For more than a century, physics has treated space and time as the smooth stage on which the universe unfolds, a flexible fabric that bends but never breaks. A new wave of theories is now challenging that picture at its roots, recasting reality as built from fragments of energy, hidden dimensions and even a kind of three dimensional time that gives rise to space itself. Together, these ideas do not just tweak Einstein, they invite us to rethink what it means for anything to exist, move or have a beginning at all.
I see a pattern emerging across this work: space and time are no longer the unquestioned backdrop, they are becoming actors in their own right, or in some cases illusions that emerge from something deeper. From black holes twisting spacetime like a whirlpool to mathematical models where geometry alone creates mass, the familiar coordinates of everyday life are starting to look like a remarkably convincing special effect.
From particles to “fragments of energy”
The most direct assault on the traditional picture starts with the building blocks themselves. Instead of treating particles and fields as separate ingredients, some theorists now argue that everything in the universe can be described as discrete fragments of energy, localized lumps that behave like particles in some contexts and like fields in others. In this view, what we call an electron or a photon is not a tiny billiard ball or a vibrating string, it is a stable pattern in a sea of energy that has no preferred shape until interactions force it to take one.
In reporting on this work, one analysis describes how these fragments of energy are proposed as the fundamental building blocks of the universe, combining the strengths of particle and field descriptions while avoiding some of their contradictions. The same discussion notes that the theory is framed as a way to reconcile quantum mechanics with gravity and could, in principle, reshape how we think about cosmology and engineering at extreme scales. By treating energy fragments as primary and space and time as the relational web that tracks their interactions, the theory quietly demotes spacetime from the starring role it has held since Einstein.
A universe with no beginning or end point
Once you accept that the basic ingredients of reality are not little objects sitting in a pre existing container, it becomes easier to imagine a cosmos that has no clear starting gun. In the energy fragment picture, the universe can be modeled as a network of interactions that stretches without a privileged first moment, more like an infinite tapestry than a story with a first page. That does not mean the Big Bang disappears, but it reframes it as a phase transition in an ongoing process rather than an absolute origin of space and time.
One summary of the theory spells this out explicitly, noting that in this framework the universe may have no beginning or end point in the traditional sense. Instead of a singular instant when everything appears from nothing, the model allows for an eternal structure in which energy fragments rearrange and reconfigure but never truly vanish. For cosmology, that is a radical shift, because it suggests that questions about what “came before” the Big Bang might be ill posed, not because they are forbidden, but because the underlying reality does not have a single global clock that can be wound back to zero.
Hidden dimensions and a universe built from geometry
While one camp focuses on energy as the core ingredient, another is pushing geometry itself to center stage. A team at the Slovak Academy of Sciences has advanced a theory in which hidden dimensions help explain where mass comes from, suggesting that the universe’s fundamental structure could be built entirely from geometry. In their approach, what we perceive as mass is not an intrinsic property of particles, but a manifestation of how objects move and twist through extra dimensions that are curled up beyond ordinary perception.
The same work emphasizes that this geometric picture does not simply add more spatial directions for the sake of it, it uses those dimensions to encode the properties we usually attribute to matter. By treating mass as a geometric effect, the theory hints at a universe where the distinction between “stuff” and “space” dissolves, and where the familiar three dimensional world is just a particular slice through a richer mathematical structure. If that holds up, then the question “what is space made of” might be answered by “nothing but geometry,” with time and mass emerging from how that geometry is stitched together.
Quantum space, “q-desics,” and the grain of reality
Even if spacetime is geometric at heart, quantum theory insists that nothing is perfectly smooth. At very small scales, the continuous curves of Einstein’s equations are expected to give way to something granular, a quantum version of space and time where motion no longer follows the neat geodesics of general relativity. Recent work has introduced the idea of “q-desics,” quantum corrected paths that trace how objects move through this discretized fabric when both gravity and quantum effects matter.
Researchers studying motion through quantum space–time argue that these q-desics could leave observable fingerprints in cosmology and astrophysics, especially around very massive objects where curvature is extreme. In their picture, large masses such as a galaxy still curve spacetime, but the trajectories of particles and light pick up subtle quantum deviations that might show up in precise measurements of gravitational lensing or cosmic background radiation. If those signatures are found, they would be direct evidence that the smooth spacetime of Einstein is only an approximation, and that at a deeper level reality is traced out along quantum corrected paths that have no exact analogue in classical geometry.
