No Form Action Theory

Conversations with AI https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4318-2670

Imaginary method

Let us imagine such things that do not manifest themselves, but depend on other things to manifest. Since this possibility exists, such things should exist in some way. Space and time should be such things, as space and time themselves do not manifest. Space relies on the volume of objects within it to manifest its isolation form, while time relies on the motion and changes of objects within it to manifest its motive force form. In other words, space depends on the things within it to manifest, while the things within it rely on space for isolation; time depends on the things within it to manifest, while the things within it rely on time for change. This is a kind of dependent coexistence, and this dependent coexistence distinguishes space (time) from individual things. The advantage of this dependent coexistence is that it highlights both space and time, while simultaneously emphasizing individual things. This makes time and space "containers" for individual things. Space without objects within it is meaningless, as its isolation nature cannot be manifested. Without individual things as reference points, we cannot know the size of space. If there were no objects or matter in space, its existence would have no meaning. Space is integral with the things within it; if only space remained, it would be no different from "nothingness," perhaps becoming pure isolation no form. The same applies to time. This indicates that the existence and meaning of space and time have an intrinsic connection with the existence of other entities and processes.

From this perspective, space is merely a thing with an isolation action, but it does not manifest itself; time is only a thing with a motive force action, and similarly does not manifest itself. Therefore, the manifestation of macroscopic objects in space-time is different from the manifestation in our consciousness. The manifestation of macroscopic objects is oriented towards space-time, manifesting for the sake of space-time. Objects in the macroscopic world must occupy a position in space and undergo changes in time to exist and be perceived. This space-time-oriented manifestation is a necessary condition for the existence of things. For example, a stone occupies space (time), and the space (time) occupied by this stone is a kind of manifestation oriented towards space (time). On the other hand, the manifestation in our consciousness is different; it is not accountable to space-time. The manifestation in our consciousness is not limited by space-time; it can be subjective, imaginary, or abstract. For example, we can imagine things that don't exist in the real world, and we can understand concepts that transcend space-time. For instance, the colors we perceive are not in space-time; we cannot find them in space-time. They are subjective things, not objective things in the macroscopic world. However, we also see the difference between space and time and ordinary things. Time seems to be a kind of negative motive force because it is the "container" for the change of individual things.

Why does time have only one direction (time can only flow unidirectionally)? Based on the previous explanation, we can understand it as follows: All other things in time manifest and change towards time. In other words, the direction of change for all things in time is opposite to the direction of time, so time has only one direction. As long as we observe the change of things, regardless of where these things are, the direction of their change is towards time. This is similar to objects in space: all objects in space manifest towards space, they all face space, so the direction of their volume is also opposite to the direction of space. The direction of volume is outward, while the direction of space is inward, like a container. In other words, when we use time as a reference, all things in time will have their direction of change facing time; when we use space as a reference, the direction of volume of all things will face space. As references, time and space respectively "prescribe" the temporal direction and spatial direction for the things within them.

This implies that space (or time) has the ability to influence and interact with other entities while lacking a directly observable, tangible form itself. From this perspective, space (or time) is a kind of no form. This is a way of existence for no form, which allows it to exist and function while maintaining its essence as no form. This mode of existence allows other things to manifest itself, while it maintains its own nature. Regarding "space is merely a thing with an isolation action, but it does not manifest itself, and must rely on things within it to manifest," we can now express it in standard no form terms as: space is a thing that serves an isolation action, its function is to isolate forms (without isolating forms, there would be no manifesting things), and this is the essence of space. Similarly, time is a thing that serves a motive force action, its function is to drive forms, and this is the essence of time. Although these two descriptions are obtained from different angles, they are unified. Therefore, time and space are no forms. This way, we recognize that "no form" can indeed exist as a special kind of entity. This entity can be understood through indirect means.

