THE TIME (EINSTEIN MISSES) The time" is the only category which, for Homo sapiens, seems to pull

out the picture which he made about the Universe, from a purely geometric context. The "time" made "holes" in the "form (the only attribute of the" whole "), which passing in a state of "parts" (which are relate causally). To "fill" these "holes" in the "form" (so, to can "see" it as such like whole - not as "parts") we must give to "time", a strictly "geometric" correspondent! But in order to determine this, it would be need to discover his true nature. For Homo sapiens, the "time just separates the "cause" from the effect "(which may not overlap) and in a well defined sense (from the "cause "to" effect "). But what are these two phenomena, "cause" and "effect"? Are they some completely different processes which are waiting for the Homo sapiens intervention to enter in the relationship, and/or the relationship to be observed? Why they were not in relation, until this intervention? Or have they been? The body cannot make contact with the outside flashing (with spatial - geometrical breaks)! This could mean that in that time (!) the "body" is "dead"! And more: if these "breaks exists, they just creates artificial "beginnings" and endings", and so, some limits of the observed phenomena. The question is: are they real, or the "breaks" are induced, solely in the way of human way of observation? We have shown above that the normal reaction of the body as "whole to external stimulus is quasi instantaneous (uncaused). But, in the case of a body which is forced to "learn" the reactions like parts" (with distinct spatial and functional structures) to the same stimulus? Then, the communication between these parties (which is made by chemical ways, with latency inherent in this type of reaction) cannot be characterized by the simultaneous processes and thus would generate much slower reactions of the body. It follows that, in the course of this long reaction, the man cannot see anything around. You have recognized the "picture"? You feel the thumb of your left leg? Maybe now, after you reading the question ... But before? Especially since the finger was not dead at all! He, always, would have to send information! But, at the time, we have been in a "breaks", from his point of view ... In a state like that, we haven't can receive his messages (and, by default, a "part" of the "whole" image of the environment). So, we can find a very unpleasant conclusion: these "breaks" of the observation of the environment which characterize the functioning of the body like "parts", equivalent to periods in which the body is "dead", put , in our way of observation (which equates to how "we live ") the "time ", with its above properties . And also: while he is there, he "kills", literally, little by little, the human bodies. In the case of animals (because the question is inevitable) the limiting of environmental observation (hence, of the "life", implying the characteristic reactions), is no made by the "time". For them, the "time" does not exist, they are "working" like "parts" than on the next to human's house. For them, the only limitation is the "space" (induced by the conditions from ecosystem). They die from lack of "space".

We could live forever if we return to our real position, of the absolutely Eye, which can see the whole "! In short: at least one of the things that characterize the nature of time is that it come from the "breaks" caused by the way of observation (like "parts") of the Universe, of Homo sapiens. In direct connection with this situation is that "someone" took advantage of the situation above and tried to put the "holes" (the "breaks") in the observation, on behalf of a exterior context of the body. Considering a "partial" way to observe the Universe (by the light) Einstein has emitted the postulate 2 of Restricted Theory of Relativity , that says the "breaks" in observation processes can occur because the of what is lost on the road by the signals that links us with the outside, and which have a limited speed: speed of light in vacuum. As we know, the effects of this Principle (generation of relativity of the "breaks" in the "observation" of environment) are add up", as expected, with the fixed "breaks" in the "observation" determined by the "time", which with has a similar nature. So, the values of "breaks" becomes relative ("time" and "space" also, by his value, which is proportional to the time, are relative), and the origin of this phenomenon is, apparently, independent from our body (it concern only relative speed of travel to the observed phenomenon). The "pill time" as such, will be more easily to be swallowed. In reality the "light" is a purely geometrical phenomenon which refers to the "decoding" of the mixture of forms (the "corps"). Thus, it depends solely of "form" (the medium thru which it propagates). His "limited" speed shall be connected solely with the formal difference (fixed) between the two modes of the contact with outside of the bodies (also fixed geometric structures): as "whole" and as "parts". So, there are areas where, apparently, we have a direct access (an access which we can control). But they are made (exclusively EXPERIMENTAL) by the "pieces" (there are domains in which the causality, implicitly, the time", have sense). To have a direct access at something we do the disassembling" of the reality! That would mean that if it "build an algorithm" (causally), the "breaks" (the "time"), involved in carrying out of his modeling, overlap over the "breaks" (the "time") to determine causal relationships between the constituent parts, of a possible experiment. And the best example in this case is that in the entire Universe, except for the acceleration due to gravity (the "fall" of the corps and the centripetal acceleration of the corps which "revolves" around of the gravitational sources), all the others are "MADE" ONLY IN THE HUMAN EXPERIMENTS. That means that they are the RESULT OF ACTIONS which are causal INTERRELATED (which are based on "engines"). In other words, the acceleration, at which we have access to modeling, is "produced" only by us. So, the "gravitation" itself is not causally describable! Therefore the Equivalence Principle is needed It is a "vicious circle" which is broken of the reality from outside us. And Einstein, by the Equivalence Principle, only wants to link the outer domain of reality with the reality itself: the gravitational actions (see above). To extend these causal domains, in a well-intentioned way, the "breaks" dimensions are limited by equipment. Only that, in this way is triggered by a "catastrophe": it is allowed the access to "parts" of phenomena. As I stated, the "parts" of a phenomenon is "something else" than the "whole" phenomenon. Their models will be encumbered by this state of things: they will not be able to form the whole" of the phenomenon. At the limit, they will not be able to form a "whole", at whole.

