[humanbydefault]

I see time as the awareness of reality. To us [intelligent species] time is a quantifiable entity. A sort of "dimension" that we normally classify along with space. To understand the nature of time we must first state the nature of reality. Reality, as I have said in the past, is "edited" according to the rate of interaction between the waves that populate the vacuum [ether]. In the realm of atomic distances each harmonic holds a specific elapsing speed of its reality. Harmonics corresponding to "quarks" spin in a different reality context than those corresponding to "protons" and "electrons." That fact is what makes its TIME absolute domain. Albert Einstein considered time as relative between "observers" and their "relative" momentum. My vision of TIME is somewhat different. The same phenomenon I've just explained occurring inside atomic harmonics has a parallel in the parallel in different planetarium orbits.

--------------------

Let's concentrate inside the atomic structure of time for the time being.
Those who read my two-parts article titled "Rediscovering the atomic model" will probably realized that I omitted the so-called "relativistic nature" so many times expressed in earlier developments in quantum mechanics. The sole reason for that was to avoid complications in the overall understanding of the model.
Today I'll be more specific about TIME. (recapitulating a little bit) I've said that the harmonic, corresponding to what we called a "quark" for instance, included a highly dense concentration of spinning energy along with a magnitude of mass equal to one lepton. The same pattern was said to repeat at a "proton" level and later on at one "electron" orbit too [in an energetic configuration that was decreasing as it got distant from the atomic core].
The "lepton factor" I repeatedly emphasized in the past is what give a quanta its "legitimacy" [its right to exist] in the vacuum or ether. I didn't give you any reason to explain such a puzzle and I hope someone will come up one day with the answer. An evidence of this was seen in the phenomenon called "strangeness" after particle collisions inside Atom-smashers.
The universe allows to survive only those legitimate quanta I mentioned earlier and the "plus energy" finds a very brief instant before the same universe that forbids its presence transform them into a more stable quanta ["particle"].
I'm sure you may be asking yourselves "Where is TIME in all this?"
Brace to your chair because what I'm going to say is controversial [what's new...]. Since TIME is the "measurable" perception of the specific elapsing rate of a given reality and because of the fact that reality could only be allow to exist under certain conditions (quantized energy interactions) we tend to see TIME as a quantized entity too.
TIME, mass and heat are in fact scalars and they are not quantized but reality forces it to manifest them in such fashion. We had called heat "phonons" in the past and we have bet our reputation over their quantized nature more than once. We have "created" a catalogue of "sub-atomic particles" out of our imperfect nature to observe the speed of validation of the "law of conservation of energy" in the quantum world.
TIME is no different than those cases previously mentioned to you.
I see two constants across the atomic model of the atom... my model to be specific. One is the "lepton-factor" in those legitimate quanta namely "quarks," "protons" and "electrons." In intermadiate harmonics [different than the one mentioned] the "lepton-factor" is violated as in the case of "neutrons" explained in my articles giving place to decay.
The second constant will refer to the structure of the TIME-configuration across harmonics.
As a closing argument respect to [inter-atomic]TIME I could resume my thoughts in the following fashion: TIME [as the specific elapsing rate of reality] is not uniform at any scale. In fact, it's manifestation varies depending the harmonic in question. It's complex nature and variable structure was not originated with "moving observers" and "mindboggling" thoughts experiments. It's nature originated in the spinning interaction of confronting energies. No energy means no time. No energy means no matter. Mass and heat do not make reality and therefore can't make TIME.

My next post will bring TIME into the macroworld and I have prepare to you a test too. So pay attention to my next post and good luck to all of you guys!

HUMANBYDEFAULT
www.humanbydefault.com

[humanbydefault]

In what's known as the "macro-world" TIME is perceived by us throughout our senses which center is in the brain and whose function is to provide our internal biological scale with the required "INTERFACE" to survive in the cosmic scale [space as we know it].
The scale I called "cosmic space" is populated with light and E-M radiation, chemical elements, biological life and other scales. Light as scatterings from atomic scales, elements from molecular scales and life from a highly evolved harmonic configuration wich group all of the above too.
A similar scenario manifesting TIME as an absolute domain inside harmonics at the cosmic scale will be one day proved in every single planetarium orbit across the galaxy. Since the temporal variations between orbits in the macroworld is hardly perceivable [by our senses] we had assume that TIME shows a sort of homogeneous structure only altered as a result of "relativistic considerations."
Einstein's time was an "observer illusion" type of dimension. Those who have read about relativity theory would certanly have troubbles trying to understand why a satellite orbiting Earth will need its clock syncronized with the Earthy one.
The satellite wasn't even moving close to the speed of light and still the REALITY it encounters was "SHRINKED" than ours down here.
Not only that, the anomaly manifests beyond 4.1 radii fron the Earth center and not much closer. If you followed my connection TIME-REALITY you would easily understand that the rate of confrontation between [gravitational] waves irradiated from our sun is not uniformely spread across space.
I'll let you with this amazingly interesting paradox for the time being but I'll continue with this analysis in my next posting... See you soon!

