Easy / simple explanation of Einstein Theory of Relativity (1)

Nederlands (Dutch) English (Engels)

"Stop Veto Power United Nations"

Easy / simple explanation of Einstein Theory of Relativity / time dilation / length contraction / speed of light / resistance / Quantum Mechanics (1)

SOME DISHONEST WEBSITES REPORT PRIVACY INFORMATION ILLEGALLY. The owner of this domain is not the writer of the contents, but a customer with free thoughts who wish to be private!
    How is this website set up (all have to do with the lack of time)?
  • this website exist out of 3 parts which are marked in the titles with (2), (1) and (0), part (2) is being called the second webpage, part (1) the first webpage, part (0) is a continuation from the first webpage (1)
  • the 3 parts are in fact sorted on most recent contents, so part (0) is the most recent
  • part (2) have been written years ago and was giving my first thoughts about time etc.
  • part (1) has yet still the first part of part (2), but has the newer thoughts following written through under 0.1 Remarks, at the end of this subsection one finds a button to go to part (0)
  • part (0) is a continuation from 0.1 Remarks in part (1) and is more pointed to the Quantum Mechanics, but starts first with a summary of the most important thoughts primarily related to the Special Theory of Relativity which forms the base of the General Theory of Relativity (is the Special theory not right, than is the General theory also not right)

(15/05/17) I think I understand suddenly why possibly the Big Bang have been happened (search on 15/05/17 in this webpage)! Energy is probably also an emergent property! Scroll down please and the easy / simple descripion about Einstein's Theory of Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and more starts (a.o. the easy / simple explanation about gravitational force, but is no force, and how a clock can be running slower, see 2.7, or my thought that energy (as a kind of physical power source) don't need to exist really, or Higgs fields don't need to exist really (within our dimensions), see 6.0)! Or my last new thought (15/02/17): an idea model for the entanglement of particles (see 0.1)! The fourth dimension can be the solution for the Theory of Relativity and the Quantum Mechanics! (07/05/17) And a possible reason why one detects an elementary particle in superposition on two locations (also a new thought, see 05/10/18)! (or search these subjects on date) Because of too long text, the explanation has been divided in 2 webpages (1) and (2). Since 2011 busy with these subjects. On the first webpage (1), you find my latest thoughts, on the second webpage (2) how I came to these thoughts in my way. Especially in these kinds of subjects you have to grow (and to study, and above all to keep going on) and that goes slow!

(12/08/17) What is time, how can this time exists via the fourth dimension where the time 0 (timeless) is? (20/09/17) Time is emergent, our universe is timeless! (22/09/17) Is nothing out of balance? (23/09/17) My time 0 or timeless final conclusion FOR NOW (physically)! See text below in box "My general idea about everything until now"! If you don't believe in energy (as I do) then we live in a kind of unreal world! (04/12/17) Mass is energy, but time is an energy ratio! (03/02/18) Emergent energy is as well mass as time (amount versus density)! (26/06/18) Gravitational waves cause as I think possibly a kind of length contraction (3D)! (or search these subjects on date)

(18/10/18) Our unreal world is in fact already proven by the Theory of Relativity, even space is also relative! (25/01/19) What is now in fact that fourth dimension as I see it? (19/02/19) I think that the "Lorentz transformation" is not right implemented and materials are shrinking! (or search these subjects on date)

(15/08/19) As I think of course, possibly for the time being. Energy is an emergent property, so exist at structure or macro level, but all particles represent a specified amount of energy. Increasing the amount of emergent energy increases the mass of a structure (through the amount of materials or emergent energy per particle), (local) time is the density of emergent energy per particle and so is being determined at structure or macro level (so an emergent property) and is inside a structure everywhere the same, "gravitational force" is the consequence of the Big Bang and is the binding (kind of glue) between the separated structures, "gravitational force" is being determined through the mass (so also through the amount of materials and locally proportionally through the amount of particles which present that mass, so can vary at locations) and so exist also at structure or macro level (so an emergent property). It seems if "gravitational force" is a reserved part of the emergent energy. (or search these subjects on date)

(07/09/19 - 28/09/19) As I think of course, are there infinitely more points in space being a singular point, so just as that only point in a black hole where the time 0 is (timeless), but has around an infinite density of energy? ((10/09/19) + conclusion for the time being again) (or search these subjects on date)

(20/04/20 - 03/08/20) New thought. Every energy has an anti-energy for the same value, this ant-energy is located in the fourth dimension. Energies attract, anti-energy pushes off. This anti-energy forms the concept time. Gravitational force is a dense form of anti-energy. I think there is more anti-energy then energy. In fact also now a clear concept of time. And what is now in fact the similarity as I think between materials and our capability of thinking / consciousness? And what is now in fact the similarity as I think between to believe in "something" (as Einstein did) or totally nothing? (13/09/20) If you tries to go back to the start of the Big Bang, you disappears as materials and ends as a photon (so light) with the speed of light. See at the bottom of this page for more explanation. (or search these subjects on date)

(19/12/20) My final personal conclusion about the Theory of Relativity (now I can continue with the timeless in the Quantum Mechanics). See at the bottom of this page for more explanation. (or search these subjects on date)

In this website I have my own thoughts, through a physics (individual) study about the Theory of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics I try to find out if these thoughts or nonsense or not (so, just the other way, first studying and then trying to get new thoughts)! Is everything a coincidence (so, "something" exists forever without beginning and reason) of do we overlook something (and/or are we not smart enough yet)? Why is this insight so important in our lives? For setting the future on the right track for the next generations ..

(22/09/17) Also I have my own thoughts, I read of course facts (especially formulas) from physics from others (mainly Wiki, in fact until now I have read only my mathematics book, this makes my studies exciting to discover what is eventually wrong to my own thoughts), if I think something what others already think, is difficult to check, it goes me purely about the truth (I claim nothing, and do I think nonsenses, I don't care).

The name of this website "From Einstein To The United Nations" means from the subject Einstein to the subject United Nations.

Table of contents: (show / hide, click on number of section)

0.1  Remarks
0.1.1  Remarks (continuation but now more pointed to the Quantum Mechanics)
0.2  Short insertion (written in 2015 and unchanged) "Stop Veto Power United Nations" (there exist an invisible universe with time 0 or timeless)
0.3  Introduction

1.1  Short summary (for whom is in hurry, in 2.1 starts the longer version, meanwhile both equally in length)
1.2  Examples
1.3  Natural resistance / braking
1.3a  Speed of light always measured constantly, made clearly visible (own thought)
1.4  Time Travelling
1.5  Summarised and personal thought (most logical I think)
1.6  E = m.c²
1.7  Thinking in more dimensions (> 3)

2.1  General
2.2  Time and distances (space)
2.3  Time dilation
2.4  Length contraction
2.5  Relativity
2.6  Symmetry and simultaneity
2.7  Easy / simple explanation about gravitational force (but is no force) and how a clock can be running slower
2.8  Gravitational waves

3.0  My own thoughts about our universe (why the speed of light is always constant, follow a curved path because of the gravitational "force" or the Higgs fields, why particles can be on 2 places at the same time, possibly direct communication with everyone and anything in our universe etc., the existance of an invisible universe with time 0 or timeless near the visible universe but Einstein is still valid, photons which pass the time 0 or timelessness + summarized in an overall picture)

4.0  Parallel worlds and own opinion

5.0  Quantum Mechanics and own opinion

6.0  Conclusion: My own hypotheses (Theory of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics)
6.1  Have the time 0 "signal" a time 0 or timeless or an unlimited great speed, and do we live in a programmed world, we can never understand it completely, it is most logical there must be more (own thoughts)?

7.0  Last thought for which the text on this page must be updated

0.1  Remarks

    Inside this text box I write only new thoughts, nothing updated in the rest of this webpage since 18/04/16, after my studies I go to write more again .. but in part 2 of this website (2) you can follow how I came to these thoughts in my way .. below within this box I describe for myself my general idea about everything until now ..

  • New thought (15/02/17) In fact, I came to this thought through thinking about the complex numbers. The numbers by which we do our calculations in daily life are a subset of the complex numbers, we as ordinary people do our calculations in fact in 1 dimension. With the aid of the complex numbers there can be calculated in more dimensions e.g. the motion of an airplane. A complex number is nothing more than a vector for which you can do calculations in geometric models. Technically / scientifically fellow human beings do understand this better because they have studied complex numbers. In fact I did not believe in more than 3 dimensions I wrote once in this website, but I think now different.
    Example entanglement in 1 dimension

