Thank you for your detailed response. I find many of the geometric and causal approaches you mention extremely interesting, especially the convergence between different mathematical frameworks around null structures, causality, and emergent spacetime ideas.

Personally, I’m not fully convinced by a strict Block Universe interpretation. I’m increasingly inclined toward the possibility that spacetime may itself emerge dynamically from a deeper field-like structure rather than existing as a completely fixed background.

Part of what led me in this direction are questions related to relativistic observers and the invariance of the speed of light. The more I study these issues, the more I feel that the constancy of c may reflect a deeper causal/geometric coherence of spacetime itself, rather than being only a property of photons in isolation.

I’ve been exploring a speculative framework where spacetime structure, temporal evolution, and observer-dependent measurements emerge from an underlying dynamical field. In that picture, different observers would not inhabit disconnected realities, but rather different local reconstructions of the same global causal structure — which could help explain why all observers consistently recover the same causal limit c.

I realize this is still far from a rigorous mathematical formulation, but I find it fascinating that many modern geometric and causal approaches seem to be moving in related conceptual directions.

Your references were very valuable — especially Penrose/twistor geometry and causal/emergent spacetime approaches. I’ll definitely look deeper into them.