Visualising the cosmic scales of the universe

[Reciprocality]

Imagine that every time you double the radius of a circle you exhaust the outside of this circle until at last there is no outside of this circle, this would be possible only on a finite plane.

Imagine now that you maintain an identical quantity of circumference throughout the imagining above on a separate scalar plane, imagine for instance a cartesian coordinate system on that separate plane on which the identical circumference of the circle is represented as a 0 dimensional dot.

However big of a portion of the whole plane you took you would just be a point on the coordinate system, but how would the lines themselves of that coordinate system behave under various inputs from the size of the circle? 

 

This is a 2+1 dimensional representation of how the indeterminate simultaneity of the universe "behaves", not only doesn't 1 meter exist in the universe but it doesn't even model ANY of its continuums and is itself a discrete property distributed everywhere yet never to add onto itself in any direction.

The set of "2 meters" is also distributed everywhere, but as implied above never in the same places as "1 meter", as is the set of "10 meters" distributed everywhere without being divisible into each meter. One triangle is indivisible into its circumference in an analogous way to how the metric and the units are inherently curved and stretched above. 

This is the simultaneity of the universe, this is the forth dimension, time is an additional dimension (5th) though nothing more than space and mutually opposed matter. 

When you move sufficiently far in ANY direction in the four dimensional manifold you will end up where you started, but there is far more direction in which to go than there would be in an equivalent three dimensional infinite space, the infinity i talk about here is like a circle not literal/additive. There actually is a perfect 1-dimensional direction from point a through b-c-d-e and then back to a in the simultaneity of our universe for the same reason every volume in this simultaneity contains discrete units and never continuous metrics. 

[Reciprocality]

Distance is a computation, it is derivative of intuition. It is a predicate never a subject, but the universe itself is just predicate and never subject, unless perhaps impenetrability, which as neither contained in the senses nor in concepts of reason is a synthesis of both, could be the actual subject and indeed substance of which everything else we think is a predicate.

It turns out impenetrability is an expression of the hypothesis of opposition in the statement above of "mutually opposed matter".

That is, the concept of impenetrability which actually is unthinkable and only experiential, can be applied to the border between each composite in every known experience way beyond the place from where it were abstracted, and this can be done both personally and scientifically.

Is impenetrability a substance? Is it a predicate of no other subject even though we used its abstracted equivalent to predicate the border between every known quality? .. We can use the visualisation of the simultaneity of space to give a proper standing for the placement of this hypothetical substance, for since there is no continuum in the four dimensional manifold only 0-dimensional points we have precisely such a thing (in these points) which could contain the substance of impenetrability.

If on the other hand there is no such impenetrability in these 0dimensional points then impenetrability is purely emergent and a mere accident in the substance of consciousness.

[Reciprocality]

Consider the starry heavens, the stars are representations of the past, but if we instead of visualising the presence of the appearance and tried to visualise the presence of what those appearances would look like if light traveled here immediately (and the slowed down again) we would have an insufficiently small outlook towards them. (there wouldn't be enough heaven for them all)

This actually means that the 2 dimensional identity of 360 degrees are insufficient for a full rotation in proportion to the distance you ideate from the perspective of a determined subject and its object, and we are therefore in a four dimensional manifold, this manifold (so far as we wish to separate ourself from the mathematics of the universe, which even an enlightened monk would do if he wished to model in his mind how it behaves) must be in simultaneity, which means that time is the fifth dimension.

The amazing consequence of my discovery is that you literally are the boundary of the universe, for you "repeat" indefinitely in its simultaneity. You don't actually repeat however, cus nothing can travel through the medium of simultaneity, it is only through the medium of time that the model represents the world itself, which itself bares certain ontological implications to dimensions beyond the fifth. 

[Reciprocality]

This is when I get mystical on you..

The very, very weirdly beautiful thing about these homogenous substances of four dimensional simultaneity is that there is no medium between them except inside each of them, because otherwise there would be a real duality between medium and mediated, instead this medium is inside each substance and so is the rest of the universe.

So how does it look like when time progresses inside each of them? And are we not hard pressed to argue that there must be an equal number of these substances in the beginning of the universe as there is now? In fact we can use the affirmation of the answer to the last question as a proof against the theory of non-simultaneity most physicists have their own ridiculous version of in their head from the "implications" of general relativity.

The other difference between this and typical ideations of "Indras net" is that the "distance" between each of the substances in this theory is always different amongst one another.