    Figure 0.2A Example entanglement in 1 dimension
    The invisible universe about I write, is nothing more than de fourth dimension as I think (see also "Possibly interesting"). The fourth dimension can be the solution for the Theory of Relativity and the Quantum Mechanics! We live (locked in) in 3 dimensions and can't never go to the fourth dimension (alive ), but to influence is possible I think because we are part of it. The information about I write in the invisible universe and others write, is something abstracts in the fourth dimension. Than everything just falls into place. Also my thought that energy do not exists really as a kind of physical power source and the Higgs fields do not need to exist really also. E.g. space and time do not need to exist in the microworld for us in 3 dimensions, but the related information do in the fourth dimension, if you can express that information in vectors in the fourth dimension, is it possible for example to show up the emergent "gravitational force" from Erik Verlinde (see next subject) as a result in the third dimension for structures. Or think for example to the entanglement of particles. In figure 0.2A I have imagine an example with vectors of an entangled connection between 2 particles if there was only existing 1 dimension for us, to make it better to understand. So, in the first dimension (the straight line) there are two entangled particles for which the properties all the time are opposite through that entanglement. That connection has been described in the second dimension (the surface). There you see two opposite vectors for a property which are always and totally zero. How far the particles go in our time, the vectors in the second dimension change immediately but the property vectors stay the same in this example model, changes in properties are also immediately reflected, therefore is the connection timeless (time 0 or timeless). It seems that light has the ability that two particles models can be connected to each other in the higher dimension. In the same way there can be vectors for the visibility of a particle in a group, for a specific value in the second dimension disappears the particle (temporary) in the first dimension, if this could be possible also for structures like objects or a human being in the fourth dimension is the question. In the same way there is also a vector for a particle of light (photon) and each other elementary particle in the fourth dimension etc. etc. What is than that fourth dimension? If that dimension exist than there could be existing more universes with worlds (but don't need to be, even if it is possible). Even there exist no space and time in the fourth dimension (as we experience), the mathematics just continues (maybe only for us)! This conclusion of myself is nothing special because science thinks already in this way for a long time, but for me it is going to being clear too via logical thinking! I think as long as we don't understand it (I think never), it will be again a coincidence .. sometimes it looks that everything we fantasy in science fictions has been partly really possible to keep us busy .. Possibly interesting: it are all just thoughts which can be removed again later, but it keeps me busy for a while. I see just now that everything is symmetric in my example, totally zero. If it is in 1 dimension symmetric (the properties), then the model must be symmetric in a higher dimension, so totally zero again. If you would know everything, the reality is complex of course, then there is possibly exactly 1 symmetric model which makes it right. But totally zero. Is a higher dimension a real dimension if all is totally zero, than it could be any dimension. Could our world / universe (three dimensions) be just existing because all is totally zero too, but space and time exist also. Could the entanglement of particles just being a situation for which the total of parts, which explain that entanglement, in the model is zero (even when totally all is zero in our world / universe, in all parts need totally not to be zero of course)? Than is the fourth dimension not real, but the zero stands for nothing. Could the parts of that model in the fourth dimension being called information (compare with example, first and second dimension)? But in fact, is the fourth dimension just as strange or not strange as the first and second dimension. In the first and second dimension exist also only imaginary mathematics vectors (that long arrows) because objects have always a volume, there don't exist flat objects without a volume. Also, measurements are possible only in the third dimension. Not all physically variables can be expressed as vectors (and so added etc.). E.g. velocities can be expressed as vectors in our world, but thanks to the Theory of Relativity is this not true anymore for very big speeds. The reality will be more and more complex in this way (for us). But because there exists no time in the fourth dimension, there don't exist something like velocity, but is a result of many vectors like the natural resistance / braking (see part 2), and seems velocity to be a vector under low speeds. I am very curious to my image formation after years of studying later, very interesting! One argues often in physics (e.g. the String Theory which I don't know) about rolled-up dimensions somewhere in the universe, personally I find that a strange image, a higher dimension can never be a part of a lower dimension. I think that such higher dimension just nothing is around us .. where no space and time exists as we experience .. welcome in the world we don't understand, then it must be a coincidence .. In fact, I find the thought of coincidence too simplistic for words. Personally, I am 100% convinced that behind everything is a plan, more I don't know either of course. I found it comical that one in physics thought in the past that the model of everything was almost complete. But ok, that would be possible but only expressed in connections and relations etc., not more than that. I think e.g. that the fourth dimension only exists because our universe and time exist in the third dimension. Without that universe and time there would be nothing in the model. E.g. where could a vector have its origin in the fourth dimension? But it is well imaginable, that everything have been started from 1 point, the model of everything was started! An elementary particle in superposition is on 2 locations at the same time. I don't know exactly all about it, but was reading in the magazine EOS that one in Leiden (NL) in the physics laboratories can already reach a temperature of .001 above 0 degrees Kelvin, or the so called absolute null point. Under this temperature it is not difficult to bring an elementary particle in a so called superposition (almost no motion anymore, so no photon, is a particle of light) by which it is on 2 locations at the same time. The decision on which location it is definite, is not taken yet by nature, when one looks to it (so the influence of light) then the definite location have been chosen. This also relates to my thoughts again about the fourth dimension in which everything is totally zero in the complete model. The equipment detects the particle on 2 locations, so it seems 2 particles with each the energy of 1 particle. But a particle has only 1x the amount of energy. So, it seems that energy have been presented by a kind of vector in the fourth dimension and energy not a real kind of physical power source is, but more a number. When the location is definite, there is a counterpart active in the model (existing out of vectors) which again makes everything zero. And just as the speed of light can never be reach by materials, in the same way can the absolute null point never be reached, always just above. The local times zero of the elementary particles (see next subject) as I think, are purely vectors in the fourth dimension (time 0 or timeless). The idea of others that the world and universe are a kind of hologram find I personally not so strange, a hologram is a three dimensional image by light from a two dimensional surface, but (26/03/17) I think that our world and universe are a projection from the fourth dimension, a kind of hologram but than materialized. But the whole is being corrected by as well as the fourth and third dimension with what we are doing. You can't walk through everything thanks to a very complex model of vectors in the fourth dimension for which every vector has its own effect in the third dimension and we absolute don't understand it at all (but have discovered it, and by studying it all we learn to use it in daily live)! Compare it a little bit with the new hologram dashboard in some cars for which it feels to push on a real button. (02/05/17) Numbers as energy as I think can also be made visible as vectors in the first dimension (if the algorithm satisfies) and so being a projection from the fourth dimension (or other dimensions). The algorithm for different kind of vectors can maybe even different (and per dimension). E.g. vectors from the third dimension are addable according the known algorithm, but a vector in the first dimension has only 2 directions and a length equally to the (positive) number and so addable only in that way. So, an energy vector can't be treated as a vector from the third dimension and even its location can't be determined exactly in the third dimension. So, energy belonging to an elementary particle (and the particle itself) can be a projection from the fourth dimension (with the local time 0 or timeless). (05/05/17) I think that emergent properties (properties only valid for structures) don't exist in the fourth dimension, but only in lower dimensions. Emergent properties are e.g. time (exists for structures of elementary particles), space (exists for structures of quanta), temperature (exists for structures of particles), "gravitational force" (but is no force, exists for structures of elementary particles, see next subject, time caused by "gravitational force") etc. Then as always comes that doubt if you need the fourth dimension for time 0 or timeless for the elementary particles. Also without the fourth dimension (because you don't know everything yet) there wouldn't be existing time or natural resistance / braking on elementary level, but in structures. But because everything did originate from 1 point (Big Bang) is it very logically to think at a fourth dimension which did originate everything. (07/05/17) Big Bang logically! How the Big Bang have been originated, nobody shall have an explanation for that I think. But on the moment of the Big Bang, it has been started I think not with 1 space unit (quantum) because of the emergent property of space, but e.g. 8. This expansion has a speed and because from the beginning all physical laws from now must be valid, there is no reason to think why this must stop (or maybe there is also an enddate for the universe), so because of that the continued expansion of the universe. Time and "gravitational force" are also emergent properties. So the local time of the elementary particles is 0, (isolated) particles of light (photons, don't have a mass) have no natural resistance / braking and therefore always the maximum speed for the observer (speed of light). How is this for the other isolated elementary particles with the local time 0 or timeless (e.g. electrons)? There don't exist also "gravitational force" or natural resistance / braking for that particles, only for a group (so at least 2). So, an isolated particle would be having also the speed of light. (07/05/17) Is this maybe the reason one detects such elementary particle (with mass) in superposition on two locations (then it undergoes natural resistance / braking or time), and when one looks to it (influence of light) it has been becoming part of a group (from the environment)? In superposition it has been separated from the group? Now I have read somewhere (exact information from experiments difficult to get) that even atoms and molecules can be brought into a superposition, that means in my thought then, that the local time 0 or timeless is on the level of an isolated molecule. That would be possible, finally is time an emergent property and so time don't exist on an isolated molecule level but only in a group. (15/05/17) Would "gravitational force" (or natural resistance / braking, so time) just being generated through motion? If you read Maxwell how electromagnetic waves (is light) have been generated through the motion of static charge through an electric field which generates a magnetic field, then I get immediately the thought that just as energy an electric field doesn't exist really, but only expresses a relation so that we can explain a phenomenon in our way, but it in fact is the fourth dimension which do originate things. It is just looking in another way to the world around you. Also, immediately a thought is coming up that "gravitational force" (or natural resistance / braking, so time) is just being generated through motion of materials, so an emergent property and controlled through the fourth dimension. Our Earth is as just as all around us in motion through the universe. Therefore, is the dilation in the new local time of materials in motion independent from the beginning velocity, but only from the new difference in velocity (relativity). Possibly are also gravitational waves generated when materials accelerated which are not measurable. But ok after reading I get more insight again. And now suddenly I think to understand the Big Bang, without the Big Bang the local time would be always 0 according the laws of physics. If the local time of materials (structures of particles) would be 0 just as for light (as in the point of the Big Bang, time 0 or timeless), all materials in the third dimension would be in motion with the speed of light only. Through starting all materials in motion from the beginning, is the local time from that materials from the beginning not equal to 0 and are after, any velocities for that materials possible. So, for making various motions with any velocities possible for all materials, it is a must that all materials must be in motion from the beginning! So, the only reason for the Big Bang is (as I think of course) that without, our universe couldn't exist! If this thought is true (what I think), then again has been proved that physics can be simple (once one know of course)! Often are these old thoughts written in the second webpage, but suddenly becomes it clear, in this way work thinking processes probably. If somebody would think, so if you decrease the speed of that motion you come back in the point time 0 or timeless, no unfortunately, that is the Theory of Relativity, time can go only slower but never being 0 again. Only light has the local time 0 or timeless because it doesn't undergo natural resistance / braking (is time or "gravitational force")! And maybe one think already in this way for a long time, I follow only my own thoughts for the moment and don't check this all unless I read this accidently in a magazine or read it in books (I am still busy with mathematics but almost ready now, so now it is going to be exciting)! I wonder me every day that the most scientists only believe in coincidences. I hope somebody picks up this new thought! (21/05/17) In fact, fits these all completely to my thoughts. Energy is also an emergent property. During the Big Bang all materials (structures of particles) have been getting at once (without transition) time, mass and energy. (Elementary) particles have no time, mass and energy, only grouped in a structure. (Elementary) particles come from the fourth dimension in which no time, mass and energy exist, but are projections in the third dimension. I think also that one in physics can never isolate completely 1 elementary particle, only as part of a group, in superposition is probably a floating situation but not completely isolated. At entanglement two particles can be connected with each other timeless. I hope that Eric Verlinde (Dutch physicist) now slowly goes to believe in the Big Bang.
    (28/06/17) When reading Maxwell, the thought came up at me that the electromagnetic wave has been found in a very simple way, like if this must have to be found, this wave has been brought many new technological developments like radio, television etc. Maxwell had found the formulas for the relations between electric and magnetic fields for charged particles. Then he found when he removed the charged particles form the formulas (so made 0), the formula originated for the electromagnetic wave in free space (is space without charged particles), so the proof that there must exist an electromagnetic wave which can move undisturbed through space around us. Unbelievable found in a simple way (light is also an electromagnetic wave)!
    (05/08/17) Logically that locations in space in fact are vectors (that arrows from mathematics)! Time is an emergent property and velocities therefore not addable anymore as vectors, only close to the local time. The question arises why addable close to the local time. So if you ignore time, so it are locations as the sum of 3 random basis vectors (third dimension), you can see that basis vectors and locations as the velocities vectors without time.
    (01/09/17) To work (and other commitments) and to study is not easy, especially when you are not the youngest anymore, but have finally finished the mathematics. Reading have again been normally for me. Fantastic that there are writers as e.g. R. Shankar who can write very good lesson books. To refresh my mathematics was really necessary to follow some subjects better, now I can again continue Quantum Mechanics and read first until the Schröder equation, afterwards the General Theory of Relativity and afterwards only Quantum Mechanics etc. What is my goal? Trying to form an (mathematically) image/idea how emergent time and space could originate from a timeless environment (the fourth dimension, time 0 or timeless)! We live in a kind of unreal world which we have been accepted as normal through daily routine!
  • SCIENTIFICALLY BREAKTHROUGH POSSIBLY (19/11/16 still nothing updated in this webpage since 18/04/16, I try to bundle all my thoughts from my website in this little piece of text, and only related to this subject). The explanation about the new theory from Erik Verlinde (Dutch) (emergent "gravitational force", "gravitational force" exists only for a group of elementary particles, in a structure, so materials, but not for 1 elementary particle alone, possibly a finetuning of Einstein which was again a finetuning of Newton; daring to think distinctive) have being explained excellent (also for not physicists) in copy link: "http://www.quantumuniverse.nl/emergent-gravity-and-dark-universe"! So that "gravitational force" exists here through the movement of information. (my opinion in general, so not related to this discovery possibly:) The physical science approaches more and more its boundaries, to think not distinctive (bolt and nut theories) is not enough anymore, possibly and hopefully leads this thinking to a good understanding about our existence and so, to a future for which everything is going better in this world finally! The problem of science is in fact also, how more we discover (while we yet still not much and can't understand), how louder scientists call that everything is a coincidence. Now we are going to understand a little bit of our brains (while we yet still not much and can't understand), there is already a conclusion that we are a kind of robots, so robots who discover by their selves that they are a robot! These all feed of course the superficiality of our time that you above all must be busy with your own, because in fact nothing has a real meaning anymore (as long as it does not harm your own interests, personally I see the human body as a kind of tool which can have defects, but not stands completely on its own). It is above all the task of science not to work with gut feelings, and at least to admit "we don't know it either" if one haven't enough knowledge! (these gut feelings originate often from personal disappointments, but as you are is the other too, many problems in the world are caused by ourselves, as I see it. It seems how more one undergoes prosperity, how more personal disappointments.)
    Now many would ask what is than that information? I think a proportional relation with something you can formulate as a factor for a mathematical formula (if you succeed) but not exactly knows what it is (and possibly never knows) .. in this case is that information related to the volume of total space with dark energy, and the volume of some materials in the universe (so not all materials in the universe) which transfers some volume with dark energy to that materials .. In fact, all is information, e.g. also the temperature, but as long you can't specify it more concrete you call it information for the time being.
    My own thoughts: Meanwhile I think much about the comments of Erik Verlinde and compare it with my own thoughts of course (with much lesser detailed physically knowledge of course) which I modify when necessary (but only in this piece of text from 19/11/16, because I go continuing to write more again after my studies).
    What are that thoughts than from this webpage (and are to find in this webpage), able to follow the rest in this text better? I believe in an invisible universe with time 0 or timeless (so timeless) from which information is passing through or is being exchanged to the visible universe to giving materials an appearance. E.g. for the entanglement of elementary particles, which is timeless (time 0 or timeless) as I think, the invisible universe has been used to exchange information between these particles in the visible universe. I believe that the local time of elementary particles of light (called photons) 0 is, and that particles have the property (near all other special properties) to create such an entangled connection via the invisible universe because of that local time 0 or timeless. I believe that a particle of light (photon) is being there as well in the invisible universe (as information) as in the visible universe. I believe in the (disturbed) Higgs fields which gives a natural resistance / braking to all materials and forms the concept time. I believe that that particles of light don't undergo natural resistance / braking and have through the structure of space (possibly also arranged by the Higgs fields) the maximum speed, calling the speed of light. I believe that the other elementary particles or being in the invisible universe as information, or being in the visible universe, so they can disappear to the invisible universe and appear again after a while. Also, I made the remarks it could be possible that the Theory of Relativity is only valid for structures (materials) (e.g. "the gravitational force" could be existing only for structures but not on the level of the elementary particles, that seems be to bring mathematically problems with the Theory of Relativity). And I believe also that our measuring equipment can only measure in the visible universe (so everything is 0 in the invisible universe). It are just all thoughts which can never be described exactly through the abstract character. The Quantum Mechanics have not changed much in the last 100 years.
    Which of these thoughts connect to the new theory of Erik Verlinde, as I see it, and what is new?
    Universe in 2 layers

