ETC. through Time DIA Space UNTIL

In this creative article will be shown that precisely this insufficient paying attention to the (hidden) power of initiated dialectical processes (dia-processes, which emanate) from the depths of eternity of times DIA infinity of spaces, or to the real power of a dialectical change, if you so please, over the passage of this dialectical way of understanding the time DIA space, was the main weakness, not only of the Newtonian understanding of time and space but of the dynamical understanding of time and space by Einstein, too. Or put it in another way, this too modern scientific approach to the creation of knowledge, which relays on the (fragile) power of five basic scientific senses, understood in terms of their limited range within the continuously created, changed and renewed worlds of dialectics through continuous reworking, reshaping, regeneration, and the rebirth of theirs, is, in fact, the main source of all the troubles arising from this previously mentioned scientific (methodological) weakness.

For all these mentioned reasons, in this creative article, the focus was put on the various manifestations of the PRIMARY LAW (rule) of dialectic in time DIA space. Seen from the methodological point of view, the primary law of dialectic follows the fundamental methodical pattern of the dialectical interactive approach:

• Thesis
• Antithesis
• Synthesis DIA
• the Renewed Thesis dia
• the Suplemented and Complemented Antithesis
• Synthesis DIA
• the Renewed Thesis at this new level of Time DIA Space and so on in Time DIA Space
• UNTIL the TEMPORARY CONCLUSION of the considered span of Time DIA appropriate scope of Space (spirit, mind dia reason, matter) is achieved.

On the other hand, static models of reality are based on the (recti) linear conceiving and understanding of the time: past ⇢ present (time) ⇢ future. On the internet can be found many articles, which explain the rectilinear, circular and cyclical (linear) features of time (AND space).

Static Conceptions of Time and Space

The static view on the time, often referred to as "Absolutism with Respect to Time", was developed by Plato, Newton, and many other proponents of this static view of the time (and space). In physics, the time is operationally defined as "what an instrument or any means for measuring time tells about passing of time". Anyway, the best known static conception of time and space was developed by Isaac Newton (1643-1727), and it was dominant in the 18th and 19th centuries. In this Newton's conception, the time is absolute, independent of any perceiver (who merely occupies time) and it is the same everywhere in the universe (that means "static"). According to him, this absolute time is imperceptible and could only be understood mathematically. As a result of this, people are only capable of perceiving relative time, which is, in fact, a (mathematical) measurement of perceivable external objects in motion

• [like the phases of the Moon, the apparent motion of the Sun across the sky, the swing of pendulum as well as navigation by the apparent staticity of stars in a broader and deeper sense].

From these external movements and the similar inner motions (the beat of a heart, for example), the passage of time was inferred.

This static conception describes time metaphorically as an empty container into which events may be placed. In other words, this container exists passively, that is, independently of whether or not anything is placed in it. In short, Newton did for time what Euclid in antique age did for space, that is, he transformed and idealized it into an exactly measurable dimension. According to this conception of the time AND space, the spatial distances between bodies were RELATIVE, but space itself was ABSOLUTE. In other words, inhabitants of this universe shared the same public space and the same public time. We talk of so many centimeters, meters or kilometers from one place to another, of so many seconds, minutes or hours from one occurrence to another, and our lives are regulated within the quantifiable domains of public space and public time. This is the world of common sense we live in, bounded by the capabilities of the five basic senses, that accommodates the furniture of the biological and social sciences as well as of the classical physics.

Dynamic Conceptions of Time and Space

While in static conceptions of time and space, time is absolute in the sense that the time of an event is independent of the observer, in the dynamic conceptions of time and space it depends on the reference frame of the observer. The for-runners of this dynamic nature of time argued that time is merely a convenient intellectual concept, which is used by people to understand events. From this follows that time was useless unless objects in space exist to interact with, and this concept was called relational time (and space). Or more simply said, time nothing but the order of successive events; space is nothing but an order of co-existent objects; but the point is in acknowledging and experiencing their interaction. For example, Descartes, Locke, and Hume argued that thy mind needs to acknowledge time, in order to be understood what time is. Immanuel Kant goes even further by claiming that "we can not know what something is unless we experience it firsthand". In the Critique of Pure Reason (1781), he described time as a priory intuition [the purest possible schema of a purest concept] that allows people to comprehend sense experience [together with the other a priory intuition: space]. According to him, neither space nor time are conceived as substances, but rather are fundamental elements of an abstract mental (conceptual) framework (together with numbers) that necessarily structures the experiences of any rational agent, or observing subject.