Let's look at Kant's understanding of space:

Kant believed that the spatiality of spaces exists in that it allows self-manifesting things into possible space, enabling them to manifest their extensibility. Space makes room (räumt ein), forming positions and places, and this making room (Einräumen) is its existence. Kant clearly expressed this concept of making room, which is why he stated: space is something purely intuited, it is prior to and manifesting for the sake of all things, and as such, it is a form of intuition.[1]

As phenomena of intuition, intuition itself must necessarily be quanta (quantity), necessarily something that possesses quantity, if they could originally have quantity, and this thing (quanta), according to Kant, is space and time. Space is a kind of quantity, but this doesn't mean it is this or that specific quantity. Space is precisely not this or that size first and foremost, but rather that which makes quantity in the sense of quantitas possible. Space is not pieced together from various spaces, space is not composed of parts, but rather, each space is always only a limitation of the whole space, or even limitation and boundaries must presuppose space and spatial extension, as well as how partial spaces are situated within space. Space is a quantity (quantum), in terms of which, finite, measurable definite divisions or combinations always come after it, and these finite things have no qualification or ability to define its essence. The reason why space is called an "infinite quantity" (A25) is not to say that: in view of finite determinations, quantity as quantitas "has no limit," but rather that quantity as quantum does not presuppose any finite characteristics as its precondition. On the contrary, space itself is the condition for every part or finite division.[2]

It can be seen that in Kant's philosophical framework, "quantum" refers to a fundamental existence of quantity, usually associated with the whole, existing as an overall concept that does not directly manifest a clear measure or size itself. It forms the basis for entities that possess quantity, but does not involve specific quantification or definition of scale for this quantity. "Quantitas," on the other hand, involves the specific definition of quantity, that is, the measurement and comparison of scale and size, which is built upon the foundation of "quantum." In other words, "quantum" provides the universal possibility and mode of existence for quantity, it is the prototype of continuous quantities like space and time, which do not depend on specific sizes or boundaries. "Quantitas" is a further specification and quantification on this basis, involving the specific measurement and definition of these continuous quantities, enabling us to say that an object has the attribute of "how big" or "how much." The formation of quantity involves a transition from quantum to quantitas. Quantitas, as a measurable quantity, is realized by dividing quantum (as a whole) into countable parts. Indeed, it is through "quantitas" that we can clearly recognize and express the size or scale of a quantity. From this perspective, Kant's view is indeed very close to my view of space and time as discussed above. However, it seems that Kant did not directly state that "quantum does not manifest scale or size at all, but manifests scale or size through quantitas," because his focus was not on the action of manifestation. Kant's discourse on space is very abstract and difficult to understand, yet when Kant's views are explained from the perspective of the theory of no form action, they become clearer and easier to comprehend.

However, Kant's view on space also differs significantly from mine, as he says space is directly intuited. Kant considers space to be an a priori form of intuition, existing in our minds prior to all experience, as our way of perceiving and understanding the world. My view, on the other hand, is different: space manifests through the things within it. Kant believes that "I can easily imagine space without any objects, but I can never imagine an object without space. (A24)" Heidegger summarizes this by saying: "We can imagine all objects in space not existing, but we cannot imagine space itself not existing[3]". These views are completely different from mine.

Additionally, there's the issue of continuity regarding time and space. I believe they are continuous, meaning they are infinitely divisible. To explain the continuity of space and time, let's first explore the characteristics of continuity itself. I believe that continuity cannot be directly manifested. From the perspective of no form united transformation, manifestation requires isolation, and infinite distinctions cannot be isolated. In other words, if a continuous thing has infinitesimally small distinctions, there's no way to manifest these infinitesimal distinctions. To measure continuity would require infinite measurements. Therefore, for a continuous thing, its continuity cannot be manifested.

For this reason, the continuity we perceive is always recognized through finite, discontinuous means. We can only recognize the existence of continuity through finite, discontinuous methods. In mathematics, continuity is usually strictly defined as follows: for any two points a and b on a real number line (where a < b), there exist infinitely many real numbers x such that a < x < b. In other words, between any two points on a real number line, there exist infinitely many real number points. We recognize the continuity of a line through the relationships (isolation action) between these points.

