When we interpret our nature, we are, in Immanuel Kant's
eyes, inextricably linked to the inner mental linguistic forms of space and
time, and then, in principle it becomes impossible for us to achieve what´s
correct/valid - about our nature
The knowledge about our - nature - also ends there.
We learn to - deal with our nature - utilize it - exploit it - live in and together with it - and gain experiences from and by it. It´s commonplace for us, but any genuine true knowledge of what the thing/physical/material is in itself, is for us completely impossible to achieve - and Kant meant: It´s because we limit ourselves to our traditional notions of what sort of phenomena space and time basically are, and it´s a tendency that still persists.
But it isn´t only average people who habitually use this way of perceiving and interpreting the phenomena space and time; within e.g. philosophy, modern physics and several other disciplines of science it flourishes just as strongly.
The present work can be seen as a total settlement with that tendency. Our traditional notions of space and time are here replaced by a completely new way of looking at the two phenomena.
Therefore, I began the task by presenting it in a so-called I-form; which in turn is due to the fact that the work as such, even before completed, has been considered to be outside the framework of the world that the form of an academic dissertation gives the appearance of.
What I present can be perceived as an idea construction or natural theory, for which I take full personal responsibility. If I´m able to convince you as a reader that it describes something that is correct-valid-true, then keep in mind that I who wrote this report, would be a fairly decent writer to succeed with that feat. At the same time - if I fail in my intention to convince you as a reader that it´s a pretty good explanatory model for what we call reality, maybe it depends on that I´m simply a bad writer and nothing else.