Although it might be argued that some ideas of the dynamic (relational) conception of time, or of the dialectical one, if you so will, were proposed by Aristotle (“neither does time exist without change”), the more distinct ideas of this conception of time were developed by Leibnitz, Huygens, Berkeley, Mach, Hinton, Michelson, Morley, Lorenz, Poincare and many others. Apart from the Michelson-Morley's experiment, in particular, the incompatibility of the laws of electric and magnetic forces with previous understanding of the notions of space and time, described by Maxwell's equitations, gave to Einstein a hint how to develop his theory of relativity. In either case, it was Albert Einstein, who expanded and refined the idea of relative motion, and then molded this relational understanding of time and space by initiating dialectical processes of creating a cluster of fruitful stars [greatest inventors and inventions of this galaxy], which (actually still) rotate around the galactic core of his basic ideas of this dynamic conception of time and space. In short, it managed to him to put himself in the core of this "relational galaxy” in the similar way as it did Isaac Newton two centuries earlier, who actually reinterpreted Galileo Galilei's (1564-1642) concept of "relativity" in the absolute (static) sense. In other words, their basic (theoretical) ideas ignited the (creative processes of the) industry and space revolution of the 19th and 20th century

Albert Einstein, in his Theory of Relativity, overturned long-held ideas about the nature of time as a steady, continuous progression of events from past to present to future. As a consequence of this way of understanding the time and space, the Newtonian idea of absolute time and space has been superseded by the notion of time as one dimension of space-time in special theory of relativity (1905), and of dynamically curved space-time in the general theory of relativity (1916). Basic postulates of the Theory of Relativity are:

• There is no "absolute" frame of reference, and therefore time is not absolute. In short, this concept of time depends on the spatial frame of reference of the observer, observer's perception of time, as well as how it is (personally) experienced by this particular observer. Or put it in another way, simultaneity (of happenings) in time and space is relative, and for this reason, time and space are relative too;


• Time does not progress at the same rate for everyone, everywhere; the rate at which time flows depends upon where thou art located as well as how fast thou art traveling. As a result of this, the measurement of time by clocks are different for observers in relative motion. In general, the faster an object travels, the more slowly time passes for that object, as measured by a stationary observer;


• The speed of light is absolute and invariable, that is, it is the same within a vacuum (299,792 kilometers per second) for all (inertial) observers, no matter the speed at which an observer travels, who measures it or how fast this person measure it. On the other hand, in this relativistic understanding of space and time, lengths and distances depend on who measures them;


• In special) theory of relativity no material object can be accelerated to light speed, and consequently travel faster than light, which is already moving (through vacuum) at light speed. In other words, photons, that is, the light itself, reached limits of the physical laws: zero distance at zero time, respectively, here the word goes about a manifestation of stopping the time, understood from the point of view of the special theory of relativity. In short, an object that has nonzero rest mass [although contains a certain amount of energy] cannot move through vacuum at the speed of light because the consequence of it would be its increase in inertial mass to infinity. Or put it in another way, the amount of energy required to move it any faster will also be infinite, that is, beyond boundaries of the operation of known physical laws. As a result of this physical absoluteness, in full compliance with the special theory of relativity the speed of light is, for this reason, more fundamental than either time and space because both of them must be relative and flexible in order to satisfy this essential axiom of the special theory of relativity;


• The previously described topic of the increase in inertial mass is part of a more general phenomenon, known as the relativistic equivalence of mass and energy. In short, by adding energy to a material object, its mass automatically increases, and vice versa. Energy, mass and the speed of light are inextricably interlinked by Einstein's famous formula. Every object of mass 'm' will necessarily have total energy: E=mc**2, where the constant 'c' is the speed of light;


• In the general theory of relativity, Albert Einstein also introduced his understanding of gravity. In short, he presented and explained gravity not as a force but as a consequence of the curvature of spacetime, which is, in fact, caused by the uneven distribution of energy and mass (space) in time.

Theory of Relativity

In the theory of Relativity, which is, by the way, the most famous scientific concept in physics of the 20th century, time is considered as a fourth dimension, on an EQUAL footing with the (Euclidean) three dimensions of space

• [the dialect-matter, in the dialectical way of understanding the space],

where the past and the future, as well as the present, all exist equally. Or put it in another way, to be distinctly specified occurrence of an event, time as a fourth coordinate is required, along with three spatial coordinates (height, width, and length). In full agreement with the Relativity theory, space and time are not independent of each other but make up a space-time continuum (of instants) because they are woven together. This implies that time is gap-free and not discrete. In this new public domain, the spacetime is constructed in such a way that the distance traveled by light rays is always zero. In short, in this conception of time and space, the laws of physics are the same for all non-accelerating observers. Although, Einstein did not explicitly rejected the existence of time, but influenced by the way on which time acts (and "passes") in the worlds of elementary (sub-) particles (micro-universe), he rejected the distinction between past, present, and future. As a result of this way of understanding the time (and space), time does not "flow" (it only appears so) but it just "is". As Einstein himself emphasized:

• "People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion".

