Illusory Information in Apparent Reality

by Elward Bruce

I intend to propose an new analysis of the Cartesian plane in order to demonstrate that the fundamental nature of information in space is ultimately illusory; rather, the core information which determines the essence of each item within a given frame of reference is of a different nature entirely. Thus it can be demonstrated that much of the information which we think of as essential to the analysis of any given structure in fact reduces to 0. This has the effect of dramatically increasing the number of identical objects which exist in this or any other universe.

In his Special Theory of Relativity, Einstein has implied certain points which are particularly relevant to the most basic topic of metaphysics: Of what does fundamental reality consist? That is, which information within apparent reality has independent existence, and which is merely contingent on something else?

In order to separate such Relativistic "wheat from the chaff," let us consider the following two points:

I The only reasonable way of considering multiple objects in motion respective to one another is through relative frames of reference (when doing this however, it is important to note Carezani's correction of Einstein's critical error). By extension, all potential spatial coordinates (including objects and parts of objects) themselves constitute relativistic reference frames.

II Since all frames of reference create curvatures in time and space according to their relative motion, and since all parts of all things are always in motion, each body that exists in space is itself constituted largely of minute and changing curvatures in space and time within itself. This is in marked contrast to the standard physical description of characteristics as being solely dependent on matter and energy, or for that matter upon anything which itself has independent and actual existence.

Just as a purely relativistic model of the universe is incomprehensible in real terms to everyday life (as it reduces existence to nothing more than mathematical equations which are no longer visualizable) so is an accurate description of anything in the universe impossible to measure using the standard x/y/z Cartesian coordinate space, inverted or not. In order to remove all holographic illusions caused by the warping action of matter and energy time and space, it would be necessary for nothing to move, i.e. exist. It's worth pointing out here that this is demonstrable theory is isomorphically identical to the principle in quantum physics of the observer's inevitable influence on any experiment. However, it is even more pervasive than that - we live in a physical universe which is for the most part, completely illusory.

Representation of a fractal image in time, demonstrating the illusion of complexity

In the same way that a fractal image takes a single piece of information and replicates it constantly, reality itself also takes a small piece of information and replicates it it constantly through this "warping" process. As with fractal images, the illusion is that a very complex result has been created, even though it is all made from repeated alterations of the same information. A physics which consisted only of the real, one which accounted for the constant warping of time and space which results in apparent reality would both be incredibly more simple and incredibly more bizarre than the physics which all of Western science has created to date.

Even though we are at present incapable of providing a complete description for such a non-illusory model of physics, there are certain characteristics which we can say for certain that such a model must have:

Any figure in it would have fewer spatial features than those we understand according to Euclidean geometry

Since spacetime must be rotatable within all possible frames of reference, many of its apparent spatial geometric features would be interchangeable with chronological features.

All acute and obtuse angles within this model would cease to occur. It would be impossible to describe without discarding the notion of Cartesian dimensions entirely.

The hypothetical development of such a model, as well as the mathematics necessary to describe it, would necessarily indicate a paradigm shift of such magnitude that all knowledge developed since the ancient Greeks could very well be discarded. While it is rarely appropriate in a scholarly paper to discuss the impact of such developments on social structures, it is worrisome to me that the exposure of a true model of reality could very well take man back to the Stone Age. My own ethics as a scientist force me to leave the obvious question of these ramifications to others. Fortunately for humankind, it is extremely unlikely that such a model could ever be developed, much less accepted by the academic world at large.

Elward Bruce
Chair of Natural Philosophy
Lachart University, Scotland