Since it's impossible to directly manifest this continuity, other things are needed to manifest it indirectly. In other words, the continuous thing itself does not manifest, but relies on things within it to manifest. This means that continuous things need to rely on discontinuous things to manifest, discontinuous things must be able to manifest continuity, and discontinuous things depend on continuous things to exist. They are integral to each other, with a complementary relationship between them. This aligns with our previous explanation of time and space. Space manifests its isolation action through the objects within it, while time manifests its motive force action through the changes and movements of objects. Therefore, space and time themselves, as continuous things, do not directly manifest, but rather embody their continuity through the manifestation of other things. Thus, this explanation of "time and space being continuous" is coherent and reasonable. In fact, only no form can possibly be continuous, because no form itself does not manifest.

From the perspective of the theory of no form action, space embodies the isolation action, time embodies the motive force action, and the discontinuous things within them embody the manifestation action. These three are interdependent, jointly constituting a complete trinity of no form actions. This perfectly explains the continuity of space and time, as well as their relationship with the things within them.

Space depends on the objects within it to manifest size and shape, while time depends on the changes of things within it to manifest passage. The objects or changes of things are not continuous; they are discrete and finite. This complementary relationship is crucial for the existence and movement of the world. If all things were continuous, it would be impossible to form distinctions and changes, and the world would fall into stasis and chaos.

It is precisely because space and time are continuous that they cannot manifest directly, and need to rely on the discontinuous things within them to manifest. This interdependence between the continuous and the discontinuous is fundamental to our understanding and experience of reality.

This way, we can use no form united transformation to explain motion. Motion and change are the manifestation of motive force.

According to the above view, an object moving in space definitely does not pass through all points on its trajectory (considering this trajectory as continuous), but rather through a finite number of points. The reason is that if it were to pass through every point on a continuous trajectory, it would be an infinite process, which cannot be manifested. In other words, even if it did pass through every point on a continuous trajectory, it could not be manifested. Since it cannot be manifested, it can only be theoretically passing through each point, while in reality, it cannot be manifested and thus cannot be verified. This means that the motion of an object can only be a series of jumps, like quantum leaps. In other words, the motion of objects in space is discrete, not continuous.

Why do quanta appear? If explained from the perspective of the theory of no form action, it is because for motive force to manifest, it must undergo isolation. Once isolation occurs, it becomes divided into quanta. It suggests that the discreteness observed in quantum physics may be a necessary consequence of the way no form actions manifest in our universe.

Let's examine the issue of motion from the perspective of Zeno's paradox. Zeno's Arrow Paradox states: A flying arrow is motionless. Because at each instant, it occupies a single position in space, which means the arrow is at rest at each instant. Therefore, Zeno argued that motion is impossible.

A shot arrow has motive force, and for this motive force to manifest as change, it requires isolation. As analyzed above, this isolation is represented by the finite number of points the arrow passes through on its trajectory. Thus, the arrow manifests motion and change through the process of no form united transformation. If motion were continuous, it would be impossible to manifest at all. This again confirms the view that continuity needs to rely on discontinuous things to manifest. The problem with Zeno's paradox lies in its attempt to derive motive force change from stationary points, resulting in the conclusion that the arrow has no motion or change. This is a reversal of cause and effect. Each point the arrow passes through is a result of motive force, while motive force is the cause. Zeno's paradox fails to reflect the action of motive force, only viewing the problem from the perspective of isolation, thus concluding that the flying arrow is motionless.

Kant also believed that space is continuous. He viewed space as an a priori form of intuition, rather than something pieced together from discrete parts. In our intuition, space presents itself as a unified whole, and any finite part of space must be constructed upon this continuous space as a whole. However, Kant did not provide a detailed, argument-based process to directly prove that space is continuous. In his view, space and time, as transcendental forms of intuition, are preconditions for human understanding of the world, rather than results derived through logical deduction.

