Becoming ‘Realistic’ About General (and Special) Relativity
There is a circular relationship between any X and-or Y. Missed, historically (and even now), by the original ‘scientists’ in Nature.
There is a mandatory circular relationship between general and special relativity (any X and Y). It looks like this:
This is because a zero and a one is, more technically, circumference and diameter. Of an ‘always-conserved’ circle (and line).
That is, X and Y is 0 and 1. Giving the basis for comparison and choice (mathematics and physics, in general).
Meaning, X and X is, always, X and Y (0 and 1) explaining (and exposing) how we, as humans, are able to ‘differentiate’ between ‘identity’ and complementarity.
Meaning X and X is, always, X and X’.
Therefore, the diagram proves (what a human labels) ‘reality’ is unified.
Therefore, Nature, is, also, ‘unified,’ since a human is a necessary ‘part’ of Nature.
Again, this is easily explained by the mandatory circular relationship between an individual and a group. (Any system, discipline).
Exposing the natural reality of a circuit.
Allowing us to see a circuit as the universal system architecture in Nature.
Where, we can begin to understand how Nature uses ‘redundancy’ (universality) to confuse ‘us.’
Where ‘us’ is a general word for the ‘specific’ relativity (gravity) called a ‘human.’
Where you cannot have an individual without a group, where the word ‘group’ always refers to a minima-maxima ‘number’ two.
And, technically, if you decide you want to ‘go there,’ that is all there is to ‘reality.’
Meaning, the diagram gives us the only ‘realistic’ interpretation of ‘reality’ that is consistent with the operation, and, therefore, then, the observation, called ‘Nature.’
Where, technically, zero and one is, more correctly, labeled, one and two.
Giving us the ‘reasoning’ behind the human constructions (words) ‘and’ and (or) ‘or.’
So, there it is. The conservation of an uber-simple circle is, realistically, the core dynamic in (and the universal architecture for) Nature.
Why we have to centralize the strings we use to describe both ‘reality’ and Nature. (Notice, on this page, the strings of characters articulate a line, diameter and circumference of an always-conserved circle.)
Proving a line is a circle (one is zero) (diameter is circumference) from the circle’s (pi’s) point of view.
Meaning we, as humans, have many names that describe the exact same (unified) reality.
This is, obviously, because the conservation of a circle is the basis for a zero. And, a one.
Where, to go back to the beginning, zero and one is circumference and diameter. Literally and figuratively (X and Y).
Meaning, if X, then Y (because if 0, then 1) (because you cannot have a circumference without a diameter).
Explaining ‘technology’s’ hold on ‘reality.’ (Gravity in general.)
So, therefore, we cannot escape the whole idea of quantum circularity (which is the correct, technical, description for quantum relativity) (the qubit, in general).
Again, conservation of the circle is the unifying feature (core dynamic) called ‘reality.’ Nature (relativity and gravity), in general. And, therefore, then, specific.
Explaining, why, perhaps, we decided ’long ago,’ we really didn’t want to ‘understand’ ‘reality.’
What Einstein (and all of the ancient mathematicians) missed: only a circle can circle (explaining radiation, rotation, revolution).
Removing the necessity for (and the whole idea of) an ‘inertial’ frame (the center of a circle).
Proving, after all is said and done, the conservation of an uber-simple circle (absolute relativity) is the basis for reality (and, obviously, then, the core dynamic in Nature).
Invest in the Circular Theory…