Because the speed of light is always the same (in a vacuum), in Einstein's theory of (special) relativity, it means that a traveler going very fast relative to the Earth will measure the passage of time slower than an Earthbound observer will. In other words, time slows down for this traveler through time and space, a phenomenon called time dilation. This relativistic effect of time slowing down is insignificant and very hardly perceivable, because happenings in the everyday life and corresponding motions are extremely slow, compared to the speed of light

• [and for this reason, the relativistic deviations from the all classical ways of understandings of the space and time are correspondingly small, and thus negligible (the realm of the five basic senses: a scope of space dia the suitable span of time understood in terms of dialectical interactive approach)],

but it becomes very pronounced at speeds approaching that of light. In Einstein's theory of general relativity, time dilation effect describes a difference of elapsed time between two events, measured by observers that are either moving relative to each other, or differently, depending on their proximity to a source of gravity. Theory of general relativity, posits that gravity of a massive body [such as, for example, the mass of a black hole, star, planet,...] distorts and warps the space-time around it, causing the flow of time to speed up or slow down depending on its distance from the formed source of gravity. Basically, in general theory of relativity, Einstein managed to reconcile relativity and gravitation by discarding the traditional view on (physical) world, which saw time and space as merely a stage on which the events of the everyday life unfold.

In essence, in full compliance with the theory of relativity, as the faster is traveled (and the speed of light approached) as more the (experience of) time is affected. This shows that the time is relative and not absolute because in full agreement with this dynamic (relational) conception of time and space whether an object is at rest or in motion depends on the frame of reference of observer (her, his point of view). As a result of this way of understanding the time, someone in a parked vehicle is in a different frame of reference in comparison with someone in a vehicle traveling at a constant speed.

• Although it appears that this driver sits still in the parked vehicle (in relation to Earth), he travels, relative to the Sun, through space (in time) very fast (the concept of relative motion) because the Earth is traveling at 107,000 kilometers an hour around the Sun [in fact, both drivers are traveling with this additional velocity], as well as the Sun rotates around the core of Milky Way. In addition to this, to get a more authentic and trustworthy picture of this dialectical understanding of the universe, keep in mind that our galaxy also rotates within the local cluster of galaxies and so on in these changeable (not only dynamic) worlds of dialectics in a dialectically long-run. As a result of this dialectical way of understanding the time dia space, a clear distinction between and among the observable universe, (potentially) reachable universe, accessible universe (from the point of view of common sense of a human being), and the currently accessible universe is made. More about it will be said later.

Hermann Minkowski (1908), a former professor of Einstein, showed that time and space, as a result of Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, is actually fused together into a single four-dimensional continuum (of the space-time). SPACETIME (continuum) is the new public domain, where people share the same spacetime

• [that is, in the theory of relativity, the spacetime is absolute as a counterpart to the Newtonian understanding of the absolute space and time]

but not the same space and time [because in this conception neither time nor space is absolute but relative].

• In this way, seen from the dialectical point of view, as it will be later more thoroughly elaborated, the mega-dialect time was reduced to become effectively just part of a coordinate specifying an object's position in this dynamical interpretation of space-time.

The presented Einstein’s special theory of relativity (1905) with its speed limit of light works locally but not globally. In general theory of relativity (1915, 1916), the concept of space-time was further refined, when Einstein realized that perhaps gravity is not a field or force, but a feature of spacetime itself. For this reason, the space-time continuum is actually warped and curved by mass and energy, a warping that it is thought of and experienced as gravity, resulting in a continually curved spacetime. In other words, distant as well as local matter produce curvature and distortion of spacetime, because everything is attracted to everything else by this source of gravity. This understanding of the gravity, as an attractive force, acts in effect in this model, as negative energy, causing the reaction of the curvature of space-time. In this way, the spacetime becomes, in general theory of relativity, an active participant in the physical universe, where both energy and mass are affected by this source of the gravity.