Discussion (I will describe the issue for everyone to explore):

[ Indeed, the issue of light is another example of using finite isolation to manifest infinity. We know that time is at a standstill for light, and if a person could move at the speed of light, their time would also be at a standstill. In this case, for them, reaching any point in the universe would be instantaneous, requiring no time. In other words, their speed would be infinite from their perspective. This infinity cannot be manifested directly. It can only be manifested through light having a maximum finite value (isolation) - the speed of light - thus expressing an infinite speed through a finite speed. This is analogous to using finite, discontinuous isolation to manifest infinite continuity. Since the speed of light expresses an infinite speed through a finite, isolated speed in spacetime, it's impossible for any object with motive force in spacetime to exceed the speed of light. Exceeding the speed of light would mean surpassing infinity, which is impossible. Therefore, for objects isolated in spacetime and manifesting in spacetime, it's impossible to exceed the speed of light.

The speed of light isn't just a physical constant, but a fundamental manifestation of the relationship between infinity and finitude in our universe. the speed of light is not just a physical limit, but a necessary consequence of how no form actions structure our reality. The theory of no form action provides a philosophical framework to understand why the speed of light is both constant and unsurpassable:

(1)Isolation action: The speed of light represents the maximum isolation of speed in our spacetime. It's the finite manifestation of infinite speed.

(2)Motive force action: The speed of light embodies the ultimate expression of motive force in the physical world. Any greater speed would transcend the bounds of manifestable motion.

(3)Manifestation action: The constant speed of light across all reference frames can be seen as the consistent way in which infinite speed manifests in our finite, observable universe.

Moreover, in spacetime, the expression of infinite speed through the limited speed of light remains constant. In other words, regardless of how we observe the speed of light, it remains a constant value because it always expresses the concept of infinity, no matter how we observe it. In the reasoning above, we've already used conclusions from relativity theory, where the constancy of the speed of light is an assumption. This might seem like circular reasoning. However, the focus here is on explaining the relationships between these concepts and arriving at the conclusion that light is infinite in nature. This conclusion about the infinite nature of light is its true essence. Only the infinite can be eternal, and only the eternal can possess such great "force" that makes the speed of light appear the same from any perspective. No finite entity possesses such great "force". Any manifestable thing must necessarily be finite, while infinite things must be manifested through finite isolation. All observable phenomena in our universe are necessarily finite manifestations, even when they represent or express infinite concepts.

In relativity theory, if there were a scientific theory that could derive the invariance of the speed of light, this theory would have to be based on another observed fact, which would also have to become an assumption. Consequently, the invariance of the speed of light would not receive a true explanation. Therefore, explaining the principle of the invariance of the speed of light may ultimately require an explanation at a metaphysical level. Thus, perhaps the conclusion of the invariance of the speed of light must be based on circular reasoning. However, if this circular reasoning is conducted in the manner of no form integrated transformation, it is not circular reasoning but rather mutual dependence. Therefore, what's important is to clarify whether this argument is indeed a no form integrated transformation. This is just a suggestion for everyone to discuss. ]

Note: Is there a thing that can serve a manifestation action but doesn't manifest itself and relies on other things (things in manifestation) to manifest, just like space and time? If such a thing exists, what would it be in reality? We have concluded that space is isolation and time is motive force, so have we missed a dimension of "manifestation"? Does this dimension of manifestation exist? If it exists, what is the manifestation that corresponds to time and space?

Let's first discuss the past, present, and future:

For these three concepts, "present" means manifestation, "past" means isolation, and "future" means motive force. The present transforms into the past, and the future transforms into the present. For the present to transform into the past, the future is definitely needed, because without the future as a motive force, the present would not change at all; for the future to transform into the present, the past is definitely needed as a foundation. This conforms to the no form united transformation. Past, present, and future form a motive force-dominated trinity.