The Phenomena's models will become "relative" ("causation" becomes the "probability density" function). And this happens at the micro level (the impulse "p" from the Heisenberg's Uncertainty Relation, which contains the "time", whose measurable value is , so, conditioned by the relationship itself) and at the "macro" level (the Lorentz transformations). In other words, we ourselves, like we created areas where we have access, in the same way, we created areas where we don't have access. And the "time" (the "causation"), it only "assembles the "parts" of our artifacts, by our way of "observation" (with the "breaks"). But, the general laws"(the causal relationships between phenomena), there are exactly in the areas where causation cannot be controlled (outside of "experiments", in the environment, where the phenomenon it matters only as "form", in the relationship with our physiological possibilities - means: in the domains where these phenomenon were "discovered", OBSERVED, whenever it want to, not fabricated). Is it just coincidence? If not, would be further proof that the "reality" (the only one which answers" actually at our signals - the searching) is not caused, is "geometric". Here, Im back to what I said above, on the formal language used in modeling phenomena, in science: Definition: formal elements for achieving these used models ("memory", "predictions") are accepted as "ideas" (which have a geometric nature information). It materialized that the "IDEAS" are "images" of the partial objectives to being achieved and exceeded for meet the physiological needs (what the dog has "imagined" when the bulb is lighting, and in the stomach is secreted hydrochloric acid, without to give him food). These partial objectives are targets, artificially introduced (does not exist in nature- i.e. by the bulb) and imposed by the algorithm (mechanism of the conditioned reflexes) from the "other side". If between observing a phenomenon (CAUSE) and the formal language model to describe it (EFFECT) there is a certain lag (based on the use of the algorithm), period with measurable duration, then the relationship between cause and effect is (how else) of "causal! Therefore any description of a phenomenon supported by science (which works only on formal models), is accepted to be fair only if it involves "causality"! "Time" is used only in the formal language, and corresponds to the physiological "breaks" in the process of observing the environment, required by the "reasoning", specific to Homo sapiens. He has only the function to introduce, possibly, a maximum GEOMETRICAL indeterminacy degree between "causes" and "effect", because these are geometric, and so, can be modeled exclusively differentiated. So forcibly, he hasnt their nature: HE NEVER WILL BE PUT, ALONE, in one of the positions of "cause "or "effect "! TIME" should be, therefore, the opposite of the "form" (meaning "no form"). His "existence" which, in these circumstances, is not part of "reality", stresses the purely geometrical nature of the latter.

A body, whether it works like the "parts" (or especially because of it), like that of Homo sapiens, it must be "assembled" somehow (controllable!). That would mean that "breaks", as any other physiological processes that can generate positive feedback mechanisms, with uncontrolled entry into oscillations and the system instability, should be compensated (canceled) through a negative feedback loop, with a "surrogate" process, which must oppose to the "break". That surrogate" process is represented by the observation of clocks indications. They give the impression that there are no losses in observing, by the "breaks": always are, in their place, information with geometrical appearance but, nevertheless, which has no form (can be integrated with any other specific geometric form of a context). Clock INDICATIONS - the "TIME" can split the whole", the geometry (which is "continuous") IN "PARTS"! Also: Clock INDICATIONS - THE "TIME" - by their nature, may pose in relation, FULL DISTINCT PHENOMENA, from of geometrically point of view! How many times did you interrupt a pleasant conversation, with someone you love, because you had to arrive, at a certain time, at an important meeting...? But how, in fact, "everything is form" which would, however, the geometric meaning of "clock's indications"? A possible response would enable us to "translate", a descriptive in "time" model", for a strictly geometrical "language". Let's start with the "space" which is the entity used in the formal modeling of phenomena, the nearest as nature, from a pure geometry (from the 'whole', and at which image we tend to have access). "Space is": it has value (i.e.: Km 45 "), because is proportional to the "time", and "form" (form path). In addition to "time" is about all we have at hand to shape the "reality" and its geometric properties. So it would be (partly) OK! From the space it would have to start (because we don't have from at what else). So: Can, something quasi "geometric", remains without "form" (meaning to turn into "time")? Yes: when a trajectory of a mobile is closed (like at the "clock"). When a corps is moving and not go anywhere (it turns back on start). This it could be the geometrical "equivalent" of "time: a movement without purpose (geometry without the "form"). But it is not! For as "space" must be, also, strictly geometric! And it is not! From The Gravitational Theory of Life follows that the Universe is, really, a superposition of geometrical fixed "figures" (we can call them "possibilities"). Living body is able to "navigate" through this ocean of possibilities (overlapping them a "modulation", according to his stable geometric properties). For example: a circle located in an orthogonal axes system goes into a system of two axes forming an angle different from 90 degrees between them. If and in this new coordinate system it retains the properties from the definition (plane figure formed by the set of all the points equally distant from a fixed point) it will act as a "body": Each of the figures in the two coordinate systems will have the same geometric properties but in reality other shape in each of the contexts. Changing of the geometric context, to call it "absolutely", keeping the "relative" geometric properties (to himself) means that the "corps" is "displaced" (means "space")! He actually changed the context by a simple geometric shape change. Like a puzzle piece, which, altering their shape, "fit", possibly, continuously in a variety of positions of the general image (in some it is "disappeared" and in other it "occurs"). If changes

