and from what I've read and heard so far is that nobody's ideology really has a corner (to use a commodity market term) yet on the mystery of space. Imo, the problem is that scientists are obfuscating the simplicity, common sense and logic of it so as to mystify it, complicate it and redefine it to lend support the BB theory.This message has been edited by buzsaw, 03-12-2005 22:24 AM

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

I appreciate that you responded, but what in your message 66 answers the following two questions as posted in message 63?buz exerpt:

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

Hi Percy. Thanks for the advice on the realplay. That doesn't make it work. I will try Razd's suggestions when I get time.My space model as per the great debate and subsequent has consistently been a boundless space concept. From what Sylas has posted, it appears that the difference is that the majority science view is that space is bounded with bounds, center, radius, et al, where metric applies. Before anything is introduced into his model, you still have these properties. In a boundless space model, however there could be no center, no bounds and no radius et al to meter. You would have nothing but space/area/nothing, with the only property as being existing area. My question in message 63 was on this model as stated. The only answers I got applied to what appears to be a bounded model where metrics would apply. It is only when things are introduced into my model of existing boundless space that metric could apply, applicable only to those things introduced into it.The problem with the majority science view is that their/your model has space which consists of bounded abstract metrics allegedly expanding, yet having no outside of to expand into, this having allegedly been going on for 15 billion or so years from the alleged singularity submicroscopic particle of space. I guess this is the reason Ned regards these aspects of science as nonsensical and why Faynman admits that he doesn't understand it (theory of electrodynamics) either.It appears we're at an impasse here and I'm not wanting to irritate anyone by repetition of my position, except to answer questions posed. I will continue to study and learn from you people and others, but until what you people claim makes sense, I'm not buying it, regardless of the math. I regard this the same as I regard the Bible. My faith in anything must be substantiated and must be both logical and sensible. I see an intelligently designed universe as substantiated, logical and sensible and going with that until shown something more substantial.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

It is the arrogancy of some of you as demonstrated in this post, Ned, that implicates you as the closed minded kind. You, Sylas and others, including Faynman, admit to the unknowns, but almost in the same breath debate as though you know it all as an open and shut case. We all have unknowns in our concepts. Some of our more significant unknowns aren't a bit more significant than some of yours, yet because the majority have been persuaded your way, you seem to act like yours is absolutely imperical and anyone else's has been totally and absolutely falsified. I don't think so.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

Thanks Justin and others for the study advice. I don't have much time to read extensively and not a fast reader, but will do what I can.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

Hi Percy. This debate so very interesting and imo, very relative to the subject of space. I hope we don't loose it since it now affords some professional debate balance for both camps. Can we either continue without interruption or get up a new thread now on tired light? Thanks.Edited to say that the subjects of redshift, tired light and expansion vs static space, imo, is essential to the question of this thread topic. If we begin a topic on tired light that will isolate a necessary argument factor as to what space is, as per this topic. Does that make sense?This message has been edited by buzsaw, 03-15-2005 10:55 AM

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

Ned, would you mind responding to my edited message 131 before closing this thread?

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

Hi Lyndon. A hearty welcome and thanks much for taking the time to come on with some substantial educated debate on tired light relative to the space debate and this alternative to the argument for an expanding spaced universe. Your website is well organized and helpful. Though I'm not educated enough to understand the formulas and math, one such as myself can go to the home page and click on the segment of what Ashmore's Paradox is all about and understand it quite well. Though you've indicated you're passing through, I hope you will stay logged in and bless us with your wisdom and knowledge whenever you can spare the time, since we really need more of an educated balance on some of these issues here at EvC.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw