It seems, that my explanations came to the point, where in order to proceed further, I will first need to speak about the most fundamental aspects of physical reality and to define some primary laws for the interactions between mass and energy distributed in time and space. To be honest, while until now, my claims didn't directly contradict generally accepted knowledge (even if some ppl called them rubbish), I'm copletely aware that my model might at some point become quite inconsistent with mainstream theories. Some of my conclusions will eventually lead into different directions, than mainstream science does, as my model of gravity has it's roots in a completely different concept of so called "physical reality", which came to my mind couple years ago.

In the difference to generally accepted assumptions regarding the mechanics of Universe, I've began to define my theory, by basing it on experimentally proven facts about the nature of physical existence, and the process of experience - what means, that I used the laws, which are describing physical reality in quantum physics. What QM tells us about the existence of matter and it's distribution in time and space, seems to contradict quite a big part of the concept, where all, what we understand, as physically real, exist in a 4D spacetime in the way, that is presented in Einstein's theory of relativity. Main difference here, is obviously in the general understanding of time. In Einstein model, time is understood as an axis of a linear dimension, which just like the 3 spatial dimensions, is fully determined in each of it's infinite moments, while the point of time, which we perceive in the current moment, is in nothing more, than single frame of a very long movie, that had it's premiere in the beginning of time and which still is being displayed, in a film-show, which is private and individual for every observer. On the other hand, quantum mechanics seems to quite clearly suggest us, that time can't be in any way determined beyond the moment of observation, as we need to describe it in terms of probability distribution, which "becomes" a definitive state, while it is being experienced in current time. In shortcut, if Einsteins concept of so called "block universe" is like an infinite number of frames in a movie, then quantum universe is like a open-world MMORPG game, which renders itself in REAL-TIME in brain of users, according to the data, received during the constant process of information exchange, which takes place for observer and for the world which he observes.

Around 7 years ago, when I started to "assemble" my model, I've made a quite obvious assumption, that my ideas stand in total opposition to generally accepted science, but it didn't took long, before I began to notice, that my claims might actually be much less radical, than I thought. Somewhere around 3 years ago, it became obvious to me, that there is at least one area, where my theory seemsto be 100% consistent with the most accepted model - that means of course magnetohydrodynamics. Einsten's relativity became the subject of my interest, only around a year ago, but before that I was researching already some of my ideas, regarding gravity and the general understanding of space and time. When it comes to gravity, the idea of using a fluid, as a way to represent spacetime curvature and the forces associated with mass and density differential, came to me after I saw a well known practical experiment, which uses hydrolysis of water in the presence of external magnetic field, to represent the primary laws of MHD

Since I'm a curious animal and this is an experiment, that almost any one can perform at home, I've had to try it by myself - but to make things more interesting I've included as well some floating objects with different size and mass (mostly herbs and spices, which I found in my kitchen). I've let the experiment runing by itself for couple minutes - and miracle! - when I came back to see the results, I saw how the dusty particles of spicy powder, surrounded bigger and more massive grainy seeds of black pepper, creating clusters, that looked to me, just like rings of giant gas planets, orbiting around the central electrode.

And then I asked myself, what would happen, if each pepper seed would contain a tiny bar magnet inside it - and so, with nothing more, than a simple process of deduction, I was able to learn about a quite important aspect of reality. I understood, that electromagnetic fields create structures, that maintain (in big part) their characteristic spatial geometry, at multiple levels of SCALE of dimensional space. This is where I've came out with the idea of space that has geometry of a fractal. And because at that time I didn't care too much about scientific correctness, I've spent couple minutes, to think just a bit about the role of size in different physical processes, and came to couple simple conclusions. As a result, I've came up with a simple model, which uses orbital motion of planets, to explain the relation between the size of objects/observers and the rate at which time is being experienced in their respective inertial frames. In shortcut, I've made a basic model of spacetime, which is interconnected at all observed scales of physical reality, with a mechanism than can be explained just by it's own title: "5D Spacetime - Frequency of Cycles in Dimensional Scale". It took me couple years, before I've learned, that even those of my claims, which were far too bold, to be mentioned together with thew word "science" in a single sentence, arein fact considered as serious scientific theories, which are being researched by professional physicists.

I won't lie by saying, that as for today, at least 85% of my "crazy pseudo-scientific fantasies" seem to have a pretty solid support in modern science and the only reason, why some people call them rubbish, is because in mainstream science, no one is particulary interested in learning about theories, that could help to get theoretical physics out of the s***hole of early 1900's and point out the right course to year 2020. Why someone should care about connecting fields of physics, that couldn't be connected for at least 100 years? Sure, let's just continue to assume, that objects in macroscale exist in a different reality, than the bits of matter, creating those objects - maybe after another 100 years, it will just start to make more sense just by itself...

Anyway, let's get to the main point. The general reason, why I wanted to speak about all those things right now, is because model of gravity, which I want to present here, is designed in such a way, which makes it able, to be applied on all levels of spatial scale dimension. At the same time however, I'm not sure if I'm in fact ready, to make claims, which I need to make, in order to set theoretical foundation for my concept of gravity, as quite important part of this model, clarified in my mind rather recently - so, I don't really know, where my claims will be consistent with modern science and where they will cross the borders of scientific acceptance...

Anyway, as some of you maybe noticed, my theory as a whole, lacks one important aspect, which for many physicists makes the prime base, to make a decision, what they will or what they won't consider as scientific - yes, I'm talking of course about the math. I admit my guilt: I assembled the entire theory, using nothing more, than simple logic and publically avaliable knowledge as my primary tools, used to shape it's parts. I'm sure, that in physics, no one won't treat seriously my ideas, if I won't express them in form of a mile-long string in which numerical functions define layers in a spectacular orgy of letters, numbers and strange symbols - however some 90% of my theory is based on equtions, that were already written down by people smarter, than me. Besides, honestly - when it comes to solving complicated math, I put much bigger trust in my PC, than in my own brain. For some reason I can't understand, why should I need to learn equations for Lorent'z transformation, if I can use a free online tool or in which way knowing the numerical solution of a Mandelbrot set, will allow me to understand, what the fractal cosmology is about? I spent 7 years researching modern physics, and there was only one time, when I had to figure out a mathematical solution, which will allow me to calculate results predicted in my theory - and in the end, it turned out, that all I needed, was the Pythagorean theorem, about which I've learned in school at the age of 10.

On the other hand, I'm also aware, that my model of gravity won't be able to compete with model, that was proposed by Einstein, if it won't be able to make any numerical prediction, that gives an outcome, which seems to explain some given process better, than the numbers predicted in GRT. This is why, I figured out, that what I need, is to come out with an equation, that will become for my theory a flagship, just like the famous \(\displaystyle E = m * c^2\) is a flagship for Einstein's relativity. And I think, that I might have something, what looks to me, like a golden dagger, that exists only with the sole purpose, to be used by me, to stab the old king in his back, in the sneakiest of all possible ways... Be patient - I will tell more, in the next post, which won't be an answer to some other post...

*But before I end, I have still one question for topsquark: which section of forum would be the right one, to make a thread about fractal cosmology and scale relativity?*