If the mass is only the relative velocity of two objects, then it becomes interesting, an object that is stationary relative to the planet, on the surface of the planet, relative to the planet, shows the mass of a stationary object, if the object has a constant velocity relative to the planet, then the object is detached from the planet, and the object has no mass relative to the planet.

Is this reality? It feels unreasonable, does mass exist in reality? Or does it exist relatively? If mass does not exist absolutely, then the object exists relatively, this is a fact, then the parameters of the object only have relative velocity, the volume of the object exists, the relative volume exists.

Continue, the existence of relative velocity between objects can be deduced from the existence of object distance, space existence is due to the existence of relative velocity between objects, and the existence of distance causes the appearance of size and mass of objects, and if it is deduced, time and other parameters of the performance of objects can be deduced.

Then there is the most primitive, the most primitive existence, the relative velocity of the object exists, then the question arises, what is the situation of the relative velocity of the object, how does the relative velocity of the object appear, the object decomposes, splits and produces the relative velocity, and the objects collide with each other.

Collision between objects, then don't think about it, after all, if the object appears because of the existence of relative velocity, then the relative velocity of the object collision occurs, which is like discussing the question of whether there is a chicken or an egg first, assuming that there is a relative velocity first, there will be an object, and then there will be an object collision and decomposition.

It seems to feel right, but if the relative velocity of the object exists, then the object exists, and then it feels like the two are entangled, and it becomes that the existence of the object is due to the existence of the relative velocity of the object.

If the object does not exist, whether there is no relative velocity, it seems to be true, there is no relative velocity between the objects, it becomes other objects, the object does not exist, and there are other objects on the planet, but they actually have relative velocity, and if they are completely stationary, they will be squeezed into it infinitely like a black hole.

But it is still scored, whether there is a relative velocity first, or an object first, thinking that there is still a relative velocity first, then there are objects, all objects are produced in this way, then it is necessary to discuss, what is the situation of the relative velocity between the smallest elements, do they really exist at the speed of light, the relative velocity is the speed of light can be seen by each other, if the speed of light is exceeded, the two objects will not see each other at all, and become objects in two worlds?

If this is true, if I am a photon, then relative to my world, the planets that see me as a photon phenomenon are a bunch of photons in my opinion, and those photons with the same speed as me together form their own world, and the objects that are faster than me are also the matter that makes up our world.

In this way, for each being matter, she will see different phenomena of the world of her own, and only those objects whose relative velocity is at rest, or similar, will see the same or similar phenomena of the world as her.

If this is true, it does sound like the truth, then it may be possible to return to the past world, as long as you adjust your speed to the relative existence speed of that era, you need to find the relative starting point of the object's start, and then use that starting point as the relative velocity adjustment object, and adjust your speed to the relative existence speed of that starting point, then you may appear in the past era。

It is easier for the mind to make this kind of speed adjustment, the body may not be able to do it, this may be the reason why the mind can appear in the past and in the future, it is so mysterious that I almost believed it, but I can't explain it, so I can only put it here first, and then discuss it later.

Speaking of which, there are some things that have not been discussed, and we have to go back and discuss, that is, how objects are decomposed, produced relative to the speed of light, we now know that nuclear fusion and the like, can make photons appear, let the relative speed of light appear, this is not considered the decomposition of matter.

It is easy to understand that if the maximum velocity of light visible to a relative velocity matter can be produced in this way, how does the zero velocity of a stationary synthetic new object come about, a black hole?

In fact, there is still an important problem that has not been solved, if it is a void existence, nothingness is nothing, there is no space, we know that space is because matter has a relative distance, a relative size, and the relative distance and relative size of an object is generated because of the existence of relative velocity.

So we need to explore how a void produces relative velocity? We talk about logical derivation, whether one always determines the appearance of another, whether such a mode of thinking is wrong, whether it is possible to appear at the same time, like many 1s appear at the same time, just like relative velocity, relative distance, relative size, relative mass, relative object visibility is all at the same time, there is no deterministic relation, there is no single logical determinant relation, is it possible that this is possible to appear at the same time and disappear at the same time.

It seems as if it is really possible, to appear at the same time and to die at the same time, but if this is the mode of thinking, then it appears at the same time, why does this appear at the same time? It's amazing why a void will appear with matter, and thus some of the rules corresponding to matter will appear at the same time.

Is it really the same thing? Matter appears, with relative velocity, relative distance, relative mass, relative size, these appear appear, so it should be that matter appears first, and then determines whether the following properties appear at the same time, is there really a single logical relationship?

It only makes sense for matter to appear in pairs, otherwise it doesn't matter if these relative velocities, relative distances, relative masses, and relative dimensions, but the dimensions must exist, which is the size measured from the point, which means that the appearance of matter has the property of size space, is there a smallest element matter that has no size, just a point matter?

If point matter really exists, then if they want to form space, they must appear two, or three, two point matter appears, then there will naturally be relative velocity, relative distance, relative mass, relative size, that strange question comes again, what is point matter, how did it appear, don't think about it, sometimes you may enter a misunderstanding, you need to stop for a while, and then continue to explore.