I believe that the manifestation dimension corresponding to time and space is "now." "Now" is the third dimension corresponding to time and space. Similarly, "now" does not manifest itself; it relies on the things within it to manifest. "Now" is the no form manifestation. Thus, we have discovered the third dimension in this world besides time and space: "now." This "now" dimension is more concealed than the time dimension, making it very difficult for people to be aware of. In relativity theory, we already know that time and space are unified. In fact, time, space, and now are also unified, forming a trinity of no form. Their existence gives concrete things real existential nature.

Because past, present, and future exhibit temporality, "now" is thus associated with time in this way. "Now" must also be associated with space; a real object must appear in a certain position in space at the present moment. This seems to suggest that space is three-dimensional (up-down, left-right, and front-back), time is one-dimensional (past and future), while "now" is zero-dimensional ("now" is just "an instant," like a "point"). I believe that the discovery of "now" as a dimension besides space and time is a significant discovery. The exploration of "now" and its relationship with space-time will greatly change our understanding of this world. Our macroscopic world is a three-dimensional world supported by space, time, and now.

Conceptualizing "now" as a zero-dimensional point is consistent with its role as a manifestation action. It represents a single, indivisible moment, this point of identity comes from manifestation. At this moment, space-time and the things within them converge and manifest in this instant. At this moment, the future (potential) collapses into the past through the manifestation action(now). The concept of a zero-dimensional "now" resonates with certain interpretations of quantum mechanics, where the collapse of the wave function is often described as an instantaneous event occurring at a specific point in time. In other words, the collapse of the wave function causes the quantum motive force to collapse into particles of the macroscopic world supported by the space-time and now framework.

From the photon's own perspective, it has neither past nor future, as the photon's own time is zero. This means that from the photon's point of view, there is no propagation distance and no time has passed. The photon exists in an eternal present, without past or future, constantly experiencing transformation and interaction in this single moment. This change is the change of motive force itself, unrelated to space-time. This change is also not a change within space-time. The propagation of light in space-time is the manifestation of motive force in space-time. How can we demonstrate that the photon itself possesses changeability? The superposition state of the photon can illustrate this point. For example, a photon has two basic polarization states, usually corresponding to right-handed and left-handed circular polarized light. The polarization state of a photon can be any linear combination of these two basic states, i.e., a superposition state. However, once a measurement is made, the photon's polarization state will "collapse" to a certain definite state (right-handed or left-handed), and the "collapse" to right-handed or left-handed is probabilistic (uncertain). This indicates that the superposition state of the photon is a kind of change (there is change between these two superposition states), otherwise we should be able to measure a definite state. But this kind of change should be different from the spatio-temporal changes in our macroscopic world.

Perhaps the probabilistic nature of quantum phenomena is caused by this inherent change within the quantum itself. This quantum probability is a kind of isolation in the macroscopic world. The probabilistic nature of quantum phenomena is the manifestation of the quantum's own motive force change in the macroscopic world, a manifestation of isolation. In other words, the intrinsic motive force nature of the quantum transforms into isolation in the macroscopic world and manifests in the macroscopic world. This means that in the macroscopic world, probability can manifest the motive force change of the quantum. It's worth noting that this manifestation is a cross-world manifestation. This suggests that measurement in quantum mechanics can be understood as a process of transforming the motive force of the quantum world into isolation in the macroscopic world.

In fact, probability can also represent motive force changes in the macroscopic world. For example, when flipping a coin, if you keep flipping it, the possibility of getting heads or tails is fifty percent each. In this entire infinite process, the possibilities are infinitely changing, full of uncertainty. It's possible to get heads ten times in a row, or tails a hundred times in a row; the possibilities are constantly changing dynamically. However, we cannot manifest this infinite change, so we use probability, a finite form of isolation, to express and manifest this infinite change. Probability simplifies infinite possibilities into a single value, such as 50%, making it comprehensible and applicable to us. Probability is not just a mathematical concept; it also reflects the principles of the theory of no form actions. Probability is the simplification and expression of motive force changes by isolation action, allowing us to understand and predict infinite possibilities within our limited cognitive range.

