One of the first things I did was invent a new kind of clock, a so called perfect clock. One whose period does not vary with motion. Actually I did not invent it. Its construction has been known for years but I am the first one to actually use it as a clock, to obtain scientific results using such a clock. As you know many advancements in science have accompanied advancements in time keeping. Using such a clock it is possible to obtain varying velocities for the speed of light. Therefore using such a clock it is possible to invalidate Einsteins 2nd postulate, that the speed of light is constant. By doing this it is possible to develop a alternative physics. Unfortunately this physics is almost identical to Newtonian physics so there are no new developments from this analysis. But it is a valid Physics not just a approximation. There are two valid physics now Newtonian and Einsteinian.

The weakest part of my theory is the first theorem. That time equals motion. This is because it is a assumed premise. I tried to give it as much justification for it as I could but I could not prove it. All great theories have to start with a assumed premise. As far as I know there is no proof for such theorems as "A body in motion remains in motion..." or for the notion that all motion is relative. You just have to start off with a assumed premise, that's just the way it is. I feel mine is not too egregious. Therefore stay with me though this weak part of my work, please do not dismiss it to quickly or out of hand. It is the results of this premise that give credence to it.

By beginning with this premise I was able to determine what time is, what motion is, what space is, how gravity works including how all the forces work, that space and time are both forms of energy and subject to the laws of particle physics , determine the arrow of time, determine why the speed of light always appears to us to be constant, unify not only Newtonian and Einsteinian physics but also relativity and quantum physics and stumble apon a new law for physics.

yours truly Sidereus Nuncius


The unification of Quantum and relativity theory

by Sidereus Nuncius From: (NHol310053) Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics Subject: What Time Is (I to IV) Date: 18 Sep 1999

Contents List:-

  1. Devotion

  2. Dedication

  3. Abstract

  4. Introduction

  5. Theory of Time

  6. Theory of Space

  7. Theory of Motion

  8. Relativistic Quantum Physics


In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The Earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. Then God said "Let there be light." And there was light. And God saw the light that it was good. And God divided the light from the darkness. God called the light day, and the darkness he called night.
So the evening and the morning were the first day.
-Holy Christian Bible

Lion of Judah,
God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Brilliant Morning Star, Lamb of God, King of Kings, Lord of Lords, Word of God, the All Sovereign, God Almighty, the Great I AM!
The God of Heaven and Earth.

Blessed be the name of the Lord who was, who is, and who is to come. Worthy are You O' Lord to receive honor, glory and blessing because You and You alone have created all things. By Your will they were created, and have been created and without You nothing that was created would exist. Before time You laid the foundations of the Earth. The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament shows His Handiwork. The Earth is the Lord's ,and all its fullness.

Day until day utters speech and night until night reveals knowledge. The word of the Lord is right, and all His work is done in truth. By the word of the Lord the heavens were made and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth. The voice of the Lord is powerful, the voice of the Lord is full of wisdom, Teach me Your ways O'Lord, do not be silent to me, to the end that my glory may sing praise to you.


This book must be dedicated to the two blessed patron saints of science Whose generosity has enabled this endeavor:

To my mother
maternal grandmother.

Science owes them a great debt. And so do I.



That A L L the phenomena of nature as we know it, i.e., mass, energy, space, time, motion, etc... are the effects of subatomic particle exchanges. That for each and every physical manifestation there is a associated particle and for every particle there is a physical manifestation. All causes are particle causes and without a particle there is neither cause nor sensation. We only experience what we come directly in contact with. (Action by contact) Reality, the physical universe, is the sum total of our experience of the particles we receive. No particle - no experience. We experience particles and that is all. Subatomic particles are the cause of all are physical experiences and without them we have no physical experiences. That all experience of phenomenon is quantified the experience is discrete because the cause is discrete. No particle no experience no experience no particle. The universe stimulates our senses one particle at a time.


To be able to advance the relativistic quantum hypophysis one thing must be done - associate with every phenomenon a particle or series of particles. There are several immediate difficulties here. One, there are as many phenomenons are there are experiences, millions of them. Which experiences go with which particles or series of particles? Also all particles are probably not known so any analysis will be incomplete at this time. The most logical course of action is to create a category of fundamental phenomenon, associate particles to these and then derive complex phenomenon from a fundamental analysis.

The most basic fundamental units of physics seem to me to be:
(I) mass
(II) energy
(III) space
(IV) time

At any rate if the relativistic quantum hypophysis can be demonstrate for these it is a sufficient start.
Quantification type theories already exist for matter and energy are well established and accepted by all. For matter the theory is called Atomic theory or Atomism and was discovered by Leucippus and Democritus. The theory basically attests to the fact that matter is little particles. For energy the theory is called Quantification Theory and was discovered by Max Planks. Energy has the same characteristic as mass of being quantized or existing as separate particles. Therefore we can pass over both mass and energy in considering the relativistic quantum hypophysis by granting that the hypophysis has already been demonstrate for these two quantities.

Further I feel it is only required that equivalence to either mass or energy be demonstrate to assume a quantity must exist quantified. By equivalence I mean transformation either in theory or in practice. By the first law of thermodynamics there can be no fractions left over for this would mean loss.

This only leaves space and time to be demonstrated.

Not only is there no quantum theory of space and time there is no theory whatsoever as to the cause of their generation. From whence comes space? From whence comes time? There has never been a adequate theory as to the nature of space and time. As to the properties of space and time some were discovered and only recently by Einstein. But wherever a property arises we know some relation, some connection, must exist, IE, physical connection, so that one quantity, like time, can be depended on another quantity, in this case motion. Otherwise how is it dependent? Every property must have a cause. (Principle of Cause and Effect) It should be obvious that these connections require some particle, (action by contact) or some force (action at a distance) to operate. We presently have no other option unless it waits to be discovered.

From such considerations it is possible to develop both a theory of time and a theory of space. Theories that are homogeneous to quantum physics and a quantum universe. A space and time that are materials, physical quantities, quantum, quantified, just like mass and energy. With materialization of space and time it is easy to demonstrate quantum properties for these materials exactly has been done for the other constituents of the universe. Time and space become material and quantified. Space particles, time particles! Then time and space can come under the province of quantum mechanics and elementary particle physics and obey quantum mechanical laws and the laws of elementary physics like any other particles. Space or its particles becomes a subject of elementary particle physics! Time becomes a subject of elementary particle physics! This is a extraordinary implication in physical science. Once these facts are uncovered a new science unfolds, almost trivially. The science that I call Relativistic Quantum Physics.


"Because mathematicians frequently make use of time they ought to have a distinct idea of what time is, otherwise they are quacks..."
Issac Barrow


What is time? What physical influence generates the phenomena of time? Where does time come from and where is time going? Is it everywhere? Or only in spots? Is it a physical quantity or merely a psychological manifestation? If it is physical can it be defined? Or is it too fundamental a notion?
At first impression time appears to be a simple, reasonable, self explanatory, uncomplicated and unbelieving notion. But try to analyze time, define it, explain it, and the simple, reasonable, self explanatory, uncomplicated and unbelieving notion of time vanishes.
To quote St. Augustine (354 AD-430 AD) , "What is time? If someone asks me, I know; But ask me to explain, I know not." Time is such a hard concept to appreciate because time is a completely abstract quantity, it does not have weight, it can not be felt, it has no heft, you cannot hold it in your hand, you cannot examine it, there is nothing to experiment on, nothing to analyze. In short time has no corporal body, it is a wholly intangible, impalpable medium. Neither does it have a place of existence, it is not up, it is not down, it is not over, it is not under, it is not here, it is not there, time does not seem to be anywhere. Time is not in a place, we seem to be in time. Time envelopes us. Time just seems to be.
Mass and distance are much more concrete subjects. Mass has weight, it can be felt, it has heft, you can hold it in your hand, you can examine it, there is something to experiment on, something to analyze. It has a corporal body, it is a wholly tangible, palpable medium. It does have a place of existence, it is either here or it is there. Mass can be directly appreciated. While space cannot be directly experienced as mass can distance can be seen, we see space, it is all around us, we see the distances between things, every distance has a place, distances can be marked off, they can be walked; if necessary space itself can be enclosed in a box and taken from place to place as it were.
Yet it is neither space nor mass that stimulates our imaginations the most as does time. Time is the great healer, time marches on, time and tide wait for no man, time is money, you cannot beat time, time is fleeting, time slips away, time is catching up with you...For such a ubiquitous concept you would think it would be well defined and the underlying physical stimulus well comprehended.

Time is and always has been a critical concept in every branch of learning and in all human affairs. Time crops up in ventrally every aspect of human thought. There have been two great schools of thought who have debated the genesis of time, philosophy and science.
Because of the ethereal nature of time time has for along time been the province of philosophy more than science. Time is incorporeal, immaterial and intangible. Time is a quite abstract concept. And abstract concepts lend themselves to philosophical debate. Philosophy has speculated about time from everything that it does not exist, (ignore the problem and it will go away) to it being a disturbance of the middle ear! Science has done no better.

