In a holistic perspective, time is absolute and relativity a direct consequence of the conservation of total energy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We are taught to think that the description of relativistic phenomena requires distorted time and distance. The message of this essay is that, in a holistic perspective, time and distance are universal coordinate quantities, and relativity is a direct consequence of the conservation of energy. Instead of the kinematics/metrics-based approach of the theory of relativity, the dynamic universe (DU) approach starts from the dynamics of space as a whole and expresses relativity in terms of locally available energy instead of locally distorted time and distance. In such an approach, e.g., the frequency of atomic clocks at different states of motion and gravitation is obtained from the quantum mechanical solution of the characteristic frequencies, and the unique status of the velocity of light becomes understood via its linkage to the rest of space. In the kinematic/metrics-based theory of relativity, we postulate the principle of relativity, Lorentz covariance, the equivalence principle, the constancy of the speed of light, and the rest energy of mass objects. The conservation of momentum and energy is honored in local frames of reference, and time and distance are parameters in frame-to-frame observations. In the dynamics-based DU, the whole space is studied as a closed energy system and the energy in local structures is derived conserving the overall energy balance. Any local state of motion and gravitation in space is related, through a system of nested energy frames, to the state of rest in hypothetical homogeneous space, which serves as the universal frame of reference. Relativity of observations appears as a direct consequence of the overall energy balance and the linkage of local to the whole—with time and distance as universal coordinate quantities. DU postulates spherically closed space and zero-energy balance of motion and gravitation. DU does not need the relativity principle or any other postulates of the theory of relativity. Primarily, the theory of relativity is an empirically driven mathematical description of observations, with postulates formulated to support the mathematics. DU relies on mathematics built on the conservation of an overall zero-energy balance as the primary law of nature, which makes DU more like a metaphysically driven theory. Both approaches produce precise predictions. The choice is philosophical—nature is not dependent on the way we describe it.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".