Physics mostly sees it as spacetime curvature. In =y mind, space does not really exist, there is only an incredibly dense =etwork of paths in a graph. Around objects, the paths are much denser, =o superficially, if you move in a straight line near an object, the =robability to move toward the object is much higher than the =robability of moving away from it. However, there is more to it, =ecause the paths evolve (change) in 4D, and as a result, are not a =andom jumble, but probably relatively (but not perfectly) well =rdered.

Seeing gravity as urvature (i.e. a pseudo force) works well, but it works for the other =orces, too. All forces are essentially regular deviations for how =ertain types of information travel through the universe graph, and articles are types of patterns of traveling deviations. So, in my =urrent view, all forces are pseudo forces, and all particles are pseudo =articles.

In my mind, the =niverse looks like a data structure in a giant computer that is ticking =orward step by step, thereby creating all the dynamics that we observe, =ith the added complication that we can never access the absolute =alues, but only the relative differentials of things we are entangled =ith. Observers are causal systems that are complex enough do form and anipulate memories (i.e. computers) that are parasitic on the =omputations of the universe computer in much the same way as water =ortices are parasitic on the fluid dynamics of a river. For an =bserver, nothing can be absolute. For instance, time is the difference =n the rate of change of an observing computer in relation to the rate of change in its immediate environment, which happens to depend on the =peed with which the computer moves through that environment. Spin is he difference in spin of a part of the computer to what it gets in =ouch with, etc.

=

like spinning a stone on a string over your =ead, it creates a pseudo force on the string (=entrifigal). we are fooled into thinking =therwise. we are fooled into thinking =therwise… simple =uestion

why if i throw a fair =oin. many many times will the heads and tails =ventually come up in equal numbers. . =robaablity forces it into a 50/50 ratio over time. and is =uaranteed in infinite time. but says nothing about each =hrow. the coin thinks it has free will. but obviously =t doesnt. it beleives that it can be either heads or =ails. it can but it operates under the mysterious force of =robabilty

gravity can be =easured, but no reason for its existence makes =ense.

I really =ike your self organzing intelligence module =dea.

I think it is only an

outcome of=robability. modules

on a=rain issue, I belive that this has led to the formation of =hat i have your layers generate roabilities and the more time they take

referred to as MOBJECTS. "mental objects. " =nbsp; to develop arguably the =ore accurate the curve

Yes, that is correct. The brain forms layers of =xtremely primitive mobjects, which is combines into more complex =objects, and which it can later evoke (imagine) at will to explore =ossible worlds/hypothetical outcomes. The mobjects are formed by =athering the structural probabilities of occurrences of patterns into =ierarchical functions. Sometimes there is little discernible =ifference, like in the coin throw, sometimes the coin falls almost =lways on the same side, as in the laws of perspective, gravity or =ighting, or in a language that we learn. Mobjects are generated by =odular function approximators that describe =robabilities.