Indeed time was supposed to be only a abstract concept, but the chief reason is that science has long been almost completely ignorant of time and its genesis Scientist are split as to what time really is, some of the better speculations being:

Time is a primitive undefined notion and as such can never be defined. Anymore than mass or space can be defined, it simply is. Time is the result of the peculiar initial conditions from which the universe started. It started with high entropy and is transforming to a condition of low entropy. Time becomes the subjective experience of this shift from order to randomness. Time (its sensation) is not actually a physical quantity but a psychological aberration brought on by macroscopic properties of matter. Science has decided that although not understanding how time operated that it is a dimension and that it is interlaced with the spacial dimensions. This combination is called space-time. But space-time is not so much a theory of time as it is a theory of gravitation. Gravity effects (warps or bends) space and time in equal proportions. It is simpler to handle these calculations together as one quantity, the space-time manifold.
There is no adequate theory of time in science. This is the great enigma of time. Everyone is aware of it, everyone has a deep personal experience of it, yet no one can define it!

What would appear to be essential to physics would seem to be a theory of time, a explanation of what time is. It is mandatory that science be able to specify what entities the universe does contain and what it does not. What the universe is composed of or what it is not composed of. From ancient times time and space to have existed in a kind of knowledgeable limbo, neither existing or not existing, intermediate between real and imaginary.



To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven.
Ecc. 3.1


Thesis: Time is equivalent to motion, motion is a form of energy therefore time is a form of energy. It directly follows from relativity that of some of the fundamental units that describe the universe, three are all alternate equivalent manifestations.

According to empiricism all true knowledge stems from sense perception. Since we have knowledge of time we must have some real sense perception of time, according to the rationalist. Every natural effect has a natural cause. If the experience of time is a natural effect then it should have a natural cause. Thus time should have a natural cause.


What is time? That we have not known. Einstein came closest when he said, "Time is what clocks measure." Unfortunately the notion of clocks incorporate the fundamental notion of time so that time really wasnt defined. Such a definition does not state what components of a clock define time or inform us as to any properties of time. It is too vague.
I agree with Einstein, time is what clocks measure. So what do clocks measure? Mechanical time, physical time or clocktime is the time measured by mechanical instruments. All measuring of time requires comparison to regular occurring phenomena. Time requires some change to be perceived. Change is motion, therefore time requires some motion to be perceived.
There is no independent time. It is all dependent and all comparison. This makes time a relation. What's the relation then? What is it relative to and what's the connection? Time is a phenomena, it has corporal extension, in the things to which it relates or within things themselves. One the other or both. Physical relations are necessarily between things. State the thing and the rule that governs them and you state the relation. Therefore we know that time is some thing and some process between those things.
If time is a thing or a relation between things we should be able to catagorize exactly what that thing or relation of things is. We should be able to point to it, we should be able to say, "That is time!" Therefore a theory of time is possible!
If a phenomena requires a concomitant process always to be perceived and no other associated process it is only reasonable to assume that the concomitant process is the primary process and not just a associated process. If time requires motion then motion defines time and motion is time. If time is relative to motion then it must be connected to motion in some way. A time that is relative to motion is inseparable from motion.
Clocks are motion machines. They move. There entire operation consists of there movement. We translate this movement into a concept of time. A clock is mass in motion. If time is what clocks measure and clocks are devices that measure motion then time is motion. Since we measure time by motion a quantity of time becomes a quantity of motion.
Clocks are not measuring some external dimension they simply move. If we accept that time is relative to motion then we are obliged to accept that the concept of time is inseparable from motion. Then time is not a independent dimension that exists somehow apart from everything.
Time is motion because it is observed to be such. A quantity can be conceived only from some relation it bears to sensible objects. Things don't exist in time, time exists in the motion of things.
Since at least the time of Newton time has been considered some ethereal unworldly, immaterial quantity that can be neither isolated nor contained. Since time can be neither isolated, contained or obtained in practice time has only been a relation to time keeping devices. The entire modern concept of time is based on the measurement of time.
Generally in measurements a quantity to be measured is the measure of the same. A quantity of mass is the measure of the same, a quantity of length is the measure of the same, a quantity of energy is the measure of the same...All clocks keep time by measuring some motion. If motion is the measure of time then perhaps a quantity of motion (time) is a measure of the same (time). This implies that time is motion.
The analysis can also be reached by this reasoning, there is a inexplicable connection between change and time. Without change it is impossible to apprehend time. It is even conceivable that without change time does not exist. So time=change. All change can be reduced to some kind of motion. Therefore time as change is also reduced to time as motion.
In mechanics one concludes that all the processes of nature can be reduced to motions. Why not time? The time taken for any motion is the period of that motion. Because clocks are moving devises clocktime is just the comparison of one movement to another. Because of the motion theory of time time really does not exist. It is just our relation of one motion to another.

We apprehend time only when we have marked motion. But not only do we measure time by motion but we measure motion by time, they define each other. This seems to imply a equivalence. A clock measures time and it is assumed that time exists without clocks. Everything that experiences time is a kind of clock and nothing that is not a clock does not experience time. So every thing is a clock.
When we say we measure motion by time what we really mean is that we are comparing one motion to another. So we do not measure motion by time but motion by motion. A quantity of motion is the measure of the same. There is no way to measure motion except by motion.
This is actually true for all quantities. A quantity of matter is the measure of the same. A quantity of energy is the measure of the same. A quantity of space is the measure of the same. When something stimulates a balance we call it mass, when we can extend a ruler thru a space we call it distance, when something heats a thermometer we call it energy...That is we usually measure a thing by a quantity of the same. We measure mass by mass, we measure distance by distance, we measure heat by heat...

Now the subject of time measurement is motion. If we measure time by motion it must be motion. If the quantities we measure with our instruments is to be the subject of our measurements. Until we can find some other quantity to measure we will have to take time as motion, defacto.

If as Einstein said "Time is what clocks measure." What do clocks measure? A clock is a machine, a device, a instrument, a construction of parts to a certain end. Is time inherent somehow in the construction? Configuration? That I do not believe because there's so many variations on clock design. There is nothing within a clock that generates time and this is consistent with are experience of time as a external quantity. A clock however as it is configured is nothing, does nothing, measures nothing until it is set in motion, until a external force is added that sets it into operation. So what clocks measure is not time but forces and if time is what clocks measure then time is a force or forces! Time is a force!

The Time-Motion Equivalence Principle:

Motion theory of time hypophysis; Time is motion.


What is important from this analysis or any analysis of the operation of any clock is that time (the measurement) depends on motion. Matter in motion determines both space and time! Or at least the geometry of space and the chronomitry of time. Motion is the link that connects space and time. Motion requires both space and time. Unless we could find some way to define physical space and/or physical time without recourse to motion the two will be inexplicably connected. This also indicates that motion is not really a derived term since it is used to set the parameters of fundamental notions. When you start defining time by motion you make time motion or a kind of motion weather it is truly a motion or not. But it is no coincidence that time is motion.

Motion is the concept that connects space and time. It is impossible to conceive of motion without both space and time. Is space-time a motion? They cannot be separated when considering motion. If they cannot be separated they must be interrelated. If they are interconnected there must be a physical interconnection. Since Einstein it has been known that space and time very with motion. Space and time therefore cannot be independent of matter in motion. Motion as a physical process must somehow be in physical contact with space and time. Physical things only make contact with physical things. Therefore space and time must be physical entities. If a physical connection exists one must wonder what is the nature of this physical connection? The only (known) common connection between motion, space and time is gravitation. Gravitation is a field in space, it drives the motion of bodies and it has been shown to effect time dilation. Gravitation is the common connection.
If we measure time by motion by the use of clocks how do we measure motion because we certainly aren't using time. This means that what we are really doing is making comparisons of one motion to another. And the concept of time really becomes unnecessary. In effect we are only comparing one motion to another where the concept of time acts as a intermediary, essentially a mathematical concept. Time cannot at the same time be measured by motion and the measure of motion. We cannot take time as a fundamental notion even if we wanted to because it is impossible to measure time without motion. Motion is the fundamental notion.

Under the motion theory of time motion must be taken as a primitive undefined term replacing time. The expression v=d/t must be taken as a expression of two motions one compared to the other. Where the motion in the t variable is a standard unit of motion/time. What you actually have is motion defining itself by the use of clock motion which is the standard. Therefore it must be admitted that motion is a fundamental quantity. Really what we call time is really motions and comparisons of motions. When I see the expression T=D/V I see time being expressed as a mass moving with a velocity thru a distance. And that is a motion.
Given a motion such as a vibration in a string, the string will be marked in segments, 1, 2, 3, 4, that when the vibration reaches a particular segment, segment 1 equals time one, segment 2 equals time two etc. We see that motions can serve as there own chronometers. This is our clock. The shape of the string can be described by some equation say y=f(x) at t=ta. But the reverse is also true that motions define time. Really only the motion exists.

We see that the time variable can be omitted. It is not required. This is strong evidence that time = motion. Time is the number of motion. Time has a number because velocity is a quantity and quantities have numbers. Every motions numbers can be compared, this is time a comparison of motions. Time is a motion but it is a rate of motion. Time is a rate. It becomes a rate when one is compared to another.


Because time is motion and motion is a form of energy time is a form of energy.

T = E

So we no longer just have E=MC2, not just one relation of one fundamental parameter to another but we have added another. Now we also know that time is energy. Perhaps this energy can be harnessed.


A mechanistic explanation of the properties of time. Many of the properties of time can be explained in terms of motion. Time becomes a physics of motion which is well understood. It can be explained wholly in terms of motion, there is no need to recourse to a hypothetical dimension of time, or the transformation of such a dimension to effect local time. We do not need any meaning for time apart from motion. If time is motion then all the properties of motion are properties of time and vis versa. If motion could be stopped then time could be stopped. And I do not mean relative motion. With the proper technology objects can be frozen in time. Of course such objects disappear from or plane of view I believe.

