A Short Theory of TimeA SHORT THEORY OF TIME hypothesislast update -31.03.2002 Aleksander St. Uzunov IIIIIIIII auzunov@yahoo.com +359 87 335 187 http://asu.hit.bg/english bulgarian mail home Heisenberg’s principle of indeterminacyshowed that the state of a system cannot be measured exactly and so its futurebehavior cannot be predicted accurately. Only the probabilities of the differentegresses can be forecast. This very element of chance is what troubled Einsteinso much. He refused to accept that the laws of physics cannot make anunambiguous and exact prediction of what may happen. But, no matter how weexpress it, the proof is this: the quantum phenomena and the principle ofindeterminacy are inevitable and they are observed in every branch of physics.Stephen Hawking Withoutbeing too ambitious, in the next few pages I will try to describe my views onthe subject of time, speed and movement and the curious conclusions, I havecome to. The cause of all this was an article, published some time ago in the Cosmos magazine /10.1994/. Its author,Stephen Hawking, was describing the so-called arrow of time. Just then I askedmyself if the “arrow of time” was theadequate term. If it were, it would mean, that time is passing smoothly andregularly, but:“Innature there are no variations only if we haven’t looked for any.” /The resonance-isomorphic principle, K.Tomov/And a little bit more:“In1905 Einstein taught the physicists that time and space were not independentconcepts, but the two parts of an indivisible whole, the space-time.” /Life in science, M. White, D. Gribin/.Asa matter of fact, something, which due to lack of a better definition iscompared to the flight of an arrow, suggests the notion of a long straight linewith beginning and end. The problem is that this line wouldn’t look quite inplace in a picture, painted solely with the help of the complex and varying curvesof space and matter. These were the notions that provoked my thoughts, which Iwill describe below.First,let us imagine that the whole Universe appears and disappears, and that is how ithas been, and that is how it will be forever. We can try, can’t we? Or, as IsakAzimov says: “We have no reasons to believe that this is not the way it is.” /The gravity collapse of the Universe/.Why? Because we cannot even approach such a phenomenonwith our senses. We couldn’t see it, since our eyes vanish with the world.There is no device, no matter how precise and sensitive, that would measure it,due to the same reasons. We don’t know for how long we are “here”, “somewhere”,or, better say, “nowhere”. In other words, according to our notions, the timebetween the intervals and the intervals themselves, when talking about anoutside observer, could be a part of a second or of million years.However,one thing is for sure:Every time we’re“here”, we are different; i.e. a change has been made.And one more thing,which, for the time being, we will claim to be true:Thedifference between two close intervals is the smallest possible change.This sounds almost absurd, since it would mean thatwhen we are “here” we will be, generally speaking, absolutely immovable, thenwe will be “nowhere”, then “here” again, but changed. In other words, everyparticle changes its position, but the way it goes is the shortest possible.Like in movies. The film rolls, the frames change twenty-four times per second.But when we watch it we don’t notice the frame change, because the eyes, whichotherwise do a fine job, are quite imperfect. In fact, we, like the moviecharacters, move “in frames”, but it seems, that our frames are a lot more. Itcan be showed as follows: (fig. 1) Theappearances are showed as dots. That follows from the second conclusion. Inthis perspective, it means that THERE IS NO MOTION IN THE UNIVERSE. But how is that, if everything ismoving? This necessitates the definition of two basic systems /levels/, whichdepend solely on each other. The first is presented by any of the dots on fig. 1.It obeys no laws of movement. It sets these laws by its strictly fixedgeometrical structure. The accumulated energy is released as an impulse/interval/, after which the next state of balance occurs /dot/. The secondsystem consists of all subsequent phases of the first, or:Time is not aphenomenon, which simply depends on the speed of movement; it is movementitself.Letus imagine a clock. It’s a device, which shows us the time. It has a spring,which drives the cogwheels and their rotating speed is set by a specificanchor-like mechanism. Every clock in the world is set in such a way, that thehand, which shows the seconds, makes one full round for exactly one minute. Theconcepts of second, minute, hour and so on are defined by a certain system of measurementsand describe a certain quantity of time. Defined by us. If the clock startsmoving