are made in a closed order (to reach an initial geometric context) this is called "time" (which this time is a purely geometric model). An intuitive picture of the example above would be: if we build a circle around of the origin of orthogonal axes system and we look from the top of the origin we will see a "circle ". But the process takes place in three dimensions: we must go out of circle's plan, for that to can observe him, along of the third axes. If we observe the "circle" from the top of an arbitrary point from the plan, except the origin (meaning from "a side"), the apparent image of the circle will turn into an ellipse and the axes of orthogonal system of coordinates, except some situations, would be, apparently, an angle different of 90 degrees, between them (known effects of "perspective" from the painting). But if, standing there, on the top of origin of orthogonal axes system, the image of circle (which is "animated" without us to knowing it) is, continuously, turns in to an ellipse, and the angle between the axes it changes, like consequence? The feeling is certainly that the circle is rotated together with the coordinate axes. Or, that we have spun around him! "SPACE"? Yes! Definition: It's called SPACE the apparently continuous open sequence of geometric configurations of a given external context, geometrically stable, relative to the changes of the shape of the bodies relative to their stable geometric - functional properties (the state of the ordered closed chain). So the "space" it can be seen only by "living organisms"! And, if the change of the form occurs so that it comes back to a circle? That means that the circle made a "rotation" of 180 degrees? What we could say? That weve certainly "moved" around of the center of the circle, but we have no geometrical evidence in this sense: the situation is identical to that from the beginning of the experiment. The TIME"? Absolutely! Definition: It's called TIME the apparently continuous closed sequence of geometric configurations of a given external context, geometrically stable, relative to the changes of the shape of the bodies relative to their stable geometric - functional properties (the state of the ordered closed chain). And this is only by form changes! But in this experiment the reality" is fixed! We are the "Animations" (but remaining stable)! As you can see this model of "time" equals a "break" in the observation process ("between" times "nothing happened). Although the body it continues to "live" (to observe the environment at the level of "whole" body, whose shape - must - remains stable in any context) the time is a formal stop of the possibility to change randomly our forms at elemental (cells) level. We can "move" but because of "time" we can "move" only by where is "allowed" us... What would be the explanation of the possibilities of the bodies ("geometric" entities) to have certain degrees of freedom in a context, purely geometric too, hence, fixed? It refers to the fact that in the mechanism by which this geometric context has its self consistency (how he "appeared" and "exist only on a geometric basis) the "movement" it resulting only from dimensional variations (of the "ladder", of the metric, in which can be described the forms).

The theory is described a "support which is "geometrically, by his nature, but that works exclusively as a support, on the dimensional criteria: the "form", if you go near to it too much, it turns into parts": but if you go too far off it loses his meaning. There are "domains" which, generically, could be called "particles", which contain within them "something" that cannot be integrated, at this specific level (at the exterior) into a geometric context because the intervals between some elements which could exists, are dimensionally too small to have a geometrical sense (what exists in there is too "far" for the "outside") . But those "particles", as such, along with others of the same nature, may generate, in their exterior, a geometrically well-defined context. What I mean, in particular: in the "space", were "particles" as I described above. But some of it manifests a sort of geometrical "independency. So, each of them, for to have sense, independently, in terms of geometry (i.e. not to be integrated, with any other, in any certain symmetry) should show something in the sense of a moving", each relative to all the others. This equates with the existence of the possibility, that, in their "movement", to it "meet" each other, in a "point" (in any case, in a "domain" with the appropriate dimensions that the "processes" from inside of these particles to get sense). Under the influence of these internal processes which become manifest (like the "parts"), because of proximity sufficiency, in the meeting "point", the particles" will lose all of their geometrical "independency". So a number of distinct symmetries, equal with number of particles (practically infinite) turn to a finite number of symmetries which will be supported by all the "particles". And those symmetries will continue the way of particles" beyond of "point" of the meeting, creating a certain context which it "swells". I will return below at this model. Now I just try to give an intuitive picture: Imagine a balloon painted. As the balloon it swells, the figures do not change their shape but only their size. From their point of view is not sensed the inflating of the balloon in any way. I describe a kind of "big bang", strictly geometric (that leave the shapes unchanged -"invariant"). Now: if the surface of the balloon would fall a few drops of paint, oily, thick, and they were dry and we could have the image of "interaction" between the bodies and the geometric context (two entities of the same kind) as the "balloon" continue to swell. Rubber layer under the dry paint drops would not expand as the balloon is inflated. Around them would occur some areas where the rubber is stretched ("gravity"!?) more than in the areas without drops of paint. This relative deflection (the situations in which only rubber from around the droplet is deformed, or only the one from under the drop is deformed, are equivalent), in the context described above, means a navigation in "time" and/or space" of the cells. Emphasize that, in the reality (the geometrical one), "drops of paint" are, of course, strictly geometrical, and occur spontaneously in the contact zones of the distinct "forms". To clarify should be said that the "geometric reality" - the "whole is finite, from a geometrically point of view. Mean that the number of DISTINCT "forms", which are included in the "geometric reality" - the "whole, is finite. The "space" in which they can expand (continuing to remain invariant) is "infinite". In the process of enlargement, the contact zone of two or more distinct symmetries, there are components relative, to call them "dynamic", mutually perpendicular on planes included by the symmetries. I mean, that there is something local, which does not affect the overall geometric layout. That happens "in time" (causal!?). At the level of this