Time is relative because motions are relative. The relativity of time is just the relativity of motion.


Many notions of physics are not physics. Many of our most basic and core ideas are notoriously difficult to define. How do things exist? Where did they come from? How do things change? If things are constantly changing how are they the same things? The same and yet different? Are things one or are they many? What is substance? What is space? What is time? What is energy? Many a physicist will tell you that he doesn't have to understand such concepts he only has to be able to define them. Unfortunate for many physical concepts they cannot be defined exactly or even roughly. It is not good enough to say "I cant define them but I know them when I see them." Not if what you are practicing is exact science. How can you have exact science built on such weak foundations?

Consider time and space, traditionally two of the most important of concepts of physics. There has been no true theory of time and/or space. No physical explanations of them. Having no explanations both have had to reside as metaphysical theories. Really as nothing more then metaphysical phantoms, primarily apprehension of the mind alone. Not truly physical and therefore incapable of physical analysis. To me it is intolerable that such important physical notions should have been disposed of.

Of course the reason why time and space have remained metaphysical notions is obvious. Both have the same surreal properties. Both appear to be immaterial. They cannot be handled, weighed, felt or observed. They appear to be nothings, fictions unreal and immaterial. As nothings both are uncreatable and indestructible. Both are invisible and incorporeal. Except to reason to are hardly real, beholding them as if in a dream. One inalienable property of any thing is that it be, that it occupy space, that it be felt, be observable. But that which has no mass, no weight, no feeling, no taste, no sound, can it exist? Can it be? It is impossible to prove time is motion because it is like saying time is time. Some physical notions are so basic that they can only be accepted by there shrewdness.



In this section I intend to demonstrate that what we call time is simply a manifestation of the force of gravity. That is, I will give a definition of time by what causes it and how it operates. This new explanation of time will itself suggest a alternate theory of motion. Thus this section is both a treatise on time and a alternate theoretical development of motion.



Does the notion of absolute time still exist? Is it still viable? Having completely yoked time to clocks I find somewhat of a paradox. If you define time by clocks your definition acquires all the failings of any earthly container, all the weakness of the flesh, all the foibles of mortality. The flesh is weak. To have a good definition of time you need a good clock. But what is a good clock? If you have a bad clock a bad definition will almost certainly result. The idea of good and bad clocks of course is a hold over from Newtons concept of absolute time. Where every event had a absolutely correct time. A good clock was a clock that corresponded to that time. While we have abandoned the idea of absolute time we have remained saddled with the concept of good time. Of course good-time is nonsense or at least I don't know how to define it. Good and bad time is only consistent with Newtonian physics not Einsteinian physics. It has been difficult to divorce our selves from many of these old conceptions. Because we don't even notice that they cling to us. Human beings are still plagued by the superstitions of the past how much more of antiquated concepts. There is no good time or bad time or right time or wrong time.

Of course you will never know the good from the bad, what definition will you use to choose? Time becomes a contradiction when you base it on judgement. The best we can have is a agreed upon time. We set our clocks so the velocity of light is c, if we set our clocks so the velocity of light is c it is inevitable that the velocity of light will always be c. Is the velocity of light c or do we make it c by the chronomitry of our clocks?

All clocks have to be set, they have to be calibrated, they have to be coordinated. What if we could create a clock that was not effected by motion. So called a perfect clock. For such a clock one must ask, what are the laws of physics then? What is the velocity of light? This kind of clock can be constructed. Its period is not relative to motion. It is simple a mathematical fiction using the Lorenz contraction . Its time will be different but in sync with a clock in a higher gravitational field. The thing is the clock in the higher gravitational field will be calibrated so that it reads c for the velocity of light. The lower clock will read a increased velocity for light. Which is right? So the velocity of light is not truly constant but variable.

Physics depends upon the clock you choose. Thus Newtonian physics is correct if you use a relativistic clock and Einsteinian physics is correct if you use a Newtonian clock. It is odd that each would require the others kind of clock. They complement each other. Newtonian time is defined such that it was supposed the speed of light varied, Einsteinian time has time where the speed of light does not vary. The former problem was that Newtonians were trying to use a Newtonian clock. Good science, bad clock. Of the two kinds of clocks which is right? Which is the correct time? Both and neither of course. You might as well ask, "Which path does the electron take?"

With such a clock I was able to obtain varying velocities for the speed of light. The speed of light is not constant. This discovery negated Einsteins second postulate. From the negation it is possible to construct a anti physics. A contradictory physics. Just as it was possible to develop contradictory geometies by negating the fifth postulate so too can we negate Einstiens second postulate, the constancy of velocity of light. You can either derive relative time, relative mass, relative distance from the absolute motion of light or you can derive absolute time, absolute mass, and absolute distance from the relative motion of light with neither being right or wrong so it is possible to construct various scientific paradigms with neither being right or wrong! If you find such things interesting.

Given two clocks in a gravitational field at rest of identical construction if you drop one it will remain synchronized with the stationary clock for as long as it falls. That is, They will remain in phase (simultaneity-clocks are simultaneous or in phase if they appear to pulse at the same rate from boths frame of reference) and at the same frequency (time dilation). There are no relativistic transformations from the motion. This shows that time dilation is not relative to motion but too energy. The energy does not change because it is only being converted from potential to kinetic energy. The two clocks remain in sync because they remain at the same energy level.

Frequency=time Dilation,
wavelength=space dilation,
amplitude=energy dilation.

Relative transformations require absolute changes in energy. And while a clock falls from a height the energy is not changed it is only transformed form potential to kinetic energy. This shows that potential energy also causes time dilation not just kinetic energy. The overall energy does not change. This is why clocks vary in a gravitational field. Time like motion is a vector quantity it not only depends on the quantity but also the direction. All that matters is absolute changes in energy and the direction they move.
Falling clocks, measuring rods, weights, remain Galilean reference bodies because for them no gravitational field exists, they are not effected by gravitational time dilation under the same conditions. This also shows that it is not motion that is the dominant source of time dilation but gravitation.


You may wonder does the velocity of light equal c for the falling clock as it does for the stationary clock since they run at the same time but are in different motions? Because they keep the same time but one is moving and the other is not they cannot possible record the same velocity from a source of light. This means that the velocity of light is not constant!!

Let us analyze what is happening. We know while the two clocks are in sync they are not truly in sync because one is experiencing greater gravitational force since it has fallen to a lower gravitational position. The lower the position the greater the gravitational force and the greater the gravitational effects. The stationary clock records the velocity of light as C with a frequency n because let us say we have calibrated that clock to be set at a rate just so that result is experienced. Say we have another clock right next to it set in the exact precise way. The clocks are in sync. They are also at a high altitude so that one clock can be released and various experiments can be preformed.

Now the one clock falls the other remains stationary. By sending pulses of light between the two we determine that they appear to remain in sync relative to each others frame of reference. Now we take a beam of light and point it downward so that it passes both the falling clock and the stationary clock. Both measure its velocity. Both come up with identical readings. How can this be. We know they are not truly running at the same rate because of varying gravitational forces. The only explanation is that the velocity of light increases as it falls. The falling clock rate also increases as it falls. The greater the gravitational force the faster a clock runs, its periods are shorter.

So the result is that in direct proportion light and clocks fall at the same rate equalizing each other so that the velocity of light appears to be constant. This could not happen if the velocity of light did not actually vary! Light falls at the same rate as everything else in a gravitational field! Only the frequency will be changed. So light is accelerated and decelerated and such as that. Light is accelerated thru a gravitational field just like any other particle! The velocity of light is not constant!

If energy is equivalent to mass then it must be subject to gravitation just like mass. Light must not only bend in a gravitational field it must fall in a gravitational field like every thing else. There cannot be two kinds of motion one for energy and one for mass, one relative and one absolute?

This brings to completion Galileo's thesis of the uniformity of falling bodies. All bodies fall at the same rate including light. Of course the velocity of light can only be expressed in reference to time and clocks and using a Einsteinian clock (relative one) the velocity of light will always appear constant. But we do not always have to use a Einsteinian clock. We could use a Newtonian (absolute clock) and then will wind up with many varying velocities for light. The velocity of light is purely arbitrary. It depends purely on the clock chosen to measure its velocity.


Einstein two postulates, the principle of relativity and the constancy of the velocity of light, actually serve as a definition of time, that is as a calibration for setting clocks. Making the velocity of light constant is the same as saying the only clocks that record the velocity of light as c are correct. This serves as a calibration of clocks. Only such clocks will be accepted as correct. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Only clocks that record a velocity for light of c are correct therefore only the velocity c for light can ever be recorded.


Light is a clock. In fact every particle is a clock. Actually every particle in motion is a clock and since every particle is in motion every particle is a clock. All particles are clocks! That is if time is motion. To the physicist any stable vibration is a clock. Every quantity can be reduced to one of time. You see this in met achromatism, a change in color due to a change in temperature. Since heat is time you could make color changes a function of the time. Frequency is just variation in time dilation thus the spectrum of frequency is just a spectrum of time dilation. Frequency is just the comparison of one time dilation to another.