faster or slower we'd say it’s broken and we'd take it to a watchmaker.But the more interesting case is when we want to make it work at a differentspeed.Weknow there are no immovable things. One would say “Every night my car isabsolutely motionless out there in the car-park”. I would remind him that hiscar isn’t just moving, but it spins around the earth’s axis at about 30 km/sec.The Earth, on its behalf, moves around the Sun, which is a part of a galaxy,called the Milky Way, which, on its behalf, spins as well and even moves in aspecific direction In space. God knows what the direction of the car’s movementis at any time, as well as the total velocity of all the movements, but it isnot so difficult to guess that it’s enormous. From now on, if we want to slowdown our clock, we will have to listen to Einstein and accelerate it at a speedclose to that of light in relation to our system. And if our arguments untilnow are correct, it will appear and disappear less times, than it will if it ismotionless in relation to the Earth. The opposite case makes sense too. Theconclusion is rather important and it has to be mentioned. The Universe doesnot appear and disappear at one and the same time, like the fluctuations /letus name them so/ of every single body are defined by its speed in relation tothe absolute zero speed. The following can be concluded: Time is change anddepends on the frequency of the fluctuations, concerning a certain fragment ofspace.Weknow that time is defined by movement. So:The length of theintervals defines space and depends on energy. Their number for a certainfragment of space defines time. Both variables depend on the velocity. Let uscall the ratio between them a time ratio /KB/. A 'ratio', since it will be avariable with a certain minimum and maximum critical value of speed.Here,“critical speed” doesn’t mean a “speed limit”. It solely means thoselimitations which concern the realization of a certain condition, e.g. theUniverse we know.Ifwe define speed not as a distance, covered for a certain time, but as afrequency of vibrations that depend on the energy of movement for a certainfragment of space /lower frequency, higher speed/, we will see that it will bethe definition of time, i.e.:Timeequals the speed in relation to the absolute zero speed.Now,we can build a coordinate system where X is time-speed, beginning at zero, andY is the time ratio. (fig. 2) Thecurve represents the Universe. A certain part of it represents the Universethat we know /observe/, i.e. we cannot observe other parts directly. If we movea point from any part of the curve to the left we’ll have the Einstein’s picture,which we will be able to predict, using the time ratio. And if we try to play abit, sooner or later we will come across such misunderstandings as Heisenberg’sprinciple of indeterminacy. As far as the speed of light is concerned, yes, itis constant, but only if we consider it from a certain part of the curve, i.e.we can assume that C is the difference between the different speed ofthe movements. The meaning of the rest of the constant values, i.e. theabsolute zero /temperature/, the relation of weight to volume /density/, etc.,is similar.Theb intervals, defined by the energy ofthe movement, do not imply a smooth change in their values. So, the curve onfig.2 is a sequence of lines, parallel to x. Their length is in a directproportion to KB. The distance between them in the curve, described in theterms of space, is in an inverse proportion to KB /and if it refers to theweight of the objects /bodies/, do we have the reason to doubt its change?/.In order to examine thecurve and especially its beginning and end, it’s already time to make anattempt to describe the mechanism of the vibrations. We know that theelementary particles consist of quarks and that the interaction between them iscarried out by gluons. Let this be our starting point. The problem is, that asingle quark cannot be traced during the usual observations/accelerator-particle/ and, as we will see later, it will never be traced. Whyis that so?Letus imagine that the whole space /the ether/ consists of gluons with absolute zero speed, placed at one and the samedistance to each other, like in crystal structures. In this case what shouldquarks do? They have to “associate” with each other to make a particle round acertain gluon and then, following their movement, they will have to“dissociate” and move to the next one /fig. 3/. The number of the gluons passeddepends on the energy, shown by the time ratio, and on the fact whether thereare gluons, occupied with other quarks or not /important/.KBcan be shown as:  , where  is the distancebetween two neighbouring gluons and  is the number ofintervals /vibrations, matter frequency/. (fig.3)  Sincethere is power that makes quarks