As a consequence of this, the curved space permeated and saturated with energy, and hence clothed in intangible mass, is itself a source of further curvature. This SELF-INTERACTION OF SPACE is the essence of the general theory of relativity. The concept of the self-interaction of space is often illustrated by the image of a rubber sheet distorted by the weight of a bowling ball. If another object (with a mass) tries to move in a straight line on this curved surface its attempts will now end up following a curved trajectory. Seen from the perspective of Newton's understanding of time and space, such (an elliptic) movement was due to the force of gravity in action. On the other hand, Einstein's response would be that this motion is the result of free-falling this object through the curved (and distorted) spacetime. Personally, I am impressed by this pictorial way of representation and interpretation of this source of gravity but it says nothing new in comparison to what already Newton said, that is, there is a source of this secret force that holds and does not allow setting free this object from the curved spacetime. Keep in mind, a supernatural manifestation of this secret source of "gravity" can also act as a repelling force, causing that the recession velocities are infinitely great and independent of the speed of light. As a consequence of this phenomenon, galaxies are separating and flying apart from each other.

But do not be misled by the plausible and self-persuasive convincing of this simple-reasonable explanation of this secret source and manifestation of gravity, because the real power of Einstein's understanding of gravity (1916), as a part of this dynamic conception of space and time, is that this curved spacetime can be used for traveling through outer space without consuming additional fuel for doing it by simply exploiting this way of understanding this source of gravity (in terms of how space (-time self-) interacts). On the other hand, for Newton (1643-1727) was not (technologically) feasible to think about it in this way in the year 1687 when he published this law of gravity, seen from the point of view of the development of culture (dia RELIGION), philosophy, art, and science. For your proper orientation in time dia space, the Italian astronomer and physicists Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), who died one year before the birth of Isaac Newton, escaped the death sentence for the support of Heliocentrism at the price to recant it (forced by the Inquisition). In short, the concept of heliocentrism is based on the astronomical model of Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543), and was published right before [or, as some others argue after] his death (1543). In this model, the Earth revolves around the Sun and not the inverse. For this reason, to the opinion of Copernicus, the Earth is not (at) the center of the universe [geocentric model of Claudius Ptolemy (100-170)]. But the point of these real happenings understood in terms of your proper orientation in time dia space is that for this heresy Galileo Galilei spent the rest of his life under house arrest. It seems, forces of the Inquisition, after a relatively short period of opening the windows for creative exploration (freedom of creative acting), manage each time to close it sooner or later, as a result of the alternating (ping-pong) swaying back and forth by the teeter between these forces of extremism ["two sides" of the same coin] in the sense of bipolar (or-or) dia binary [or] way of thinking.

Dialectical Conception of Time and Space

The dialectical understanding of time, as it is based on the individual, human way of thinking, encompasses all the essential features of the static and dynamic conception of time and space and is in full agreement with the understanding of these complex dialectical contents by the common sense (of human beings). As a result of this dialectical understanding of time and space (spirit, mind dia reason, matter), validity of the aforementioned static and dynamic conceptions of the time and space is not interpreted in this dialectical context in terms of the bipolar (OR - OR) DIA binary (OR) way of thinking. In short, dialectical understanding of time and space in full agreement with this methodological approach (dialectical interactive approach), in fact, complements and supplements the Newtonian and Einstein's understanding of space and time. In short, the Newtonian static understanding of space and time is still valid in the usefull realm of the five basic senses. But as it is moved away from this realm to the enormous vastness of the universe as more grow (accumulate) deviations of this (recti)linear understanding of time and space compared to the dialectical reality. In other words, there is more and more need for a dynamic understanding of time and space, such as for example, the Theory of Relativity of Einstein to be applicable in this much wider range of circumstances and conditions. But sooner or later, even this powerful conception of time and space cannot keep the step with the pace of dialectical changes in this vastness of the eternity of times dia infinity of spaces. In short, these dialectical transformations, metamorphoses, annihilations and annulments cannot be simply added, subtracted, multiplied, divided.... and solved by means of the static dia dynamic (quantitative) mathematics.

In this conception of the dialectical understanding of time and space, the mega-dialect TIME was redefined and presented as it follows:

• future (within thee),
• emotively emotional dia physical PRESENCE (the medium of time),
• past (around thee),

while the mega-dialect SPACE consists of the following dialects:

• spirit,
• mind dia reason (the medium of space),
• matter (materia),

In this dialectical comprehension of space, the mega - dialect space was completely redefined, and in this interpretation of (the meaning of) space was presented as the dialectical interplay between and among the spirit, mind dia reason, matter because only in this way (their and) its subsistence, understood in terms of the dialectical unity of theirs can be created, and then continuously maintained in a dialectically long-run. In other words, the mega-dialect space is only an interactively creative dialect (part and piece) of a much broader concept of the spatial infinity (DIA eternity of times). In short, contrary to the static and dynamic understanding of space and time, in this dialectical conception of space and time, the space is not only passively observed and measured, as well as understood in terms of self-interaction of this external physical (three-dimensional) expanse of the space-time, which is dried off, not only of the spirit but also of the mind dia reason. Basically, seen from the perspective of this dialectical understanding of time dia space, the previously considered static and dynamic comprehending of space and time, actually takes place in two dialects ("modules") of this dialectical conception of time and space:

• Space in Time (matter embedded in the past: the HERE and NOW),
• Time in Space (future embedded in spirit: NOW and THERE).

