what is the "density" exactly means?

[zenmaster]

At 1D we have the differentiated aspects of unity in the form of space and time: s/t or t/s. They can be thought of as qualities (i.e. linear or circular, causal or acausal) or as domains (i.e. physical or metaphysical). Psychologically, we impose the duality which makes them distinct, but inherently, the aspects are one in the same thing - like yin and yang.

However, at 2D we've added another s/t component in each aspect. This 2nd component allows us to establish a reference or base from which to consider another aspect. We can think of the reference as 'objective' and 'subjective' depending from which 'domain' the evaluation takes place.

It does appear that each identifiable part of "reality" has intrinsic "subjective" and "objective" aspects regardless of the notion of an observer. The "subjective" aspect (or the qualities of time) provides orientation, whereas the "objective" aspect (or the qualities of space) provides proportion. (This subjective property of orientation (a temporal aspect) may provide a clue to a more workable means to couple Larson's 'scalar motion' with a vectorial direction in Larson's 'extension space'.)

Both systems are objective and subjective. When you consider the objective case, it is an abstraction based on some understood principles - you have forced a background and context by separating something inherently whole into parts and sequence. When you consider the subjective case, the phenomena describes itself from an ineffable periphery of wholeness and creates its own context in a novel and ad hoc manner - not very scientific. We tend to dismiss the subjective component in science because we need to understand based on what we have logically established as already known. However all observation, and therefore all science, necessarily involves subjective understanding.

Arthur M. Young (inventor of the helicopter) seems to also hold a similar idea regarding the need to be able to represent the subjective element of observation in science:

At this point, the scientific reader is likely to object that such considerations are irrelevant to scientific objectivity, which is concerned only with such description of the object as would be common to all observers. Science, he points out, is careful to eliminate just that aspect of observation that we are reinstating by emphasis on the spherical coordinates of the observer. Apparent size and orientation are not objective realities and have no significance for scientific inquiry.

We could answer this criticism by pointing out that, since the conditions we are emphasizing are present in all scientific observations, they are as much a part of reality as are the objective determinations themselves, not because they concern the object but because they are an inevitable part of the act of observation. Support of the importance of the relation between observer and observed in a world scheme comes both from Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle and from the theory of relativity. The former calls attention to the inevitable energy exchange involved in observation of individual particles such as electrons, an exchange which makes complete predictability and, hence, objective determination impossible in theory as well as in fact. The latter calls attention to the impossibility of establishing simultaneity, and, hence, of the impossibility of identical world views.

Since science is based on observation, and observation involves dimensionalities which are not necessarily objective, we must give attention to just those aspects of the act of measurement which underlie or precede objectivity.

http://www.arthuryoung.com/wwexc.html