associate with each other round a certaingluon, it will as well deprive them of some of their motion energy when theypass different gluons. In other words, the question about the first law ofmechanics stays open. If we follow all our arguments it turns out that every“independent” object moves with constant deceleration, i.e. the time ratiocomes to zero. It must be underlined, that if a time ratio comes to zero, it isincreased to the maximum KB:  , which is the beginning of the curve, where ő1 isthe lowest possible speed /fig. 2/. What would happen to such an object? Theenergy of the movement decreases gradually and at a certain moment the objectwill transform into a different kind of matter for zero time and this new matter I would call matterof first kind. This mechanism follows the attractionbetween quarks and gluons. And so a new factor must be added – therotation of the objects. Inhow many directions can a body rotate? And what is the minimum number ofdirections which is enough for it to exist in the matter we know, which obeysthe gravity laws? Answer: at least two, /and maybe even more/, round theintersection of the rotation axes. Thebeauty and the importance of the rotation comes from the fact that, no matterhow insignificant the difference between the centre and the periphery speed is,it still exists; i.e.having occupied certain gluons, some of theparticles have the chance to affect others while they “don’t exist”, increasingthe route of their quarks in space and we can add a certain factor, respondingto the minimum number of the revolutions and depending on the KB. I think itwon’t be too daring to say: Gravityis not force, but a phenomenon that follows from the rotation of the objects. /see the part on Gravity/Itmeans that each object, which stops moving, will transform into super-densematter, i.e. all neighbouring gluons will be occupied. /And what if it does notstop, but continues rotating quickly enough?/. The object would obtain theabsolute zero speed – time, absolute density, with no relation to gravity. Everyobject bound to another in a systemkeeps the rotation of the whole, since the attraction between them is carriedout at an angle, defined by the each object’s rotation, i.e. each system may beconsidered a single object. About the right part of the scheme. Ata certain moment and a certain speed, the KB will become zero, i.e. within theframework of a certain space fragment the energy of the movement exceeds theenergy of quarks-gluons attraction, or, in other words, we’ll have zerointervals. From a mathematical point of view, that would be the death of thematter and it probably is. On the other hand, it is a factor defined by thechoice of the length of a certain line, proportionate to the distance betweentwo neighbouring gluons. So, KB is transformed into:  , where  is the number ofsubsequent lines of space, which are enough for  .KB cannotequal zero outside the beginning of the coordinate system. LEVELS OF REFLECTIONand the principle of indeterminacy Letus divide the Universe into parts or, better say, levels of reflection. At thefirst level we study everything from the elementary particles and downwards; atthe second - the elementary particlesplus everything else – atoms, molecules, apples, /every neither living, nordead cats as well/, stars, etc., or:- first level - movement; - second level - interactionsand the total lack of movement, concerning the elementary particles, i.e. anelectron is an electron only when it exists and that doesn’t apply to the firstlevel. The interactions, which define the powers we know, are states of matterat the right part of fig. 2, applied to the left /as a consequence of therotation of the objects/; - third level – a total of subsequent second level states; thedifference between them is the smallest possible change; Inother words, the phenomenon of the apple, falling over the Newton’s head, mightbe considered only at the third level of reflection. At the second we wouldhave to study billions of apples, hanging over billion Newtons. And what aboutthe first? At the first level of reflection there are neither Newtons, norapples, nor problems; there are only quarks and gluons. THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTION Theposition of the occupied gluons in a certain line /proportionate to thedistance of two neighbouring gluons/ is very important. Whether it’s there,where the quarks will gather, or it lies on their way. Inthe first case, deceleration or impact will occur, depending on that, whetherthe gluon is occupied at that moment or the quarks, that have occupied it, areleaving, or they are at a stable, balanced state. The geometrical positiondefines the direction and the action – bouncing, dissociation /annihilation/,deceleration, acceleration. In this way, transformation