Dear Basudeba,
I am glad that you enjoyed my essay. I try to keep my information presentation as practical and simple as I can. I don't think that I saw your 2013 essay, but I am pleased to see that we agree about language concepts. Although most people do not think much about it because we are so used to using abstract spoken or written languages, the most basic language distinction is whether the language is abstract or literal in structure. As an example, when you say or write "The car is green." You are using an abstract language because the sounds or written shapes (letters) are not in any way connected to an actual car in sound or shape, etc. An alien who does not know your language would not be able to understand what information you are trying to transfer to him. On the other hand if you have a piece of paper and a pen you could draw a picture of the car on the paper with the pen and point to it and say car and write the word car beside it. You could then show him a green crayon and say and write the words green crayon. You could then color the car green with the crayon and write the word green to the left of the word car and say green car as you move your finger across the written words. The alien would then know what the spoken and written words car and green mean. This is because the picture is a literal language form that directly expresses the meaning of the car in a visual image form. When you say green crayon, the alien might think that those words both represent the object shown to him, but when you color the car image green and write green car beside it, he would likely understand that green is the color property of both the car and the crayon and would thus also understand what a crayon is. Literal language forms are easily understood because they either use the thing itself like the crayon or an image of the thing in some direct sensory input form that is the same as the real thing can use to present itself directly to you like the image of the car. It is important to realize that all of the things that we can sense are actually literal language forms that are being sent to us by the world around us. The structure of the world is such that it begins at its lowest levels as an abstract language form in the form of basic motions and is built up through many levels of hierarchical structure to form the literal language of the things that we see, hear, touch, smell, and taste. It is all a very complex communication to us and we are designed to be able to receive it. Of course, we are not able to directly observe all of the provided information, but we were made to be able to use the things that we can observe to make other things that can allow us to gain the ability to observe more of it over time as we respond, interact, and manipulate the words in that language. At the same time we ourselves are very complex multiword structures in that language. Mathematics is a very abstract language, but it can be used to build a structure that can represent the literal what, why, when, where, or with whom about objects as can easily be seen when you play a video game that can present very realistic literal action image forms as a result of the use of complex mathematical structure combinations. In a general sense, physics is the study of the world around us with the intent to learn how it works and how we can use that knowledge to make our lives better. In that endeavor we can use both the direct literal language that is directly provided to us by the world around us and we can also use abstract forms such as the English language and mathematics, etc. The important thing to remember is that an abstract language can portray things that are true to the reality that the world presents to us, but it can also represent things that are not part of our world, which we call falsehoods, errors, or fictions, etc. The problem is that if you get too absorbed in an abstract language and don't check out your results to be sure they conform to observed reality it is very easy to be living in a fictitious concept of how the world works.
We live in a motion continuum. Time is not an entity of itself. It is just a relationship between motion and the space that it travels through. If all motions contained the same amount of motion (were all of the same volume or amplitude of motion) time would equal distance and it would be easy to understand. If someone asked you how long it took to travel from your house to their house you might answer "It took me 5 miles" and everyone would understand the duration of your travel because it would always take anyone the same duration to travel five miles. You could easily compare the motion of 2 cars because if they were both simultaneously started side by side and traveled in the same direction they would always tie in a race, etc. You could use any name that you wanted to, but you would only need one name to represent both distance and duration. In this world motions can possess different magnitudes or amplitudes, which make the situation more complex, however, but there are no time dimensions, multiple universes, or past or future worlds to go to. There are only motions. The positions in the universe that a given motion used to be in, but has now moved out of are that motion's past, but you cannot go back to look at that motion in those places because it is no longer there. It is only in its present position. The positions that the motion will go into, but has not yet arrived at are its future. It cannot be found in them, however, because it has not yet arrived there. All of the matter particles, energy photons, and sub-energy particles in the universe are composed of motions. The total motion content is the only thing that is truly conserved. Motion is the true energy that is conserved. C is just a specific motion amplitude. When you burn coal you are just rearranging its molecular structure. In the process you cause some atoms to be joined together by sharing electrons and portions of their respective sub-energy fields, etc. and in the process some of the excess motion is transferred to sub-energy particles causing them to be changed into energy photons which then carry that excess motion away from the interaction. The e=mc2 equation shows the motion transfer between the fourth vector and the fifth vector. If the motion is transferred from the fourth vector to the fifth vector the result is generally that an energy photon is changed into a matter particle. If the motion is transferred from the fifth vector to the fourth vector the result is generally that a matter particle is changed into an energy photon. Of course, matter particles also have a continuous inter-dimensional motion flow from the fifth vector to the lower three dimensions then to the fourth vector and finally back into the fifth vector as part of their internal structure. What do you consider the electric field and the magnetic field to be composed of? If you say they are waves, then what are those waves composed of? If they displace the electron from an atom by giving it extra motion and in the process they cease to exist, then they must be composed of simple motions that are transferred to the electron to increase its motion to the level that causes it to escape the atom's sub-energy field, but simple motions cannot move back and forth in a cyclical manner in the absence of an interaction. In the absence of an interaction a simple motion always continues to travel in the same direction.
All that exists is the spatial system that provides the positions for motions to travel in and the motions that exist in the spatial system. Motions can interact with each other in that system when they intersect at the same position. Such interactions can change a motion's motion amplitude and/or direction of travel. Energy photons and matter particles are composite structures composed of more than one motion. Because of the small size of their structural points they do not usually intersect head on. It is usually their angular motions that generate the interactions. The angular motions are what gives an energy photon its dynamic inertia or mass effect and matter particles their static inertia or mass effect, etc. Most interactions take place through sub-energy motion transfers except when great velocities are involved.
The fourth (time) dimension of GR does not exist as mentioned above. Time is just a relationship between motion and the distance that it travels in the space that it travels in. In the lower three dimensions, motions can be transferred between dimensions easily through interactions with other motions due to the way those dimensions are connected to each other in the dimensional system. One way to look at the way that the fourth dimension is connected to the others is to visualize that instead of the direct connections that the lower three dimensions have with each other, the fourth dimension is separated from the others by a small distance. A low speed motion in the lower three dimensions does not travel far enough in one of its position changes to jump that gap, so it cannot enter the fourth dimension. Once a motion gains a great enough motion amplitude level, however, one position change of that motion can bridge that gap and travel into the fourth dimension. That minimum required motion amplitude level is anything greater than the speed of light. The addition of fourth dimensional motion to a sub-energy particle changes it into an energy photon by giving it its frequency, wavelength, and dynamic mass/inertia effects. This is because the fourth dimension interfaces with the lower three dimensions at a ninety degree angle in the same way that the other lower 3 dimensions interface with each other. This creates the motion component that acts at a ninety degree angle to the photon's direction of travel. Since the energy photon is traveling at a composite motion amplitude of the speed of light in those dimensions, the fourth dimensional motion can be transferred back into the lower three dimensions during an interaction. This allows the photon to give up its fourth dimensional motion to the electron during an interaction, so that the electron can then contain enough motion within itself to leave the atom that it was bound to. I have not seen your current essay shown on this contest yet. What is your conclusion that extra dimensions are a myth based on?
Sincerely,
Paul