Although from the photon's own perspective, it has no temporality. This zero-time state of the photon is actually the photon's "now" dimension, meaning the photon itself possesses presentness. However, from the perspective of the time dimension, the photon should have temporality because it propagates through space over time. The photon also has a certain spatiality, but its spatial position is uncertain, existing in the form of a probability wave. In other words, the photon's spatiality is weak. Observation merely determines the photon's spatial position. This means that our observation is "collapsing" the quantum state of the photon, forcing it to become a particle within the space-time and now framework of the macroscopic world. So we can imagine whether certain aspects of the quantum world can be "purified" to a degree that is purely uncontrolled by space. For example, quantum entanglement. Quantum entanglement is a non-local correlation where two entangled particles can instantly influence each other's states even when separated by great distances. This seems to be unconstrained by time, but I believe its essence is that it's unconstrained by space (being unconstrained by space, quantum entanglement doesn't need time either). This is because this entanglement doesn't transmit any information; if it were constrained by space, there would necessarily be information about the path traveled. In other words, quantum entanglement correlates without passing through space at all. This correlation seems to transcend the limitations of space, but it still needs to occur in the "now" dimension, because any event's occurrence requires a moment of "now".

I attempt to explain quantum entanglement using the theory of no form actions.

Description of quantum entanglement: Quantum entanglement is a strange quantum phenomenon in which two or more particles are correlated with each other, even when they are far apart. Taking the polarized light experiment as an example, when a laser shines on a crystal in the middle, it produces a pair of "entangled" photons, each of whose polarization direction is in an uncertain superposition state. The polarization directions of the "entangled" photons are measured separately on both sides. However, when you measure the polarization direction of one photon, its superposition state immediately collapses to a definite state (e.g., horizontal polarization), while the polarization state of the other photon also immediately collapses to the opposite state (e.g., vertical polarization). The bizarre thing is: the photon pair is produced first, and the measurements on both sides should be independent. Therefore, it's incomprehensible that no matter how the direction of the polarizer is changed, the other side seems to know the change instantly, and this correlation is not limited by distance, even if the two photons are light years apart. This challenges our traditional understanding of space and time.

My explanation: Before measuring the two "entangled" photons, both photons belong to the motive force entities of the quantum world, not to the isolated entities of the macroscopic world. Although they are separated, they have not become two isolated particles of the macroscopic world. Therefore, they do not possess the distance property of isolated entities in the macroscopic world (i.e., they are not limited by space). Furthermore, from the macroscopic world's perspective, photons do indeed propagate in space, but propagating photons only possess hidden spatiality and have not manifested in the space of the macroscopic world. They are not yet truly particles of the macroscopic world, and thus do not have the distance property of the macroscopic world. Only measurement can make them truly manifest as isolated particles in the macroscopic world. In other words, measurement transforms the photon's hidden spatiality into manifested spatiality in the macroscopic world. Consequently, they acquire the distance property of the macroscopic world.

In other words, before the two "entangled" photons are measured, their separation doesn't make them truly separate in the macroscopic world; they still belong to one whole in the quantum world. Only when one of the photons is measured do they, as a whole, transform into two different isolated entities in the macroscopic world, and only then does the entanglement between the two photons disappear. When the two photons become isolated particles in the macroscopic world, their originally entangled polarization directions will consequently show definite opposite polarization directions. After the two photons become isolated particles in the macroscopic world, only then do the two particles truly have macroscopic world distance between them.

This indicates that, from the macroscopic world's perspective of photons, although photons propagate in space, when we don't observe them, they don't truly manifest as isolated particles in space; in space, they are only in a hidden state. They are only continuously evolving in the quantum world over time. And after measurement, it changes the substantive nature of the quantum, bringing them into the realm of classical, isolated particles in the macroscopic world.

