Time-Space Thinking (1)

1, the movement of things we refer to the state of things change. There are three rational assumptions:
A) things are a reality that can be perceived by other observers. Note that the perception here is a generic one, including visual, auditory, and other indirect observations through certain tools.
B) Things have a state that characterizes their existence (a feature that can be perceived and recognized by the observer);
C) Things can change from state S1 to S2. We call this change of state as movement.
2, the "real" nature of things and movement characteristics, also led to the following concepts:
A) Space: The object itself and the environment in which things are located, and space measures the appearance of things.
B) Time: Time is a measure of the process of changing the state of things, that is, the process of changing things from state S1 to state S2;
The above implies two assumptions of the public rationality:
A) The absolute nature of the existence of things;
B) The absoluteness and relativity of the movement of things; these two traits are interdependent, first of all, if the motion of a thing is not absolute, logically it can be put out that things can be at absolute standstill, and because of the observer's problem, absolute stillness does not exist. Also, because of the observer's problem, the movement must be observed, and changes can only be made by comparison. This comparison is a kind of relativity.

For the state of things, to know the change of state, actually implies the concept of reference, the state of things from S1 to S2, is a kind of relativity.
The following concepts are produced:
A) Things and states: The absoluteness of things, but things are in the form of state and are perceived, state is the characterization of things, is the embodiment of the division of things.
B) Observer: Another thing that perceives things. The measurement of a thing or the characterization of a state is described in terms of the observer. This sounds a bit idealistic, but the truth is that, after all, the truth can only be expressed by approximation, which is the result of observation. But it is important to note that the observer here is also a generic, not necessarily a person or a living body. A more generalized observation can also be seen as a function that can be called a reference function. Many observers in quantum theory refer to this. The isolated system is not really there. This is also the fundamental difference from classical idealism. Of course, if you take the "Me" in idealism as the observer of the above-mentioned broad sense. Then I think the world is in fact idealistic.

The real World:
1) There is no real sense of inertia system, uniform motion is essentially nonexistent. Why? Because according to the present observation, the universe is expansive, and gravity is everywhere.
2) There is no real sense of isolation, so quantum can be entangled, but never tangled, Schrodinger's cat either dead or alive. Both dead and alive exist only in theoretical deduction.

Of course, this is my point of view .....

Time-Space Thinking (1)