People take time for granted. They don’t pay attention to it until they start looking into it, and then it begins getting complicated. When it’s 6:00 PM in Tampa that’s 3:00 p.m. in California and 11:00 p.m. in London. We’ve learned to manage with these things. But when it’s 6:00 p.m. in Tampa, in Fiji it’s 10:00 in the morning, but it’s tomorrow. It’s earlier on the clock, but it’s tomorrow.
When you look at the moon what you actually “see” is not the moon now but how it looked about a second ago. And the sun, not what it is now, rather what it was eight minutes ago, since it takes light that long to reach us. Had something dramatic happened to the sun four minutes ago, we wouldn’t know it for another four minutes. When looking at the stars, it gets worse. Many of those you “see” were destroyed centuries ago, but we won’t know it for many more centuries. So are they really there? We need to work on our semantics.
Another problem in investigating time is it’s hard to get a “feel” for it. In the time it takes to say: ‘a thousand one,’ a ray of light can circle the earth seven times. No problem knowing the ray travels at 186,000 miles per second, it’s just hard to relate to it.
The one that really gets me is the white dwarf. This is a star whose star days ended then condensed into an extremely dense body. Our earth rotates on its axis once every twenty-four hours. These white dwarfs rotate on their axes 30 times a second! And they’re huge. I have trouble grasping this and feeling it. I understand the logic; it’s just that to get a feel for this sort of thing impedes my understanding of time in total.
So are they really there?
We learned in physics that time is the interval between events, and it’s absolute; but there is an ongoing discussion whether it’s just a measuring tool or actually a property of the world. Physics comes to us in three ways: macro physics, or that of Einstein for very fast, very large, and very distant things; micro physics or quantum mechanics, which is the physics of teeny things; and classical physics, Newtonian physics, things of everyday stuff which we can observe.
Along comes Einstein who shows us that time is not absolute. Two people, both with stopwatches, observe the same event and start their watches when the event begins and stop them when the event ends. One says three minutes, the other four minutes. This is only possible if the three-minute one is traveling at almost the speed of light.
But, time is not absolute.
And quantum mechanics makes a joke of how we depict time. As a matter of fact, quantum mechanics is counter intuitive to just about everything it involves and especially so with time. Split a photon so half goes one way, the other half the other way. They can be millions of miles apart, and if a property of the photon on this side is changed by measuring it, the change will be made to the other, in zero time. This is called entanglement but how is it possible? What’s going on with stuff we call time? Again, it’s certainly not absolute.
A possible hypothesis is that time is not even absolute in classical physics. I cite two experiments I was involved with.
Remote viewing is the ability to see or view things regardless of distance or time. We found in the Vietnam War that the Russians were spending millions of rubles on it. When our intelligence finally found out what it was, we developed our own program at Army Intelligence Headquarters at Fort Meade, Maryland and it lasted 19 years. During those 19 years. each viewer stayed a few years until his tour of duty was up and left the army and had to be replaced by another trained viewer; and several heads of the program left after their tours were over. The last one of these didn’t believe in this “crystal ball” stuff, so he leaked to Congress what this black funding was for and that ended the program. Various intelligence agencies collated their results and determined that out of the tens of thousands of viewings they’d requested, 48 percent yielded useful information and the yearly expense was $1,200,000—about the cost of a few of those high-priced toilet seats.
The most accurate of all the viewers was Joe McMoneagle, and later we became friends. Once he was brought to Tokyo to locate six people who had disappeared anywhere between 30 months and 30 years ago. They handed him a paper with the names and the ages of these people, written in Japanese (Joe can’t speak a word of Japanese, much less read one) and he found four of them. He was an instant celebrity. One wealthy businessman offered to buy him a million-dollar home with the only condition being that he live there in order to serve the businessman should he need Joe.
I asked him to do a viewing for me. I do a lot of archaeology work, and one of the mysteries in this hemisphere is the spherical stone balls in Costa Rica.
Most are granite and are so accurately round that special optical equipment is needed to measure how out of round, if any, these spheres are. No one has come close to explaining how the ancients could have made them.
The way this worked was, I sent a picture of one of these balls in a sealed envelope to his wife, Nancy. She put it into a drawer, closed the drawer, and asked Joe how the target was made, and he starts drawing. First he described the target as a ball. They would go into a mountain and carve out a roundish rock, crudely. They would then build a square plate made of wood which had to be flat on top and sawed a circular hole in it, the diameter of the hole then determined the diameter of the ball. Next they would create a “chopping block” which was smooth on the bottom and beveled on one end so as to form a sharp cutting edge, with the block made of a harder stone than that of the ball.
Then the block is pushed across the plate, chopping off any material, which is higher than the plate. The block is then moved to another place, chopping off material there protruding above the plate. And so on. Theoretically, if repeated an infinite number of times, a perfect sphere would form. How many times did they actually repeat these chops then produce what they did? An industrious archaeologist friend repeated the method but with a big chunk of clay and got a spherical chunk of clay. In other words, ‘it works.’
I asked Joe how he was able to do all this and he said, “I watched them do it.” That’s a thousand years ago! He’s never been to Costa Rica and had never heard of these balls! So I asked: are you saying a psychic is able to manipulate time itself? “Of course, how do you think we can do what we do?”
Time cannot be absolute, and it is indeed a property of the world.
