## KHTK AXIOM #7: Location (old)

### January 3, 2014: This essay is superseded byKHTK Axioms

.

.

5. #### Thus, certainty of locating an object in this universe goes hand in hand with its resistance to motion, or inertia.

.

##### [For further details, please see: KHTK Research]

.

• vinaire  On October 24, 2013 at 6:02 AM

Space is a matrix of locations. It appears that the uniformity of distance among locations in this matrix may depend on the field of gravity around it.

The distance among locations in the field of gravity of this solar system may be approximated by Planck length of 1.6 x 10^-35 m.

This unit of length may change with change in the field of gravity. But this would have to be determined experimentally.

.

• Chris Thompson  On October 24, 2013 at 9:49 PM

I’ve been waiting to comment on this til I could study on it a bit . . . I didn’t yet so am simply holding it as “new” in my email until I do.

• vinaire  On October 25, 2013 at 5:02 AM

This is just a wild intuition… a part of closer and closer looking at inconsistency, as mindfully as possible. I have been moving forward based entirely on what seems consistent. The exercise is

https://vinaire.me/2013/09/11/contemplation-2/

.

• vinaire  On October 25, 2013 at 5:16 AM

There just seems to be a correlation between inertia and location of an object when one compares the cosmic scale to the quantum scale.

The more one resists motion, the greater is the precision with which one gets located. One needs to look at motion and not at space-time, which simply describe motion. Space and time are “dimensions” of motion.

At cosmic scale, motion is well defined by Newton’s Laws of Motion. There is precision and no fuzziness.

At quantum scale, one cannot apply the Newton’s Laws of Motion to particles becuase motion is not in terms of discrete particles. It is a different animal. Its dimensions of space and time are of a very different color too.

So, now I have to look at the electromagnetic phenomenon more closely. When I do that I do not have to assume normal space and time associated with it as I did before. I have no idea what I may find there.

.

• vinaire  On October 25, 2013 at 5:42 AM

The EM phenomenon is very different from the particle phenomenon. The space and time associated with them are very different.

(1) A wave seems to consist of energy.
(2) A wave has its own space and time, which is different from the space and time of discrete particles around it.
(3) In a sound wave, the air particles oscillate about equilibrium positions, imparting their motion to adjacent particles.
(4) In music, there is a certain pattern of motion. This pattern is not carried forward by air particles in physical space. Rather this pattern is carried by the oscillation of air particles about their equilibrium positions. The pattern seems to move in physical space and time, but this space and time are different from that in which the air particles themselves are moving.
(5) The same can be said of the wave moving on the surface of the pond. It is like a disturbance moving through a lattice of physical particles.
(6) In case of EM, however, it cannot be said to be a disturbance moving through a lattice of physical particles. This difference needs to be looked at more carefully.
(7) In case of EM, it is pure energy that is being transported through vacuum. The “physical particle space and time” is not there. So, what kind of “space and time” is there?
(8) What kind of space and time is there within an atom?

.

• vinaire  On October 25, 2013 at 5:49 AM

An atom may be compared to a black hole. The atom has captured “light” that is being condensed as one moves towards and into the nucleus.

.