kind of contacts, due to the finite number of symmetries which are involved, the happenings" interrelate in a closed cycle. You have the exact image of the DNA double helix which is "closed" (as a MBIUS's strip) I'll talk about below. The "drop of paint" is thus a phenomenon that depends exclusively on the finite number of distinct symmetries, in contact in a particular domain of the "geometric reality". He does not comply with the process of "extending" of the rest of the "geometric reality". The "tensions" so generated, it manifested by relative changes of form of the closed route . In other words, all the symmetries in the area of "contact" disappear along of the closed route, and "turns" into a single one: the "momentary" form of the route - corresponding to a certain degree of extension of the "geometric reality". But the momentary shape of the closed route always coincides with one of the symmetries in contact. These mean the "movement" thru the "geometric reality" of this closed route. This is the Complete DNA, the "engine" of the UNIVERSE! Guess who uses it also! There is, because of finite number of symmetries, and areas completely "empty". There's no symmetry. At the existing contact with such areas, there is a phenomenon of local extension of those symmetries to the opened space" in question. It seeks to "fill" it, without ever succeed (being exactly the opposite of the expansion of the overall "geometric reality"). Symmetries disappear in this case also, but the process it becomes a "mixture" of all symmetries that reaches the zone. This below, would be very important to note: From this model it follows that "life" (the completely DNA) and the "gravitation" have the same origin: the "expansion" of a finite number of symmetries, which forms the "geometric reality", in an infinite "space". But, none of these processes is not causal. They are strictly geometrical. So Einstein's intuition was good and this time: "gravity" and expansion of the Universe exists and are directly interrelated. But not in a causal way! So, these are acting independent. Therefore, specifically because of this, there was no need to "cosmological constant" (http://super.colorado.edu/~michaele/Lambda/blund.html). An appropriate mental picture would be: Let us remember how Einstein tries to exemplify the behavior of "space-time" nearby of a heavy corps: a sheet of rubber, as tight as a drum, on which is placed a heavy body. This deforms the foil to form an "crater which deforms any corps movement that passes nearby, "drawing" it to the heavy corps. Now begins the change: Suppose that the rubber sheet is impregnated with a material that gives it the property to reflect light like a mirror. In the areas where it is perfectly flat, it clearly reflects the images of the corps, without distortions. In contrast, in the "crater", the images of the corps would be deformed and it would become fluid, and, therefore, it would flowing" toward the heavy corps. What are we talking? About gravitation! It is something that "destroys" symmetries (like the closed and completely DNA). The only difference comes from the finality of the process: - The closed and completely DNA determine a "behavior" geometrically unique, well defined and independent of the general context of "geometric reality", - The "gravitation" determines a mixture of symmetries in which each is losing his identity. In conclusion, a complete and closed DNA allows us to free change of our form ("moving") in the "geometric reality".

As we noted, the "time" is resulting from closed cycles of changes of the organisms form". The context in which we "exist", controlled by "Pavlov" (i.e. by "movements" of heavy bodies in the solar system) requires such closed cycles. This limited the free and instantaneous access to the "forms"- possibilities ("places" and "moments" "elsewhere" in the Universe). The "TIME" for Homo sapiens is a trap, at the level which should make him free: at the DNA level! Depends only on him to get away from it! Let's clarify a bit: The complex body (with a geometric nature) it makes contact with the environment (also with a geometric nature) at two distinct levels, simultaneously: 1) At cells level, where this should function, each, as a whole, 2) At the entire body level, that works as well, as a "whole". A contact with the environment (to "observe" him) means, for a body to "crossing over" various forms, in a certain way, so that certain geometric properties characteristic of him, to be preserved. It seems a little unclear but an intuitive image it is the description of the bodies, made since the beginning of this essay: The "Body" is an "order" (exclusively geometrical, which means non material), in time and space, with a certain support. His material part (which is "seen") is only the support for this "order". The new and more delicate part is that which refers to "crossing" thru forms which, in a material (causal) reality, is meaningless. Until this point I have made great efforts to prove that reality is geometric. What's a geometric entity, with given properties, which include other random forms, and yet to keep its basic properties? The answer is quite simple: almost like a CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN, as it was defined above. This structure is uncaused at level of complex body, despite the contact with the environment, at cells level. So the complex organism "passes" through the environment without leaving, one to each other, mutual "traces (thru the complex of processes "actions - reactions"). But he leaves traces at the cellular level, in terms of causality (material). So, to the animal cell it lacks something that to allow them not to leave traces in the environment (not to "interact" with, but to "assimilate" - into a closed circulation - any form from the local environment, which are all "open" - only at the overall level, the geometric reality is "closed", where they behave as a "whole"). I mean, it lacks something to be a CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN. And this is the truth: the living cell will become a CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN only if will be coupled, not incidentally, only chemically, with the vegetal cell. The chemical nature of the contact with vegetal cells generates, geometrically speaking, a total indeterminacy of the liaison at this level, incompatible with the thermodynamic nature and with the strictly geometric orientation of the internal processes and structures of the two types of OPENED ORDERLY CHAINS, that is shown on page 14 and as shown in full, in Gravitational Theory of Life. So individually, these two structures are OPENED ORDERLY CHAINS (or causal). So, they cannot change their shape randomly. They are, each for the other, a kind of "iron ball" at the foot, in this regard, so that they can form a CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN only at global level (only on this way them being able to "pass through" the reality of the Universe, which is only geometric). In these circumstances, locally, but taken out of context of CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN of natural environment coupled with the body, may occur some geometrical stimulus. These stimulus being geometric, but cannot being integrated, because of their shape, taken out of context, in the internal structure of ORDERLY OPEN chains of animals and plants, cannot be "crossed " without altering the shape of those latter. The effects of these causal contacts (due to the opened nature of ordered chains, vegetal and / or animal) that should affect the ascertained geometric stability, within certain limits, of the two types of structures, are controlled by gravitational actions (which generate the complex of processes actions -