into another kind ofparticle may occur /e.g. p into µ/. In the second case, displacement inspace, and KB respectively, without a change in its value, will occur. Thisprinciple, /perhaps we would not be mistaken if we call it the principle ofproportion/, would be appropriate in describing and interpreting such phenomenaas transparency of the objects, the tunnel effect, the wave function, the photoeffect, the chemical and mechanical solutions and reactions, i.e. the colour,even the smell and the taste of a certain chemical substance might bepredicted, the diffusion, the Brown movement, the diffraction of light, theadiabatic processes, radioactivity, as well as all the others, I cannot thinkof now, or, in other words, the whole Universe. THE TOTAL PERSPECTIVE VORTEXThe Hitchhiker’sGuide to the Galaxy, Douglas Adams Followingthe principle of proportion, we can ask a question, that definitely will driveLeon Letherman mad /when talking about Thedancing masters of Mu-Shu/, and this, I admit, will give me much pleasure,especially if this quant-abuse of mine turns out to be quant-pleasing. And so –are there any parallel worlds? If we follow our arguments, we could see thatthe answer to that question might be found in the very beginning of this paper.It only has to be stated /as far as we can manage with it/. The only thing that can be said for now isthis: the number of the parallel dimensions is in an inverse proportion to theKB. Fig. 4 is the final variant of fig. 2, where Z shows the number of thepossible dimensions, but there are no guarantees that all that is mathematicallyassumed will exist physically. (fig. 4) 
Eachdimension can be described by a KB curve, identical to that on fig. 2 with acorresponding beginning. Theoretically, the dimensions extrapolated one overanother in a 2D coordinate system, for a certain value of KB, will be at theshortest possible distance from each other /fig. 5/. And that’s exactly thedistance between two neighbouring gluons. Their number depends on the lowestpossible value of KB, if there are limits at all. A certain distinction betweenparallel dimensions and otherdimensions shouldbe made. In the first case, we examine different curves with a commonbeginning. In the second case, we examine different parts of the curve on fig.2. Parallel dimensions The distance, expressed with the space between twosubsequent states of movement of a certain object or an elementary particle, examinedat the second level of reflection, is, in fact, a line with occupied gluons atits beginning and end and free gluons at its extensions. The length of thisline depends on KB in an inverse proportion. The free gluons can be occupied bythe quarks of another object or particle without interacting with each other,i.e. they are not observed directly one next to the other /fig. 5/. At a KB,which equals or is very close to one, the parallel dimensions intersect, i.e.they have a common beginning. (fig. 5)  Other dimensions Objectsor particles with a different KB are characterized by different distancesbetween two subsequent states at the second level of reflection. And so, theyare not observed directly one next to the other. Intersections /interactionsand disturbances of the principle of proportion/ are possible at certainproportions of the lines’ length. The areas of intersection /fig. 6/ are thereason why, for example, we observe the light and, better say, its quanting,wave length and diffraction. (fig. 6) Quarks and gluons It's important to be mentioned, that, when I use the word"gluon" here, I don't guarantee that it is the right term or the rightparticle. My very aim here is to create a model for reflection, in which thenames don't matter. The gluon-quarks scheme is rather an exemplary model, too. Whatwe agreed that is true so far, is indeed very difficult to be believed in. Iexplained it to myself in this way: the gluons consist of at least threeparticles, arranged and connected to each other like in the water molecule. Oneof the particles attracts the quarks /if it is some kind of power, it lies inthe basis of a force that we know/. The other two particles carry negative andpositive electrical charge. Their never stopping rotation provides them withthe preservation of the same distances, i.e. with the lack of"pressure". We cannot explain the reason of their initial rotation,but we can suppose that the Universe has an end and its boundaries are thegatherings of gluons, like the water molecules in a drop of water at zerogravity. Infact, this, even as a supposition, is silly enough and it would save us a lotof energy if we leave this problem for now. On the other hand, the nature ofsuch gluon gatherings raises certain questions, which have to be answered. Istheir volume likely to change and if it is, does it increase? Ifthe answers