Everything is just a manifestation of motion, the ratio of space to time. Matter is motion, energy is motion, thought is motion... it is just a matter of organization, which is what consciousness does.
So what is motion?
That, MrTwig, is exactly the question. But, do you understand that what you are asking, is not the meaning that "newtonian" physics have imbued to the word - i.e. something moving from point "a" to point "b" - but what you are actually asking, in this context, is actually really - What is "God"? What is "Reality"? You are asking a very big question there. You are asking all of the following:
of yourself, others around you, everything you experience, everything you wonder about, the universe, life, etc.
I'm not going to go into When and Where since our understanding of time and space is perhaps too basic to be useful to discuss such an advanced question. And perhaps, it is irrelevant.
Motion IS something. Or is it? Is it perhaps "nothing" that we simply ascribe attributes to in order to understand it? But this creates a problem. A well-known one in Quantum Physics. By looking at electrons differently, they behave differently. As if our very observation of them changes them. So what does it mean then if we have nothing / something and try to understand it by measuring it against certain attributes that we can conceive of? That method is useless, because we transform whatever it is by using our descriptions, words, concepts, methods of understanding into things we already know. We learn nothing new. Just as it is thought that electrons are sometimes "particles" and other times "waves". They're neither. They're not even really called electrons, but its the limitation of our conditioned thinking that traps us into the convenience
of using known concepts to try and discover unknown concepts (or badly understood ones). Can't be done.
To get the answer to this one, traditional means won't do. You will need to understand and experience what it means to "BE" (which is just the appropriate tense for the word "IS"). And that is not attainable through limiting concepts that act like a prison by introducing "rational thought" to your pure consciousness. Only the function of your consciousness can experience and understand "IS"-ness - unfettered by anything else (for example the function of the conditioned rational logic). Unfettered by awareness of space. Unfetterred by awareness of time. Unfettered in a total sense - as if you experience, what some may call, "nothingness" in its purest form. For some it is blissful and liberating beyond words because of its infiniteness and beauty - for others it is the most terrifying hell imaginable due simply to one fact - what is your expectation of reality? You need to let go of that. Completely. Otherwise you will discover that your EXPECTATION
is what created the terrifying hell that is a prison to the vast consciousness that you are, which wasn't designed for such a prison (i.e. the expectation), but was designed for Infinity - the exact opposite. Wouldn't an infinite consciousness experience the limitation of a single concept (like an expectation of what reality is) as the most torturous hell it can endure?
Motion DOES something. One can never start understanding the "How" without first understanding something about the "What" on any topic. What does Motion DO? Unfortunately this question is the best way we can ask (with our limited language and known scientific concepts) about the nature of Motion in the sense of how it interacts - with whatever, even if it is interacting with itself only. So it IS, and it DOES. It exists, and it interacts. The "DO" of Motion is what makes it relevant. If it simply existed only, why would we be bothered by understanding it if it has no effect or interaction with us?
This concept of relevance of Motion is critical. Because it always interacts based on relevance - never without. It is such a universal built-in mechanic, that it even applies to a person's ability to understand Motion, just as it is applies to a person's ability to utilize Motion. So, if you think of Motion as something that moves, you are immediately limiting your understanding of it. Thought as Motion has just used the relevance of your "concept of Motion" to create a limit in scope of how it can manifest itself and explain itself to you. You can no longer experience it as something "standing still" or "remaining the same".
What if you changed your concept of how Motion interacts? What if by simply EXISTING, does it interact? Suddenly the thought of gravitational interactions between celestial bodies come to mind - how the moon sticks to the earth. The earth seems "still" relative to the moon, yet it interacts with the moon. New concept added of Motion - expanded capacity to understand it. That wasn't hard was it? Now you can think of Motion (as Motion that INTERACTS) without thinking of "movement" - because you have an example.
Relevance of Motion (What it DOES) is a template. It is a rulebook. Whatever relevance you choose to apply Motion to, it will show you how
it does that. What Motion DOES is mutable - completely changeable. Completely flexible. Completely infinite. What Motion DOES is only useful to learn the understanding of - once you have chosen a topic to understand it according to. I.e., you've given Motion a template by giving it relevance. Now it will show you the next question. It will show you HOW it interacts using that template/relevance you've given it. Without relevance, Motion is dormant, invisible, phantom.