reactions"). A certain configuration of gravitational actions is that which ensure the geometrical stability of the cells, vegetal and animal, formally (continuous) by closing the two OPEN ORDERLY CHAINS, despite of casual contacts (material) with the outside. So each turns, formally, in a CHAIN ORDERLY CLOSED. This explains the "material" (causal) contact of the environment with the body (both being geometrical). And DNA has a fundamental role in this context. I will come back below. Warning! If structures (and the DNA, by default) of these two types of cells would be coupled, as naturally they can, they would perform a completeness of a CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN, without the help of gravitational actions. I mean that would become independent of them (anyone heard of "green little people"?). By the de facto status, of the opening of the ordered chains (gravitational compensated) it makes possible the contact with the material environment of living organisms (which have a purely geometric nature). And so it became possible to use "signals" (stimulus which are out of the context of the CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN of natural environment of the body) with which he was forced to "interact", repeatedly, yielding conditioned reflexes and the functioning on parts" of the body. I mean, by "breaks" of the observation of the environment (i.e. from the geometrically point of view, the "time", with the above definition, which it occur around of the limitation of the forms changing, due to the coupling condition with the vegetal cell). In summary, the contradiction between the existence of "general laws" that proves the existence of the whole", with his exclusive attribute (the "form") and the failure in its modeling thru some "causal relationships" (as they have been defined above) between partial" models, can be explained as follows: The "ideas", with the above definition, have a purely geometrical (uncaused) nature like any process or phenomenon characteristic of "living bodies". They interrelate "causally" by means of the "breaks" in the observation processes (the "TIME") of the Homo sapiens organism. There are phenomena outside the body which are exclusively "observed" (it is discovered spontaneous - i.e. causelessly some "domains" of their which match, as "form", with the "ideas" - previously structured at synaptic level). If the causal models which occurring thru interrelation of these "ideas", in an order of "time", are spontaneously (causelessly) "observed" in the outside, with maximum probability, (hence, being "unique", determined) they become "general laws". As is easily noticed, the "contact" of body with the outside, from which result the "general laws", which is spontaneously (causelessly), cannot be held, initially, only between entities with the same "geometric" nature: the "ideas" and the "domains" of the phenomena outside the body, with similar "shape" with those. The fact that the "domains" of phenomena from outside the body have the same nature as the "ideas" ("geometric"), and are, also, as the "ideas" are, limited (finite describable) lead to the conclusion that some "parts" of reality have a geometric nature. These domains may, possibly, be causally interrelated (a situation which can only be accepted as long as you have not established, yet, the exact nature of the "ideas") in the evolution of phenomena. This would lead and to the simultaneous acceptance of some causality aspects of the reality. But the "contact" with external phenomenon, which is spontaneous, causelessly, so that he can "begin" (and, implicitly, finish") anywhere and anytime (what gives of the model which it describes the status of "general law") mean that these notions, the "beginning" ("cause") and, obviously, the "end" ("effect") are senseless and, therefore, the "whole reality is