In fact, the entire dynamic content of the previously thoroughly explained events in the four-dimensional reality (of Einstein’s theory of relativity) can be placed in only one dialect of the listed ones. I guess, you know which one is most suitable for it: Space in Time. In short, two observers (stationary and traveling one) can be seen as two "modules" of Space in Time, separated by a gap of the space and time, where each of them passively observes one another from the own location in space and time, understood in terms of the instant of "the now and here". In effect, this gap of time "dia VERSUS and space", which lies between these two embedded and captured "Spaces in Time ("modules")

• [a barrier, which has to be overcome in the rectilinear sense versus the dialectical way of understanding this topic under creative reconsideration and reexamination]

is the main cause and source of all previously discussed deviations in the measurement of time and space. Pay thy attention to the fact that already in this simple "module" of the encapsulated time and space but a dialectical one [a Space in Time-like half of the "Dialectical Creative Framework for Orientation in Time DIA Space"], of course, by interpreting this in an appropriate way of thinking, were included all relevant parameters for the orientation in this dynamic (relative) understanding of space and time:

[The Four-Dimensional Reality of] Einstein's Theory of Relativity

1) the three physical dimensions of space [the dialect - matter],
2) the past

• [this is a proper enough understanding of time as its fourth dimension because in full agreement with this dynamic conception of time and space the distinction between past, present, and future is rejected by Einstein, as well as their physical presence, is in the external sense (from all sides) surrounded by the past (events)],

3) the observers [understood in the sense of the physical presence of theirs],
as well as the not explicitly mentioned
4) mental (intellectual) framework [the dialect - reason] by Einstein ("the fifth dimension"),

otherwise without some form of manifestation of reasoning, that is, without some mental way of processing their observation, perception, and experience of each other, as well as without the multitude of external observers (any one of you), this dynamic model of reality cannot (properly) function. As an example, just consider all the complexity of the following Einstein's conclusion, which can not even be imagined, let alone derived from a three-dimensional physical space fused with Einstein's understanding of time as the fourth dimension of his model of reality, where the past and the future, as well as the present, all exist equally, accordingly "time does not flow (it only appears so) but it just is":

• Time does not progress at the same rate for everyone, everywhere. The rate at which time flows depends upon where thou art located as well as how fast thou art traveling. As a result of this, the measurement of time by clocks are different for observers in relative motion. In general, the faster an object travels, the more slowly time passes for that object, as measured by a stationary observer.

In short, although this Einstein's extremely simplified model of reality is not entirely consistent seen from a methodological point of view, Einstein indirectly suggested or implicitly assumed the existence of this mental (intellectual) framework by using the concept of (different) frames of reference. In other words, in his dynamic (relative) conception of time and space:

• There is no absolute frame of reference, and therefore time is not absolute. In short, this concept of time depends on the spatial frame of reference of an observer, observer's perception of time, as well as how it is (personally) experienced by this observer" (the FIRST Basic postulate of Theory of Relativity).

Or, said it in another way, seen from the perspective of the dialectical understanding of space (and time), this dynamic model of reality, consists of a mathematically expressible module (four dimensional reality)

• [(triangle of the) Space in Time: the three physical dimensions of this dynamic (relative) understanding of space, which is embedded in the past (the matter dia past)],

and a kind of the dynamic (relative) medium of the space (reason) and time (their physical presence), which are represented in this illustrative figure by two right-angled triangles. Although, this dialectical content as a whole can be quantified

• [especially the dialectical content of this dynamic (relative) medium of the time: the physical presence],

these non-physical (mental) aspects and properties of the (social) physical universe are not (in the same way so easily) mathematically expressible. And probably, for this reason, it was way apart, respectively this scientific content was considered in the developed concept of the physical universe as (distant) objects out there of this four dimensional (physical) reality, which is in the focus of this (scientific) way of considering this complex creative content. Recall, the right-angled triangles are a typical feature of the static (binary) and dynamic (quantitative) mathematics in action.