    Figure 0.1 Universe in 2 layers, see this in 3D
    The universe exists according a new view in physics and new for me, as an abstract network with little units, called quantum units, filled with dark energy and entangled with each other (so one side of the universe knows the other side). According Erik Verlinde space and time do not exist on that level of quantum units (new), so also not on the level of elementary particles (have also the size of quantum units), but bundled in structures they form space and time, so emergent properties. So, this could mean that the Theory of Relativity is not applicable on elementary level (microscopic), but only on macroscopic level but also for the bundled structures of quantum units (space) or elementary particles (materials). This could make the Quantum Mechanics right again. So that quantum units are timeless, they are entangled, so they form as first layer the invisible universe with time 0 or timeless in my thoughts. The next layer is dark energy in my thoughts and forms the visible universe. The visible universe has been controlled by the invisible universe (mathematically seen you could imagine a space quantum unit as a vector, a space quantum unit completely on its own as a null vector, entangled space quantum units as a sum of these null vectors so still a null vector, not entangled space quantum units as the sum of vectors of the separated space quantum units which are no null vectors anymore because of the bundling, see figure 0.1). Materials are there in the second layer and light in both layers. The effects from that invisible universe plus dark energy are the (disturbed) Higgs fields (must have a name) about I write all the time (the Higgs fields, (new) so now the consequence of emergent "gravitational force" and mass inertia, both related to information from that abstract network plus dark energy, the natural resistance / braking about I write all the time). The Higgs particles have still a meaning yet in these thoughts, because the formulas of Erik Verlinde include mass. Because you can argument emergent "gravitational force" and mass inertia (apparently), but dark energy possibly also never detectable is, suddenly you see an elementary particle arising spontaneously (made of dark energy) and that's it, is it all information out of nothing! Welcome in the world of the mysterious Quantum Mechanics! Near the emergent "gravitational force" is also new in the theory of Erik Verlinde that elementary particles must have the local time 0 or timeless just as the elementary particles of light (called photons). In fact logically because you can't create a clock of (or within) 1 elementary particle, so you can't measure time (no, also not with a particle of light, called a photon, that is our time and not the local time). So all the elementary particles must exist in my thoughts as well as information in the invisible universe as in the visible universe. You should almost going to think that the invisible universe absolute is and the visible world relative, time exists only for the observer. So the local time of the elementary particles is 0, the entanglement is also timeless, so the whole happens in time 0 or timeless or timeless in the invisible universe. Information have been used for the visible universe. So, I think that abstract network with time 0 or timeless has the function to exchange information or passing through to the visible universe. E.g. during the entanglement information have been exchanged via that network in the invisible universe (without dark energy) to the visible universe (with dark energy or materials). Yet 1 comments: would the curving of space being caused because dark energy have been taken away there? In an accelerated rocket somewhere in space far from the big masses happens the same according the so called principle of equivalence from Einstein, so there is no dark energy been taken away, so I think it has to do with disturbed Higgs fields! Some new thoughts (26/12/16): when you are busy with these kind of subjects, often they continue in your brains in the background while you are busy with other things to do, even during your sleep, at some moments there arise new thoughts which do not need to be true of course, but possibly can give new ideas, so have to try this out. I still have not read much except mathematics through the lack of time, that will be a new resolution for 2017 (but I am going to get far with that this year, the enthusiasm is very tremendously, I never give up!!). I think that in that abstract network with time 0 or timeless in the invisible universe, the totally quantity of information is always be zero. Think e.g. to two entangled particles which have each opposite properties because of that entanglement e.g. their spin. So, I can imagine that the emergent "gravitational force" the proportional opposite information is from a specified kind of information in the "empty" universe with dark energy. If all the other emergent "gravitational forces" like around the Earth stay equally unless the new formed materials at the edge of our universe, this would be an explanation for the extension of our universe. The proportion "empty" universe with dark energy and materials within that universe would be constant possibly. So, the Big Bang has started possibly out of nothing (with other words science is limited consciously). Would you ever that abstract network using for immediate communication with other worlds, then you would vary a specified kind of information according a pattern which can be picked up by another intelligent civilization, so challenges enough in the far future.
    How can the local time of an elementary particle being 0 and also being there in the visible universe? This was already known for light. We see light in our time but the own time (local time) of light is 0, how strange that is. So, also for the other elementary particles. They are possibly only detectable via their information, because forms no space and time, but structured they form objects in the visible universe and is the Theory of Relativity applicable. According a Chinese mathematical research is the motion of an elementary particle alone (so outside a structure) in the Quantum Mechanics no continue motion (discontinue) in the visible universe, a particle is then in one location (quantum unit in that abstract network) and then in the other location, so it is for some time or 0 seconds invisible. So, it's local time is 0, it exists for some time or 0 seconds only as information. So, elementary particles alone (outside a structure) are as well at the same time in the visible as invisible universe, and possibly only as information detectable in the visible universe. E.g. think at experiments with separated photons. So, e.g. the spin of an elementary particle alone (outside a structure) is only information because a round shape does not exist really because there is no space and time. But elementary particles are mostly already part of a structure like e.g. a current (electrons) through a wire, so difficult to say as I think when an elementary particle can be seen as completely separated. E.g. take a muon, that is also a specific kind of elementary particle that exist for a fixed time (afterwards it disintegrates), how faster it moves how longer the disintegration takes for the observer, so the processes inside go slower, the local (own) time goes slower, so the local time is not 0, so it must be a composed particle, so a structure (I think)! But a muon can again be a part of another structure possibly in the visible universe ..
    How can a quantum unit or elementary particle being timeless but together not in a structure? E.g. if you want to measure a distance you need two points, within 1 point there is no distance (always 0). So, within all points is the distance 0, but with combinations there exist distances. In the same way for space and time, you need minimal 2 quantum units, with 1 quantum unit there exist no space and time (is always 0). So, within all quantum units is space and time 0 or timeless, but with combinations there exist space and time. Space is clear to understand I guess, for time there must be motion possible, if not possible the time is 0. For motion, you need also at least two quantum units. You must not see Information as a motion, but as something abstracts for which nobody have a theory for the time being!
    What is the difference between an elementary particle of light and another elementary particle? So, for both is the local time 0 or timeless. Both are there as information in the invisible universe, outside a structure detectable as information in the visible universe, within a structure they have possibly an appearance that give materials a shape (or an appearance as light if they are photons, photons are elementary particles of light). Both can disappear possibly sometimes to the invisible universe as information and not being detectable as information in the visible universe (so now another thought) and some time later again being detectable as information. Within a structure also possible maybe, and for a little while no appearance in the visible universe. Photons can entangle information in the invisible universe between other elementary particles via collisions. Photons are the fast elementary particles. They exchange also energy between the other elementary particles. Photons have the leading role in physics. Photons undergo no natural resistance / braking in the visible universe, but other elementary particles undergo natural resistance / braking because of the Higss particle. But that natural resistance / braking can be seen only in structures, if it has an appearance, outside a structure it is all pure information.
    Why is the speed of light for anybody (in motion) always equally? You can reverse it, and argument that all what is found because of the Theory of Relativity, therefore is the speed of light always the same. Or you can also argument that quantum units can't being overbridged faster than the speed of light or being observed in the visible universe. Because particles of light (photons) undergo no natural resistance / braking in contrast to the other elementary particles in the visible universe (so structured), is that speed fixed in the visible universe.
    A black hole (materials transformed to dark energy again? .. but information stored in the horizon, and so reversible ..) is possibly connected with 1 point of that abstract network (time 0 or timeless). I am curious about the next follow-up theories soon! It would be very miraculously if time 0 or timeless could already be proven theoretically in such a short period (since 2015) of years (or is this in fact already done in a black hole?)!
    Would the world going to change or will time 0 or timeless (everything is connected) being accepted just as a pile of sandwiches and is all just seen stoical again as a coincidence?

  • (12/05/17) My general idea about everything until now! I describe this primarily for myself and update this during my studies.
    I consider all macro objects (materials) as structures from the microworld for which that macro objects have been becoming an own local time according the Theory of Relativity. I consider time as an emergent property and think that microworld (molecules, atoms etc., called micro objects) has the same local time as the macro object belonging to. That time is being used for all eventually motions in that microworld. A complete isolated micro object (so, not belonging to a macro object) has the local time 0 or timeless or is timeless, and there exists also no space within this micro object (space is also an emergent property). This micro object can probably be represented as a collection vectors from the fourth dimension and is something abstracts, and is being projected in the third dimension. Also, space units (quantum units) can be represented in that way as micro objects. Through the Big Bang space is being created and seems the universe being inflated (as a balloon). The same situation as micro objects are making connections with each other, structures originated, macro objects, which also seems to be inflated. Light is an object on its own, and has always the local time 0 or timeless (but space is for light also an emergent property). Connections with space units are used for motions. If there no connections can be made anymore with other micro objects (so, under which also space units), motions can't continue their followed path anymore (e.g. in this way one can't walk through a wall of stone). It is very understandable in this abstract way that the third dimension has been started with the Big Bang, micro objects from the fourth dimension with time 0 or timeless (so coming from nothing), starting composing structures (macro objects) in this third dimension.
    Macro objects with a local time 0 or timeless, could only be in motion with the speed of light. Because macro objects must have the possibility to be in motion with different velocities, is the local time of that macro objects from the beginning nonzero. That is, macro objects must be in motion from the beginning (compared with the point time 0 or timeless of the Big Bang). This explains the Big Bang! At the Big Bang, macro objects have been becoming time, mass and energy at once, these are all emergent properties, micro objects totally isolated have no time, space, mass and energy. Energy is no physical but an abstract something, a number gotten from the fourth dimension through projection in the third dimension.
    What do I mean exactly with the local time of materials? The speed at which an earth clock runs, positioned on that materials. How faster that materials are in motion through space, how slower that clock runs. The local time of light is zero. A clock runs slower through natural resistance / braking ("gravitational force", Higgs fields, materials have Higgs particles inside) probably gotten from the fourth dimension. Light has no natural resistance / braking (no "gravitational force", no Higgs particles inside) and has therefore the maximum speed possible. Because there are no forces in the game, is that speed of light constant. Gravitational waves let the local time vary a little bit, at which one (the observers, can be equipment) length contraction (is nothing more than a visual effect) detects for materials subject to that gravitational waves. The Big Bang have been happened in a point with the local time zero, a black hole has also a point with the local time zero, both are points from the fourth dimension.
    (05/08/17) Somewhat thoughts for the time being, must check this better later if this is too couple at time 0 or timeless (so timeless) although the fourth dimension. So, time could be an emergent property. Just as temperature is an emergent property (1 elementary particle has no temperature, only at group level), you could see time just as temperature as a "scalar field" (mathematics), that means every point in the field has a value but is no vector. With the Big Bang, there are starting macro objects originated which have gotten a local time. For each macro object in motion relative to that starting macro objects or relative to other macro objects from which that motion have been initiated, one can set up a "scalar field" as an observer, for which each point around that macro object in motion has a local time, that is the time goes slower through the speed difference from the leaving macro object (for "gravitational force" there is yet another factor). For a "scalar field" there exists also something as the gradient which is to see as a vector. So, time (although natural resistance / braking) can be coupled to a vector and can be projected from the fourth dimension. Time and space are coupled, where time exists must also exists space, because time is related to motion. But space in which no time exists is also possible I think, space in which no motion exists and something can be on more locations at the same time (for the observer), so possibly phenomena from the micro world ..
    (12/08/17) What is time (and link with fourth dimension with time 0 or timeless or timeless)? I give below a summarize from how I think (presently):
    • I suppose our universe exists out of three dimensional space units (quanta), these space units can be represented as vectors (that arrows from mathematics) and can be stationary, they have been originated during the Big Bang and extend themselves at the edge of our universe (possibly with the speed of light, so that the first light can follow its path)
    • structures of materials have been originated at once during the Big Bang and are in motion from the beginning and so have a local time not equal zero, materials will be recycled somewhere in the universe
    • motion of a structure is relocation from a space unit to the next in a specific direction
    • I suppose a structure is always visible, so the transition between space units must go immediately (time 0 or timeless)
    • dependable of the velocity of a structure, stays this structure for a while in a space unit
    • strange is in this process that if it looks the structure doesn't move, immediately to another unit and doesn't move either there, only for the observer there is motion (difference between fourth and third dimension)
    • for the structure, the motion has been compared with the standard motion in a clock which we call 1 second, a unit in time, so the velocity for that structure can be calculated
    • how long a structure stays in a space unit, depends on a natural resistance / braking, the velocity depends on the ratio total kinetic energy and total energy of the whole structure
    • motion is for me a connection between a structure and space units, the duration of the connection with a space unit depends on the ratio total kinetic energy and total energy of the whole structure, how faster how more than proportional kinetic energy have been requested, so the natural resistance / braking have been increased, for particles of light (photons) is that ratio always 1 and so in fact no natural resistance / braking
    • seen from the fourth dimension, so you have three dimensional space units (vectors) originated from that fourth dimension, also materials have been originated in that way, emergent (group) properties as time and temperature don't exist in the fourth dimension and so be no vectors, time is zero in the fourth dimension, time is natural resistance / braking, possibly is that natural resistance / braking build in all that space units, compare it with living cells and a cell's covering membrane with natural resistance / braking, one even says that space units or space can be originated somewhere in our universe, I think then to space units (cells) which splits (cell division), so space looks like a living whole. But that natural resistance / braking is no force, so at a constant speed (e.g. in space) there is no energy lost!
    • just as an elementary particle has no temperature (only a group), it has a local time 0 or timeless (only a structure has time), in a structure it has a local time not equal 0 and independable of a motion, it has the local time of the structure
    • if one decreases the temperature close to zero Kelvin, one can extract kinetic energy from particles, particles come in a kind of superposition and being in a state belonging for 50% to a structure for which the local time of that particles is going to come close to 0, nature creates then a fake structure for that particle and shows that particle on more places at the same time, this is the same mechanism as for motion from one to another space unit (this is not the case for particles of light, called photons, that particles are always in motion with the speed of light and have a local time 0 or timeless)
    • locations are vectors, velocities are locations with a time factor, because of that time factor is not linear by greater speeds for the observer, velocities are no vectors but can be considered as vectors by lower velocities (time close to the local time)
    • for entanglement, there is a time 0 or timeless connection (again the same mechanism as for motion from one to another space unit), both elementary particles are part of a structure, it seems me not likely that there is a connection through all the space units between both if there also other structures go all over, but is more a matter of vectors via the fourth dimension
    • one talks about parallel worlds, because there have been originated a universe there must be an anti-universe which makes the total 0 again, but because energy is nothing more than a number as I think (nothing physically, but mathematically responsible for motion and so time) are there possibilities enough if one not only thinks in coincidences ..
    • probably are mass and energy (mass = energy) also emergent properties, but yet I think that energy is a vector in 1 dimension (all energy is addable) and therefore can be projected from the fourth dimension, but only active in a structure. Because natural resistance / braking (= time) depends on energy ratio's, you have the link how time can exist from the fourth dimension via vectors, while the time there 0 is! For the mathematician: the time dilation factor is √(1 - v²/c²), writing different is this (et - ek) / et) for which ek is the kinetic energy and et the total energy of the structure ( *) see derivation at the bottom, emergent energy is as well mass as time). So, I guess that the local time of the starting situation at the Big Bang shall depend also from energy ratios because the structures are in motion, v = c . √(1 - ((et - ek) / et)²). These formulas are valid seen from an observer. To prevent confusion with so called frames of reference in which kinetic energy can be different seen depended on observers (there is difference between a real local time for an object and a time valid seen from an observer for an object which have not been departed from the observer, it will be clear I think in my study about the General Theory of Relativity that the local times of 2 objects together are the same again after motions with accelerating and slwing down, (04/12/17) meanwhile I have this argued with somewhat reading and is not right, see explantion below at 04/12/17), and it goes about the subject time, imagine the example (purer) of e.g. a traveling clock which is the object with velocity v and have been departed from the observer. The time in the clock goes slower and the clock have been gotten more kinetic energy. Fortunately, I had been reading today that there is kinetic energy in an object and always the same seen from different frames of reference (I have to wait in my studies), that must be, otherwise there could not exist local time stationary. And finally have everything be originated from 1 point during the Big Bang. So, the local time on earth is depended from the ratio kinetic energy of the earth through space (formed from objects in motion because of the Big Bang) and the total energy of earth (structure). The "gravitational force" has only a little effect on the local time and have also to do with energy (clocks above the earth run somewhat faster than on earth). I had this once already described in my other webpage. The real kinetic energy from a structure belongs to its local time which have been originated through the speed v and belonging time dilation and extra kinetic energy with another structure as starting point. The time dilation and extra kinetic energy of a structure observed by an observer, belongs at another speed v which have been seen by the observer, this is in fact the local time and extra kinetic energy of a structure when it had been started from the observer. This difference will be clear once if one can be taking pictures timeless (with the technique of the entangled particles) from clocks on structures which have not been started from the observer (possibly is this already the common thought). Then it will be clear that a clock on a structure not started from the observer, shall not point to its dilated calculated time but just the local time. Only a clock started from the observer shall point to its dilated calculated time, with other words, there must be really something in motion between an observer and observed structure in motion for meaningful time calculations (e.g. a GPS signal).
    • in my studies, I am curious in quantum mechanics later to the state vectors of particles, these vectors have the properties of particles, and so form a so called linear vector space (I must wait yet on the subject). In that same way e.g. form all thinkable shapes (are vectors) from a vibrating string also a so called linear vector space. So, within our space dimensions which also form a linear vector space (our "arrows"), so there exist other linear vector spaces as well. So, one linear vector space shall be depended from another linear vector space I guess. As far as I think now shall the covering vector space be energy, a four-dimensional vector space but within our 3 space dimensions only 1 dimension big ..
    • it is now also clear that the link time 0 or timeless in the fourth dimension with time in the third dimension only possible is through quantum units (are smallest units) in the third dimension