"GEOMETRY". I mean, for example, that you can check the Universal Law of Gravitation (a causal law) anywhere and anytime in a geometrical (continuous) reality. And more: in this context, in fact, the same "form" of the "ideas" and the "domains" from outside, into a STRICTLY GEOMETRICAL reality, means that they are "one and the same" ( THE BODY - Geometry - NO the "I" , and the Reality - Geometry, ALSO, can have a partial common zone)! An intuitive picture of this context would be: The "beginning" and the "end" (the "cause" and the "effect") of a phenomenon it lose their meaning (as shown above) if it represents only some limited modelable aspects ("ideas" generated by signals which come from out of the natural context of the body) of a single geometric reality, continuous. They are not really differentiated. Only the "time divides them. But the 'time is not geometry. So there is no differentiation in a geometric "plan", but in outer of any geometric domain. Those phenomenons take place causally, for Homo sapiens, but in a loop which is "out" of any field of geometric nature, with which have, however, the contact points". These, being parts of a geometric (and continues) reality, it not differentiates between them: they ANNULS the causality. That which happens in these loops does not influences the basic geometric reality. This could be like the way in which are modeled the particles in the "string" Theory: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wl9qfxf958M. In connection with how the representation of phenomena in "spaces" with variable number of dimensions can be understood: The "strings" are fixed, in the geometric reality, in two points: the "cause" and the "effect". The representation in a different number of "dimensions" would mean to added another new "layer" of complexity to the existing "string", resulting "strings" of "thickness" of various values (models that incorporate more "time" - which are more "complicated" - as the number of dimensions is greater) to describe the same phenomenon. As results from the film, each representation with an extra dimension can resulting from "moving" of a corps perpendicular to any plane (out of this plan) originally included in the model with initial number of dimensions. The corps moves only in the "time", relative to it. So, in this way the gravity would "lose" the intensity in a greater number of dimensions". From which we can see" only three But as mentioned, the mechanism of "construction" of each new dimension takes place only in "time". So all representations of Homo sapiens, at any number of dimensions, exist only in "time": they are "non geometric". But the gravity is purely geometric: the "string" of a gravitational phenomenon not comes out of the real geometry domain. Because it refers to one and the same phenomenon ("image"). One and the same phenomenon is his own "cause" and his own "effect ", at the same time. It is a virtual "string. Only as the phenomenon is due to the geometric reality, which have unevenness, in the area of an "image", which generating of a transformation from a "cause" (a certain "form") to an "effect " (another "form") which, under the "magnifying glass" of observing thru the "parts" is manifest as a "string" (a moving phenomenon). But the "time" (non geometric relationship between two "images"), involving movement, is notified as such by Homo sapiens. So no heavy bodies (which are only some "mixed pictures", and that have a causal existence only in loops time - "strings") are due to gravity, but vice versa. There are, however, and phenomena created "ad initio" thru an experimental (causal) way. The difference between them and the "discovered" phenomenon is that their "beginning" ("Cause") is

no longer outside but inside of the body. The "Cause" is the "experimenter" himself. But we decided that the real nature of it (of his body) is not causally ("Geometrical"). So, neither these phenomena, generated only by experiments, have not a "cause" which coming from a reality, exterior to the "I"'s of Homo sapiens. The question is: "those phenomena actually exist or not? As shown above, bodies act as "whole": they are characterized only by their "form". Can they be generated by a causal reality that exists only at the "parts" level. No! As shown above, between "whole" and "parts" there is any relationship: the existence of one of the categories it excludes the other. So the bodies are solely the consequence of a geometric reality. Their existence, completely independent, proves the self consistency of this reality. This is not the case of a possible "causal reality": of a certain "cause" always is missing it something: her own cause. So, a reality (the geometrical one), being self consistent and the other (the causal one) not, and also, the existence of one excluding on the other, mean that the latter it result causelessly from the first, but in an outside domain, strictly separate. The only ones who can "see" the objects of this "causal reality" are we, Homo sapiens! So the answer to the question "exists those materials phenomena, in reality?" is NO! They have their place in a "fictional reality" ("scientific") appropriate to the "social environment". Or, more suggestively, in a "informational cage"! The model of phenomenon would be more consistent if would be clearer the way from a strictly geometric reality, continues and well determined, to a causal reality, which it can occur causelessly. One can describe such a geometrical model, in the context described on page 43, if you consider that over the "geometrical reality", which result from the "meeting" of some "particles", initialy independents, from a geometric viewpoint, overlap symmetries from outside of that mechanism. That is made up of "particles" that have never "met" each other or with the "particles" of the "geometrical reality". In short, if, over a "geometric reality", continuous and strictly defined, is overlap a certain geometrical reality from outside and independent of the first (with a relative movement, at the level of symmetries), with no formal interaction (each of its preserved his form) then they can generate a distinct field, by breaking continuity of the resultant geometry. It will generate some geometrically limited "images", between emerging some areas with a maximum degree of geometrically indeterminacy, linked by non geometrical (causal) relationships. It might be objected that some material phenomena are external of the reason or to our will. It's true! The explanation is that they are "involuntary" generated in the loops time by on a particular behavior induced by a particular genetic configuration. For could not leave the loops time (this translates by not being able to modify our cells shape - transfiguration- for direct access to any "places" - "moments" of the Universe) the DNA was "broken"(see above): he had originally the appearance of MBIUS's strip, allowing the cancellation of any temporal loop ("breaks") from body structure. The "fracture" (which is "made) makes it possible existence of the "I"-s (the human's "reason"). We know cells that do nothing and cells which do "something". What would you say about the cells that can do "everything""anytime" (can become neuron after they were liver cells, after were, before that, muscle cell, and so on)? And so the body shape may change at any level.