In our consciousness, there is a scene, but the spatiality of this scene is not important for consciousness. No matter how large this scene is, it can fit into our consciousness, which means that spatiality is weak in consciousness. Our thinking can even almost detach from this spatiality and think about problems using only abstract things or symbols. In consciousness, when our body experiences an impact and feels pain for a period of time, such direct sensory manifestations in consciousness indeed have temporal causality, but this is only the interaction between the external world and consciousness. Even if our consciousness persists for a period of time, there is no temporal standard within consciousness to measure such time, and it can only rely on macroscopic time for measurement. However, for pure consciousness, it can almost detach from temporality. For example, we can think about problems in terms of purpose, which reverses causality, with the purpose coming first and the cause later. Another example is that we can recall the past, imagine the future, and even contemplate existence and meaning beyond time. But the logical relationships of these thoughts are not controlled by temporal order, even though we think about problems in a sequential manner. The fact that logical relationships in thought are not constrained by temporal order indicates that there is a fundamental difference between the structure of conscious thought and the structure of physical reality. All these indicate that temporality and spatiality are weak in the world of consciousness, and can even be purified to a degree that is purely uncontrolled by space and time. The world of consciousness is dominated by the action of manifestation; it focuses more on how things manifest and their meaning, and is less constrained by the limitations of space and time. Temporality and spatiality are replaced by the laws of thinking (e.g., logical laws) and ways of thinking.

However, in the world of consciousness, there should be this "now" dimension. Our consciousness exists in the present, which is also the main dimension in the conscious world. In other words, the "now" dimension exists in the conscious world, the quantum world, and the macroscopic world. It's a dimension that traverses these three worlds. In the conscious world, our conscious experiences all occur in the "now" moment. In the quantum world, the occurrence and evolution of quantum events also require "now" as a reference point. In the macroscopic world, events and processes cannot be separated from the participation of "now". This is also the essence of the "now" dimension. Because "now" itself is the dimension of manifestation action, it possesses identity and has the ability to unify these three worlds. The "now" dimension connects the conscious world, quantum world, and macroscopic world; it is the common convergence point of the three worlds. Our perception of the macroscopic world (conscious world) and the measurement results of the quantum world (quantum world) all occur in the "now" moment. "Now" also has the intuitiveness of manifestation; in this dimension, things directly manifest themselves. From the perspective of the theory of no form actions, "now" can be understood as the ultimate embodiment of manifestation action. In the "now" dimension, isolation and motive force retreat to the background, and only manifestation takes the dominant position.

We know that a macroscopic object (like a stone) is an isolated thing, and its manifestation is also an isolated manifestation. However, we can imagine such a thing: an isolated thing whose isolation aspect does not manifest, but it manifests its existence indirectly through the motive force it produces. In other words, an isolated thing can manifest through motive force (this actually conforms to no form united transformation). I think dark matter might fit this pattern: it has mass (isolation), but it doesn't emit light or interact with electromagnetic waves, so it can't be directly observed. But it can indirectly manifest its existence through the gravity (motive force) it produces, for example, through its effect on galaxy rotation speeds.

We can also imagine such a thing: a thing of motive force whose motive force aspect does not manifest, but it manifests its existence indirectly through the isolation it produces. In other words, a thing of motive force can manifest through isolation (this actually conforms to no form united transformation). I think dark energy might fit this pattern: it's an unknown form of energy (motive force) that we can't directly observe, but it can indirectly manifest its existence by driving the accelerating expansion of the universe (isolation).

This section demonstrates the imaginative power that the theory of no form actions brings us. According to the previously discussed method of imagination, we can envision patterns we can conceive to predict potentially existing things. By comparing these patterns with facts, we can better explore this world. We can even create new things based on the patterns we envision.

References

[1]Heidegger. The Question Concerning the Thing, translated by Zhao Weiguo, Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 2010, p.179.

[2]Heidegger. The Question Concerning the Thing, translated by Zhao Weiguo, Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 2010, p. 176-177.

[3]Heidegger. The Question Concerning the Thing, translated by Zhao Weiguo, Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 2010, p. 177.