It's hard to call this my ''theory'' because the essential idea's have been in place for many years. The only thing new I personally add is a model: A new way to think of the universe as a spacescape; I do however add one new feature to an already existing model of relativity that Julian Barbour has been forwarding for decades, to Machian relativity, to find a full a theory will have to involve physical locations in space - this can only be done by taking world lines of all the systems in the universe (holistic) and their interactions. This will make Machian Relativity (considered by some the most difficult of all relativistic theories, compatible with GR. We will also reason why Minkowski space-time is not compatible with GR. I may need to split the posts up as this work is very very long.

The Fully Relativistic

Space-Scape

ABSTRACT

In this work, we will show you how Newtonian time (a time which flows) can only be called into question in this paper. Instead, we will argue there is no evidence an external time for the universe and the flow of time is in fact an illusion; we will argue it has only existed so long because of a fanciful idea that science clung onto since Minkowski proposed it, a little after Einstein published his special theory. What we will find in this work, is that Einstein most likely didn't think time was fundamental and was aware that his general relativity predicted static time for the universe. Time falls out of general relativity in three ways, one way is by describing evolution as a symmetry of the theory, one is directly from the Wheeler de Witt equation and the third is that GR really says you cannot think of time without matter. To satisfy a proper understanding of time, we must conclude that if GR is telling us global time doesn't exist then it cannot be fundamental to the universe and the evolution within it. However, local time can exist because it is emergent, it is induced when the universe becomes cool enough to allow matter to appear (Higgs Mechanism). In this sense, time is emergent when matter appears in our universe. We will also investigate mathematical tools to see how viable it is to describe a theory of timeless physics.

And in the beginning: There was the definition of time

This will not be an easy paper to simply write out and explain, it will probably take about several reads to understand it as well. The problems are numerous and in this paper, I must tackle these issues efficiently. First of all, we need to define what time is. Newton, the father of classical physics defined time as:

Absolute, true and mathematical time, of itself, and from its own nature flows equably without regard to anything external, and by another name is called duration: relative, apparent and common time, is some sensible and external (whether accurate or unequable) measure of duration by the means of motion, which is commonly used instead of true time ...''

And concerning absolute space, he said

Absolute space, in its own nature, without regard to anything external, remains always similar and immovable. Relative space is some movable dimension or measure of the absolute spaces; which our senses determine by its position to bodies: and which is vulgarly taken for immovable space ... Absolute motion is the translation of a body from one absolute place into another: and relative motion, the translation from one relative place into another.

Thinking time flows equably without any reference to anything external, means that time flows relative to the human being. This ''flow of time'' has been in physics literature for a very long time and the conclusions are startling. And though there is nothing external which we can say is in any reference to time, means that any mathematical we use in our equations,assumeimmediately without any evidence that there is an external time present without the observer.

We of course, do not believe in any absolute space or time in the context Newton implied them. In Newton's picture, the universe was a pure vacuum with no quantum activity. In the quantum picture, time doesn't even have a flow. In relativity, there is no true ''flow to time'' either, because fundamental to it is the relativity of simultaneity which argues all events actually happen side by side... time itself was an illusion.

Now, this external, intrinsic flow to the observer, which seems to extend from past to future... isn't actually the way modern scientists think about time at all [1] - If time really existed in the quantum sense it would instead be sharp beginnings and ends, fleeting moments of existence which are not continuous. This is the quantum picture of time.

The relativity of space says it is continuous. Minkowski (Einstein's teacher) extended his relativity principle to say space-time is continuous also as a fourth dimension of space. (1)

The quantum picture of time at first differed with the relativity of time. But sooner or later, the mistakes would show.... Minkowski space was probably based on faulty principles including the idea that time is continuous or discrete... it turns out that time probably doesn't exist at all (this still leaves open the question of whether space is fundamental, maybe something I will tackle in a future paper) (2). Minkowski when he extended Einstein's idea's made time as a fundamental property of the universe. When Paul Dirac was asked about he thought, he said he was ''inclined to disagree to think that four dimensional unity was fundamental.''

Einstein had a bit of a schizophrenic nature on time concerning ''some'' comments over his career, but I think it's clear Einstein never considered time fundamental within physics. He was definitely more than aware that his very own GR which is hailed to this day through experimentation was essentially timeless. After Minkowski had published his theory on four dimensional space, Einstein was known later in his years to comment that the mathematicians ''butchered his theory'' as he knew it.

Before Minkowski's idea shot off, Einstein's theory was still basic in how they were interpreted and Machian relativity almost vanished from the minds of physicists altogether; though, not many know, but Einstein was heavily influenced by the idea's of Mach, one of the founding fathers of relativity. Actually Machian theory was more truer in the general relativistic sense Einstein intended his theory than the four-dimensional case proposed by his teacher Minkowski.

To be relativistic, you need to talk about each point in space; but points in space are not really physical, only interactions are. This happens because General Relativity is manifestly Covariant which makes sure that the laws of physics remain the same in every coordinate frame. This allows physicists to use diffeomorphism invariance, a beautiful mathematical consequence in which the universe isn't desccribed by a cosmological ... instead it arises as symmetry of the motion of the theory. In other words, it's measuring change using diffeomorphisms to describe ''time without time.''

Machian relativity doesn't use time either to describe the evolution of systems, instead as he famously put it

''we arrive at the abstraction of time, from the changes of things.''

Interestingly, Leibniz also made a similar argument, believing that space in itself made no sense, unless speaking about locations. Time in itself made no sense, unless inferred from the relative movement of bodies... But Mach's idea's where already bubbling, he wanted to advocate a holistic relativistic model

''When, accordingly, we say that a body preserves unchanged its direction and velocity in space, our assertion is nothing more or less than an abbreviated reference to the entire universe.''

Gravitation and Inertia, p. 387

On this relativistic ''space-scape'' I call it, changes of physical systems in this universe are our definition of time, without it, if systems did not change, there would be no way to define time at all. Here is one way to articulate the problem, if change is the true definition of time and change happensin spacethen time isn't space itself, it's a measure of disorder in space. The closest thing we have to the definition of time as we understand it, is entropy and this thermodynamic law gives rise the cosmological arrow of time as it is known using popular science buzzwords. (Later I will provide a ''toy'' model towards a theory of everything using entropic gravity, the entropy part being our definition of the measure of change and gravity being described from the entropic laws).