    (15/08/17) I see now that I must explain the local time 0 or timeless etc. better because the explanation is maybe not clear enough.
    I give below a summarize from my thoughts (presently):
    • local time is, as I think, the time a structure (materials) in motion experiences like e.g. the earth, so as a clock (the motion) runs on our planet, another structure in motion starting from the earth experiences another local time with that same clock, the time of earth but slower etc. as described in the Theory of Relativity, time is a form of natural resistance / braking
    • the first structures (materials) since the Big Bang, as I think, are originated immediately from the fourth dimension and have been gotten a first local time not equal 0 from the moment of existence, for that reason in motion from the first moment
    • as I think, all elementary particles (particles of a structure), are particles projected from the fourth dimension in the first structures, and have a local time 0 or timeless if they not belonging to a structure (materials), so just as the fourth dimension it selves they are timeless and probably take no space
    • as soon they belong to a structure, as I think, they take space and take over the local time of the structure, so if a second particle would be in motion starting from the first particle the local time will be that from the structure, so time is equally for all particles in the whole structure
    • a particle of light (photon) is an exception, it has the local time 0 or timeless from the fourth dimension and also the local time 0 or timeless in motion in the third dimension, there is no new motion possible starting from a photon, because a photon undergoes no natural resistance / braking (it has no mass) and undergoes no forces, it has in space the highest constant speed possible, always in motion with the speed of light (I think because this is in space encapsulated, for motion is the maximum distance possible per (slower) time unit equally c for an observer, therefore is the speed of light c, in that case this would then also a link between time and space. Space exists out of vectors which are locations and so projectable from the fourth dimension. So, you could write, through the projection of energy ratios from the fourth dimension originates time and space, and can space extends it selves with at maximum the speed of light for the observer. It are little steps but for me a good start for the insight!)
    • even though that time is an emergent property within a structure, the entanglement between particles is a time 0 or timeless connection via the fourth dimension (how the reality is, it have all to be right in mathematics to the fourth dimension)
    • are there no isolated not particles of light at all with the local time 0 or timeless in the third dimension, maybe not as I think, remember that experiments with particles always happens in a group (so structures), also in CERN (particle accelerator). I think that such particles with the local time 0 or timeless don't have space and time, still being in the fourth dimension and can't yet to project in the third dimension (e.g. being perpendicular on the third dimension).
    • during my studies, I must discover what is right or not in my thoughts, without own thoughts I was never started these studies

    (13/09/17) How could you see space?
    As I think now. Elementary particles have no time and no space in the fourth dimension, but get time and space (emergent properties) in structures in the third dimension. Time have been specified by the ratio kinetic energy and total energy (= mass). Via molecules in structures everything gets its own shape. In motion or just to be there in motion in space, get elementary particles and so structures space. Particles of light (photons) have also in the third dimension or space, a local time 0 or timeless, but get also space in motion or just to be there in motion in space (particles of light have only kinetic energy and no mass). Space units (quanta) have also no space in the fourth dimension and are also not in motion in the third dimension, but are all entangled with each other (according the last vision in physics) in the third dimension. Because space units originate at the edge of space, the already formed space can still exist through that entanglement in this process. Possibly there are gaps in space which are filled later, by which it looks there is space being originated. For structures in motion and for "gravitational" waves locally, observers see the so-called length contraction in structures. So, then its shape changes for that observers (just a visual effect). As I think I see a model of vectors in the fourth dimension which immediately (timeless) changes because of a new situation e.g. in our 3 dimensions. It is possible that the fourth dimension only exist because of our 3 dimensions exist to make it mathematically correct, otherwise there was nothing in the total model, possibly is nothing out of balance. So, every time that something is in motion in our 3 dimensions, the model in the fourth dimension is timeless updated. If you could describe physically or mathematically what that model doing updating timelessly, you understand more of the concept space, so what space is.

    (20/09/17) Time is emergent, our universe is timeless!
    Now it will be more logically suddenly after all that thinking. It follows from above mentioned that all space units are timeless and that the energy ratio specifies how long a structure stays in such space unit (is speed). Space units are entangled with each other and so form a timeless universe (that is the first layer I have written about). So as well the fourth and third dimension are timeless, that is also easier to understand. The second layer I have written about, are in fact the functions from that space units. E.g. a structure can only be in motion if all space units work together, that is the whole structure have to be moved to a next space unit at the same moment, so each space unit have to know the energy ratio of the whole structure. For particles of light (photons) is that only the kinetic energy and is that ratio always 1. For entangled particles have that space units also a function possibly to exchange info timelessly. And possibly have that space units also a function to give elementary particles a shape if they belong to a structure and so again react on energy ratio's (vector hologram with info from fourth dimension), but now only on the kinetic energy just as for particles of light (photons). How faster a structure is, how more kinetic energy needed and how more a hologram must be projected. That all is very abstract shall be clear. It looks if all have been programmed! So each location in our universe is timeless as long there are no materials, then the local time of that materials is the time (could be a clock). The functions in a space unit are of course functions from the fourth dimension. Even there wouldn't exist space units, this story can be right also, we are just looking for connections / relations, we understand nothing! E.g. time originates locally in the third dimension as kinetic energy and total energy converging (projected from the fourth dimension), if that energies not converging in the fourth dimension the time stays 0 there. It is finding of vectors models in the fourth dimension which projected form the properties in the third dimension, indeed complex models! Maybe is space or are space units just (stationary) particles with which other particles react (temporary), just so strange / normally as normal particles. There is yet nothing to understand! So, space can exist without time, time (in/on) materials can be created by adding materials in motion to that empty space. So empty space is timeless, and even an empty space only filled with light is still timeless (local time is 0). That proves also the fact that there exist an embedded constant c in space by which the speed of light is c. Nevertheless a speed is only measurable with a clock and then you need first materials.

    (22/09/17) Is nothing out of balance?
    Example time structure in 1 dimension

    Figure 0.2B Example time structure in 1 dimension
    Suppose that the third dimension in which we live a sub linear vector space W is (that "arrows") from the fourth dimension and that each vector A in the fourth dimension has an anti-vector -A by which the total stays 0, but that only vector A have been projected in that third dimension W. So -A have not been projected from the fourth dimension, then you could say the total is 0 but it is out of balance. And all projections of vectors -A don't need to form a parallel sub linear vector space (a form of parallel world). In figure 02.B I have again made an example (see also 02.A) as if we live in 1 dimension (line) to make it again more understandable. Then you see there a structure with projected kinetic energy ek and total energy et (two converging vectors) which form the local time of that structure in that dimension. In the second dimension (the surface) you see also that vectors ek and et which don't converge, so the time stays there 0, and together with the anti-vectors stays everything 0. If there is motion in the first dimension, the vectors follow in the second dimension for which the time always stays 0.
    But if you would this all imagine in the fourth dimension, e.g. time may would exist also there for such structure because everything has another meaning there then in the third dimension, in the fourth dimension you may call everything information as e.g. the information for a vector hologram which gives a structure a shape through projection from the fourth dimension. In this way I see for me the complex vector models which form our world!
    (23/09/17) My time 0 or timeless final conclusion FOR NOW (physically)! It depends all from what is true in my thinking since 2011 (see above). The concept emergent from the Dutch physicist Erik Verlinde have been given me more ideas. As I think now, there exist no time in our empty space (time 0 or timeless) but only there where are materials. So anyone in motion has his/her own clock, although running almost equally. No time in a location shall not be checkable, because one can't measure time in a space location without a clock. But all timeless space units after each other gives a timeless space. Motion of materials happen in timeless space. So there don't exist so called fields in space which are responsible for natural resistance / braking (time), but as I think, time originates from the fourth dimension (projection of ratio kinetic energy and total energy). But if that natural resistance / braking (time) do come from the fourth dimension, so nothing physical in space (third dimension), or from the Higgs fields (physical, but where I don't believe in anymore) makes no difference in explanations as I have used often in this website with Higgs fields. So, in the fourth dimension there are vectors models which projected give our world. Intuitive it would me not surprise, knowing mathematics, that the fourth dimension again depends on the fifth dimension etc. and so for infinite dimensions. With other words, the beginning of all shall never be found by which things are as they are. Therefore I don't think in coincidences, everything have been built too ingenious. If all was a coincidence, it would be easier to find an explanation. But of course there exist coincidence in our world, without coincidence live could not be challenging, we have to do it by ourselves. Personally I see live as a step to take and therefore I am not afraid for death.

    But of course I continue my studies able to check my thoughts, but faithfully I think not to see surprises anymore broadly speaking (rather more details). Just waiting, but the Schröder equation from the Quantum Mechanics stays exciting! But somewhere I expect with this equation to get new ideas again. It is notable already that the wave functions as sinus and cosines etc. everywhere appear in physics and mathematics, the balancing around nothing. I learn slowly through the lack of time, so I take the time to understand the basics very well. With learning fast you miss this often, unfortunately live is very short!