HUMANBYDEFAULT
www.humanbydefault.com

[Guille]

I think I understand.

But why don't the gravitational waves spread equally throughout space? Is it to do with a force which controls the force of gravity?

[dleviwing]

humanbydefault;
Do you know the difference between a measurement term and an entity???
Can you tell the difference between a mathematical term and reality???

Your concept of time requires work and more logic. Remove the SiFi and stick to facts.

[humanbydefault]

Before I take you into controversial discussions deep into temporal mechanics I'd like to thank your comments. I'll try to give a brief response to them:
1- You got it right! >>>GUILLE<<<. It is the same phenomenon indeed. Einstein was right the moment he made the connection between both. He saw the relationship between gravity and TIME, my problem with that is that TIME was "spinning forward" in an absolute manner and not as a consequence of light-speeding observers... That's my point here!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
2- I bet that my 5 years old nephew could tell the difference between a real ice-cream and a picture of it...
Mathematics are nothing but symbolism. Let me give you an example:
Heat [as temperature] can be felt, measured and given a magnitude and a physical unit. Sound [as music or noise] could be heard, measured and also given a magnitude and a physical unit too... and so on. Those examples are part of "our reality" inside our "domain" in other words, in our cosmic boudaries. They are all medium-dependent whether we like it or not. Sound does not propagates in the water as in the vacuum, the same happens with TIME across space.
Back to TIME again... We gave TIME a unit [seconds-minutes-hours,etc.] a scale from 0 to infinite [considering zero the beginning of TIME] however I have a question for the FORUM members:

Do you feel the passage of TIME?

If you answer was YES I happen to disagree with you "big time."
What you feel is the interface between your internal "biological clock" [learn about TURING'S WORK] and the actual density of those gravitational waves in charge of "editing" the reality you feel.
Are you sleepy at night? Our hormones [melatonin chief among them] manifest a change with respect to that density I mentioned a moment ago. I wrote about that in my first article, didn't I? "The Young Experiment."
If we repeated the "Two slit experiment" under the conditions I especified we could observe the effect of that density variations throughout night and day and between the phases of the moon reflected on the screen results.
YES there is a difference between a mathematical term and a physical entity or a physical reality: One is a symbol the other is REAL.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

There was an old time paradox I wanted to bring it to you so you will be part of the discussion. I'd like other members of the forum to participate and give me their own opinion about it... I'm sure they have one once I start telling you what is this all about.

Bell (the wizard of CERN) as many used to call him in the past, came up with a very interesting time-paradox some years ago. He proposed a thought-experiment that could be resumed like this:

Two spaceships attached by a rope leave Earth accelerating to almost the speed of light. Both ships synchronized their departure so the actual distance separating one another never changed. In English there were no push from either side. The question is the following:

"Did the rope brake?"

Many of you may have read about this and "believe to know the final answer to the puzzle" but I have a surprise for you too.

Surprisingly, the entire theoretical department in CERN came to the conclusion that the rope stayed without any structural damage whatsoever.
However a [Noble prized] professor whose name is T.D. Lee [I believe he is still lecturing at Colubian university in N.Y.] used a lot of mathematics, time-diagrams and Einstein's stuff and came up with an astonishing conclusion:

"The rope did in fact broke!" So, according to mathematics [applied wrongly in my personal opinion] the rope suffered a sort of "contraction" during our observation process.
According to ME, both ships [and the rope] traveled all the TIME throughtout equally dense populated gravitational waves which made the reality in the entire context ONE AND THE SAME. The only possible case we could see a realistic brake in the rope would be in the hypothetical case both ships were traveling across different regions of space at distances comparable with galaxies in between them.

THINK ABOUT THIS time-paradox yourselves!

I'd like to hear from you when you're ready...

HUMANBYDEFAULT
www.humanbydefault.com

[dleviwing]

Einstein's reference to time is that of the "Measured" quantity by a clock and not the concept of time as an absolute.

Any physical or thought experiment that produces a paradox indicates an error or ignorant on the part of the experimenter.