Spacetime whirlpools and Einstein’s twisting universe
While theorists refine their models, astronomers are starting to see spacetime behave in ways that Einstein predicted but no one had directly observed. Around some black holes, gravity does not just pull, it drags the very fabric of spacetime into a whirl, twisting nearby orbits like leaves caught in a vortex. Observations of a so called spacetime whirlpool give a visceral picture of curvature in action, turning abstract equations into something closer to a physical landscape with eddies and currents.
One report describes how astronomers have, for the first time, observed a spacetime whirlpool near a black hole, while also noting that “Titan May Not Host a Massive Ocean After All” in a separate context that underscores how quickly our cosmic intuitions can be overturned. In parallel, another team has confirmed a key prediction of general relativity by catching a black hole twisting spacetime as it spins, directly validating Einstein’s claim that a spinning mass should twist the universe around it. The observation of a black hole caught twisting spacetime shows that frame dragging is not just a theoretical curiosity, it is a real effect that shapes the motion of matter and light in some of the most extreme environments known.
The bold claim that spacetime does not exist
As observational evidence piles up for curved and twisted spacetime, a different group of philosophers and physicists is making a more radical claim: spacetime itself might not exist in the way we think. Their argument starts from the way physics describes events, treating them as things that bear properties like position and time, and then asking whether those properties are fundamental or just bookkeeping devices. If the underlying reality is a network of relations or quantum states, then space and time could be emergent, like temperature in a gas, real at large scales but not part of the deepest description.
One analysis of this idea notes that these discussions rely on an assumption that events are existent things that bear properties such as location and duration, and that we usually picture spacetime as a container that bends and warps due to gravity. The same report argues that physics cannot actually describe the universe without sacrificing a single prediction even if spacetime does not exist as a fundamental entity, because the equations can be reformulated in terms of more basic structures. In that picture, what we call spacetime is a convenient way of organizing correlations between events, not a substance that flows or stretches, and the real work of physics is to uncover the deeper pattern from which that appearance arises.
When time is the canvas and space is the painting
If spacetime is not fundamental, something else has to take its place, and one of the boldest proposals is to put time alone at the foundation. Physicist Gunther Kletecka has suggested that time might be three dimensional, a kind of volume in which different directions correspond to different causal possibilities, with space emerging as a derived concept. In this view, reality unfolds on a temporal stage, and what we experience as spatial separation is a way of encoding how events are arranged within that multi dimensional time.
In coverage of this work, the theory is described with the phrase “Time as 3D Canvas,” inviting readers to imagine a universe where time itself is the true stage for reality. The same discussion explains that in this framework, cause and effect relationships are potentially ambiguous in ways that differ from standard relativity, because the three dimensional structure of time allows for more complex patterns of influence. By treating space as something that “emerges” from this temporal canvas, the theory flips the usual hierarchy, suggesting that what we measure with rulers is secondary to what we track with clocks, and that Einstein’s fusion of space and time might itself be an approximation to an even stranger underlying order.
Quantum, geometry and energy: a converging picture
What strikes me in surveying these ideas is not just their ambition, but their convergence. The fragments of energy approach, the geometric mass model from the Slovak Academy of Sciences, the q-desic description of motion through quantum space–time, the claim that spacetime does not exist, and the three dimensional time canvas all point toward a universe where the familiar coordinates of space and time are not the deepest layer. Instead, they suggest that reality is built from more abstract ingredients, whether those are energy quanta, hidden dimensions, relational events or multi dimensional temporal structures.
At the same time, observational breakthroughs like the detection of a spacetime whirlpool and a black hole twisting the universe as it spins show that Einstein’s picture remains extraordinarily accurate in the regimes we can currently probe. The challenge for the next generation of physics is to weave these strands together, finding a framework that respects the success of general relativity and quantum theory while accommodating the possibility that spacetime is emergent, geometric, quantum granular or even secondary to time itself. If that effort succeeds, the result will not just be a new equation, it will be a new way of thinking about what it means for anything to exist somewhere or sometime at all.
More from MorningOverview