to these questions are positive, then we should revert to thestatement that each "independent" object moves with constantdeceleration. But if we assume that the Universe has a beginning, like theforming of some kind of a gluon heap, likely to disperse, the quarks-gluons andparticles-bodies interactions make their movements relative. Or:Each independent object moves with a constant deceleration inrelation to the first law of mechanics and with a constant acceleration inrelation to the dispersion of the gluon heap. Thetwo statements have no relation to each other and they do not depend on eachother. However, the term itself, the gluon heap, presupposes that the lowest KBvalue still has its limits, set by the limits of the volume. Whetherthe gluons are comparatively immovable in relation to each other or they"disperse", does not mean that the whole gathering is not moving inthe tremendouslyinfinite, infinitely tremendous, dimensionlessly spaceless, speck-like void. If this is so, the term absolute zero speed will turn out to be a temporary term – infinitefrom all points of view. Mr.Adams, your "total perspective vortex" is actually working.The comparison seems enough to me. And still theinevitable question is: is there any reason for the lack of other similar gatheringsand what has God to do with all this? A lot, we can answer the last one, butperhaps it's time to move His throne somewhere else. However, the number of similar gatherings is maybeinfinite – an infinite number of "eggs" moving at infinite speeds outof time which are likely to make an impact and thus start a new Universe. Butthis, for now, is beyond our reach. GRAVITY Anobject at the second level of reflection /interactions and a total lack ofmovement/ leads, following the arguments so far, to disturbances in thegeometrical structure or, in other words, in the homogeneity of the near gluons/outside the object/. This presupposes the formation of particular "gluonvortexes", as a result of the inertia, if we assume, that the gluon heapis moving in the VOID. The vortexes lead to a twisting of space, obtainconsiderable differences in the distances between neighbouring gluons inrelation to the rest in the heap. It's a statement that excludes gravity. Everysubsequent state of the object at the second level of reflection moves thevortexes radially round itself as a result of the rotation. If we examine thesame object under the conditions of the third level of reflection we will comeacross to, what we are used to call, the gravity field. Areas, that contain gluonvortexes, change the common KB of an intersecting object /deformity/ or:  , where  is a factor that setsthe difference in the distances between the neighbouring gluons. It depends onthe mass and the velocity of a certain object or a system of differentobjects. The mass is defined by theinertia as a result of the gluons "catching" quarks. So, the extentof the gravity force and the amount of mass should depend on the speed ofmovement in an inverse proportion, i.e. the amount of mass decreases but notincreases, as it is in accordance with the Relativitytheory. However, the problem with anti-gravity can be defined and thereforesolved. A section of the gravity field It is defined mainly by two factors.The total direction of the object's movement and the direction of dispersion ofthe gluon heap. If we examine the section in one plane at the third level ofreflection, its shape will be roughly the one shown on fig. 7. The  factor will bedifferent at different points of the section. The shape changes as a result ofeach object's orbital movement. The mess becomes complete, when the deformityof the object as a result of the interaction with foreign gluon vortexes isincluded as well. (fig. 7)  ELECTRONS It is believed, thatthey, like the rest of the lepton family, are indivisible matter /do notcontain any other particles/. If this is true, everything, that has been said tillnow, will make no sense. This, of course, is not out of question, but stillthere are enough examples of an electron's behavior, that imply itsdivisibility. On the other hand, that is not so important in terms of thishypothesis. In my opinion, the probability interpretation of the wavefunction works, but it is not important, since it is a look at the Universe,concerning only the third level of reflection. Not to mention that "Goddoesn't play dice" /A. Einstein/. Using the standard model of the atom, but abandoning theaccepted laws and arguments, with the risk to finally discredit myself, Ibelieve that the state of a certain macro-system is identified mainly with thestate of the nucleus. The argument is that the electron covers a considerablygreater distance in space than the atom itself, which leads to differences inthe KB values /or, perhaps, identical values