    So entangled particles have contact via a timeless connection via the fourth dimension. The local time from each structure in motion started from another structure in motion, is only dependable of its speed, so with the same speed is the ratio kinetic energy and total energy equally for all structures, big or small. So one can explain the local time of the first structures at the Big Bang (structures coming out of nothing or the fourth dimension, without Big "Bang" there can't exist time). Because all space units are timeless, it is possible to create a timeless path between all structures in space. With other words, in one or the other way there can be created a connection via the fourth dimension. If somebody find something ingenious to use that connection, contact can be made with other inhabitants of space who at least have our intellect!

    But now you know that our universe is timeless, is it possible that there exists an unknown vector in the third dimension which can connect two structures timeless (I don't believe that really yet, physical things are for the third dimension, no physical things like information, for the fourth dimension, see example below)! We know already entanglement of particles and with black holes one thinks also something like that (but not timeless, one thinks at wormholes)!

    So summarized (I am not going to change my old text each time) how I think now about space and time: as well the fourth (or higher) and third dimension (universe) are timeless. Space can be emergent because valid already after minimal 2 units. Isolated particles or space units don't have space and don't have time and are possibly yet in the fourth dimension. Structures have emergent space (volume) and emergent time, so to the most little level there is 1 time. So structures are in motion in timeless space. Structures have emergent gravitational force and emergent energy. Space units are entangled with each other because they have to cooperate for the motion of a structure.

    In this document "What quantum mechanics describes is discontinuous motion of particles" from Chinese scientists on my second webpage (search on text), they have been proved probably space units (quantum units). I can't read this yet because I am not far enough in my studies, but I find also this document exciting!

    What thoughts (04/10/17), everything starts with thoughts, proves and understanding follow mostly later after years and years (if right) .. Although I don't know all the subjects, I know the mathematics now, I can't read yet the Chinese document above through the absence of enough knowledge, I was thinking about that document why a particle would be in motion discontinue (so from space unit to space unit, a so called quantum unit) but not a structure (so not from space unit to space unit, but fluently). Also it is not clear for me if everything is right in that document. But it have been given ideas to me about everything. The Theory of Relativity describes the laws for structures (macroscopics). The Quantum Mechanics describes the laws on the level of particles (microscopic) which finally have to prove the laws of the Theory of Relativity (macroscopics = total microscopic). Then you have the String Theory from which I only know one sees a particle as a vibrating string, and this brought also ideas. In mathematics it is well known that the motion of a vibrating string (there started the idea of the String Theory I think) exists out of a sum from basic motions from infinite dimensions with 1 basic motion per dimension. With other words, you can't determine the beginning. This have been called a linear vector space in mathematics and have been used often in many subjects in physics. Are all dimensions the same for that kind of vector spaces, I don't think so, because e.g. every basic motion of a vibrating string is two dimensional, so a first dimension is there different then for space (is a line). We have all problems with what is space or what is time (motion). Just as for the vibrating string this can be just all sums of infinite pieces of space and time from infinite dimensions, because of that you shall never find the beginning and can't imagine it. The Chinese document proves there exists space units and further analyzing (see above) that the universe is timeless. As motion not have been determined by our (timeless) universe, the motion on structure level can be just continues (so not from space unit to space unit, but fluently), after all have been determined by higher dimensions. So, a quantum unit doesn't mean generally it is the smallest unit. So emergent time comes from the materials (structures) it selves and have to do with the projection of energies from a higher dimension. So the whole secret of nature have been locked in particles via properties, which perform emergent in structures (energy, mass, gravitational force, space and time). Energy would be probably the basis for all. Particles can also be presented as waves. Possibly are all that properties in one of the other way saved in that wave, and exist that wave again out of basic waves from infinite dimensions etc. With other words, there is nothing to imagine as we are used in daily life. And I think also, as you already know how I think, that energy is just a number, not a physic power. But I know the law of energy conservation, we have to decide by ourselves how we use of reuse that "energy". Is all a coincidence? (I know it is more popular to call that everything is a coincidence) (08/10/17) Could you now explain "gravitational force" better (roughly, possibly not exactly)? So, possibly are all structures in the universe timeless with each other connected because space is timeless. This is possibly another kind of connection than particles entanglement (possibly caused by humans). It would be possible that there exist an attempt in nature distance dependable (and via the fourth dimension), to be in motion in the direction of the greatest total energy because closer to the average of both, possible through that timeless connection. (19/10/17) So, gravitational force could be possibly an attempt of nature to be one again after the Big Bang! If e.g. a structure leaves the Earth with a specified speed, there is extra kinetic energy necessary because the local time of that structure goes slower, this is opposite to that attempt so costs extra kinetic energy than in the normal situation somewhere in space far from big masses. Energy needed, needs force. In fact this costs kinetic energy from the Earth, by which its local time is going somewhat faster. The other way around, if a structure comes closer to the Earth that attempt is stronger to move direction Earth. It takes by that attempt kinetic energy from the Earth through that timeless connection by which the local time of that structure goes slower, comes closer to the Earth and takes again kinetic energy from the Earth and accelerates. There is no force used because that kinetic energy have been gotten from the Earth free. Would that structure fall on the Earth, the kinetic energy returns again. Skims that structure over the Earth, costs extra kinetic energy again and returns again to the Earth by that timeless connection. And e.g. a stationary clock above the Earth runs somewhat faster than on Earth. Because that attempt above the Earth lesser strong is then on Earth, there have been used lesser kinetic energy. And as I think changes the local time for a little moment with a gravitational wave, so a gravitational wave must have positive / negative kinetic energy and being able to act on the local kinetic energy by which the visual phenomenon length contraction occurs observable by equipment which is the observer in that case. What could be time 0 or timeless more? Because time is an energy ratio, could be there where no time exists, possibly a lot of energy be available and in quantum or space units eventually. The rest of my explanation above stays the same, possibly that during falling because of the gravitational force energy have been taken from the environment and later have been giving back eventually. The local time of light is 0 and has only kinetic energy, so light could be travelling through a field with 1 kind of energy. The Big Bang is the Mother All Motions by which time have been originated and can't be stopped anymore, and all other motions with time are originated from that mother motions. (15/10/17) So, the Theory of Relativity is not valid for particles, only for structures! So space is timeless, particles of light are timeless and ordinary particles (materials) are timeless too because are "in motion" in timeless space. Between timeless particles there exist timeless connections as for entanglement (logically). That time exist within a structure is understandable, convert mass within a structure to kinetic energy and its structure time shall going slower. Back to the level of particles. So undependable of the speed of a particle, the local time of a particle can't being changed because is always 0 (just as for light), a particle contributes only to the local time of its structure. So the physical laws on the level of particles are different then on the level of structures. The speed of light has only a meaning on structure level (materials), within that structure and belonging time, another structure with slower going time can only approaching the speed of light. So the speed of light has been arranged always within a structure and has always a fixed value c (also arranged in the fourth dimension). The local time of light is 0, but the speed of light belongs to the local time of a structure. Difference timeless and time? So a structure has time and can be only found simultaneously at one location in timeless space. Particles are timeless and can therefore be found eventually in more locations simultaneously in timeless space. Now I understand to try this with structures in experiments never succeed. With Lorentz / Einstein it took many years to understand slower going time, physicists are also normal people with a specific world view, the concept timeless needs its time too. But there is nothing to understand in physics (that said a teacher physics already once to me), there are only connections / relations being found which give a new world view! (22/10/17) Additional: so extra kinetic energy necessary for eventually motions of particles (e.g. increasing of temperature) or extracting kinetic energy from particles (e.g. decreasing of temperature) have no impact on time of a structure and so on the kinetic energy of a structure. In the last situation occurs the timeless property of a particle in one of the other way, it is to localize in more places at the same time. So in one of the other way are these separated processes, being timeless and the contribution to time of a structure. (01/11/17) Universal time, simultaneity and the timeless. I still don't know exactly how the others think about the Theory of Relativity (but I read it later in my studies, but for me I see some things "different" I think), but as a second structure is in motion from a first structure (only 1 is really in motion because of the followed path compared with the point of the Big Bang and this is here the second structure) then the local time on the second structure (a real clock have been used on that second structure) goes slower with a time dilation factor belonging to the speed difference between the two structures, that speed have been specified in the local time of the first structure. If the other way around a third structure is in motion from the second structure in the direction of the first structure with the same speed difference, but now in the slower time of the second structure, the belonging time dilation factor would be identic, so the local time of the third structure would be again going slower. From the second structure, the local time and the speed difference (in the local time of the second structure), you can calculate the faster going local time of the first structure, the speed difference in the local time of the first structure is the same. This is right too thinking in energy ratios, each (extra) motion costs more kinetic energy, the direction is not important. This all argued as an observer "stationary" in an environment with the local time of the first structure. Each other observer don't see the real local time, but a local time if a structure would be in motion from his / her location. This all to make it clear how I think about the Theory of Relativity according the Lorentz time dilation factor. If you connect groups of points from all structures with recalculated times timeless with each other, e.g. via entangled connections, you can speak literally of simultaneity (as I think). This is only possible I think, if there exists an universal time, and exists as I think. The Big Bang have been given a same constant velocity to all structures but not really necessary, may be also different constant velocities, so have all gotten a ratio kinetic energy and total energy, belonging to a specific local time. If you could determine the velocity of one such structure in its local time compared with the point of the Big Bang, you could determine the starting faster going universal time, mother of all slower going local times through many motions. However being impossible possibly through the degree of difficulty, but still exists (call this just x). (16/10/17) Again summarized (as I think of course) Time can be universally because it can be converted between e.g. inhabited worlds or other structures (e.g. a table) with other velocities. Time has been originated during the Big Bang and is emergent (only a group of particles knows time). So only structures know time as e.g. that inhabited worlds or other structures (e.g. a table) which are all travelling through the universe since the Big Bang. This time is good enough for daily life. However on the level of particles there seems to be no time existing, the universe seems to be timeless, but particles contribute to emergent properties as time etc. to the structures they belonging to, within that structures there exist only one time. So structures travel through timeless space. The Theory of Relativity is only valid for structures. Particles contribute to time in structures via the fourth dimension because space is timeless (no natural resistance / braking). This means that eventually "motions" of particles must be argued different. They are in motion according one time within a structure, they are timeless, and the velocity of a particle have no influence on time. So the Theory of Relativity is not valid on this level. So now I am going for the time being studying again and let this subject in piece for a while. I am curious later to the String Theory because I have learned now not to try understanding something! Meanwhile the gold fever has been broken off in the universe .. (a last idea already removed, variations in time are not noticed probably, but in gravitational force they are) .. (26/11/17) Complex numbers better explained, I hope. Many people have sometimes / often problems with complex numbers, me too sometimes, and then it is better to make a short summarize which you can read back always, of what the meaning of complex numbers is on moments in doubt. Because without that understanding is physics (especially the Quantum Mechanics) difficult to understand. The existence of complex numbers proofs in fact already that everything in nature have been controlled by vectors (that arrows). With the aid of complex numbers you can do calculations "numerically" on vectors without to be busy graphically with that vectors (e.g. an arrow ended in (3,4) can be written as a complex number 3 + 4.i, but representing a vector exactly through a complex number is only possible in the first two dimensions, so a vector in 3 dimensions can't be represented by a complex number, but a vector from the first two dimensions can be converted to that vector in 3 dimensions with the aid of complex numbers). But with complex numbers within a dimension you can only convert vectors to 1 dimension higher. Suppose you do calculations with complex numbers in the first dimension, then you can only convert vectors from the first dimension to the first two dimensions (1 dimension higher). Do you calculations in e.g. 8 dimensions, then with complex numbers you can convert vectors to max. 16 dimensions etc. You must see functions with vectors as what is the result vector (y) from that function, for each arbitrary vector (x). If you have functions, as learned in basic mathematics, then you see ordinary numbers x for which a value y exists. If you now consider that ordinary numbers x as a subset of vectors laying on the x-axis, then are the related values y, the result vectors in that function. But if you take other arbitrary vectors not laying on the x-axis as x, you get many more result vectors in that function. So with ordinary numbers, you see graphically (x and y-axis) only a fragment of that function. According the natural mathematics has e.g. a function with squares of x always 2 solutions for which y is 0. But some functions have 0 solutions with ordinary numbers. But then there seem to be 2 solutions yet with complex numbers. With other words, that function gives the result vector 0 (y) for 2 vectors not laying on the x-axis. It have to be clear now that functions in nature cover vectors. If you for example want to see complex solutions for such function together with the function it selves in 1 view, then copy link: "http://blog.mrwaddell.net/archives/339". But this is all pure mathematics, in physics it have to be also a meaning. You can have the same function in any dimension, but yet with another meaning. Suppose you use such function for financial calculations with ordinary numbers. Then you are busy with vectors in the first dimension (just as for energy), for each vector x there is a vector y but in one dimension (where vectors have only 2 directions, positive or negative, with the aid of graphics with an x and y-axis, so in 2 dimensions, you can make it better visually). That such function can have also complex solutions for y = 0, have only a meaning if such function would be used in 2 dimensions for which x and y can be vectors in all directions e.g. forces. Velocities can't be added as vectors in the Theory of Relativity, but the result is still a vector (has a value and direction), but velocities don't form a so called linear vector space anymore. In calculations with complex numbers you see often constructions as e.g. ei . θ, but this is just another notation for cos θ + i . sin θ (θ is an angle in radians), with that e powers is it easier to calculate. These constructions have been originated from the calculation rules for complex numbers and exist out of parts from the world of calculations for ordinary numbers. So consider those as calculation tricks. (04/12/17) Which thoughts are right now in the Theory of Relativity and what is not right I think in the Theory of Relativity (or maybe is right but I can't really find that)? 1) I think for years now from the Lorentz formula that time is going slower again if an object is in motion from another object in motion, but had never checked if it is right that the followed path is not important, with other words if 2 objects via other followed paths being one again, so have the same speed for an observer, the time dilation must be the same for both. And that is right fortunately, with examples and calculations checked (Wiki, relative velocity addition). You would think the finally dilation factor would be the multiplication of all dilation factors of the followed paths, but there is one factor more. And that factor is related to the formula of the end velocity seen from the observer. So all my writing have not being meaningless fortunately, because if it was not right you could nothing with it. But this have nothing to do with the local time of that objects, that time can still be different, think at somebody standing on a station, and a running person in opposite direction on a running train, both can be "stationary" for an observer at the station but both have a different local time (the observer has a local time A, that somebody on the station has local time A, the running person on the train has local time B to see on its watch, the time dilation factor for the running person and that somebody on the station calculated from the observer is 1 because there is no velocity between them). 2) Also I think all that years that others think in the Theory of Relativity, if 2 objects A and B are in motion away from each other, the clock is running slower in both objects A and B seen from the other. And that is not right I think, if one thinks that really. There is only one object from both that seen from the followed paths since the Big Bang is in extra motion (unless both objects are in motion the same since the Big Bang). The object B in extra motion, there is really the clock running slower with dilation factor F. For the other object A the clock runs still the same. If there from B an object C is in motion in direction object A, then the clock runs slower in C with the same dilation factor F if the velocity seen from B would be the same of B seen from A. So the real time is the local time of an object, but observers see other times seen from their local time, they see that time in calculations as if the belonging object would be in motion from their location. The real local time is in fact also not important for objects which you didn't bring in motion by yourself, it goes about the travel times from other objects / signals between from/to that object and yourself for calculations. And the local time is only really different for big velocity differences which we don't experience in daily life and space around us. Again, with local time I don't mean the position of hands within a clock but the rhythm of the clock (fast or slow for "our" 1 second). (04/12/17) Mass is energy, but time is an energy ratio! So it is now clear as I think, that time for objects in motion originated from the observer, the real local time is. The time dilation factor seen from the observer doesn't depend from the followed path with inter velocities, but is the same calculated for the velocity of an object measured as the crow flies from the observer. If the observer now is the start of the Big Bang with a starting local time x, then all objects in space have a local time gotten from the starting time x. Between the objects it must be right too, because it is independent from the followed paths. Later I must study better the mathematics proof of path undependable. But I got immediately the thought of the line integral for a force (is energy, a line integral is the total of pieces along the line, so here e.g. the total of pieces of force x path) which is independent from the followed path. Local time is as I think, the ratio kinetic energy and total energy of an object (earlier explained in this webpage) since the Big Bang. So this ratio is path independent. So seen from the Big Bang one can imagine kinetic energy as an imaginary force following a path as long as the object has not reached a constant speed. The total kinetic energy is path independent, but of course dependable from the end velocity. With this all it is immediately clear that the local time goes slower by acceleration, but faster again by slowing down (therefore it can be path dependent). Giving that I think the natural resistance / braking forming time, is not originated in our space or dimensions, this force is a pretended force. The same pretended force as somebody who falls down, don't seem to feel a "gravitational force", it have only to do with energy. The other way around you need force to escape from earth, but in fact you need only energy. Giving that I believe energy is nothing physically, we live in a kind of unreal world looking for us real, but it doesn't matter as long as you can enjoy live in your own way! (19/12/17) What is the difference between an observer in the point of the Big Bang or somewhere else? At other locations an observer can observe other "stationary" objects with the same local time as the observer it selves. This is not possible for an observer in the point of the Big Bang. For the concept time everything have to be in motion at the Big Bang, otherwise The Theory of Relativity is not valid. All times are going slower then in the point of the Big Bang.