• Pay thy attention that this Space in Time-like half of the Dialectical Creative Framework for Orientation in Time DIA Space in the hidden knowledge, on which this methodological approach is based, when considered autonomously and separately from the corresponding Time in Space-like half of the Dialectical Creative Framework for Orientation in Time DIA Space, also represented the lifeless (dead) physical worlds (of dialectic: still life). More about "these happenings after the death of a living being" will be said in the following chapters.

This creator of knowledge hopes that now everyone understands how and in which way the dialectical conception of time and space complements and supplements the Newton's and Einstein's understanding of space and time rather than the widely spread negating it in the well-known bipolar (or-or) dia the appropriate binary (or) way of thinking and (the corresponding way of creative) acting. Keep in mind, unlike me they had not at their creative disposal such a powerful methodological framework but had to use (much more inferior) methodological frameworks, which were available in those days. Or, to say it otherwise, the application of the right methodological creative framework is already a half of the knowledge creating.

While you were (made) busy with the mental processing and digesting of perceived, observed, and experienced events in time and space of the stationary and traveling observers (of each other), it will be utilized this opportunity by me, as the next step, to simplify further this artificially made complexity of understanding these very simple (recti) linear events within the dynamic (relativistic) understanding of time and space

• [a two-way approach, without manifesting some kind of (dialectical) change, starting with a trivial one, such as, for example, the death of observer or traveler, or both of them: the dialectical transition and transformation of the Space in Time into Time in Space.

Abstract Methodological Creative Framework of the Dialectical Interactive Approach: Four Key Concepts of the Dialectical Understanding of Time and Space, expressed through its Two Paired Dialects: Time in Space ⇄ Space in Time DIA Medium of Time ⇄ Medium of Space

For all these reasons, in my opinion, the better way is that each of these two participants [stationary and the moving Space in Time: the HERE and NOW] in this mental experiment considers actions of each other as a (distant) Time in Space: NOW and THERE. Although, the medium of time [emotively emotional dia physical presence] DIA the corresponding medium of space [mind dia reason] was automatically incorporated, that is, (re) generated by this inclusion of the second "invisible half" of the Dialectical Creative Framework for Orientation in Time DIA Space with the sense of sight, the point of this dialectical understanding of time and space is at the first place in the dialectical interaction of these four key-dialects, understood also in terms of their dialectical unity dia the oneness of theirs. Or uttered it in terms of this applied methodological approach (dialectical interactive approach), by transformation of the four elements (fire, earth, air, water) into various forms of stars will be initiated corresponding dia-processes, the purpose of which is an pictorial presentation and explanation as well as a deeper elaboration of these complex dia-processes as a continuous dialectical interplay of these four dialects: Time in Space ⇄ Space in Time ⊠ Medium of Time ⇄ Medium of Space.

Or, to say it otherwise, for an external interpretation of this complex creatively interactive dialectical content (both inner and external one), on the basis of this ground plan of a pyramid should be constructed a replica of the real (Cheops') pyramid, or to be visited in order to comprehend the full meaning of this dialectical understanding of time and space [in a familiar and understandable way to the majority of people]. Or it can be much cheaper done virtually by a computer simulation, or even simpler imaginary by pulling the middle of this ground plan of the pyramid (marked by "0") to up in order to form the representation of this pyramid in thy mind dia reason. Regardless of the option, which was chosen by thee, in this dialectical understanding of time and space, comprehended in the sense of appropriate interpretation of the perceived content (by the five basic senses) in interaction with the (innerly) experienced dialectical content within the created medium of time dia the corresponding medium of space to be it EXTERNALLY expounded, the future is experienced as something beyond the (left) corner of this pyramid,

• [the location of heart (left side) in a human body, that is, the future was experienced endlessly remote like a feeling in the physical sense]

that is, it is out there of the realm of five basic senses, while the past is experienced as something behind the (right) corner of this pyramid of encapsulated time and space. In other words, the past appears much closer [close as thought in the physical sense], also understood in terms of this external reinterpretation and translation of the dialectical understanding of time and space in the (linear) sense of comprehending this space and time, which is a much more understandable to the majority of people.