with different "tension"as a result of the forced interactions/. It can be assumed, that the nucleus'and the electron's existences differ to some extent, i.e. the nucleus and theelectron affect each other, concerning the directions of interactions /vectorinteractions/. In other words, they play hide-and-seek and catch-me forever.The atom model with defining speed and direction of motion is the result oftheir play. The electron wouldn't move in a circle. If we could examine themotion of the atom's particles in space it would follow the trajectory of thetwisted spiral of the DNA. By the way, this analogy makes me question myselfabout the relation between the DNA and astrology. But that's another subject. In my opinion, the differences between the nucleus' andthe electron's existence are the reason of the misunderstanding, calledleptons. MOLECULES Following the model, described above, the vectorinteractions are determinant both in the atom system itself and the system ofseveral atoms, which forms a molecule. Where the nucleus of one atom interactselectro-magnetically with the electrons of another atom. Here, again we see theprinciple of proportion. ZEROOBJECTS AND SUPER-NOVAS The matter of the first kind – it obtains absolutezero speed, i.e. it lacks free gluons within its volume, zerotime, zero gravity /or one-way gravity, depending on the direction ofdispersion of the gluon heap/, absolute density, absolute transperancy. Such anobject cannot be hit or touched by another /particle/, since it will pass rightthrough it and the energy of the quarks-gluons attraction will transform completelyinto kinetic energy. Depending on the volume of the zero object and the KB ofthe moving body, the latter in no time will receive a new, considerably lowerKB or it will move to another dimension, or both – teleportation.Moreover,it's important that we have in mind the size of the show, if we succeed in theexperiment of "pushing" such a zero object. We would have to look forit somewhere far on the right part of the KB curve. The same will happen, Iguess, if the moving object is big enough and the energy transformed is greaterthan the Zero energy, i.e. at a certain proportion between the zero object'svolume, the mass and the KB of the moving object. STARS Let us examine an object that has "decided" tobecome a star. As a result of the gravity, somewhere at the intersection of therotation axes the pressure is big enough to disarrange the fixed geometricalstructure of matter. As a result the principle of proportion is broken to suchextent, that the teleportation of matter at the shortest distance to aneighbouring area in the object itself, where the density is not so high,becomes possible. The so moved matter, keeping its parameters at the moment ofmaterialization, can break the principle of proportion in a certain area. Achain reaction is started, not at nuclear level, but at quarks level where thepowers are much bigger, i.e. we cannot expect to run out of star fuel. Thelosses of the matter are different types of radiation, defined by the principleof proportion at the moment of their formation /they are set by the KB, therotation speed, the pressure, which depends on the mass and the radius/, i.e.it can be assumed, that at different points of the object's radius differentwaves /radiations/ occur. Havingin mind the level of the processes in stars it can be assumed, that these areobjects that exist in more than one dimensions, i.e. in our solar system thenumber of the planets may be bigger. BLACKHOLES If a certain object obtains the common features of ablack hole, it inevitably would "ignite" and continue its life but asa star. But in such case, why should a star bother itself to collapse, i.e. thereare no black holes, except next to Shroedinger's cat. The objectsthat we describe as black holes are in fact nothing more than bodies with a KBclose to one. MATTERAND LIGHT Ifwe consider the zero object as matter of the First kind, the moving objects –as matter of the Second, we could consider light as matter of the Third kind, situatedfar in the right part of the scheme. We have already assumed, that all of the moving objectsmove with a constant deceleration as a result of the "friction" withthe gluons /which surely keeps each object's own temperature, that depend onthe density and the KB, which means that the Earth will never grow cold/. Theparticles, that form the matter of the Secong kind, consist of three quarks andthe photon - of two. Therefore, it canbe supposed, that at a KB which is low enough the matter will "lose"a certain quark /?