> how many cycles per second the object is at.
In order to scientifically perceive frequency it has to be measured but frequency itself (on the large) has a substance independant of measurement, it has to; without it frequency would'nt exist.
> Everything has it's on frequency, that much is true,
> but the bottom line for a frequency is time itself.
> 1 cycle per second = 1 hertz
Some frequencies can be measured; as well some cannot (atleast yet, maybe not ever), but time itself is but a frequency centralized to a point of reference; it's used to catagorize some 'frequencies' which are already in existance. Our type of time can only be used to destinguish certain frequencies for ourselves and whereas it's centralized to our time (earth based by system movement,.. solar system) it is'nt really the fabric of frequency itself. I know and understand what your saying with regards to how you percieve time as a construct of (or bound with) frequency but to me that does'nt seem the case. To me; time seems as an impact within space just as frequency. Frequency is in time and time is in frequency; cycles within cycles, but time is the linear movement of frequency within space; the construct or alottement of movement, making space the construct of or alottement of frequency. Frequencies are bound with space not time; atleast that's how I see it.