    (28/09/17) Example difference between something physical (third dimension) and information (fourth dimension)! As I think of course. This is now a nice opportunity for a simple example. So I don't believe anymore in physical Higgs fields in the third dimension which deliver the natural resistance / braking responsible for time (but still usable in explanations). The universe is timeless, so space units don't give natural resistance / braking. Time for materials (structures) have been specified by energy ratios. Materials are physical in the third dimension (= total energy) and kinetic energy is also physical (e.g. a person riding on a bicycle). The vectors models in the fourth dimension are unknown for the time being, which may give more details about time. Then you could make up Higgs fields existing out a quantity of information just as much as the energy ratios (kinetic energy / total energy). That information gives natural resistance / braking by which the local time will be slower when that structure goes faster. So now you have formulized something from the fourth dimension by which time may be understand better than only by energy ratios.

    (08/01/18) I think that structural (emergent) kinetic energy and local kinetic energy are a different kind of energies! I had already what thoughts (see above) but through the lack of time it takes what longer to formulate that thoughts better. With structural (emergent) kinetic energy I mean that kinetic energy that (timeless) particles via the fourth dimension emergent attribute to the structure they belong to. With local kinetic energy I mean that kinetic energy of particles in motion within a structure. This kinetic energy originates e.g. by temperature (in fact exchange of energy), but also temperature is emergent, temperature don't exist for 1 particle. The structural (emergent) kinetic energy have an influence on local time within a structure (Theory of Relativity). The local kinetic energy seems to have no influence on local time, viz. if one decrease the temperature close to 0 Kelvin, appears the timeless character of particles, they are visible on different locations at the same time while they still travel with the structure in motion (since the Big Bang). If one thinks already like this I don't know, but I don't think so seen the experiments trying to make structures also visible on different locations at the same time (but I think that is not possible because structures have always time). So, the Theory of Relativity is not valid for particles, only for structures! You are going to think more and more that particles are just a little bundle of properties from the fourth dimension .. how so, living in an unreal world?

    (15/01/18) What is now the Theory of Relativity very short explained (as I think of course) and what is my goal with this website? (it seems that I repeat myself often, but such summaries in between can often being clear for the whole concept, also for myself) Thought from energy. Suppose you have in space (no friction) a structure A in motion with a constant velocity in the shape of a platform, and on that platform a structure B (e.g. a ball) in motion with a constant velocity according a repeated standard motion. With the aid of more energy (because you undergo more natural resistance / braking) you can increase the constant velocity of structure A (platform), that energy is also partly divided over structure B (the ball) because undergoes also natural resistance / braking which to have win over. Structure B (the ball) is going slower in motion over that platform because that repeated standard motion is going slower, viz. the kinetic energy that structure B (the ball) already had for the repeated standard motion delivers through the higher natural resistance / braking lesser motion. Such repeated standard motion have we by ourselves introduced and calling time, structure B (the ball) therefore can be replaced by a clock which is going to run slower. Mathematically you can show this because the velocity of structure B (the ball) seen from an observer is decreasing (in his / her time), so on balance, structure B (the ball) travels lesser meters then before. This is for all motions on that platform, everything goes slower, except light what always have to be seen for all observers with the same velocity (but goes also slower for observers on that platform, but because the time is going slower the speed of light is still the same). Observers see visual effects as length contraction (something seeing smaller) only based on the velocity differences between observer and other structures, for which it doesn't matter what is in motion really seen relative. That light always is being seen with the same speed of light by observers have to do that observers see a longer or shorter wavelength of light what have been originated on other locations. Together with this mathematics and that about the gravitational force, there are more derivations like e.g. for light not following a straight line in gravitational fields etc. And now my goal! In terms of logic I have never believed that all is a coincidence, in our world yes because otherwise there couldn't exist challenges, but not let's say before the Big Bang. I am totally not religious, in fact a humanist, but I am also not stoical blind by denying everything without having knowledge about all. So I try to see through everyday and trying to show that nothing is what it seems. Would everything being a coincidence, then it wouldn't matter what I and others think, nothing would have a meaning in that case, then would live being nothing else then surviving (all your actions and behavior would be only based thereon, unconsciously or consciously). If I would think in that simplistic way, I would not live anymore for 1 second, 100% meaningless! You would then be a little heap of molecules with AI, but the difference between AI and a human being is e.g. that AI needs thousand of pictures of a cow to recognize a cow and a human being needs only 1 picture, but I don't know if AI after a long time needs a picture also once, and if AI ever can come so far that it asks it selves the question who am I. I think if you could others convinced that our whole existing is no coincidence, you can create easily a better world (possibly our goal) because everybody starts to think differently and is not busy anymore especially with oneself. Then many problems resolve it selves. I try with this website to inspire especially young people to continue this line of thought (I am not young anymore) to show scientifically right that everything is no coincidence, to create in this way a better world. Also is it important to explain subjects from physics short and clear to not physicists, so that everybody have knowledge about the world around oneself. I am positive grounded by myself and find that the world is going better step by step, but that can be caused by increasing prosperity, it could also suddenly change because humans are still egocentric and selfish from inside (but I think being lesser egocentric and selfish these days)!

    Example emergent energy is as well mass as time

    Figure 0.3 Example emergent energy is as well mass as time
    (15/01/18) Mass is energy and maybe is energy also time! Above already argued that time an energy ratio is from kinetic energy and total energy. But you could consider that total energy also as kinetic energy gotten from the Big Bang and so determines the local time. So the expansion of this energy from the local time through extra motion (kinetic energy), let that local time slow down (time dilation). And this expansion can be lesser in relation to the total energy, it is just how everything have been designed. So the Big Bang gives mass energy and causes time, so being in motion is essential to let everything exist. So everything can be reduced to energy to make it all right in physics, and energy is probably nothing (so an unreal world)! So e.g. at the explosion of an atom bomb there comes no energy free from particles (but they represent a structure), but kinetic energy from a structure (or structures) for which the biggest part have been gotten by the Big Bang and a smaller part through extra motion after the Big Bang .. (03/02/18) Emergent energy is as well mass as time (amount versus density)! *) see also derivation 12/08/17 below. I knew already that mass increases if the total energy increases, mass is dependable of the quantity of particles which represent a structure, so how bigger a structure how greater the mass. According the formula derivation is local time also dependable from that energy. How more energy per particle how slower the local time, so just the other way around. Is the energy of a structure being increased, the mass is increased (weight is being called the rest mass), the energy of a particle is increased and the local time is running slower. So if a structure is bigger or smaller, as long each particle represents the same energy, is the local time of both structures equally. (09/02/18) The energy of light represents no mass and time, but contributes possibly to the emergent mass and time of the belonging structure, so that this hypothesis is right also. Light has no mass and the local time of light is 0. Light originates in a structure (materials) and stays connected to that structure (in this way I understood this always with so called frames of reference) as long it has not been absorbed in another structure. So the total energy of that structure stays the same for which the mass and time stays equally for that structure. The speed of light belongs to the local time of that structure. (20/02/18) Figure 0.3 is a so called light mill. This mill comes in motion if touched by sunlight (only if the sun is shining). What is exactly happening as how I think ? The structure is being stationary and has the same local time as the environment e.g. the same local time as the observer. If the sun is shining energy have been absorbed by the structure, the structure mass increases and its local time goes slower, the average energy of all particles have been increased, therefore the mill comes in motion (if the friction have been win over). If the sun isn't shining anymore, all extra energy is consuming by the friction and the mill stops and returns again to the mass and local time at the initial state. But as well the observer as the mill stationary, are in motion with a great velocity through the universe since the Big Bang what the local time determines "stationary" (as our clock is running). What is to understand about this all, absolute nothing! It are all links / relations / connections using in daily life to make our live more pleasant as e.g. our means of transport. (24/02/18) As I think you can solve all mysteries about time and mass just to think in energy, e.g. the gravitational force .. but taking in account that an observer not always the real local time (or energy) sees .. But if the local time is different, one sees of course length contraction just as for passing gravitational waves. Now I have to repeat some other thoughts on this webpage, but it fits in this subject. As two structures are going to merge, their local times are being equally after if they are stationary, this merging is not immediately but gradually within a specified zone. So I think at the gravitational force, possibly an attempt of nature to be one again after the Big Bang. If a little object is localized in that zone of a bigger object, then receives that little object (in fact the object with the least energy) timeless (think at teleportation) a part of the energy of that bigger object, how closer how more, until they merge. Therefore the mass and so energy for that little object increases more and more, think at clocks above the earth (also stationary) which are running slower when closer to the earth. All provided energy through that bigger object returns again. How more energy that bigger object have, how more energy can being provided proportionally to that little object, how more the gravitational force is. Therefore I don't believe anymore in curved space, although it would be possible. Light seems only to turn off visually in the neighborhood of very big objects like suns, because light have a little energy, is the provided energy through a very big object (so with many energy) proportionally only worth the effort for visually turn off under the high speed of light. You should think that curved light is better to see (brighter) because it then gets more energy, once passing that sun the energy is given back to escape. (26/2/18) So probably is it not mass undergoing gravitational force, but energy (per particle). Then you could think that light has also a local time if undergoing the gravitational force, but the local time of light is 0. It could be possible then if light gets more or lesser energy, it has an effect on the emergent local time of the belonging structure where that light originated. But increasing of energy for a structure can have another effect qua local time then for light. But it goes here about minimum changes. (04/03/18) Curved space. Because everything travels with a great velocity though space since the Big Bang and you would believe in curved space, then space have to been curved locally during traveling through space without causing any interruption, because space is not traveling through space. I should think then that the obits in which many objects are in motion have been caused through a kind of balance that possibly can be the same explanation. I can imagine myself that e.g. the moon tries to attract the earth and the earth the moon, but because both are very big energies (and also under influence of the sun) they can both not to provide too much energy to the other so that there exist a situation that the most little celestial body is in motion around the bigger celestial body and further attraction is not possible anymore etc. And possibly are things also arranged through the fourth dimension. (17/03/18) Singularities. You could not get around this concept last time through passing away of our Stephen Hawking (on the birthday of Einstein and at the same age, if this is a coincidence we have to know from the press later), I didn't know this concept really but read this later in my studies. It means that the point of the Big Bang or in a black hole have an infinite little volume and an infinite density. I suppose having the energy putted in. Always interesting if it fits in my own thoughts and in fact it does. This looks suspiciously like the fourth dimension, just as such point in a surface (second dimension) would represent a finite vector from the third dimension perpendicular on that surface. In this point would no time and space existing, also logically. Local time exists only in my thoughts for materials (structures) and are later created at the Big Bang or disappeared in a black hole (see (22/09/17) Is nothing out of balance?, because I believe that energy is only a number would it be possible so many energy in an infinite little volume, but emergent energy is as well mass as time, the time is here 0 and the energy is not connected anymore with anything as for light, so the energy must be converted again to the fourth dimension coming from and to project nothing via particles in the third dimension, but that energy have still its effect on the gravitational force in that point, the total energy in the fourth dimension is 0, possibly is there a link yet between energy and information on the edge of a black hole and is still everything there in the third dimension ..). But converted would the local time in the point of the Big Bang (and after the Big Bang) being faster than anywhere in the universe. Then you would think if you could slower down materials and being stationary compared to the point of the Big Bang you got the highest possible local time, and the whole also is in motion but purely mathematically. Materials can never be "stationary" because of the gotten local time! But the Big Bang could be originated from a black hole in motion that the previous universe have been sucked out (I hope not, because you can postpone the first beginning) .. take care, there is nothing to understand, we are part of the whole and you must not have the illusion being able this to surpass .. maybe space was already there and are we going slower at the moment (possibly not measurable) because of some reason and do we think that space now faster expand .. Above my ideas about the gravitational force. For a black hole the same I think, a black hole have been originated by many energy or gravitational force in a little area, how more energy have been sucked out, how more forcefully the black hole becomes, it can provide more and more energy to passing materials to sucked out of the universe etc. These are all my own thoughts for the time being, nothing have to be true, but it can give new ideas! For myself are these thoughts inspiring / motivating for studying more and deeper in these subjects, anytime when I have time and above all to follow my own path! If I would nothing believe in something, why I wanted to know if space have been curved in some places? In that case I would being to feel myself a real robot .. but from the other side we try to understand something what our daily life possibly can improve with one of the other application once we are here now ..
    It stays of course a physical puzzle which is not easily to solve, but through a right thought (if that thought is right) you can make progress ..