This is where all the "rules" of how we understand reality is broken. Killing is no longer wrong or right - it is wrong and it is right, depending on the context. When defending your newborn babe from a rampaging cannibal, it isn't even a question of what the right thing is to do. What is killing in such a context? It is how Motion is expressed as courage, as the most sacrificial love, willing to put itself in harms way with the possibility of losing one's very life - the most precious thing one has, for the sake of another. Completely selfless. Sacred. I killed the cannibal because (insert why here).
In another context, killing is the most tragic and enraging act one being can commit to another. It is how Motion used killing as an expression of seperation, suffering, selfishness, or recklessness.
Motion used the same tool. It used the "WHAT" concept (killing another being) with a "DOES" template (relevance, i.e. context) to show you how it can manifest both the most honorable selfless love and the most tragic, hateful evil. It showed you given WHAT and DOES here's the other dimention of Motion - the WHY.
But the WHY can only have meaning when viewed in hindsight - i.e. when you start with WHY and use HOW, you get surprised that the WHAT doesn't matter. The result of WHY will remain constant given any HOW and WHAT.
What Motion is therefore, does not have an answer, because the answer entirely depends on what ingredients you add to it. "Nothing" is what it is. Not in the sense that it is a "lack of something". Instead, it is a "slot to put something into" that modifies "how Motion works" for the use of "whatever reason".
In other words, the following might be as accurate a description of Motion as we can muster with our limited understanding:
Motion is God's playground, toy box, and the story being played - all in one package. Motion isn't a "thing". Motion is alive.
In the context of mainstream science - What we try to do, whether we know it or not, is to try to understand the WHY. The mistake we make, is we think we know the WHAT, that there is no WHY (that is for philosophers and crazy people to argue about), and as long as we understand the WHAT well enough, we can engineer the HOW according to the "WHY" we want it for.
It really is sad. It is inside out. It is a dead-end thinking. And as in nature, dead-ends don't procreate, they just get replaced by what isn't dead-ends.
Anything complex is only as useful as it is simple. We want complex explanations because we believe that gives it more substance, and matches our expectations of it being "out of our reach" or "difficult". But we can only use what we can comprehend and apply. Simplicity has therefore higher value than complexity. When looking at a fractal - whether a biological pattern or an algorithm in math, it is always the explanation of complex and intricate systems - yet the fractal itself is so simple.
Simplicity doesn't limit complexity. It unifies complexity. There's a big difference. Simplicity gives meaning to the complex. And simplicity of what Motion might be, doesn't have to exclude the complexities of all the WHAT's, HOW's and WHY's. In fact, complexity is what makes the simplicity beautiful. Like a beautiful fractal color pattern that expresses in endless patterns the variations and complexities that was all folded up and invisible in the "simplicity" it originates from.
Your challenge therefore, is not "understanding" Motion. Your challenge is "knowing" Motion. That is the only way to "understand" it. There are an infinite amount of gateways to experiencing and gaining understanding of it. Like the fractal analogy. Your capacity to get to "know" Motion is not limited by your IQ or by your credentials.
It is limited by the amount of "relevance" you constrict and shape it by into a hard and nonsensical form that refuses to conform and fit into your reference framework yet attempts to give you something to understand it better by. It is alive. And you are part of it. By applying limits to it, you are only applying limits to yourself.
It is a mirror.
If you want an answer, you have to start believing you already have some of it, and start saying it and doing it and applying it, with an attitude of wanting more and being humble enough to receive it in whatever form it may come. It is not your slave, but it is also not your god. That is why a "mirror" is such an appropriate analogy. It shows you, you. It interacts with you, where you are at. No PhD needed. No need to have ascended either. It is impersonal yet intimate. You are accountable, but never condemned by it. Are you an unstoppable force or an immovable object? Will you climb into the river of life and become it, or will you be a rock or a tree next to it, always getting some whiff or spray but never getting in it?
Do you really want to understand what is the engine of the universe?
What are you willing to do, be, or give up for it? Only by the amount you are willing in that regard, will you get to know it. No more. No less. If you want it all, look in the mirror. Stretch out your hands with your palms up. Give it all.
You won't be dissappointed.