I saved this section for last. For both of us. Very little of this is conjecture. Almost none of this comes from today's science. But Sid took a whole intro class on this alone. And I'm sorry but I just barely have comprehended the slightest bit of the little he paid attention to.

The phrase "time is pixelated" is something that was stressed heavily time and again and made an impression so it is a bit more vivid than most. Researching that brought me to a video. And they had 90% of what I'm trying to say overall correct. I think it is worth watching and then I can correct the other 10%. I'll push this video on most of the level papers as it explains a lot much better than I could. And with graphs and pictures too. So, even if you have a few times by now, watch the video.

Okay let that perculate in the back of your mind and let us delve into the big things science currently have wrong.

We can use The Theories of Relativity and The Theories of Quantum Mechanics to explain just about anything. An interesting thing though is that they can't both be true. One assumes a fixed background of spacetime, one assumes a dynamic one. Together they both perfectly predict how the universe behaves and how it is built. But one is a lie. Interesting that math can still be useful even if not true. For instance, Euclidean geometry didn't stop being useful when the curve of spacetime was discovered.

So which is right? Neither! Or more accurately, parts of both.

Best to just leap in. Don't worry, if you can't follow along. Neither can I. But it isn't terribly important. I just figure if one scientist gets one idea ahead of the previous now for it, that's a major ripple. The again maybe it undoes all of this.

SpaceThought is 10 dimensional. 9 dimensions of space and one of choice.

Previous to this when I would try to imagine extra dimensions it turns out I was picturing parallel universes. Then I started reading books and internet articles on quantum physics and most of them talked about these extra dimensions as tiny curled up balls of space too small to see. This feels like cheating to me. But I'm not the one with a degree.

This is the best I can do explaining 9D space. Space is pixelated. That means it isn't one continuous object. Like matter it is made up of discrete units. The smallest unit we will call a pixel. It is a 9D hypercube and in our 3D world it projects as a square. The lattice of a square appears contiguous. And that lattice either is or nearly is the fabric of spacetime. But like in our world it is also the 3 dimensional container of everything. So that lattice extends along all three axises.

Up until here I was following pretty well.

So how is this 3D pixel actually 9 dimensional?

At 1 dimension you have a line, the x-axis. At 2 you can make flat shapes, circles and squares. You've added the y-axis. With the z-axis you have the 3D world we perceive and can have 3D shapes, spheres and cubes. From here it gets hard to conceptualize and, if we aren't mathematicians, we have to use analogies.

At this juncture I've got to talk about the omnia. Omnia is Latin for 'all.' I looked it up. Omnia is the building block of everything. Here is a thing we currently have wrong: the mass of the universe is infinite. I'll return to omnia further down but for the moment let me just say it is its own dimension and it is everywhere. It can not move or alter in any way. Think of it as a single block filling all of everything. Except that the universe is pixelated. So go back to the square. The square is the face we perceive. Each of the four corners of the square can have a 'charge' state: negative, neutral or positive. This 'charge' represents the way it wishes to turn: spinward, anti-spinward or content. And in a 9D way that is totally lost on me this determines how it interacts with the squares connected to it.

When I speak of a consciousness making a choice, at the very lowest level that choice is what 'charge' those corners will have. And that 'charge' determines how the pixels around them will self-organize. You can see how that would ripple outward just as changes elsewhere (and everywhen) are rippling as well.

Aside: The difference in 'charge' on two ends of a pixel axis is called torque. Torque is the basis for energy and potential. This is will come into play further down.

But as stated this is a 3D world so the square is a cube. Each axis being a square that is the membrane of the omnia which extends 'down' into the fourth dimension; not to be confused with time. There is also an each/opposite membrane on the 'other side' but I am really confused on that.

Now hang on tight. Take the cube, make a copy and rotate it 90 degrees around a corner so that it is in the same 'space' but not touching in any way. Do this one more time rotating on the last axis and you have a 9 dimensional pixel. To my thinking it is either 27D or 729D. But again, I'm horribly out of my depth and not the scientists.

Aside for mathematicians: Inspired by the video I looked up E9 polytype which hurt my head with all the rabbit holes it took me down. One place it took me was the 6D hypercube which was only interesting because the shadow projections made me realize that bisecting a cube gives you a pyramid and bisecting that gives you a tetrahedron. So each charge point would be the tip of a tetrahedron. An impossible one as it would be smaller than a Planck length but it struck me potentially interesting just the same.

Final Thoughts

First I want to come back to omnia. They stress that omnia is infinite. I don't know how they could know this. There is a limit to the distance we can perceive. So how can we tell the infinite from one continually expanding or multiplying? But infinite they seemed certain. And they add that being infinite means it has always been. For something can not become infinite. You don't start out, grow and eventually become infinite. You just get bigger and bigger. So in the beginning, even before consciousness, there was omnia.

While never directly said, I assume that means that our dimensional membranes must be infinite as they must cover the surface area of the omnia. And while the omnia does not have to be completely contiguous its area must infinite. So the dimensions have to have always existed as well.

The universe however is the disruption of the unity of charge via observation resulting in omnia expressing as matter in our dimension and as electromotive force along the membrane. This disruption is ever effecting its boundaries causing our universe to expand.

So infinite omnia, infinite size of the dimension, finite expanding universe. That's my takeaway.

Nobody has a clue what conditions were like before the initial consciousness, how it came to be, what it was like or what it has become. I can assume given that time flows all ways that it has bootstrap improved itself a near infinite number of times. The origin point of the universe has probably continually expanded backward in time as it continues to expand forward and in spacial dimensions as well. The ever expanding eververse.

Will entropy eventually result in a complete return to a neutral charge state or will observation continually stir things up? Regardless our pocket of time will go on forever ever changing and with effort, improving.

So once more I say, be better.

Shall we continue down the rabbit hole?