| 
		The lack of a general understanding
        that the fundamental principals of physics are entirely dependent upon faith
        . . . that is: Metaphysics
        (that which requires much faith to understand the logic of its 
		postulates) . . . is largely because:
 
			
				
					|  | The certainty of applied
        scientific method, concerning said fundamental principles, is strongly
        implied by academia . . . rather than academia clearly stating that: The
        fundamental principles of physics 
        
					
					result
        from theory that is derived from mysterious phenomena that is not
        currently understood by any member of post-modern academia |  |  
		
		Usually,
        these fundamental principles involve orthogonal space;
        
		
		cyclic and linear time; and four forces, sometimes
        fewer
        forces, sometimes more, depending upon which
        authority is being consulted . 
		. . also, the Inverse Square Law should be included; and, unbelievably, 
		often forgotten, the entire discipline of mathematics is a fundamental 
		principle of physics..
 
 The
        
		fundamental
        forces that are most usually 
		considered are: gravity, light, the strong
        
		atomic
        force, 
		and 
		the
        
		weak atomic force;
        
		occasionally, 
		several
        of these forces are considered as one by some physicists; and, others
        sometimes include 
		inertia;
        or,
        
		as
        it's often known: 
		the cosmological
        constant,
        or more recently, either Cosmic inertia; or even, enigmatic "dark" energy that emanates from
        the void.
 
 Thus, generally, the considered forces are between three and five; however,
        the general consensus is that there are four fundamental forces.
 
 The cosmological constant is often considered  
		as
        
		a force because of
        its inertia-like opposition to gravity. 
        
		Because of recent observations of galactic recession and other
        cosmic motions, the cosmological constant has been resurrected from a
        long discarded conceptual contrivance of Einstein's.
        However, for post-modern observation and application, Einstein was wrong about the cosmological constant being
        constant; and, he, also, misplaced the source and direction of its action.  
		Astronomers often refer to a form of this force as the mysterious, 
		observed "Great Attractor."
 
 The
        fundamental etiology and nature of all these concepts of 
		orthogonal space, time, The Inverse Square Law, mathematics, and forces are little
        understood . . . if
        at all.  Thus, an understanding of the "Why?" of these concepts, as professed by
        academia,  requires much faith . . . a prerequisite for
        metaphysics.
 
 The fundamental concepts of
        physics have been invented/contrived to explain observed, natural happenings. 
        And, thus, their proof is often mistaken because the natural happenings,
        happen to happen.  This proof is circular, at best; these fundamental concepts
        are not 
		presently
        
		provable
        with any currently acceptable theory.  In fact all fundamental 
		physics is "theory" because none of it is provable . . . 
		a prerequisite for metaphysics.
 
 The
        current theories 
		are
        
		little
        more than 
		a form of symbolism that is useful for representing
        inexplicable, natural phenomena; and are thus, similar to the gods which
        were invented
        
		during
        early history 
		to explain the
        
		stars,
        
		sun, thunder, lightning,
        
		life,
        consciousness, death, 
		
		and so on. 
        
        
		Quite likely, the ancients had a better
        
        
		natural
        
		understanding of god than
        the designing, anthropomorphic representations that modern religions now
        provide.
 
 An
        ancient person of learning was a combination scientist, theologian, and
        philosopher; a combination seldom seen in the modern
        "scientific" era; these disciplines, Science, Theology, and
        Philosophy, have
        gone their separate ways in search of the same goal: understanding and explaining our
        natural environment so that we can, by design, better live our lives.
 
 Space and time have been linked
by Einstein's  
		concept
        that has been labeled: 
		space-time.  Though
there is much justification for such a linkage, it is still similar to linking
the words "light-gravity" and their enigmatic connotations. 
The linkage of space and time, each a poorly understood concept, in
itself, only creates confusion.  Particularly,
when space is no more than a relative illusion of our senses. 
        And, time, two distinct concepts, is, both, confusingly, and often, circularly defined.
 
 Space, more appropriately time,
is not only a function of speed, but it does not actually exist as usually
envisaged . . . it is relative;
        
		and
        
		
		an illusion. 
There is no 
		such
a thing as 
		
		"space" where
"something" such as light
waves can not be found.  In fact,
all matter, no matter how dense, is composed entirely of wave phenomena. 
It is our senses that are not sensitive enough to perceive certain
"dark-matter,"
		"particles,"
rays, 
		
		and waves, which completely fill all 
"space."  Our
senses, thus, create the illusion of matter 
 
		 
from the motion of energy and resonance such that the energy (light) is 
		contained; 
		
		and, subsequently, the illusion of
voids,
or "space," between
		
 matter,
which consists of 
		
		various wave phenomena.
 
 Reality is without voids. 
Reality is causal and local; everything is in resonant contact with something . . .
and everything . . .    
		without
        concern for "time". . . 
		
		at some relative speed. 
The apparitions of   Reality's
non-local phenomena; such as 
		
		tunneling,
quantum teleportation, photon entanglement, universal gravitational and inertial
action-at-a-distance, et cetera; are associated with triquametric motion and speeds beyond that of
light.
 