    (19/03/18) Artificial intelligence (AI) This is not to stop anymore, all superpowers work on it secretly also eventually not allowed anymore by the UN, superpowers are always dreaming about controlling others totally (so, a kind of virus). AI is a found method to simulate the brains via neural networks, but for the time being on a low level. Remarkable at it is that it is being trained to see connections / relations (e.g. to recognize a cow with thousands of pictures of a cow, a human being have to see only 1 picture). Now I write all the time that we are only able to see connections / relations but never would understand the real. So AI don't do either. And why not, because we live as how I think (energy don't exist really) in a kind of unreal world, there exist only connections / relations but the real don't exist! E.g. think to energy .. or think about e.g. that if you could take away all connections / relations, the whole universe would disappear as a flash .. this is difficult to explain, but this is for me the link to the supernatural in which I believe .. you can believe in nothing but you can't prove that either .. do it harm to believe in a good world and that to create together via the United Nations without the right of veto? Today coincidentally read in the newspaper that Stephen Hawking leaves new work behind and could be prove that more universes exist near each other, all originated during the Big Bang, that all in the third dimension, I am curious how this work is being received by other physicists (I couldn't read this yet). It still would be fit in my world of thoughts, because in an unreal world is everything possible (even to make 1000 bread from 1). The fourth dimension is for the time being not in picture yet (time 0 or timeless is, partly) ..

    (09/05/18) Soon I continue my studies again with the Quantum Mechanics, being curious to the Schröder equation. Meanwhile also being convinced that all kind of energies contribute to mass, so also heat. Fortunately you can build on knowledge of others from the past. A particle in physics can be represented as a physic particle or as a wave. Personally I think (but I know nothing yet about this topic) that every particle in the third dimension involved in a structure, vibrates and that this is the wave by which the particle can be represented. If the vibration is switched off, then the particle disappears in the fourth dimension and is not visible anymore. So if the temperature in a structure has been strong decreased around 0 degrees Kelvin (0 exactly is not possible I think) heat is taking away, particles almost don't be in motion anymore (the total energy of Earth don't change, the structure has a connection with Earth, so the local time stays the same) and also the vibration of the particles have been strong decreased (possibly also the bindings energy). Therefore the particle comes in the twilight zone, it belongs yes or no to the structure. It disappears repeatedly to the fourth dimension where the local time is 0 or timeless and comes back again, and because the local time of the particle 0 is or timeless, it shows up from more places at the same time from the fourth dimension. (24/07/2018) Sometimes you hear about passing separated particles, but I think that particles always belong to a structure (how far that is) while specific particles like a muon are being a structure on it selves (I think). So is it possible maybe that light always belong to the structure where it have been originated and gravitational waves belong to the structure where they originated.

    (26/06/18)..(17/07/2018) Gravitational waves (rewritten). The last weeks what read about gravitational waves, why materials shrink back / strech under the influence of gravitational waves (because space shrinks back / streches), but it don't have convinced me yet (but it could be possible, it is in fact from the same caliber as time which goes slower), I have an own way of thinking about it (I also don't believe in curved space, but I do believe just in curved paths because of energy patterns). One thinks that gravitational waves are being a swell in space (just as waves causing a swell on the ocean) and these gravitational waves materials repeatedly shortly stretch and shortly shrink back during passing. Gravitational waves are in motion with the speed of light so the local time just as for light is 0. As I think there are 2 possibilities to explain it, for which the first possibility fits in my own way of thinking the last years and a second possibility which also is new to me (new thought). But besides these two own possibilities, I am open of course for the current thoughts (space stretching / shrinking back). First possibility (own way of thinking): first again my general beliefs (see also described on this webpage). "I believe that time only exists for energy and that space is timeless (there where is no energy, or energy with the speed of light). I believe that a gravitational wave is escaped gravitational energy from objects in space (but possibly still belongs to the mass of that objects) and moves as an wave with peaks and troughs. So that energy fluctuates. Furthermore I believe that also for a stationary object from which the local time fluctuates, length contraction can be observed by an observer (with another local time) in the direction of that energy fluctuations (the same effects as for motion). And also that an observer (with another local time) another wave length of light observes, transmitted from a stationary light source from which the local time changes. Furthermore I believe that objects with gravitational force provide energy timeless or with time 0 (sometimes temporary)." Length contraction is a visual phenomenon (so not real) for which an object seems to be shorter. In the gravitational wave project the length of an object is not measured directly but via laser beams, so one have to be sure about the behavior of these laser beams for the right interpretation. If a gravitational wave passes, the energy from that object fluctuates and the local time fluctuates temporary because the energy is not stored but provided temporary. Because of this fluctuates the local time of that laser beam which is covered by that object (in this case a pipe), the equipment which generates the laser beams would not observe changes so the wave length of that laser beams seem to be the same. But the observer (is the photodiode) which observes the interference of both laser beams (with changed local times) observes length contraction observed in laser light by changed wave length, the analyses of that interference patterns shall be very complex and don’t need to be correct if one is not to be sure what happens as long one don’t have the right knowledge of local time changes on various moments. E.g. it could be possible that 1 laser beam moves slower in a slower going local time (locally is the speed of light still the same, for the observer always too of course). (06/08/18) Besides if one go with the current thoughts that space stretches / shrinks back, and therefore materials stretches / shrinks back, this have also effect on laser beams, also because of this wave patterns change, once more a very complex analysis. Second possibility (new thought): some objects in space are compact, have a lot of energy, so are heavy, have much gravitational force, the local time is much slower. So much energy per particle let to shrink a structure. If a gravitational wave passes, the energy of a particle increases temporary and the structure shrinks temporary. There is a difference with an heavy object, there the energy is stored. But by gravitation are no forces used, so it costs no energy, so the gravitational wave keeps its energy, and the shrinking of the structure is temporary. The belonging laser beam shall travel a shorter route by which the interference for both laser beams changes, but the local time also changes (more varied energy) by which the wave length of the laser beam also changes for the observer (= photodiode) through length contraction (so double effects). The beauty of the gravitational wave project is as I think that it is the first time that physically stationary a local time change have been proved (a local time change is a change in the rhythm of time "stationary", so the duration of a second is longer or shorter). Alternatively there is at least something unique registered, one have equipment to detect gravitational waves. As I think do we live in an unreal world, so physically is in fact all possible, we understand nothing, we try to see connections / relations. I know the General Theory of Relativity not good enough (next step after a few chapters Quantum Mechanics) so I can think about my own thoughts yet and to check it after (exciting). One thinks that space around objects with gravitational force have being curved (so one explains the orbits of our planets around the sun), but the whole solar system travels with a specified speed through space since the Big Bang. Then would that space being curved continuously and without hitches, because the location in space is every moment differently. So I would think to a kind of field that travels with our solar system, so my thought is curved paths because of energy patterns. But because I believe in time 0 or timeless, space could being curved continuously (everything is possible in an unreal world in which we really nothing understand, the Earth seems to be shaking continuously, maybe because of curving continuously for its path through space). Although Einstein have been provided a starting theory, it does not need to be the reality (it never goes in that way, such theories are continuously improved, possibly endless in the many and many centuries which the humanity have to go yet). And don't forget there is still a gap between the Theory of Relativity and the Quantum Mechanics, so somewhere there are cognitive biases yet, so free thoughts don't need to be killed yet! Even so it is not very different to think in e.g. curved paths through energy patterns. Einstein have found formula probably by which the skeleton of the gravitational force fields have been made clear (the curvature of space around gravitational objects) but that doesn't explain that skeleton. And a gravitational wave which causes a swell in space is probably not strange too (without gravitational objects in the neighborhood), because just as light can be related to the light source where it originated, a gravitational wave is possibly also related to the gravitational objects where it originated. And if you see it from the Big Bang, then curvatures travels through space (e.g. from our solar system), just as a gravitational wave is doing. As I think all these things will be more explained finally in the Quantum Mechanics but still not understand (never). (17/07/2018) If a gravitational wave travels with the speed of light then it must be a kind of length contraction what one observes, as I think. If different observers with different velocities (so different local times) observe a different wave length for light originated from a light source in motion, then must this being true for each signal with the speed of light. So also for a gravitational wave, and for now to suppose that it a swell in space is (and not only energy). That is, each observer observes then another wave length, and so a different shrinking back / stretching of materials, so a kind of length contraction, in other words the shape of materials don't change really! Suppose that the gravitational wave not travels through space, but is a part of space it selves, then travel materials through the gravitational wave what must give the same effect (I think). (03/08/2018) But it would be possible that just as observers not always see the really local time (see explained above), a gravitational wave (with one thinks currently) stretch / shrink back materials (because space stretches / shrinks back), but the really effect is as seen from the Big Bang but observers see this always differently. (02/08/2018) The fourth dimension. Just as I think that time comes from the fourth dimension and only exists for materials (see argumentation above), space is timeless, so I think that curved space (or energy patterns) also are determined by the fourth dimension, it is therefore not necessary to curve space continuously during the traveling of solar systems through our space. Also space it selves and a gravitational wave (which would distorted space as one currently thinks) are determined through the fourth dimension.