The Lift Experiment
This is more complex. I’m sitting in a chair, where the chair and I weigh 200 pounds, and four people are bending over to hold a leg of the chair so each must lift 50 pounds. One is a strong ex-Marine; his wife is another. The other two: an average size-and-strength woman; the last is a 60-year-old woman who weighs 127 pounds. The man conducting the experiment is a scientist who believes none of this crystal ball stuff. Each stands on a digital scale, which shows their own weights, a video of everything is recorded, each trying to lift me, or 50 pounds each. He would yell, “Lift!” and after a number of failures, suddenly up I went! That’s up about 18 inches. And I don’t have the slightest idea why one lift worked and the others didn’t. During the time I’m being lifted the rules of dynamics apply. Once up there and being held still, the laws of statics apply, which are relatively simpler. Later I asked each how much weight did it feel like they were lifting; answers varied between five and ten pounds.
Something changed; something had to have changed, because there’s no possible way a 127-pound woman could bend over and lift 50 pounds over her head with ease. No way is this normal, it’s beyond normal, which is the definition of paranormal. My scientist friend is in disbelief. Something radically affected gravity. Back to my college physics book, I found the force of gravity is equal to G, the gravitational constant (Gamma), times m1 minus m2 all divided by r squared whereby m1 is the mass of the earth, m2 is my mass, and r the distance between me and the center of the earth. My mass didn’t change, the earth’s certainly didn’t change, nor did the radius of the earth change. But something had to have changed, and that leaves Gamma. What is Gamma?
Back to the book. Gamma is 6.67384 x 10 to the minus 11th, an incredibly small number. This times a Newton times m squared over Kg squared, and there we are again. The m is in meters, distance again, which hadn’t changed; and the mass didn’t change, and the number is a number. So what’s left?
Newtons—back to the book again—it has been too many years. Turns out one Newton is equal to one k times m divided by seconds squared. K, the mass didn’t change, m in meters again didn’t change. Look at the denominator: seconds squared! How about that? Gravity is a function of time, so the only thing left to explain the lift experiment is a change in time. That’s all that’s left. And this would make time a property of the world not just a measuring device by man.
Time is not absolute in all three phases of physics.
Now let’s apply this to dark matter. Science has known for years the mass of a given galaxy as they have for its individual stars, and they have calculated the centrifugal force that it takes for the stars to stay in orbit rather than having them hurled into outer space. But the numbers don’t add up, not even close, so orthodoxy concluded that tremendously more matter must be there for a gravitational force to hold its stars in orbit; but we just can’t see it, hence—dark matter.
As a matter of fact they calculate that what we see is only four percent of what’s really there, with ninety six percent dark. And they’ve tried in a number of sophisticated ways to detect it, devising many experiments, with the highest expectation of verification using the CERN accelerator in Switzerland, and they still couldn’t find it.
Now they insist they need to build a much more powerful accelerator. Might it be they can’t find it because there’s a different explanation than dark matter?
One of the great discoveries in modern physics is that the universe is not just expanding (we’ve known this since Edwin Hubble’s discovery in 1921), but it is accelerating in its expansion. Before this discovery science considered just two possible expansion explanations. First, the universe is a constant universe, expanding at a constant speed it always will expand at that constant speed and always has expanded at that speed. Hence, it will expand forever and has expanded forever—-there never was a beginning and there will be no end. The second explanation: an incredibly huge explosion, the big bang, hurled infinitely dense matter into space; but someday the energy to hurl it out will ebb, gravity will take over and pull it all back for another big bang—and maybe for another and another.
There are four forces known to science: the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, electromagnetic force, and gravity. The problem is that none of these can explain the acceleration of expansion, so they invented one that would: dark energy, the slickest concept foisted on us since the phlogiston theory. In the early 1700s the German scientist Georg Ernst Spahl noticed that the more a block of wood burned, the heavier it got. Impossible, because you could see with your own eyes smoke spiraling out of that had to weigh something. So he invented, rather proclaimed, the smoke was comprised of negative matter he called phlogiston. The more negative matter driven off, the more the block weighed. This is quite logical, but wrong. That’s what science believed until they understood oxidation. Pretty slick but not as slick, in my opinion, as dark energy. And here’s why.
Instead of trying to explain something they can’t, they just invent something that does. But isn’t it the job of science to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated? But they did just that. And what they invented is harder to justify than the acceleration itself. First, we can’t see it so it must be dark. Next, it must be energy since there the world is composed of only matter and energy, and it doesn’t behave like matter. Schopenhauer had it right when he said: “Every man takes the limits of his own field of vision for the limits of the world.” But scientists are supposed to be above all that. Looks like they’re not. Now this dark energy is endowed with some interesting features. It’s supposed to be evenly distributed throughout the universe but able to direct matter in one direction: out. And it is an antigravity that doesn’t pull; it pushes. Why in the world can’t they say we just don’t know?
Here’s what they did. They created something comprising characteristics for each and every aspect of what it is they can’t understand and proclaimed they’ve found the answer! Of course they neglect to explain how these characteristics could possibly be factual: gravity that pushes, not attracts; indeed. What kind of science is this? Analytical overlaying—a propensity for explaining the unknown with the known.
Suppose for a moment in the early stage of expansion, Mother Nature herself tweaks time so that one second becomes three seconds, and remembering that gravity is an inverse function of time squared, therefore the total force of gravity suddenly gets reduced to one-ninth of what it was so that the hurling out force has so much less resistance as to cause acceleration. Maybe.
And as with dark matter, a hoard of scientists are trying to detect dark energy in a variety of sophisticated ways in order to verify it, and they haven’t been able to do so. And as with dark matter; is that because it doesn’t exist?
If nature can affect gravity by tweaking time, as explained above, we need to redefine how we depict time.
The author is a mechanical engineer with a degree from M.I.T. (1956). He has done extensive investigative work in archaeology, most recently at the Hueyatlaco site in Mexico City, where exhaustive dating tests contradict orthodox timelines placing the beginnings of human activity back at least 250,000 years.