[mkirkpatrick]

Time is an illusion,and so of course is space,all the mathamatics and academia
all the equations,all the many formulas,and lots of numbers with little letters
added by there side,or E=mc2,will change that fact.time and space play absolutly no part in reality,for they are false,and have no bearing whatsoever
on that which is real.that which is real is by its very nature "timeless"and exists
in an eternal now.Evolution isnot about time,although it may very well appear so.,"but then appearances can be deceptive,cant they"it is about expanding
consciousness,and beginning to understand the Big picture,so to speak,the more that we grow in conscious awareness the more we will see and understand just
how expansive this now can be?then it will dawn on us all that what we have taken for granted for so long is false,and we will discard it like some worn out toy.and that consciousness cancels out time and space,which is not that difficult as they dont exist in thefirst place,what there is a lot of is mind,and very little space.

kind regards michael.

[humanbydefault]

I think that there's been a misunderstanding in the interpretation of my last posting. This is what I replied to GUILLE with respect to his comment:

[... He (Einstein) saw the relationship between gravity and TIME, my problem with that is that TIME was "spinning forward" in an absolute manner and not as a consequence of light-speeding observers... That's my point here!]
Let's rephrase it this way:

... My problem with that is that TIME [in my personal view] was spinning forward in an ABSOLUTE MANNER and not as... Is it clear now?

I-ME-MYSELF-HUMANBYDEFAULT believe that TIME is limited to the harmonic nature of our own reality and holds its regional status depending which scale is analysed. The spiral and spinning configuration of galaxies and solar systems represent individual and inter-connected TIME systems.

About the term "paradox"... Well I didn't like it either, but what a heck! that's what you find in non-fiction literature written by "experimenters-physicists."
How many times I've said in the past that some "scientific non-fictional literature" sounds worse than the most horrible Sci-Fi novel?
I didn't invented the "Einstein's twin PARADOX" neither the so-called "EPR PARADOX" and so on... It was THEM!

I'll be back to this subject in a minute, but I want to thank mkirkpatrick for his reply. The idea that TIME was "an eternal now" was not new. I remember reading a year ago that some earlier philosophers believed that TIME was just a product of our minds and all there is was PRESENT. This form of thinking changed with Aristotle who proposed "TIME as a measurement of change." I feel that this idea was more advanced than Newton's one even being older than the English scientist's.
TIME is (I said) the way we perceive the result of changes that occur in the vacuum and represent the reality we see, feel and measure in our experiments. Those changes (I repeat) are manufactured inside our sun. Gravity is the final result of star activity and has nothing to do with some alleged warping of space by the sole presence of mass.
Kepler said: "There is a force inside the sun that moves the Earth along with the rest of the planets" It is sad that we have paid very few attention to those wise words...(!)
The "curved space" is (if you think hard) nothing more than a human illusion. The teaspoon (dramatically bent) inside a glass full of water, the shrinking of objects traveling close to light-speed, the rainbow after the storm... the list could be infinite.
I went further than that! I included the existence of "sub-atomic particles" as another dangerous "human illusion." Not as a consequence of our minds... They are REAL! but they are not what we believe they are! A quantum of high energy is not ABOVE THE LAW! And I'm talking about The Law. [The law of conservation of energy] A PERFECT VACUUM in space is a violation of the sacred LAW and the universe-creation-God (you may use the "term" that you may find more appropiate to your "personality) won't allow it! PERIOD!

That's why mass comes into the picture! It's pathetic [I know] but is the way it is. Mass never held polarity, charges, and human-given properties. Mass is INNERT and it will be always there to avoid a blank wherever ENERGY needs it.
Even ENERGY found no other way to "survive" than to confront each other in a desperate attempt to create a pattern (that I didn't invented) called STANDING WAVES.

Now! If what I've just mentioned to you does not qualify as a PARADOX... What would then?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm very honored by the high interest this subject has produced among the forum members. Every one could see that by the fast growing number of visitors of this page. I welcome every intelligent and well-intentioned comment you may have, no matter if they are the exact opposite of what I said. TIME is a precious commodity and I'm not willing to wast it in empty explanations about what I said or I didn't say. I hope this "incident" will not be repeated again... After all I believe we are all gentlemen right?

HUMANBYDEFAULT
www.humanbydefault.com

[dleviwing]

We seem to agree on one fundamental thing and that is the hype of Relativity and Quantum theories border on SiFi. These concepts are great for "Intellectual Brainstorming"; however I have yet to encounter an instance of which they are applied outside the academic temples.

Much of your confusion seems to stem from believing these theories are accepted as proven facts; They are NOT. Unfortunately many false concepts have been attributed to the quantum phenomena by ignorant authors and experimenters. The resulting effect is to cause the real concept of Quantum Physics to be lost in a sea of misconceptions and false beliefs.

If you concentrate on true science and the real accepted definitions of the science terminology, your will find much less frustration with real scientist. Real scientists are not in the academic halls, but in our industries that provide the needs of an ever growing world population.