Because the proper perception and experience of this dialectical content is culturally sensitive, in order to be in-seen and experienced it on (approximately) the same way by an observer, grown up in a Semitic culture, this illustration of the "Dialectical Creative Framework for Orientation in Time DIA Space" should be flipped horizontally. By using this analogy, this illustrative diagram should be adequately flipped if one perceives and experiences this dialectical content in the sense of the down to up, up to down, diagonal, or in any other rectilinear way of presenting this dialectical content [in the mind dia reason]. But this "flipping" is, in fact, necessary for a proper dialectical understanding of time and space on the first place because in this dialectical view "With respect to Time", the mega dialect - time starts with the dialect - future (within thee),

• [that is, it also emanates from this inner eternity of times DIA infinity of spaces, and not exclusively through understanding this dialectical content in the external sense: the point is in their interactively creative interplay]

emotively emotional presence dia physical presence (of body), past instead of the rectilinear representation of the flow of time in the sense of the past ⇢ present ⇢ future. More about it will be said in the creative article: Arrow of Time. Notice, in spite of the fact that dialectical way of thinking, in general, can be externally represented in the most approximate linear way by using a spiral form, its physical construction, and especially the appropriate mental processing, presentation, explaining, elaboration, and conjuring it up in an understandable way is not so simple. It seems that the drilled mind dia reason (reasoning of this dialectical content) in this (recti) linear way from generation to generation is simply not able to process and digest it. But for truly ambitious ones, there is no need to build such a spiral construction. To find an appropriate inspiration, just watch the image of any spiral galaxy.

In short, without some manifestation of the medium of time [emotively emotional dia physical presence], DIA the appropriate medium of space [mind dia reason], there is also no way to understand and explain anything (inner) in the external sense and vice verse. For this reason, to solve the dilemma whether space (and time) can be perceived without some way of manifestating the dialect-mind (dia reason), as well as to encompass these enormous inner vastnesses, in this pre-ancient understanding of time and space, the dialect-mind dia reason was included as the constituent part of the mega-dialect - space. It follows from this that the mega-dialect space is only slightly more understandable compared to the twin brother mega-dialect - time, just because their common interactively creative outcome, (outer) Space in Time (matter embedded in the past) is more easily perceivable (with the five basic senses), and for this reason, it is also more easily understood (by mind dia reason), and then externally explainable to others in comparison to the dialect Time in Space (future wrapped and hidden in the spirit).

Although one of you can argue that some constituent dialects in each known way of understanding of time and space do not have a mental framework for judgment, this dialectical content as a whole is not in-seen in the same way in this dialectical understanding of time and space. In short, wherever the primary law of the dialectic in action was perceived, characterized by following the aforementioned fundamental methodical pattern of the dialectical interactive approach, for example, manifested and experienced in the daily life in the sense of .... birth ⇢ life (dia living) ⇢ death ⇢ rebirth ...., a certain manifestation of the mental framework is already present there. Examples and manifestations of it are also the life cycle of a star, galaxy, or even a life cycle of the elementary (sub-) particle within dialectical worlds of the micro-universe. In general, seen from the perspective of this dialectical methodological approach (to the unknown), where the dialects – spirit and matter are present, and interactive creatively encountered in this dialectical way with each other, some manifestation of the dialect – mind (dia reason) will be manifested, in one or another way.

Inner Aspects of the Time in Space DIA Space in Time

In this dialectical way of understanding time, the PRESENT (TIME) was replaced by the dialect - physical presence (of a body) DIA emotively emotional presence. Here the first dialect speaks of someone's active (physical) DIA creative presence, understood in the sense of SPACE IN TIME (matter embedded in the past), whereas the second dialect speaks of emotively emotional presence of some dialectical content in thy mind dia the reason, understood in terms of the TIME IN SPACE (future wrapped and hidden in the spirit). The dialect - SPACE IN TIME actually presents the memorized and recorded contents of the past as well as the dialectical worlds around me ⇄ thee ⇄ us, which I ⇄ thou ⇄ we can perceive with the five basic human senses: Nose (the sense of smell), eyes (the sense of sight), mouth (the sense of taste), ears (the sense of hearing) and skin (the sense of touch). In other words, these dialectical worlds are physical (material) nature, and they surround my ⇄ thy ⇄ our physical presence. Indeed, I ⇄ thou ⇄ we are only (cap) able to perceive the utmost (creative) results of the SPACE IN TIME

• [matter embedded in the past, that is, the physical (matter-like creative) after-effects of the past events, which are perceivable with five basic senses],

but not the past itself. On the other hand, the dialect - TIME IN SPACE (future dia spirit) actually encompasses the outer, (very) remote, and unknown worlds of dialectics, as well as the inner (hidden) dialectical worlds within me ⇄ thee ⇄ us, which I ⇄ thou ⇄ we only can sense with the two typical human senses: The sixth sense (the sense of presentiment: intuition) and the seventh sense [the emotively emotional sense of inner feeling of self], understood in terms of emotively emotional presence within these vast INNER expanses of (the OWN) time DIA space. The dialect - Time in Space can be also imagined as a manifestation of inner "frame-medium" for coming into being of ideas and thoughts DIA recording, memorizing, and keeping them there, which can remain unknown in the external sense [of this dialectical understanding of (the outer) Space in Time: matter embedded in the past].