/, i.e. at a KB which is low enough each object dispersesinto photons, if we examine it from our part of the curve. It is interesting,what will happen if we succeed in slowing down the speed of light and examinethe "filling" of the photons with quarks. In other words – spectralalchemy. INDEXof the used terms gluons – I use this word with thevery aim to create a model for reflection, in which the names don't matter. Thegluon-quarks scheme is rather an exemplary model, too; gluon heap – gathering of gluons thatform the Universe we know within the boundaries of their volume;gluon vortexes - as a result of the object'sinertia under the conditions of the second level of reflection gluon vortexesare formed that obtain considerable differences in the distances betweenneighbouring gluons in relation to the rest in the heap. They are situated radially as a result ofthe rotation of the objects. It might me described as a twisting of space;gravity – phenomenon, in which areas containinggluon vortexes change the common KB of the intersecting object or:  , where  is a factor that setsthe difference in the distances between the neighbouring gluons;critical speedlimits – thoselimitations which concern the realization of a certain condition, e.g. theUniverse we know;certain fragment ofspace – proportionateto the distance between two neighbouring gluons;principle of timesaving – similarto the principle of energy saving and an inevitable consequence of everythingwe've said;areas ofintersection – proportionatelyintersecting points between different areas of the KB curve that fix theinteractions in the powers /phenomena/ we know; time ratio /KB/ - The length of the intervalsdefines space and depends on energy. Their number for a certain fragment ofspace defines time. Both variables depend on speed. The KB is the ratio betweenthem. Or:  , where  is the distancebetween two neighbouring gluons and  is the number ofintervals /vibrations, matter frequency/. The KB cannot equal zero outside thecoordinate system; principle ofproportion – alldistances in the Cosmos are proportionate to the distance between twoneighbouring gluons, all interactions obey the geometrical structure of gluons'arrangement and whether they are occupied;matter – three functions thatdescribe matter and form the features of the KB curve /fig. 2/ can be deduced:§ matter of the first kind – zero matter, obtainingabsolute zero speed, i.e. it lacks free gluons within its volume, zero time,zero gravity /or one-way gravity, depending on the direction of dispersion ofthe gluon heap/, absolute density, absolute transperancy, or:  ;§ matter of the second kind -  ;§ matter of the third kind – light or:  , where  is the number ofsubsequent fragments of space, enough for  ;tremendouslyinfinite, infinitely tremendous, dimensionlessly spaceless, speck-like void – or the NOTHING;teleportation – unforced– the way of particles/bodies between two subsequent states at thesecond level of reflection, when the first law of mechanics is kept; forced – under any other conditiondefined by breaking the principle of proportion like: moving in time, moving inspace, other dimension, parallel dimension; levels of reflection – it's more a philosophicalnotion, which suggests division of the point of view, where: § first level – motion;§ second level - interactions and the total lack of movement,concerning the elementary particles; § third level - a total of subsequent second level states; thedifference between them is the smallest possible change; EXPERIMENTSwith results thatcan be predicted, which support the Short Theory of Time 1. If we add a second ionizing cell to thestandard setting for observation of the photo effect as shown on fig. 8, wehave the reason to believe that in cell 2 there will be teleported particles.The distance L is a constant value depending on the KB /it is probably a fewmeters/. It is important that during the experiment the angle between the Lvector and the vector of light should be kept in mind. The barrier is not so important. (fig. 8) 2. An object is placed under a strongenough electro-magnetic field and rotates round its axis with quick enough revolutions/acceleration/; its axis must be at Da anglewith the lines of the field /fig. 9/. The axis x must be fixed in accordancewith the lines of the Earth's mass and magnetic field and the mass of theobject. Such conditions suggest breaking of the principle of proportion, whichat certain values of a could be: forced radioactivity or theopposite, moving in time and/or space, other dimension, parallel dimension. Iwould not make any comments on the possible use of this method. I believe thatGod would not allow us to make such a rash and unconsidered intervention in theUniverse. (fig. 9)  3. The synthesis of extremely unstableisotopes under absolutely identical conditions at different latitude woulddetermine different duration of their existence. Probably it has been alreadydone. last update - 31.03.2002 download as TimeTheory.zip/English top bulgarian mail home |
|