Being just a "shape", how we can take a pen in hand, anyway? Simply because of the "fracture" of the DNA, we cannot (at cell level) take the form of the pen (your hand can not "pass" through it): our "form" "avoids" his "form", which is and in ourselves. To resume: in fact, the same "form" of the "ideas" and the "domains" from outside, into a STRICTLY GEOMETRICAL reality, means that they are "one and the same" ( THE BODY Geometry - NO the "I" , and the Reality - Geometry, ALSO, can have a partial common zone)! Nevertheless, the complete "form of a domain", from outside of the body (the pen, for example) it cannot be reproduce at the elemental (cells) level of the relationship "the function - the relative position" of the body (as a "whole") in order to "move" and through it. So, the "idea" is a limited picture description (done through the mechanism of the conditioned reflexes") of an outside "domain" (meaning that is made solely with only one "part" of the body structure rather than "whole body"), this "opportunity" being offered by the fracture" of the DNA which generating two chains OPEN ORDERLY chains (causal): vegetal cell and animal cell.. So, the idea, the incomplete form of domain is only in the DNA manipulated mind of Homo sapiens. When DNA is "good" (like the MBIUSs strip) we can make a complete image about a certain domain and pass thru objects (by taking their form, at cell level, so seeing them and as inside). Now it is "know" that something like this cannot be (we can leave or enter from/in a room from/in which is impossible to do that), or, on the contrary, we can "walk on water" (by which, "normally", we must pass thru). You should be clear now what is the "soul...We have already, in our bodies, cells with the good DNA! But this genetic configuration with variable geometry it can recover mentally: Bible, John 3: 6. What is born of flesh is flesh (strictly genetic determination, but with a "broken" DNA - which restricting the possibility of change the "form") and what is born of the Spirit is spirit (with DNA in a "whole " - with access to any "form" - "location ", "time" in the Universe). 7. Do not marvel that I said: "You must be born again". In this essay I have used (and will use more) quotes from the Bible and, also, the accepted formal approach in the scientific field. The aim of this approach is, solely, to be able to achieve a transmission of a message in a language as widely accepted. I emphasize that I am not agree with neither of these gnoseologic approaches. Nor of any other approach, which can results from an "association" obviously conjectural, between them. The "science and the "religion" have started, lately, to waving the flag of reconciliation, both of them trying to make an excellence from this. If the phenomenon would have occurred naturally, starting from two different points, based on different methods of analysis, then, maybe he would have been very positive. But science has gone, as is known, right from under the skirt of "god-devil". Why did she not remain there, and, so sparing a long way and many lives? However, what is trying now is only a combination of both parties in front of a big and fast rolling roller: the strikeout. But from the "parts" does not result the whole"! The "whole is something in which "the parties" have no effect: it is totally something else! Turning to the military, can be concluded that what happens at "material" level (in time loops) in this area, are easy to avoid: those are just fiction. I recall here an example of experiment from France, in the '60s, where people, randomly selected, were asked to oversee the absolute frequency signals emitted by a Geiger counter which measured the activity of a radioactive source: to signal any sensed change. The source, initially measured, which had a

specific activity (the device emits a signal of a known frequency) was changed, without any knowledge of the person, with another source who had other activity (the Geiger counter would had to emit with another frequency of signals). "Inexplicably", the new source was emitting radiation in a manner identical to the first. I mean, that initial activity of the new source, measured by physicists, was changed. It is known that the phenomenon of radiation emission can't be controlled, based on current knowledge. But, at level of geometric aspect of reality, things are different. And this is happening relative to any kind of "weapon". So, can we make "trips" to "space" and "time", without to be undertaking nothing causally? Obviously! For that us (the "bodies") we are not and we can't be really "limited" ("dimensional", like has been geometrical defined the "space" and the "time", each of us is literally a whole Universe of geometrical "possibilities", not only the physical appearance at which we have access by the "causality"). And this kind of "movement" cannot interfere with anything "physical" (the "super military technologies are just a bluff for fools). The appearance, more or less "physical" of the UFO is, and it, just a trick besides many others. We were "taught" causation precisely for not having such an uncontrollable independence of movements thru "possibilities". In relation to "social environment" as is defined above, the equivalent of the "time is the "money" (we all know the old saying that time is money! which it seems that now it has an explanation). Satisfying the false physiological needs through access to the parts of the social environment is achieved through relationship "request <->money<-> offer" ("cause<>time<->effect"?!). And this context has a geometric representation. Above one could easily recognize statements that could be classified as being "deist" (admission of impersonal supernatural forces, which, as initial impulse, created or set the world in motion, then without to intervene in the natural order of things), such as: 1) "Non causality" of the bodies, 2) "Non causality" of their "natural environment", 3) "Non causality" (purely geometrical nature) of the "whole" Universe. Also, you may note the "materialistic" statements: 1) The "Creation" is not the work of a "creator", and more, 2) It, like causal entity (as matter), like the "movement", are not caused by something external for them (the old problem of the origin of movement in philosophy). As I said at the beginning the solution of modeling of a complete Universe comes from the acceptance of the simultaneity of the two types of relationships (the "idea" generated the "matter" and the "matter" cause the "idea") conditions in which both categories lose their meaning. So if, from the theory, it could draw such "partial" conclusions, its not appropriate to get a "whole" conclusion that I have ANY sympathy with a side or the other. Because there is no "ideas" and is no "matter"! There is only the "IDEA" and the "WHOLE"! I am with the "WHOLE"! I am free (with the TRUTH)!

Kant's Triumph

I must emphasize in a few words the fact that, without looking for this in any way, the life and the Universe model from the Gravitational Theory of Life generates conclusions that coincide, to detail, to those of Kant. I quote from http://frank.mtsu.edu/~rbombard/RB/PDFs/Kant01.pdf

Kant's Theory of Space and Time

1 Ontology:
Kant postulates that space and time do not really exist beyond human experience, but are "forms of intuition" (i.e., conditions of perception, imposed by our own minds). This enables him to reconcile Newton and Leibniz: agreeing with Newton that space is absolute and real for objects in experience (i.e., for phenomenal objects open to science), but agreeing with Leibniz that space is really nothing in terms of objects as they exist apart from us (i.e., with things in themselves).