The time dilation or frequency of a particle changes with the motion. This is the same as the Doppler shift for light color. If a frequency was so many per second this would be its rythem or time. Changes in that frequency indicate changes in both energy and the time dilation of a body. Basically all electromagnetic radiation is a kind of a clock with the frequency playing the part of the length of the period. As light falls in a gravitational field its frequency is increased, IE its clock runs faster, or as it rises its frequency is decreased.

That time has direction can also be demonstrated by the Doppler effect. Pulsars are superbly accurate clocks. Being masses they can also be in motion. The timing of a pulsar can be effected by its motion. The pulse rate is increased when moving toward a observer and decreased when moving away. Thus time dilation is a extension of the Doppler effect. This is because time dilation is frequency and frequency is subject to the Doppler effect. Since the Doppler effect is dependent on direction then so too must be time dilation dependent on direction.

Every particle is a wave, every wave has a frequency, every frequency is a clock. Are all particles clocks because they are waves. Or are all particles waves because they are clocks? This of course makes time a micro property of particals. It is ridicules to believe that such fundamental properties as time or space could have been associated apart from material bodies or particals. Every property is a particle property.


There is a connection between time and energy just as there was a connection between electricity and magnetism. In 1820 Oersted discovered that when a electric current flows thru a wire a magnetic field is set up, conversely Faraday discovered that when a magnetic field is set up a electric current will be induced in a wire. Similarly when a clock is heated it appreciates time dilation and if you could induce time dilation artifacts would heat. This may be possible and a way to generate power. If a moving compass needle was sufficient to connect magnetism and electricity then a moving clock hand is sufficient to connect time and energy. Thus it is apparent that energy can be converted into time (dilation) and therefore time should be able to be converted into energy.

this means,
T = E

This shows a undeniable connection between energy and time just as a undeniable connection was made for electricity and magnetism. It means that time is a form of energy! Time is motion, motion is energy therefore time is energy! Time dilation is therefore a relation of energy and there is a form of time dilation for every form of energy.

There are not two forms of time dilation but many more.

(i) Mechanical time dilation.
(ii) Electrical time dilation.
(iii) Thermal time dilation.
(iv) Radiant time dilation.
(v) Gravitational time dilation.
(vi) Kinetic time dilation.
(vii) Potential time dilation.
(viii) Chemical time dilation.

There may be more.

Time dilation is caused by varying the energy levels of clocks. And there are many ways to vary the energy of clocks. For these reasons time dilation should not be analyzed according to motion but according to energy and specifically changes in energy.

Actually we don't want a Lorentz type equation based on velocity we want one that is based on energy. But I don't know how to formulate it.

Because the energy varies according to various frames of reference the time also varies. To obtain different frames of reference requires energy. This makes it unlike Einstein relativity where values just only seem to exist in relation. These are real values that can only be appreciated by real expenditures of energy.
The difference between the Earth and the moon is not just a relative value. To get to the moon requires a hell of a lot of energy. If you want to appreciate that reference frame you will have to expand that energy. This moves physics away from the relative back to the absolute. Reference frames, they're energy, are absolute. Different reference frames require different energies. So what relativity really means was that we exist at different energy levels! That's what's relative.

Frequency, wavelength, velocity, period, amplitude, all the properties of any particle are interconnected and interrelated by a common denominator - energy.

All these attributes appear to be functions of the energy. These of course are all reminiscent of Planks constant, Time is the rate at which energy and matter interact.


The measurement of any time requires generally a acceleration, I mean something must set a body in motion. Accelerations require a force, time is a acceleration, IE motion, therefore time is a force! All time dilation therefore is not the result of motion but the result of variations in the gravitational force surrounding a object.

The variations in time modulate just like variations in a force field. In fact directly proportional to the force of gravity. This suggests that time is a force like gravity. Since we have no notion of any other force like gravity except gravity we should accept that time is gravity. This is because time is gravitation. Motion dilation is a subdivision of gravitational time dilation. Motion dilation must be explained it terms of gravitational time dilation. Gravitational time dilation is the cause of motion dilation.

If time is a force and forces are accelerations then time is a acceleration.

Time = acceleration

The energy of any body varies with its motion.

If t=f then, time =s force. t=mxa and time =s mass times the acceleration. A change in the force changes the acceleration. An increase in the force causes a increase in the acceleration. A increase in acceleration decreases the oscillation period. Therefore an increase in the force causes time to run faster. Time also varies with the square of the distance just like gravitation does.

Or something like that.

Since time is a force it should be possible to express time as a force in equations. Every time a time variable (t) appears it should be able to substitute it for the force of gravity. Or analogously since time is energy it should be possible to express time as a unit of energy. We would not say 15 billion years have gone by since creation we would say 20 trillion units of this energy has been expended. We may find out the universe has 100 trillion of these units therefore it would be one fifth thru its cycle. So the universe would be one fifth old. Time only exists in proportion.


It will become obvious after I demonstrate a new theory of motion later that motion is a subdivision of the greater concept of gravitation. It is totally dependent on gravitation and specifically on gravitons. Because time is motion if motion is a property of gravitation then time becomes a property of gravitation. Time=motion, motion=gravitation, therefore time=gravitation. The cause of time is gravity, the effect of gravity is time. Just as gravity envelopes us time envelopes us. All properties of gravitation are properties of time and vis versa. What drives time is clocks, what drives clocks is motion, what drives motion is gravitation therefore what drives time is gravity. Gravitational time dilation and motion time dilation are really the same effect and are caused the same way. Both are caused by variations in the gravitational field.

Motion is energy, energy is a form of mass, so motion produces mass, the greater the motion the greater the mass, the greater the mass the greater the field strength, variances in field strength are time dilation, therefore the mechanism behind motion dilation is gravitation. All kinetic time dilation is gravitational time dilation because all motion is motion thru a gravitational field and thru a range of energy levels. Special time dilation (as given in special relativity) does not exist because special motion does not exist. In special relativity the direction does not matter. In gravitational time dilation it has to be considered.

Since time equals motion/gravitation all the properties of gravitation are properties of time.

(I) Time varies in direct relation to the strength of gravity. The stronger the gravity the faster the time.

(II) Motion is only defined in a gravitational field therefore time is only defined in a gravitational field. (III) Since motion is a vector quantity time is a vector quantity.

If time =gravity then time is a sensation of gravity. This is what I mean when I say time is a gravitational effect. There are several gravitational effects.
Weight is the most obvious one, inertia, and time. At first I though that weight=inertia=time but this was wrong. They are of course all connected but each is a particular sensation of a different aspect of the force of gravitation. The first difficulty is "How can so many various sensations be generated from the same stimulus?" One could ask the vary same question about electro magnetic radiation. Indeed we seem to experience a wealth of sensations from a poverty of stimulus. Since there are only four of them. For each is felt in a different way. Weight is felt at rest in a gravitational field. Inertia is felt while in motion in a gravitational field. Time is a pure experience of force alone. For example, in free fall say in orbit around the Earth we understand our weight to be zero yet we still experience time. So time cannot be weight. The same holds true for inertia. If one of these is varying then the others are also varying in exact proportion. The relationship of time to weight and force indicates that time should be able to be expressed as derived units, Because time is gravity and gravity is a force it should be able to be expressed as units of force. But I do not know what these units would be.

The rate of time depends on the gravitational force which in turn depends on the mass of the related bodies. Which in turn depends on the amount of energy they posses. Rates of time are different for different masses with different energy levels. A flea does not experience time at the same rate as a elephant.

If you could change the time of a mass you would change its mass. This may allow for perpetual motion.

Time cannot be warped by gravity because it is gravity. In this sense gravitational time dilation does not exist.


Time dilation depends completely on the energy and mass of a clock that records it. Since energy/mass varies with the position of a body in a gravitational field and the direction of motion in that field time is shown to be a vector quantity. Time is a vector quantity. Because time is motion and motion is a vector quantity time is a vector quantity. Just as a proper description of motion must include direction so too does a proper description of time require direction.


We know time changes with motion But we may well ask, "How does time know how to do this?" This appears to be another sticky action at a distance. Actually it is a property of gravity and everything associated with gravity appears to be a action at a distance. If you have a action at a distance problem it would pay to start looking at gravity.

A change in the mass/energy of bodies alters the surrounding gravitational field which in turn alters time. We know from the equivalence principle the motion, IE inertia is equal to gravity. This can only imply that,

time = motion and motion = gravity therefore time = gravity.

Time is a effect of gravitation like weight or inertia. Because time = motion then it is inevitable that the perception of time will vary with motion. Every observer has his own peculiar energy level. Change the energy level and you change the frame of reference. You also change the apparent motions. So it is not motion that occurs but only changes in energy levels. A different energy level and the motion seems faster or slower.

There are more then two forms of time dilation. For every kind of energy transfer there is a kind of time dilation. If motion can cause time dilation then so should any and every other kind of energy since energies are interchangeable. Heat causes time dilation. Heat causes expansion, variations in length cause clocks to run at various periods. Generally the greater the temperature the slower the period. This is because heat is actually a form of motion. The bigger something is or the more massive the slower it will vibrate given a constant source of energy. This is also true of mass increases with energy. The more energy the slower something vibrates. Therefore the greater the mass/energy the slower the clock.