• It is very hard to find the right notion and appropriate words in order to precisely express this dialectical content under creative consideration (inner "frame-medium"). In my opinion, all great thinkers were confronted with this creative challenge during the development of their theoretical conceptions, particularly when trying to explain and elaborate an unknown dialectical content of the time, in time dia space. For example, by reflecting Newtonian understanding of time and space through the prism of this (from now known) methodological approach (dialectical interactive approach), it is now more understandable [in the similar way, as some aspects of Einstein's theory of relativity were previously methodologically reexamined] what Newton wanted to say by his "absolute" understanding of time and space (and not only what he wrote).


• Particularly, in my personal opinion, not in the way, how it was reinterpreted after his death ("dead mouth can not speak and reinterpret it in terms of words and notions of the new Ages"], (also) understood in terms of a further (and further) merging and fusing akin minds. In short, their in-proficiency, understood in the spiritual and mindual sense, as well as the aforementioned underdevelopment of the language in general, is often utilized for various ways of simple-reasonable philosophizing of the topic under creative consideration and reexamination. For this reason, try to sense and feel what was wanted to be said by using thy sixth and seventh sense [by reading also between and among rows (of written sentences), columns, and diagonals (of the inexpressible thoughts)], instead of directing the power of your five basic (scientific) senses to what was noted down in this (already remote) time [future, EMOTIVELY emotional dia physical presence, past] dia space [SPIRIT, mind dia reason, matter].

Or more simply said, these inner, hidden dialectical contents can not be perceived with the five basic senses (in a proper way). For example, thou have an idea for a new project (Time in Space), but since thou have already promised members of thy family a two-month trip around the world, the externalization of this idea in terms of Space in Time was postponed (DELAYED) because it is impossible to be physically present at once on two different places, although thy ideas of the project WILL CONTINUE EMOTIVELY emotionally to be present during thy family trip. Notice, within thy own inner spaces (individual way of thinking) in the moment of birth of thy great idea [NOW DIA (T)HERE: the inner present] time continues to run, but not understood in the sense of past ⇢ present ⇢ future but rather, it seems that thy great idea comes from this (inner, unknown) future (within thee) to the presence (its birth), which is then innerly transformed into the past (the instance of its placing within thy inner spaces: its memorizing). On the other hand, within the realm of the external present (time) (the realm of the five basic senses), because of being still inside of thy head

• [it has not yet been externally manifested even with words so that it would be conveyed, heard, and recorded with the sense of hearing],

the (outer) public space and time (for the crowd dia groups) continues to flow in the sense of past ⇢ present ⇢ future without thy great idea, as well as without to be perceived in the outer sense (of the Space in Time).

Only in the case of a (FRUITFUL) physical externalization (materialization, actualization, realization) of thy (INNER) Time in Space [which still keeps thy great idea] by a further transition and transformation of it into (matter embedded in] the (outward) past (Space in Time), this until then (unknown, internal ⇢ external) "future" will be recorded in terms of well-known the HERE AND NOW [that is, it will become externally, publicly present]. In other words, without some form of the externalization of thy great idea there is neither past nor present nor future for it within this public outer understanding of time and space. Or put it in another way, if thou, for example, died during the family trip, only in case if it was previously externalized with thy words (suitable for the sense of hearing) to members of thy family, friends...., or if it was written on paper (suitable for the sense of sight), there is a potential opportunity (and future) for thy great idea. In other words, there is a possibility to be accomplished by others [its FURTHER DELAY (postponement) within this dialectical understanding of time and space]. By summing up the all previously mentioned, generally speaking, in full agreement with the higher knowledge, the dialect - Time in Space represents unknown, distant, hidden, invisible .... dialectical contents of time and space [which are not (properly) perceivable with the five basic senses]. I hope, it managed me to conjure up the meaning of this internal key-dialect (Time in Space) and of its external counter-dialect (Space in Time) in this constellation of the dialectical way of understanding the time and space, understood in terms of dialectical interactively creative interplay of the own (internal) and the public (external) time DIA the appropriate space. Turn the attention to the fact that both internal and external time DIA space continuously continue to flow [within the medium of time DIA the appropriate spatial medium] regardless of the previously mentioned (sporadic) happenings within the Time in Space DIA Space in Time.

Go to Top

OR

read the next part of this creative article: Puzzle of Time and Space: Aftereffects of the Dialectical Understanding of Time and Space