 Time, fundamentally, is a mystery
to physicists.  The label "time" refers to several phenomena which are usually, deceptively commingled. 
There is cyclical time, linear time, electromagnetic time, et cetera; as
well as, directional and reversible time that must be considered. 
No one has been able to clearly define 
		whether
        
		time is directional; nor,
differentiate, clearly, the differing concepts of time; nor, explain the
generative origins of these "times." 
Time as a function of, or a form of, speed is the most fundamental, and
thus mysterious, of concepts which underlie
        
		Reality. 
        Time, currently, certainly qualifies as being metaphysical.
 
 No one can explain the
		  "Why?" of gravity; only the "How?" is explainable.  No one
knows the speed of gravity, which    
		must
        be near infinite otherwise the Cosmos would forsake 
		"clockwork" for the action of billiard balls. 
However, infinite speed is not allowed by most interpretations of the
		theory of Special Relativity.  But,
then, if gravity's speed were as allowed by the usual interpretation of the
		theory of Special Relativity, gravitons and gravity "waves" should have been found
by now.  They have not been found;
nor, has any other physical manifestation of the cause (Why?) of gravity's action-at-a-distance been 
		observed or rationalized.
 
 Gravity's attraction, or
"action-at-a-distance," is an inexplicable mystery that has defied any
interpretation.
 
 (Newton)...hinted 
		that Gravity was direct, divine action, as were all forces....  
		Thus, (for Newton) gravity was spiritual.  --Anna Marie Roos, Ph.D. 
		History.
 
 Einstein considered
action-at-a-distance as . . . "spooky."
 
 Richard Feynman, also a renowned physicist, stated: "Gravitation
        is...not understandable in terms of other phenomena."
 
 And, also: "The 
		possibility exists...that gravity itself is a pseudo force.  Is it not 
		possible that perhaps gravitation is due simply to the fact that we do 
		not have the right coordinate system?”
 
 Gravity, as currently understood,
can easily be said to belong to the realm of metaphysics. 
Actually, it will be found that
        the phenomenon of gravitational "attraction" is a
form of both relative, hierarchic compression and confluent congruence. 
Confluent congruence is a universal phenomenon that effects all events
and occurs near      Infinity well
beyond the speed of light;
        but, not quite within the realm of metaphysics.
 
 Light is understood even less
than gravity, if that is possible.  Sometimes,
the phenomenon of light is explained as acting like a wave; and, at other times,
light appears to act as a particle.  The
concepts of particle and wave are two concepts that cannot be more physically,
or diametrically, opposed to one another; nor, when combined, as with the theory
of light, more inexplicable without resorting to metaphysics. 
Also, of metaphysical interest, concerning light, is the current
explanation of the speed of light as being relatively constant. 
This constant is unlike anything else known and defies all known logic. 
        
		Again, a strong metaphysical faith is
        
		a
        
		requirement for understanding 
		both light and its
speed as a constant.
 
 The atomic strong and weak forces
have been fabricated, admittedly, by physicists to explain observed subatomic
phenomena.  No one has ever been
able to explain 
		
"why" these
subatomic forces "work." 
Or, for that matter, there are no answers to the related questions of: 
How did such a tremendous amount of energy, as is observed, get into an
atom?; and, What is holding this energy within the atom? 
There is much metaphysical faith required concerning an understanding of atomic
theory, and particularly, the 
		 
		atomic strong and weak forces.
 
 And then, concerning inertia:
there are very few physicists that will even acknowledge that there is an
inertial force . . . despite many recent cosmic observations to the
        contrary. 
        Newton incorrectly defined inertia as being straight and uniform. 
        Inertia appears to act from the infinite, as opposed to gravity which 
		appears to act from
        the infinitesimal.  Thus, the source of inertia, being so far from
        the anthropic scale, appears to be without curvature or acceleration. 
        
		Inertia's
        small force is quite apparent when applied to large cosmic bodies.
 
 Inertia's close relative,
the cosmological constant, can hardly qualify as a force until it is
acknowledged that it is not a constant.  By
definition, a mechanical force cannot be constant; it must entail acceleration. 
Einstein resorted to the cosmological constant because of structural
necessity; but, he soon realized it as a mistake; as he had interpreted it. 
Though, Einstein can hardly be faulted; as an understanding of the source
and etiology of both gravity and inertia is still quite erroneous . . .
if interpreted at all.
 
 A form of a cosmological force
that opposes gravity, and is, thus, structurally necessary, must be explainable
if our environment is to be understood . . . and, most importantly, an
inertial force, 
		if
        it exists, and it does, 
		can replace the considered necessity of the misleading Big Bang
theory, and all of its
        absurdities,
        as the structural force, which opposes gravity.  Such
an inertial force is referred to as Cosmic Inertia, which together with gravity,
its alter ego, is referred to 
		
		 as, within 
		Conceptualism, Infinite Dynamics.
 
 Gravity, inertia, and the atomic
forces are all very closely related to the enigmatic and ubiquitous phenomenon
which has been described as exotic "dark" matter. 
It is this unknown, and unfound, "dark" matter that is generally considered
to constitute almost   all of the mass
of the Universe. 
        Thus, the linkage of 
		Pulsoids, which manifest as 
		
		 "exotic"
        dark matter,
        and evolve to the other fundamental phenomena of academic physics.
 
 Pulsoids liberate the theories of physics from the metaphysical beyond
        that of the minimal faith of the existence of motion as required by the Unified Concept.
 
 
 |