According to the kinetic theory of heat the hotter a body is the more the molecules within it vibrate and the greater the heat the greater the amplitude each molecule vibrates. It is by this greater amplitude that heat is conducted in a solid. This is similar to varying the length of a pendulum, the greater the length, IE amplitude, the greater or longer the period. So the greater distance thru which a atom must vibrate because of its heat the longer the period of oscillation. Molecular clocks operate the same way as regular clocks. Or in a different way of thinking what is true on the molecular level will always carry over onto the macroscopic level. Thus microcosm and macrocosm are in harmony with regards to time.

So why when you heat something up do processes run faster. Shouldn't change which is a kind of time be in relation to time? Change, processes etc. require molecular interactions. Undoubtedly when the amplitude of molecules is increased the statistical probability of interactions must increase. Therefore generally molecular changes increase when you heat them up. So change is not time, at least not molecular change since it is not harmonious with time. And for this reason it has been falsely believed that with energy increases time speeds up not slows down. Chemical processes may be misleading in the notion of heat and time. We cannot think of process change as time. If processes are quicker then we think of time having speeded up. But this is just a chemical anomaly.

Hot clocks run slow, cold clocks run fast. Hot clocks are more massive, cold clocks less massive. The greater the mass the slower the clock.

Potential energy. Just as there was no difference in inertia mass vs. Gravitational mass there is no difference in how energy is acquired by a clock.
If the clock obtains more energy in any way, be it heat, position etc., it will experience time dilation. There is no difference in regards to time dilation with regards to potential or kinetic energy. Energy is energy.


In the traditional analysis of the twin paradox no though is given to the variations in gravitational force as two twins separate, this is because it is common in physics to neglect gravitation because its effect vary at every instant. It is time to put gravitation back into physics! You need three reference frames for the twin paradox. Each twin and a control reference frame.
Twins inn different gravitation fields also age at different rates.


The speed of light as a physical constant is not a fundamental property of nature. It is arbitrary, a quirk of time dilation, it just happens to be. There is nothing particularly significant about it. The importance of it was that it illuminated the fact that time was relative and thus a relation. For every constant there must be a compensating relation. Because the constant velocity of light turns out to depend on a relativistic effect (time dilation) this means that it also must be a relativistic effect. If something is constant then something else must vary. For light it is time.

Constants are more the result of the fundamental parameters we choose then the physical properties of nature. Choose one set of fundamental parameters get one set of constants, choose another set of fundamental parameters and get an alternate set. Just like alternate geometries. The human mind is always looking for landmarks on which to anchor itself. We require constants as a frame of reference. So constants are mental properties more then physical ones!


How many kinds of clocks are there and what is there functioning. Are all clocks relative or is it possible to make a perfect clock, ie, one that is not effected by motion. Let us say from a particular reference point we had a clock and so calibrated it such that for changes in motion we altered its period according to the Lorenz contraction in reverse proportion. The result would be a clock that was not effected by motion. It would not be relitive. It would be absolute. At least in relation to a particular frame of reference.

Any observer can work out how much time dilation does or would occur in relation to another body. The calculation can be made if he knows the precise velocity and trajectory.

We could in effect extend the area over which such time is measured and effective thus creating a zone of absolute time. Time would not be relative to any effects motion or gravitational. I call such a time zone a extended clock and such absolute keeping of time may be beneficial. It is certainly possible. In a sence every clock is extended in the sence that its time is absolute over its effective range.

How to make such a clock? The Lorentz contraction gives us a way of calculating exactly the relative time of other positions and motions. We can thus compensate for motion mathematically . If we know our motion then we can recalculate for any time dilation. We can synchronize clocks according to

We can do a similar thing for gravitational time dilation for clocks at rest in a gravitational field and combine the two effects if necessary for clocks in motion in a gravitational field.

This in effect makes a clock that is absolute to a particular frame of reference. Using such a clock its period of duration varies. We can use any time keeping method we desire. Since there is a absolute kind of time this also implies that there is a absolute kind of space and mass too. Which means we can define a universe which is Newtonian if we liked and it would be valid.

Consider two clocks in a gravitational field that are extended, ie, sharing the same time. Lets say the higher clock is set such that it records the velocity of light as c. Now consider the lower clock. For this clock light gains velocity as it falls. The lower clock records the velocity of light as C+ gravitational acceleration. Indeed all light velocity measured by this clock will also be the same and all greater then c. This is because this clock has been set to run slower then it would normally at its particular energy level. But it runs at the exact same rate as the higher clock. We don't find a thing wrong with its measuring. So which is right? Is the lower clock right and does light have various speeds? Or is the upper clock right and the speed of light is constant? Here are clocks running at the same speed that record various velocities for the speed of light. It is important to remember that extended clocks while I say they run at the same speed or frequency they are not synchronous. If light pulses are exchanged between them they will not be harmonious. They are only mathematically synchronized not physically synchronized.

This experiment introduces into physics the idea of extended time. A artificial kind of absolute time. A universal time that everybody who can communicate with each other and thus synchronize by extension they're clocks. So we now have several kinds of time.
Extended time- Extended time reintroduces into physics a notion of absolute time. Since it is not depended on anything. Using such a clock we can synchronize over great distances a absolute time scale. We can use such a time as any other. We can call such a extended radius of time a extended clock.

In a way every clock is a extended clock because it generates a spacial region of time over its length although such lengths are usually small. But it is easy to see how they can be increased arbitrarily.

(I) Relative time- Clocks that start off synchronized but change as they are moved.
(II) Absolute time- Keep by extended time, clocks that operate without regard to motion.

Given various kinds of time one may well ask, "Which is the true time?" Neither one is any less consistent.

It thus appears there are two valid physics, one Newtonian the other Einsteinian. In one the velocity of light varies in the other it is constant. There is obviously a duality working here. This means that Newtonian physics is just as true as relativity. When you take the speed of light as a variable. Depending on the kind of time you choose.

Physicist like to think that physics is the most fundamental science but a great deal of physics depends on the theory of dimensions. Time is defined by what clocks we accept as accurate. It is really a state of mind. How dimensions are chosen, whether they are relative or absolute is completely arbitrary. Such things as the velocity of light, spacial coordinates, distances, time...One can use any coordinate system one liked, nature does not favor any one. Nature has no knowledge of time.

Actually its takes not 4 coordinates to determine any event but 5. You not only have to specify the coordinates but what kind of co-ordinates they are. This can and is done now by specifying the velocity of light. Which both selects the fundamental dimensions of physics , like time distance and mass and governs the choice of instrumentation. The theory of dimensions will decide the topic of physics. Whether you decide that the theory of dimensions is physics or not is arbitrary.


Motion time dilation is just a form of gravitational time dilation. Time dilation varies with the force of gravity, the force of gravity varies with the mass, the mass varies with the motion, therefore motion dilation is actually the result of gravitational dilation. For this reason the direction of the motion becomes important. Because mass/energy varies with position. So whether a object is receding or preceding also has a effect on its time dilation. For this reason gravitational equations will have to be used to describe motion dilation. The Lorenz contraction is not accurate or completely accurate. .

Einstein had two different kinds of time dilation because he still had two different kinds of motion,

(I) inertia
(II) gravitational

although he had shown by the principle of equivalence that gravity=inertia he failed to recognize that to two were actually one. Greater motion causes greater energy, greater energy causes greater mass, greater mass causes greater gravity, greater gravity causes contraction, contraction causes heat, heat is vibration, vibration is motion, motion causes greater energy....A change in any vibration causes a change in time by way of gravitational force. Gravitons are the medium of the dissipation of time. Motion, gravity, heat, oscillation and vibration are all gravity and they are all time. Only things that can be oscillated can be heated, only things that can be heated can experience time. Time is a material property. Things that cannot be oscillated cannot experience time. Things that cannot experience time we cannot experience in time! (Dark matter/tacions?)


For any vibrating body we know that the mass varies with the energy and the bodies in a higher gravitational plane have greater energy of position. Therefore the period of a vibrating body is proportional to the mass/energy and the greater the mass the slower the period, the lessor the mass the faster the period. For this reason clocks in a stronger gravitational field run faster then ones in a weaker gravitational field. Strong-fast, weak-slow.

The elasticity constant remains constant, it is not effected by relativistic changes in energy. If it was we could not use wight scales to measure variances in gravitational force by use of gravimeters. To determine the period of a vibrating body, IE its frequency, is the same as determining its time dilation. It goes back to motion, time=motion, motion=velocity, for vibrating bodies velocity=frequency. If time is motion then its measurement must be comparable with motion. Every object is at its own particular time dilation.


One minor flaw in Einstein theory of relativity is his rate of clocks in gravitational fields. Specifically Einstein states that clocks run slower the greater the gravitational strength. This is wrong. The rate of gravitation has a direct relation on the rate of time. A clock in a strong gravitational field will oscillate faster then one in a weak gravitational field and one in no gravitational field will not oscilate at all! The period of a clock is directly related to its length. A clock in a strong gravitational field is shorter then one in a weak gravitational field, it will run faster. Assuming that time is a force,

t = time
m = mass
a = acceleration
g = gravity

we see that time varies directly to relative mass and/or relative gravitational strength. So the period varies directly to either. What becomes apparent is that the critical element of time dilation is not motion, not gravitation, etc. but energy. The rate of a clock is directly related to its energy, the greater the energy the slower a clock will run. For this reason clocks fall under the rules of thermodynamics and some new thermodynamic rule should be created to encompass this fact.

