In terms of the hypothesis that mass moves across space as it moves it time, the kinetic energy associated with that motion becomes conspicuous as the source both of the energy disclosed in the conflict of geodesics, and of the persistence of the energy expressed when a massive surface is encountered. The present hypothesis suggests that there is no need for a theoretical amalgamation of geometry and force to account for gravitational phenomena, and no need to invoke a "gravitational energy." Whether free-moving or weighing against a massive body, the energy associated with gravitation is the kinetic energy, or if resisted, the impulsion, of mass moving in time. Gravitation as a geometric distortion of spacetime in the presence of mass brings the relentless motion of masses in-time and across-space into conflict. Gravitation in this view is entirely, and simply, geometry.
Conclusion
A relativistic spacetime diagram demonstrates that a two-dimensional projection of the four-dimensional continuum can illustrate the peculiar characteristics of light as the ultimate and invariant speed, and suggests that it is not meaningful to regard light as moving in either space or time. The hypothesis that light is at absolute rest, and that the apparent motion of light is the reflection of an observer's own motion in time, has been shown to resolve the wave/particle paradox and to make intelligible the apparent non-local behavior of light. It also accounts for "gravitational energy" and reduces the description of gravitation to a geometrical effect. Although experimentation and mathematical formalization are needed to confirm and better define what has been described as the radial trajectory of mass in time across space, the necessarily dual and exotic nature of four-dimensional motion has been shown to make apparent characteristics of light such as wavelength, coherence, polarity, interference, and simultaneity more comprehensible as manifestations of the relative motion of mass, rather than light.
End notes
1. The Lorentz Transformations are t' = (t-v)/(1-v2).5 and x' = (x-vt)/(1-v2).5, with t as time, x as distance, and v as velocity proportional to c.
2. It is permissible to say a body "moves" in time because spacetime has been recognized (by Minkowski, in the first place) as a continuum, as a corollary of Special Relativity. Duration in one coordinate system is a composite of motion in space and time according to another.
3. As a matter of convenience t is generally multiplied by c so that space and time can be expressed in distances of the same scale. I prefer instead to calibrate them by giving time in seconds (sec) and space in light-seconds (ls).
References
Bell J. (1964), "On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox", Physics 1 195-200.
de Broglie L. (1924), "Recherches sur la théorie des quanta," Annales de Physique 3, 22-128, 1925, translated in Gunther L., Wave Mechanics, Pergamon, 1968.
Einstein A. (1905), In "Ãber einen die Erzeugung und Verwandlung des Lichtes betreffenden heuristischen Gesichtspunkt" ("On a Heuristic Viewpoint Concerning the Production and Transformation of Light"), Annalen der Physik 17:132-148.
Einstein A., Podolsky B., Rosen N. (1935), "Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?" Phys.Rev. 47:777-80.
