Thank you Jerry for your response and great questions – I’ll try and answer them the best I can. However, If I may I’d like to first state that I spent the first 9 chapters of the book just on the exposition of the model itself. That’s not to say the model is overly complicated – it’s a very simple idea but it needs a lot of explaining. Because as you highlighted in your first reply this runs completely counter intuitive to our present view and understanding. As such the most difficult aspect of the model lies in this initial hurdle that challenges our present perception of reality – that being of the space-time continuum. The model simply proposes that our dimensions and time are actually the resultant emergent effect of dimensional interactions – and it is these interactions that the model describes in thorough detail.

So moving onto your second response, as I hope this explanation will help answer the first part also – and let’s start with the zero point particles. These are dimensionless objects which simply just are – by which I mean they are the fundamental simplest objects, and cannot be reduced to anything simpler, or changed, or destroyed for that matter. And they hold no dimensional footprint at all – so no matter how much you zoom in on them they are always a zero dimensional point.

Now this has already been proposed in a few quarters that electrons are these zero dimensional point particles, so what I’m proposing here isn’t anything new in that regard. In fact back in 1940 by John Wheeler claimed that all electrons were the same particle because they all have identical properties. Now I’m not suggesting that all electrons are indeed the same one electron – however, the model is suggesting that they are this zero dimensional point particle, and thus all appear to have exactly the same properties.

So the next logical question is how do we get from zero dimensions to one dimension? Well we interact two of these zero dimensional particles together in a simple attractive harmonic oscillation. If we take the loci of all this movement together in a single time-frame it forms a straight line, or a 1 dimensional string if you will. So all we are doing here is viewing this resultant 1 dimensional object as the completed history of the two point particles interaction. This 1 dimensional string is of course the basis of string theory and it is the further dimensional interactions which give it it’s vibrations and as for existing in 10 dimensions, this requires much further explanation which to gloss over here – but basically, these are the different dimensional zones that they interact in, forming the other particles in the standard model. I of course explain this in far more detail in the book and on my website (link below).

Next we just need to look at the dimensional interaction between this 1 dimensional string object and another zero dimensional point particle which forms the 2^nd dimension. This is basically just the point particle orbiting the 1 dimensional string and it is this interactive movement is in the 2^nd dimension. If again we treat this orbit as a time-frame of all of its movement we form a kind of 2 dimensional disc or “coin” as a result. And if we further interact that 2 dimensional object with another object we get this new interaction in 3 dimensions – which simply manifests itself as a spinning coin producing what we call an atom. Although it isn’t technically spinning as all movement is of course a superposition of movements at the same time.

Now if we look briefly at quantum mechanics we can immediately see how the use of these dimensional time-frames of this dimensional interaction appear as the superposition of the electron in its various electron clouds. These clouds are simply the time-frame of the 2 dimensional orbit then spun in 3 dimensions. And the difference in the clouds is reflected in the different possible basic orbit that forms the 2^nd dimension, which explains why these have quantised energy as they can only exist as whole orbits and not partial ones. This also completely explains why we experience the whole determinism/non-determinism issue.

Now if we apply our logic here we can start to see how it can explain matter, energy and time with relative ease. Firstly matter is just the combined dimensional interaction of zero point particles and our referencing of that interaction from our arrow of time (I’ll explain this shortly) which gives the appearance of different particles since they are interacting in different dimensions. And energy is simply the values, or quantity, of this dimensional referencing which can be transferred elsewhere.

Lastly let’s talk about time. As I’ve glossed over this so far as I didn’t want to get bogged down in it too early, so I’ve not distinguished how the model views time. Again this is very counter intuitive and I’m condensing a lot of exposition from the book here so I hope I do this justice.

Now I’ve talked about 0 dimensional interaction forming a 1 dimensional object and this indeed requires time. I’ve also explained about 1 dimensional string interacting with another zero point particle forming a 2^nd dimension – this also requires time. However, both these times are not the same time that we experience. And indeed if we approach this counter-intuitively then I could argue that it is these dimensional interactions that are creating time. The zero point particles interact in the 1^st dimension, meaning that they form a change in a first dimension between them. Thus very simply it is this change that is time. Time is just a change in a higher spatial dimension. When particles interact they are just creating this movement in a higher spatial dimension. And this movement has a directional quality to it – hence why we often refer to an arrow of time, as this describes our deterministic interactions.

So the first dimensional arrow of time describes the initial interactions of the two 0 point particles. The second dimensional time arrow describes the orbit of a 0 point particle around the 1 dimensional string. And the third dimensional time arrow describes the interaction between these resulting 2 dimensional objects (which resembles coins spinning) and lastly, and maybe most pertinently, our 3 dimensional atoms and molecules interact forming a 4^th spatial dimension, which is how we experience time – it is just this change in a higher dimension. Hopefully this should be completely logical as time is often regarded as the 4^th dimension anyway, and Einstein’s famous E=mc2 is an upshot of treating time as a spatial dimension.

Lastly it is the direction of these time arrows which gives us the time-frame referencing of dimensional objects that I described earlier, as our time arrow doesn’t run concurrent with the other time arrows and instead we experience the time frame of this movement rather than the steady flow of our own 4^th dimensional time arrow.

I hope this makes some kind of sense as I know this is a lot to take in very quickly and runs very much against our current views. There is a lot more detailed exposition of all of this in the book, with examples and diagrams to help visualise all of this – and of course it does take a far more thorough approach to what I’ve given here. As I said to begin with – the model is simple yet it challenges our present perception of reality – and as such the arising complexities take a lot of explaining and dissecting to adequately describe what we see and measure in science.

I have also summarised a lot of the book here also for more information here: What is the D Construction Model? – D Construction Model (wordpress.com)

I will also post up claims that the model confidently makes and an actual experiment that will, or will not confirm the validity of the model.