Of course the precise formula for time is a hell of a lot more complicated then this. This is only general. Since motion is a vector quantity it must be remembered that time should also be a vector quantity. So whether a objects velocity is positive or negative, IE, moving away or positive, moving toward, alters the time dilation. Not just the velocity is important. There are two kinds of motion, up and down or more importantly motion where there is a change in a bodies energy and motion where the bodies energy is not altered. Down constant, no dilation, up change in energy and a experience in dilation.



Because time is a form of energy some or all of the properties of energy will be properties of time. Indeed I believe the entire science of time could become a subdivision of the science of energy, thermodynamics. Proving an arrow of time is equivalent to proving the second law of thermodynamics. Not because of the second law of thermodynamics demonstrates a arrow of time but because the arrow of time demonstrates the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Therefore there will always exist some quantity in physical processes like entropy that always increase with time.

To know what causes the arrow of time you must know what causes time.


In Newtons mechanics, in Quantum mechanics and in Relitivity you can consider phenomina as being able to run in eithor direction as regards to the motion of time. Thus in a sense time should be reversible. Unfortunately it doesnt work in the real world. This weird state of affairs s called the irreversible paradox. We should be able to reverse time but we cant even on the smallest scale.

To prove the asymmetry of time we only have to find one true example of a nonreversible phenominon. The problem being which processes are truely irreversable. Since we now know that time is gravity there should be some phenomenon associated with gravity that is irreversible if time is irreversible.

If something is at rest it stays at rest whether the time line is run forward or backward. But when things fall peculiarities appear. Things never fall up.
Things may move upward but they are not falling. Things only fall down. Gravitation is a asymmetric force, it is a pull and not a push. The asymmetric property of time is derived from the asymmetric properties of gravity.

Time depends on motion, motion depends on inertia, inertia depends on force, the important force governing motion is gravity, therefore some property of gravity must govern the arrow of time. Because time is a extension of gravity a fundamental force it shares some properties of gravity. The most important for the consideration of the arrow of time being the gravity is not a symmetrical force.

Gravity is a asymmetric force. But to prove the asymmetry of time we do not have to analyze fancy gravitational theorems. It can be done in a most elemental way.

Falling Man Experiment

The way up and the way down are not the same. There are two kinds of motion up and down and they are different.

A man is in an elevator either in a gravitational field or experiencing inertia. In his hand hangs a spring scale. From the scale hangs a weight. There are two possibilities,

(i) The weight stresses the spring
(ii) The weight does not depress the spring.

In case one the man can come to two conclusions,

(a) that he is accelerating,
(b) Or that he is at rest in a gravitational field.

In the case of number two he can assume he either is in free fall in a gravitational field or that he is experiencing no acceleration since the scale is not being extended.

Now consider the symmetry for these two experiments. Only for the first case is time symetrical. But consider case two. If time could be run backward instead of being in free fall his motion would be reversed. Instead of falling he would be moving upward. If he were moving upward his weight would be extended as the force of gravity operated on it. Thus were have discovered a irrevesable process. Because it cannot be extended. It will appear in freefall. A clear demonstration of irreversibility.

Therefore it is quite a easy to determining which way time is running in a movie projection. . Motion in a gravitational field is asymmetric! Time is asymmetric! Because gravity is a asymetric force.

Because the experiment can be carried out in relation to any phenomina we can consider all phenomena orientated to an arrow of time. This is because all phenonina exists in gravitational fields. Because they can either be converted to motion or are equivalent to motion there fore they must obey the laws of motion. All is motion. This notion the irreversibility of gravity, shows why some energy transformations are irreversable. Gravity is the compass that always points time into the future.

The falling man experiment implies a law such as the second law of thermodynamics. Because of its complete irreversibility physical processes will also have a irrevesable nature. We notice this and call it the 2nd law of thermodynamics.


The reason that quantum on a subatomic level seem to obey different laws then the laws of motion or the law of time is because quantums are operated on by different forces at that level. We know that the electric force because of its invertible polarity is completely reversable. Atomic processes are truely reversable if the only forse involved is electrical. For this reason some quantum processes are reversible and will not obey the second law of thermodynamics. For example, a electron orbiting a nucleus. It never winds down. Further such things as superconductivity appear to violate the second law. This is why there appears to be a fundamental difference in motion between the microscopic world and the macroscopic world where different forces dominate. Apparently there is not one kind of motion but as many kinds as there are forces. Therefore microscopic dynamics is not equivalent to macroscopic dynamics. In this sence there are micro laws and there are macro laws. Different rules will have to be worked out for each. Actually they have been.


Since time is a asymmetrical relation it should be no surprise like all asymmetrical relations that it is a ordering relation. Because gravity is asymmetrical the universe is asymmetrical, IE, ordered in time. Time is such a fundamental physical elemental that actually it is the very paradigm of order.


Most if not all the laws of nature can be restated in terms of time.

1: Every body continues at a uniform motion unless a force altered it.

IE, all bodies in equivalent energy states are synchronous with regards to time.

2: The acceleration produced by a force is directly proportional to the magnitude of the forse and the mass of the body.

IE, to every change of energy there is a time dilation. Basically time is relative to energy.

3: For every action there is a equal and opposite reaction.

IE, To every time dilation there is a corresponding time dilation everywhere else.


1: energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Time cannot be created or destoyed.

2: That is any closed system heat only flows from a hot region to a cold one. The direction of time flows only in one direction.

3: Absolute zero cannot be reached.

The cessation of time like the cessation of heat cannot be achieved for any body.

I doubt this one.


Actually the hypothosis that time is motion has already been advanced in the form of Einstiens Equivalence Principle. Einstiens Equivalence Principle states that: gravity = acceleration

This can be expressed as gravity = motion. If we accept that motion = time we must accept that time = gravity.


Even geometrical axioms can be reformulated in terms of time. Time has long been associated with geometrical concepts. Cyclic time, linear time, etc. Many aspects of time are regarded by geometric notions. IE, short space of time, intervals of time, etc. Whenever possible man has sought to subordinate the temporal dimension to the spacial dimension or spacial concepts. Such as space time.

Many geometric postulates tho have time like relations. For example,

Three point postulate: Space contains at least three non collinear points.

Time also has three segments, past, present and future.

People have been very perplexed about this from early times but they do not seem to be as perplexed about the three point nature of space.

The line point postulate: Every line is a set of points and contains at least two points.

Every segment of time has a beginning and a end.

A-B-C betweeness postulate: If point B is between points A and C then point B is also between C and A, and all three points are distinct and collinear.

The same holds trues for points in time.

Newtons physics closely parallels Euclids geometry and is obviously a extension of that geometry.



Originally space and time have been studied as if they were autonomous entities that exit independently. As such there existence was not seen as varying by any relation; absolute space absolute time. After all what connection or effect could corporal entities have on non corporal entities? But it was discovered that such relations must exist, and in precise mathematical relationships. So it has to be assumed that entities somehow affect space and time.

If space can interrelate with matter perhaps it is not non corporal but a thing. It is a thing like ,matter, or like energy. One day perhaps space will be seen as a energy field that surrounds us.

The most critical fact concerning space is not its properties but its genius. What causes space? I advance that space does not exist. Space is the result of particle interactions. Particles hit us and we see space. If the particles did not hit us we would not see space. Space is a relativistic effect. I call this notion quantum space. Space like time is not independent of physical things, they are the properties of physical things. This is fairly obvious when you consider that one universal property of matter is extension. If space is a property of matter then it is not independent. Space is a thing therefore,

space = matter
space = energy

Bodies do not have space that contains them. Space is a purely sensible subjective manifestation. People see space but what they are experiencing is energy, streams of energy. For this reason space can be considered truly a thing. But not the noncorporial thing we think it is.

Conversely to consider space as a material, real, physical entity has the immediate difficulty that space has no physical existence. It cannot be weighed, it cannot be contained, it cannot be heated, it cannot be separated, it cannot be condensed, cannot be isolated, rarified, objectified.... It cannot be operated on in any way. No scientific tests can be done on it. From the complete lack of objectification one would almost conclude that space does not exist. But we experience it. It is like color, we experience color but where does color exist? Space is not a idea that can exist separately from material reality.

We have been associating time to distance for along time. If were asked about a trip we might say it was long but we do not mean a long distance but along travel time. Distance is the meaning of potential energy. Distance becomes a form of energy. It is impossible to move any distance without expending energy. Distance is a form of energy. D = E Time and space are extremely closely interrelated concepts. We use space to measure time and time to measure space. It is difficult to think of one without the other. But they are utterly distinct ideas, each with very different properties.


Consider two objects separated by a distance. They remain at a constant distance. Now alter ones time dilation by changing its energy state. The distance between the two will change. Space from energy. The transformation we call motion. When you alter the energy level space appears to increase.

The same thing happens when electrons jump in there orbit. They do not move thru space the spacial relationship is just altered. Thus distance is not a matter of space but of energy. Distance becomes a function of energy. Distance and motion becomes only a change in energy. Space does not actually exist. All the exists in reality is the energy. If there is no distance this solves the action at a distance problem. From this we can no longer say every thing in the world has spacial extension, at best we can only say everything in the world experiences a spacial impression.

The curious thing about this is that both space and time are stimulated by the same quanta. Time and space are created simultaneously. This is no doubt why space and time are intermixed. They have the same causation.
But time is a different animal then space. A meter is a meter wherever you go. You can carry it with you and upon returning wherever you were the meter remains unaffected.
Clocks are a wholly different matter. Clocks retain a history of there variations, they will not coincide when returned to there place of origin. Relativity was based on the Lorentz contraction but what if the contraction is fallacious? After all we have no direct evidence of mass/space contractions as we do time. Masses are all local phenomena whereas time can be at a distance. There is a strong connection between mass and space just as there is a strong connection between time and energy. The flipside of mass is space and the flipside energy is time. Actually the only two real entities are mass and energy.