Epistemology:
Unlike Hume, Kant denies that the axioms of geometry are self-evident or true in any logically necessary way. They are logically "synthetic," which means that they may be denied without contradiction. That is a significant claim because it implies that consistent non-Euclidean geometries are possible (involving the otherwise consistent denial of one or more of the axioms of Euclid, as Bolyai, Lobachevskii and Riemann actually accomplished). Nevertheless, Kant holds that the axioms of geometry are known a priori (i.e., that they are known to be true independently of any experience) because Euclidean axioms depend on our "pure intuition" of space, namely space as we are able imaginatively to visualize it. Only if non-Euclidean space can be visualized would Kant be wrong.

Cosmology:
Kant does not think we can know, or even imagine, the universe as either finite or infinite, in space or in time, because space and time are only forms of perception and cannot be imagined or visualized as absolute wholes. The universe, as the place of things-in-themselves, is not in space or in time and so is neither finite nor infinite in space or in time. Thus there cannot be an a priori, rational or metaphysical, cosmology.

Why Kant win? For that he telling the truth in terms of Homo sapiens, which excludes itself from the Universe which he describe. And the recognition that you have a problem is the beginning to solve it. Einstein misses!

General Relativity: Space and Time after Einstein

1 Ontology:
Kant was wrong: space and time really exist beyond human experience, but only relative to masses in motion (there is no absolute, Euclidean metric to which all physical events conform: space curves locally and times are desynnchronized for objects moving in non-uniform inertial frames).

Epistemology:
Kant was wrong: non-Euclidean space can not only be visualized, but measured (the sun, for example, warps local spacetime by approximately four seconds of arc per century)--suggesting that Kant had the relation between what can be conceived and what can be visualized backwards.

Cosmology:
Kant was wrong: although the First Antinomy purports to show the impossibility of conceiving the universe as either finite or infinite in-itself (because both contradictory metaphysical absolutes can be argued and justified with equal force, it follows that neither can actually be proven), Einstein answered Kant by proposing a consistent non-Euclidean (Riemannian) universe that is finite but unbounded (i.e. without an edge).

Why? Because his perspective does not change: The Universe is viewed, also, from "outside": can give Einstein definitions for the space" and "time" outside of human experience (like the Gravitational Theory of Life give it, because it refers to the true nature of "human" did not at his - artificial - experience)? What would be the criterion of the truth after that it could be appreciated such a definition. The definitions of "space" and "time" can result only based on a model that can describes the following phenomenon: you watch and hear someone saying the word "space" (or "time"). If you can made the model of this phenomenon, coherently integrated into a universal context then you know possibly what is "space" or "time". However Kant has determined that it cannot make a model of such processes. Knew Einstein more: like how works his brain (in which context he utters "space" or "time")? Means, in other words, he knew how his brain determines (or not) a bi-univocal relationship with some reality? If so, did not say it to anyone (at least I do not know any such approach from him). I know that he donated his brains to the specialized institutions. Perhaps he has let at the others to solve this problem.

So, if you do not know what is the "space" and / or "time (as they result from your brain), how to know in which way these categories are the only (weird, huh?) involved (or if they are involved), in to a phenomenon or another? He used ONLY some unknowns categories! And it justified this in a pathetic way: through a principle of "equivalence...
He built some theories that prove that "something" isn't "absolutely" but "relatively". Great! If he had known also the true nature of his, he would have discovered that the relativity of this "something" is, in fact, absolute: it does not exist elsewhere than in the subject's head. In Romanian is said to have discovered the "hole of pretzel" Furthermore, because of the early age at which happened this phenomenon, the subject does not know how this "something" it got there. Who recognized this? Only Kant! For the others was very difficult to accept that. And still is "Space" and "time", until to Einstein, have been used exclusively as a parameter in the development of formal models (they answer only to the question "how?"). And this is not accidental.

If you do not know the nature of a certain thing you cannot use it as a cause in explaining of other unexplained phenomena, before. But, what happen if no one knows the nature of that thing? And more: if someone with high credibility (Kant!) demonstrated that the nature of that thing is ever unknowable? Then the credibility of some people (the scientists) is subject to a big pressure. But also, the risk that Kant to do it wrong, is small. It is a big opportunity for a bluff! And Einstein has bluffing! No one will have the power to manifest his disagreement with this without putting something in place. And as this was impossible (by Kant) the only remained problem was the correct relationing of these things, in accepted (and useless) formal terms. As if that would be enough! So and today, in physics, it is expected that the language (mathematics) that was designed to describe not to explain, to be smarter than its creators: to explain unexplained phenomena. Something more absurd cannot exist! But, the "success" meant a bubble of oxygen for science: the hitting" of two birds with one stone, the "space" - "time" and the "gravity". Imagine two blind men in the desert: each of them focusing his attention only after the noise of the other steps. So, they could only to remain near, one to the other. And to going and going, to nowhere, these being the only gain... Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.