Rudolf

Thanks so far for all the thoughtful replies—I really appreciate the discussion. I’ll take some time to think this through and come back later with a clearer answer. I don’t think we actually disagree completely; I just need to find the right words to better explain how I see a possibility where the “now” (here and time) could be the point from which future spacetime is created.

Okay, this is not exactly going the way I was thinking of. I don't think that standard relativity theory, especially when interpreted in terms of foliations, lightcones, and gravitational time dilation etc.. is wrong. Where my perspective differs slightly is not in the structure itself, but in the emphasis: instead of treating foliation as just a mathematical slicing of a pre-given spacetime, I am asking whether it can be interpreted as a description of how spacetime is locally realized through causal accessibility. In that reading, the “present” is not a global surface, but an observer-dependent causal boundary. I agree with you that at this stage this does not produce new empirical predictions or should not be presented as new physics. It is an interpretational reframing rather than a new theory. So I don’t think you are missing anything essential. The only “extra” is a different interpretation of spacetime as a dimension, not new science yet.

The speed of light defines the maximum rate at which causal connections can form between events. In this sense, it sets the rate at which physical reality can emerge. I agree that in special relativity there is no universal “present.” That’s actually consistent with my idea. When I talk about the “present,” I don’t mean one global moment for the whole universe. I mean a local, observer-dependent “now.” Each observer has their own present, depending on their motion and position. So I’m not trying to introduce a preferred frame or a universal time, which would indeed conflict with relativity. Instead, I’m trying to reinterpret the existing causal structure (defined by light) in a different way. In my view, the “present” is simply the local boundary of what is becoming causally connected for an observer. So rather than saying there is one present, I would say:

I agree that a universal “now” would be problematic. In this model, there is no single global present. Instead, the “now” is local and observer-dependent. Each observer has their own present, defined by their position and motion, and by the causal structure around them. What counts as “now” for one observer does not have to match the “now” of another. So rather than a single expanding surface (like a hypersphere), it’s better to think of reality as having many overlapping local “nows”, each defined by what can be causally connected at that moment. In that sense, the “edge of the universe” is not a fixed global boundary, but a local boundary of causal interaction that exists for every observer individually.

I’m exploring a model where the present moment (“now”) is the actual boundary of the universe. The universe is not a fixed block of past, present, and future, but something that is continuously being created at this boundary. In this view, the universe expands at the speed of light, not just in space but in spacetime itself. The speed of light is therefore not just a property of light, but a fundamental limit that defines how fast reality can grow. Light is interpreted differently here: rather than “moving through space,” it can be seen as a trace or trail that connects the present to the past, marking the structure of what has already happened. Mass, on the other hand, represents the actual realized path of events, while light defines the possible causal structure. So the picture is: The present = the edge of reality The future = not yet existing The past = built structure The speed of light = rate at which the universe unfolds I’m curious how this idea fits (or conflicts) with modern physics, especially relativity.

Jazeker, het universum dijt uit vanuit onze positie gezien. Ik denk dat iedereen dat kan beademen. Maar niemand heeft enig idee wat zich op de uiterste grens van het universum zou bevinden, wellicht zien we daar de geboorte van het universum, daar zijn verschillende theorieën over. Maar daar waar we zelf altijd het verleden waarnemen (we kijken steeds dieper terug in de tijd) creëren we zelf de toekomst. Ik zou durven stellen dat we zelf vanuit het absolute heden tijd en ruimte genereren met een snelheid die gelijk is aan c. Massa genereert tijd en ruimte. Dit laatste lijkt me op zich wel een nieuw inzicht waarmee zwaartekracht zou kunnen worden verklaard. Certainly, the universe is expanding from our point of view. I think anyone can grasp that. But no one has any idea what might be at the far edge of the universe; perhaps we can see the birth of the universe there, and there are various theories about that. What I like to argue here is that where we always perceive the past from ourselves (we are always looking further back in time), we create the future also by ourselves. I would dare to suggest that we generate time and space from the absolute present at a speed equal to c. Mass generates time and space. The latter seems to me to be a new insight by itself, which could explain gravity.

I believe that each of us has a personal moment in time that we can call “now.” We experience reality from our own point of view, always with a slight delay—light needs a full second to travel 300,000 km, after all. Everyone carries their own internal clock, their own “now,” observing the world from a unique position in space and time. When I take an action, no one can witness it in truly absolute real time. The distances between us are essentially small differences in space-time; we can never occupy exactly the same place at exactly the same moment. Fortunately, in everyday life this hardly causes any problems. 😉 The point I want to make is that what we perceive as reality is always a glimpse of the past. Our sense of “now” is, in a way, an illusion—an internal construction created and projected by the brain.

It is true that the reality we see is in fact an event happening within your head. Your eyes receive light like antennas pick up a radio signal. Your brain converts this signal into "live pictures". So in some way we are kind of watching a movie inside our head. I do have my own ideas about this concept of reality but the edge between philosophy and physics might cross each other here. I really do not know where to start..

But what I would like to argue is the idea that this "grow" happens from here at our own place and moment in time. Do we shape our own part of the universe by our own actions in spacetime? We only see the past while we create the future.

Yes that´s truth. Since I think the edge of the universe is our own place in space and time this edge is not just a line between 2 parts of space but also a line or moment in time between past and future. We all expand this boundary by the thing we do. You might compare the universe with the surface of a ball. Each dot on its surface is on the edge of "inside or outside" the ball. So anyone can be on the edge from where the expansion takes place in his own spacetime "bubble".

I would like to argue that our own place in time and space is the exact location from where the universe expands. Our own moment in time (now) and location in the universe is the exact place from where we leave our own action into the past while we "travel" into the future while we create or shape the future. For this moment I am not sure if this rather is philosophical or if this is also a possibility in the "real" reality. So I love to hear some thought about this concept of spacetime and the idea that "now" is the absolute boundary of the expanding universe. This would say that we all are living as "multi entities" or parallel universes next to each other from where we all create a unified universe. Looking forward to some thoughts..