Why does space have various directions? One may as well ask why is there a up and down. Dimensions exist in perception only. Dimensions result from the attributes of particles. For every dimension there must be a corresponding attribute in a particle or a particle itself to account for a dimension. There are four know dimensions and there are four known force particles, coincidence?
Just as the time dimension was the result of gravitons the space dimension is the result of electromagnetism. For every dimension you need a corresponding partical. Force particals are vectors. And vectors have direction. Space is symmetric because some energy particles are symmetric. This is why you can move back and forth in space.


Think of space as a shell the surrounds you equally, like the shell of a nut. Wherever you go the shell follows you. The universe is such a shell. You carry your space along with you wherever you go. You dont move, your space around you varies.

The universe expands not into space ,the radius varies directly with the total energy. Since the universe is radiating gravitons it is losing energy. This loss of energy appears as expansion. The expansion of the universe is a purely relativistic effect. As the energy varies, the time dilation seems to vary, as the time dilation seems to vary, the distance seems to vary. This makes it appear as if the universe is expanding. The universe has not changed in size only in energy.

Creation started when graviton emission began. The universe, gravity, expansion, and time all stared at the same time and have the same cause. The one peculiarity of a universe which is a transference of energy, the expansion being caused by the loss of gravitons, the question arises if these gravitons do not go out into space, where do they go?



The history of physics is a history of theories of motion. Mechanics dominates the science of physics. There is in science few concepts older or more important then the concept of motion. By motion we mean a change of position. Any new theory of time would necessarily redefine the notion of motion. Any new definition of motion would alter our fundamental concepts of physics. A altering of our fundamental concepts of physics would indicate an alternate concept of the universe.

I divert from accepted understanding as concerns motion from the major premise of kinetic theory, the Quantification of motion should already have been a well established notion. But the adherence of the deriviation of motion from distance which like time is considered continuous, has prevented acceptance of such a obvious and important fact. A quantified motion will only be accepted when a quantified space has been demonstrate.


Physics is founded on the concepts of motion but what is motion? Motion needs gravity to define it. From relativity we know that motion causes time dilation. It follows from the reversal of a know effect that time dilation therefore causes motion. This means that motion is a relitivistic effect. Time dilation is caused by all kinds of changes in the energy states of a body. If motion is a change of time dilation then motions are peculiar changes in energy. Motion is not a thing things do but changes within a thing.
For every change in time dilation say by variations in energy that bodies reference frame will be altered. This will vary the reference frames time dilation. The observers in that reference frame will experience spacial Lorentz transformations and this will appear as motion. Viewers will perceive other reference frames as moving relative to there position. Thus a change of time causes a change of position. You are not actually moving your time is changing.

change time = change position

Time dilation causes apparent motion.

Time dilation is both space and motion.

What we call motion is just transformations of energy. For this reason motion is a thermodynamic process.

Motion depends on particles for it to be experienced. If motion is always completely dependent on particles then it is not independent. Motion as a independent parameter has gone the way of independent time and independent space. Because motion is a relativistic effect motion resides not in the body that appears to be in motion but the reference frame itself. For this reason the point of actions are reversed (action at a distance). There can be no action at a distance since motion is a relative ( local) phenomenon. Motion is squarely in the eyes of the beholder. For this reason motion is not in a body it is in us.

Energy transformations can only be perceived at the viewers location. Effects that appear to happen at a distance to the viewer really happen locally. For this reason there is no action at a distance.

In the standard conception of motion a body moves thru space. But isn't it just as valid to assume that space is moving thru bodies? And that bodies remain still? Do things move in space? Or does space move past things?


Since time = motion and since time was a fundamental concept this make motion a fundamental concept. It is not a derived concept as Newton envisioned.

Time is one of our perceptions of energy. Since motion is a form of energy we should be able to develop the notion of time from energy relations. This should already have been evident since the geometry of space time is determined by the motions of particles thru it. Space and time become dependent on motion. This is there peculiar connection.

Integrating time and space into the concept of motion it becomes apparent that physics can be constructed on just two fundamental notions, mass and energy which is really one. Since space and time are energies. A significant unification.


Distance is also defined by motion.

Motion is not only critical to a theory of time but also to any physical theory of space. Just as time is metered by the motion of events so is distance determined by the motions of objects thru space at varius velocities and times. Specifically currently we measure distance by the amount of time it takes light to traverse a specific region. Straight lines are physical properties only in as much as they are defined in a physical way. Such as the path of light which is a object in motion. Depending on how the object moves thru space determines the geometry of straight lines. I simply reverse Einstein notion, if time is relative to motion then motion is relative to time.

From this it should be obvious that time and space are inseparable from mass because they are forms of mass/energy.

Newton said acceleration = force, I am saying that acceleration = change energy. Not just changes of motion but all motions. Because motion is the result of particle exchanges all motion, the experience of motion is the result of continuous forces. No forces no motion. Motion is a force or the effect of force.


There are as many types of acceleration as there as particals that cause acceleration. There is only inertia when two partical work at cross purposes. Usually one of the forces is gravitation. Inertia then is the interplay of two forces. If so then if only one force were operating then no inertia effects would be felt. This we find in the case when only gravitational forces are present, as in free fall. Generally the only time inertia forces are felt is when one force operates against gravity or when a object resists gravity. If space were empty, truly empty, no forces present, then there would be no resistance and no inertia forces for a body moving in any way or in uniform motion or in acceleration. Inertia effects would vanish.

Without inertia effects motion as we know it would be impossible. And without inertia/motion time would not exist. Therefore our sense of time is connected to our sense of inertia. Therefore if we are experiencing inertia effects we can be sure we are experiencing time dilation also and vis versa.

A body acting under a single force does not feel the effect of that force. For example acceleration in a gravitational field. A body feels weightlessness, it does not experience inertia. The inertia effect is only felt when two forces operate. This means that inertia is a composition of forces. Inertia is a effect of the interplay of forces. This means that inertia is not a internal ubiquitous property of mass but a emergent property of a system of bodies and forses. Inertia is not a absolute, independent, internal property of bodies but a relative and dependent property just like all the other properties of physics. Inertia is the resistance of a body against the force of gravity.



That all the phenomenon of nature are the effects of particle exchanges.

Physical effects must have physical causes.

Relativistic- because it depends on effects that are relativistic.

Quantum- because the effects are the results of quantum exchanges. Our experience of reality is the confluence, the flow of quantums into our reference frame.

Event-Events are energy transfers.

All relative effects are quantum effects.

By making relative effects quantum effects it conjoins quantum mechanics and relativity into one science

Every moment in time, every event is signaled by a energy change. For every event there is a energy change. For every event there is a transfer of energy thus every event has a cause. Events are causal relations. Ultimately the cause of all events are quantum. All events are quantum events. They don't just happen particles make them happen. If there were no particles operating then no events would happen.


Relativistic effects are like distortions like the waviness in the atmosphere on a hot summers day. We do not see what we actually see but a distortion, distorted by energy. Energy distorts our perception. We think we see space, motion etc. but we really just see energy distortions.


For every force there is a corresponding force particle. Thus instead of f=ma, we have f= change energy. Thus for forces you can substitute partical energies. There are no feilds because there is no space. Feilds are only a ghost of a action. Lines of force are not active agents operating on a body to produce accelerations or motions. But instead are the paths that force particles traverse in there flight from one location to another. These paths and therefore space would be straight were it not for the effects of gravitons on the moving particals.

The discovery that all forces obey the same kinds of laws or there actions can be described by the same kinds of equations has lead some to presuppose that all forces are somehow interrelated and have a common origin. It is now easy to see that because all forces are propagated in the same way as particle emissions that the similarity results not from a common force but a common mechanism. Because each force has a separate partical associated with it the forces should be considered separate until or if every such particals can be shown to be convertible. I do believe one type of particle can be transmuted into another kind.


Since time is motion and motion is gravitation (principle of equivalence) and if gravity is caused by particle interactions then time is caused by particle interactions. Lets call these particles, chronitons. Since time = gravity it turns out that

chronitons = gravitons.

This is why it has been so hard to determine a cause for time.

Since time is a form of energy and since energy is quantified then time must be quantified. Time comes in packets, time moves in increments, time is not continuous, there are gaps in time. The amount of time corresponds to the smallest amount of energy that can produce motion. Time is processed in discrete units. Time seems continuous just like motion seems continuous but it is not. Time is not like points in time but like segments. Every segment of time is a piece of time. It has a beginning, middle and end because every motion has a begining , middle and end. The length of time is Planks constant.

If time dilates from motion and motion is a form of energy then time is a form of the energy,
time and dilations and such do not really depend on motion or position but absolute changes in energy. No change in energy no change in time dilation regardless of motion or position. No motion. This is because time is a function of the gravity, gravity is a function of the mass, mass is a function of mass/energy relationship which is relative. Actually time dilation is a function of the mass
The bigger something is the greater its time. The sun may not think it will burn for 20 billion years, to it may seem like two billion. I do not know if the planet seems to move faster with the increased velocity of time? But if time is speeded up so should every thing else.

Because mass determines the gravitational force what we really mean is

Because the gravitational mass is a function of the energy.

If you accept the relativistic quantum hypophysis then as regards to time the first question you ask is "What particle or particles can we associate to time?" Have we not yet discovered chroniotons or have we mislabeled them? What kind of properties should the chroniton have? What kind of particles are we looking for? Are there any known particles that are suitable candidates for the chroniton? Perhaps gravitons are not chronitons and we should look for a completely other force.

Because time is motion and because motion is mediated by a force and because force is mediated by a particle I begin by assuming that time is mediated by a force particle. And there are only 4 of these and only one general universal one. Since time appears to be general and universal I have to assume that gravity is the time particle. Since time is the force of gravity and since gravity is the abundance of gravitons chronitons=gravitons.

Actually because I feel time is equivalent to energy (because time dilation appears to be consistant with all forms of energy) any form of energy transfer would simulate our sensation of time. That is, any energy particle would stimulate the time dimension. It is just that gravity is the most consistant one we experience.

In quantum time what is important is not motion or distance or length... these can all be replaced buy one notion, energy. Clocks correspond to frames of reference. A clock is a frame of reference and as much as you alien yourself with it you are in that frame of reference. Just as every reference frame has a particle motion, a particular potential energy, particular temperature etc. so every reference frame has a particular energy. Actually reference frames can be in this way described by one number. Thus every reference frame can be assigned a energy value of level. Frames with the same energy level experience simultaneous time, and frames that experience simultaneous time are at the same energy level.


Action at a distance is not a real effect. No effects can be produced thru a distance, all effects are local.


Clocks have the same wave-mechanical duality as other bodies. They have a velocity, they have a wavelength, they have a frequency and they have a amplitude. The fundamentals for describing things in wave mechanics. Of course every micro property has a corresponding macro property and vis versa.

Time has some notions that correspond to notions of wave mechanics.

Phase = simultaneity
Frequency = time dilation
Wavelength = space
amplitude = energy

When you set a interval of a clock you are really setting or coordinating the period, IE, the time dilation of a clock. Its frequency. Time dilation corresponds to frequency.

Two important characteristics in setting a clock are setting its simultaneity, the exact moment in time it is and setting its period, the length of its mechanism. One measures epoch the other measures interval. We alter clocks to suit our convenience.

Take frequency for example, two observers measure the frequency of a beam of light they pass between them. If for each the frequency is the same then they have the same time dilation. Or consider phase, If they observe the same cycles at the same times, the wavelengths correspond at the same points in time, then they are in phase, they have the same simaltiety, Two observers can be operating at the same frequency but be out of phase as Einstein showed. If they are in phase then they share the same instant.

There is really nothing special of different about a clocks frequency or its phase. Except that we use clocks as a base or standard. No different then any other particle that has wave particle duality.

The expression
Force=#wavelengths / time
is really a comparison of two frequencies. Just as in the motion theory of time time was a comparison of two motions. Since anything can be used as a clock every thing and anything is a clock. You see that every particle has a frequency and a phase because every particle is in time and has its own time, own energy level.

When you stop thinking of time as a universal property you have to discover internal properties of quanta that correspond to these concepts. They are universal only in that all quanta have these properties. Properties of the universe ultimately must reside in the particles that make up the universe. This is why I often say the Universe has no properties. Only particles have properties. The universe only has substance, being. Substances have properties. You can never really experience the universe just substances.

In quantum mechanics the frequency of any wave function is a function of the energy. Frequency= energy/ Planks constant. Since frequency is time dilation we see that time dilation is a function of the energy. This means that time dilation and time itself is only dependent of the energy levels a object resides at. Time is a fuction of the energy! Since energy is defined by frequency and frequency by time we arrive at another equivalence, time energy equivalence.


But we already know this. Energy is time and therefore some form of energy must correspond to time. Changes in frequency imply changes in energy and vis versa.


When we talk a bout simultaneous time we really mean the now, the present, were every thing happens. For simultaneous time you really need more then one clock. Or for relative time for that matter. All clocks go at the same rate if they are of identical construction and have the same energy. Is your now the same as my now? Does everyones now happen simultaneously? How does the now happen? How do you get to the now and how can you get away from it?

Einstein define simultaneity by the signal theory of light. The concept of determining simultaneity by signals of light. This is close because we now know that time is dependent on particles namely gravitons therefore simultaneity is dependent on those signals. Without a exchange there is no time. Thus the meaning of simultaneity must be dependent on them. And the rate at which they are transferred. For two clocks to be simultaneous they must be at the same frequency and phase.


Kempler originated the concept of gravity He deduced the sun was the causal agent for the motion of the planets. He speculated that the sun produced its influence by emminating some kind of rays.

Here is how gravity works.

Gravitational bodies emit gravitons. Each time a particle is received alters the reference frame, that is that reference frames clocks run slower. As clocks run slower in a given period of time the spacial dimension changes and a body appears to be moving. Further as the time slows more particles are perceived to be received. This accounts for the inverse distance parameter. Gravity is just the exchange of particals. When a graviton hits you it appears as if a body has moved towards you. There is no action at a distance. Gravitation is within you not within the apparently moving body.

As clocks slow down due to increase of energy due to gravitons distances appear to be shorter thus gravity appears to be a force that contracts us.

more energy--clocks run slower--contraction
less energy--clocks run faster--expansion

This is how I deternineds this relation. Assume the universe is one unit wide to begin with and it takes one unit of time for light to cross this distance. So it is one light unit in distance. Now we lose energy and our clocks run faster. Light travels at the same pace, the size of the universe has not changed, but lets say instead of one we see three units of time transpire. We assume the speed of light is constant. Now the universe appears to be three light units across--a expansion. It is not the distance that has changed but our time dilation. So when clocks gain energy we perceive a contraction, when there lose energy we perceive a expansion.


Just as time= gravitational field space is the electro-magnetic field.


Space is a force! Space is not nothing it is pure force. Space does not exist out there, it exist as a property of particles, better yet as a relation between two particles. The interaction of these particles gives rise to the sensation of space. So space is a subjective experience. We call space empty but in fact it is full of fields. It is these fields that are space. Since there are mostly electro-magnetic fields I attribute the generation of space to electro-magnetic fields. Of course there are no real fields.


Constants are invariants that do not change under transformations of energy. Natures constants are nothing more then the constant properties of particles associated with the identical property of particles and there seeming identical property of interaction. Particals are identical and always operate in consistant ways. This is what makes science possible. Show me a constant in physics and Ill show you a particle. All constants are particle properties. For example for G it is the acceleration a graviton will produce.


The universe will wear out like a garment, it will become threadbare.
-Holy Christian Bible

Because everything in the universe can be considered a relativistic effect. The universe is not a mechanical devise. It is much more like a solid state devise that operates wholly electronically. It is a universe with no moving parts. Mass radiates gravitons. Gravitons are energy. As gravitons are radiated there energy is lost. As there energy is lost space appears to increase. The universe appears to be expanding. But in fact gravitational forse is only decreasing. The universe is not expanding it is decaying.

As the gravitational forse is expanded the universe appears to expand. The univervse can not collaspe because gravitational effects can not collaspe. There will be no end to the universe or its expansion as long as gravity exists.

The universe appears to us to be spherical because of the uniformity of time dilation. The same time dilation that cause the constancy of light cause the sperical universe. Distance is a function of the time which is a function of the energy. There are many other symmetries such as the spherical universe and one could ask "Which of these originate not so much in the universe but fron the interrelation of concepts?"

I have to add a major revision here. I was plagued by uncertainty in relation to my analysis as to why the universe is expanding. I keep trying to make the universe expand. The universe is not expanding. Of course on one level I knew this, that the universe is the same size but I was trying to make it expand from all reference points. This is clearly impossible. First of all we can only know our reference point. The universe only appears to be expanding to us, from our reference point. We are losing energy in the form of gravitons in relation to the universe. In relation to the universe it is our clocks that are running faster. The universe only expands from our point of view. The Hubble constant is not so much a function of what the universe is doing but what we are doing. The
lose/gain energy = Hubble constant
as a function of the time dilation.
This confused me because in relation to the Earth we gain energy in the form of gravitons but in relation to the universe a different reference frame, we lose energy. We experience a contraction and a expansion simultaneously. This was confusing. But it is because there are two reference frames. In relation to one gain in relation to another lose. The size of the universe and its expansion rate is a direct result of graviton emission in relation to mass.


I have already shown that variations in energy cause variations in time dilation. Since energy comes in quantum units time is not smooth but quantified. A change in the energy causes a instantaneous change Why are Bohrs orbits quantified? We know that position in physics is equivalent to energy. Thus orbits are equivalent to energy levels. If energy is quantified then orbits must be quantified.

Quantum jumps are actually a form of time dilation but that is instantaneous. A jump being the ability of a particle to seem to instantaneously dematerialize in one location and rematerialize in another location at the same instant. This appears to happen when particals transition orbits and during other quantum phenomina.

Energy warps time. Since by planck's formula,

You see a change in energy chases a inverse change in the wavelength. If the change in energy is instantaneous the motion will seem instantaneous. Sudden changes in orbit ie energy seem instantaneous because of time dilation, they actually experience a time warp and jump from orbit to orbit outside our perception. This only happens on the quantum level because it is only there that energy is quantified, in the macro world energy appears continuous.


Return to Contents List Page