    (01/10/18) That the speed of light for everybody is the same somewhere in the universe, is very logical. I am meanwhile again deeply digging in the theory and thoughts are coming up again when you want to see again the total picture (according my own thoughts). And I try to explain as much as possible for the lesser physicist. Light is essentially in our live to observe things around us, it must not being possible to pass light in your own environment because then you couldn't see anything. In your own environment you have a local time, this is the local time of a structure in motion, so the Earth. This local time have been determined through the emergent (total) energy (and per particle) on structure level. Within this structure you have again (sub) structures in motion as train, car, airplane etc. again with another emergent (total) energy (and per particle) and so again another local time, the local time or clock shall running slower. On all structures have light being seen with the same speed in the own local time. The delaying factor in local time between all these (sub) structures carries for the same observed speed of light. Light from another (sub) structure have again being observed with the same speed but belongs to an event from the past (it has also to over bridge a greater distance), because to observe an event somewhere in the universe on different (sub) structures in motion simultaneously, seems not (yet) to be possible. So the laws of physics are the same on each (sub) structure, only the local time can be different (but one is not aware of that) or the temperature etc. On each (sub) structure are properties in physics known as so called linear vector spaces, that means that properties are a linear combination of basic properties (think e.g. at vibrating strings). Because velocities a.o. are responsible for that delaying factors (which are not linearly) form velocities also not such linear vector space. The concept simultaneously seems not to be existing (between different structures with each another local time, within 1 local time it exists of course, otherwise seen technically exists it only repeatedly between 2 points of different structures in motion), but I think this could be possible later with the concept local time 0 or timeless, so to observe an image of an event on some other (sub) structure (not exactly) simultaneously from another (sub) structure in motion. Because all laws of physics are the same on each (sub) structure in motion, one can experience the local time 0 or timeless between entangled particles or in situations to observe a particle on more locations at the same time through its local time 0 character. (26/10/18) But light has also another important function (see described in this website). It serves the materials, and therefore have to be faster then the materials. I think that many people think about the Theory of Relativity that the consequences of time dilation have only influence in seeing delayed images of the reality around us, then it seems easier to imagine. But with the example below I try to convince that people, that with the physically law light have to be always faster then the materials, having the consequence that the materials don't have a fixed position, with other words all is not real but an unreal world!

    Example location dependent from observers frame of reference (with photons (light) and wagon on railway)

    Figure 0.4 A1 Example location object
    dependent from observers frame of reference
    (with photons (light) and wagon on railway)

    Example location dependent from observers frame of reference (with photons (light) and wagon on railway; composition of time)

    Figure 0.4 A2 Example location object
    dependent from observers frame of reference
    (with photons (light) and wagon on railway; composition of time)

    Example location dependent from observers frame of reference (with photons (light) and wagon on railway; spacetimediagram or Minkowski-diagram)

    Figure 0.4 B Example location object
    dependent from observers frame of reference
    (with photons (light) and wagon on railway;
    spacetimediagram or Minkowski-diagram)

    Example location dependent from observers frame of reference (with photons (light) and from wagon on railway)

    Figure 0.4 C Example location object
    dependent from observers frame of reference
    (with photons (light) and from wagon on railway)

    Example location dependent from observers frame of reference (with ball and wagon on railway)

    Figure 0.4 D1 Example location object
    dependent from observers frame of reference
    (with ball and wagon on railway)

    Example location dependent from observers frame of reference (with ball and wagon on railway; composition of time)

    Figure 0.4 D2 Example location object
    dependent from observers frame of reference
    (with ball and wagon on railway; composition of time)
    (05/10/18) Location object (photon or materials) dependent from observers frame of reference.
    (11/02/19) Little correction (see red)! (04/12/18 beginning of corrections) Last weeks because of the lack in time substantial struggled with this subject, but the good thing is then you go deeply into the theory to understand it completely really again and to record this able to read this later again. It goes all about moments or simultaneously between points, by which my first picture was wrong. My statements are still unchanged, if I see something wrong we see later eventually (but I don't expect that). Also I can show now exactly the total time in my picture between two structures in motion so that time dilation can understand better. If you draw a picture of 2 structures in motion, you have to represent the picture for a simultaneous situation between the two structures in motion, so e.g. from the position of a photon (particle of light) in a structure in motion that is simultaneously with the position of a photon in another structure in motion. With the aid of the "Lorentz transformations" you can convert a point (location) of an event in the one structure in motion to a point (location) how this have been seen simultaneously in another structure in motion, but that is also valid if you such similar event let happening really and between simultaneous start and end points in the other structure, if possible. So the "Lorentz transformations" calculate the exact locations, so without length contraction (that is a visual effect in the direction of motion of a structure, that you see something shorter as an observer from the other structure). In 1 common point is also the time dilation calculated for the other structure, e.g. in the pictures is the time dilation factor on the open train wagon .866 what means that the time of 1 old second on the platform of near the railway is simultaneously with .866 new second (sn) on the open train wagon and so for each old second .134 time duration have been lost. You can use light to show this time duration in a picture comparing for an equal or simular event between simultaneous start and end points, how lesser light have been travelled on a path how lesser the time duration have been and how more the time have been delayed, in the pictures and explanation below / alongside is all being more clearly. (end of corrections)
    In physics has every structure or an object in motion its own frame of reference, with other words that everything is being observed from that frame of reference, though a frame of reference has its own local time. As I think is the real local time determined through motions of that structure or object since the Big Bang, so the frame of reference is dependent from another 1 comprehensive frame of reference from which that own local time have been determined. Think e.g. to the Earth in our solar system and that solar system travels through space since the Big Bang (just an example). But it can also being a frame of reference for a human being with the Earth as comprehensive frame of reference. But in that way can every object in motion seeing a frame of reference for another object in motion, even is there not immediately a relation between them, this I leave here out of consideration. In figure 0.4 A1 you see an observer stationary in the frame of reference of the railway or platform. The short open train wagon has its own frame of reference and runs the railway with a speed of ½ the speed of light, the local time of the open train wagon is therefore 0.866 from the time in the frame of reference of the observer, so the local time runs slower. All next values have been calculated with the "Lorentz transformations". At 0 seconds departs a photon (particle of light) at the side of the open train wagon and a photon from the open train wagon. Because an observer must see photons always with the speed of light (according the real traveling path in the frame of reference), both photons (at the side of and from the open train wagon) have been travelled the same distance after 1.5 seconds (c is the speed of light, so 1.5c km after 1.5 seconds). At the side of the open train wagon is this easy to see, but the observer sees in the passing train the photon at equal distance (.75c, because .75c + .75c = 1.5c). From the open train wagon is that photon to find at location .866c at the same moment. What is now remarkable? Before the open train wagon and from the open train wagon light has been travelled 0.75c + .866c and for the observer 1.5c. What explains the difference? The observer sees length contraction (as well distances as objects are being seen shorter), so sees the photon in .866c at .75c, so everything is right for the observer, because he/she observes what he/she has to observe (in the other way is this also true in the Theory of Relativity, from the open train wagon is also length contraction being observed, the landscape passes in opposite direction, then the photon at 1.5c is being seen at 1.299c, see figure 0.4 C, snn is again a slower second then sn). Seen from the observer the photon (or a ball in figure 0.4 D1 if that's better to imagine) can arrive faster than light at the real location .866c after converting (so without length contraction). But this is in another frame of reference, in the own frame of reference is this impossible, so if a second observer waits in his own frame of reference from the observer at location .866c (marked with X), there arrives nothing at location .866c at the same moment, while it from the open train wagon arrives at location .866c at the same moment (for that second observer is the photon at .75c, that is about 35.000km away, so length contraction is not only something visual, simultaneity can exist between all points in a structure with a specified velocity, but between structures with a different velocity, there is only simultaneity between 2 points technically seen, so between 1 point of the first structure and 1 point of the other structure, so that a second observer waits at location .866c with local time 1.5s, then the other simultaneous point in the open train wagon is 1c with local time .8sn and there is nothing to see, if the photon in the open train wagon is at location .93c, then that second observer at location .866c sees that photon with length contraction at location .866c, so for that second observer is the photon yet (.93c – .8c) / 1.155 or 34.000km far away, if you want to see that point 1c with local time .8sn in figure 0.4 B, think to the fact that the open train wagon is not so far yet for that second observer as for the observer, so let the line t1' – (x1,t1) drop a little bit so that in the point of intersection with 1.5s the distance from the open train wagon 1c long is, the local time in the open train wagon is then everywhere .8sn (18/02/2019) Simultaneity here again summarized: so that 1.5s for the observer and that second observer in the same structure or frame of reference are simultaneous moments, however that .866sn in the other structure or frame of reference (with another velocity, so another local time, so that open train wagon) is simultaneous with that observer (1.5s) but that .8sn is simultaneous with that second observer (1.5s), simultaneity between structures in motion is not the same as simultaneity in one structure (in which everything is "stationary"). Between all points in one structure exist simultaneity because the clock points to the same time everywhere. But between two structures in motion there is only simultaneity between 2 points and no more. So my statement is right, the photon what should be located at .866c simultaneous with the observer at 1.5c can't be observed at .866c, so locations objects (photons or materials) are not located in frames of references at a common location (e.g. a point of intersection) by which that objects can be unreal, in each case no objects as we think they should be (unless it are shrinking objects, see later)!). Is it possible to see light slower from the observer just as from the open train wagon? Yes, that is possible in this example. Let e.g. departing a photon vertically from the open train wagon, then sees the observer that photon rises in a curve, the real path in his own frame of reference. If the observer goes to stand now behind the open train wagon, the observer sees that photon rises vertically in the frame of reference from the open train wagon, so then light is going slower, but take care, this is not in his own frame of reference (more like a visual trick). You see also that e.g. the path of a photon or ball at the side of the open train wagon is longer and from the open train wagon shorter, where time is going slower. Then you could think that something is shrinking. I explain this always as natural resistance / braking, from the open train wagon undergoes the ball extra natural resistance / braking, therefore goes time slower but the path of the ball is also shorter simultaneously. For the ball is this explainable, with the same energy you come not so far with more natural resistance / braking (the mass of the ball has increased through the total energy of the train to over win the natural resistance / braking, but the ball it selves had already energy). For light you can't explain this in that way, but that was also the first beginning, so the basis, of our whole existence, that is a fact and can't be explained in any way.
    How can I explain time more exactly visually with figure 0.4 B and 0.4 A2 (for a ball with figure 0.4 D2 if that’s better to imagine)? Time is nothing else than a standard motion in 1 structure which we compare with another motion. In 1 second has light been travelled c km, for each faster or slower second, that is a given fact. So we can express the total time in the travelling distance of light for comparison, how lesser light has been travelled, how slower the time by comparison. In figure 0.4 B you see the buildup of time of the open train wagon and in the open train wagon separately buildup. If the open train wagon has been moved for 1 old second, is the time in the open train wagon simultaneously buildup to .866 from that old second, so for each old second has .134 time been lost or .134c travelled distance of light. In figure 0.4 A2 you see the total time as expressed in travelled distance by light. Light has been travelled totally .50c + .866c, so 1.366c. Near the open train wagon or railway 1.5c, so there is indeed 1.5c – 1.366c = .134c time lost, so by the part of time in the open train wagon goes time slower. But figure 0.4 B shows that the old time 1.5s is simultaneously with the new time .866sn in the open train wagon. All moments between 0 and .866 new time are simultaneously with moments old time between 0 and 1.5 second. So here (0.4 B) is visually mapped how that time has been buildup, but at 1.5 second old time is the open train wagon also 1.5 old second further! And this all sees an observer in 1 image according the "Lorentz transformation"! Ok, but what is now exactly the difference between figure 0.4 A1 and A2? The requirements for the existence of simultaneously are firstly that the clock points to the same time on different locations, and secondly simultaneous events happens at the same moment (point in time) or converted. In figure 0.4 B you see that in all locations for the open train wagon the slower clock points to the same time (.866sn) just as the faster clock outside the open train wagon (1.5s). The relation between the old and new points in time is, that always a series different old points in time (with location) are simultaneously with a new series points in time (with location) in the open train wagon, 1 to 1.5 old second (with location) are simultaneously with .866sn (with location) at the moment of 1.5 old second (location open train wagon). So in A2 goes it about clock speeds (moment of change from 1 old second to .866sn at the first location from the open train wagon) and in A1 has light reached the last location from the open train wagon after 1.5 old second, again .866sn, and that is the moment for the "Lorentz transformation"! (09/12/18) How is that now exactly with that length contraction? E.g. a ruler (or ball) with the head (so right) at 1.7209c has the real length in the frame of the open train wagon in figure 0.4 D1, but the observer in the frame of the platform or railway sees length contraction, the ruler (or ball) has been seen shorter but also at another location, the head (so right) at .8571c, everything has been seen shorter as well units as distances as lengths! Length contraction has never been seen experimental. (09/12/18) How is that now exactly with the very known triangle with light for illustrating time dilation? Over and over again I am in doubt about or figure 0.4 A1/D1 or A2/D2 is right. The reason for that is that burned image of the triangle in my brains since school. That you are able with Pythagoras to calculate time dilation, and that's right as seen in A2/D2. But to imagine 2 sides of that triangle as light isn't right, if I see it right. That situation approximately has being reached after 1.5 seconds according the "Lorentz transformation", and can't be calculated with Pythagoras. In my thought of 11/12/18 is maybe and possible the "Lorentz transformation" incomplete yet, (16/12/18) but still correct I think, length contraction is possibly the real shrinking of materials.

    (18/10/18) Our unreal world is in fact already proven by the Theory of Relativity, even space is also relative (but in thought 11/12/18 is possibly that extra space already explained)! That is now fascinating in physics, to try looking through daily life with the aid of physical formulas (so facts). So above I have worked out an example (I think it is right) and even then you don't see it immediately and you have to think about it for a while. If you would consider our universe as something fixed with fixed coordinates, the photon is located at .866c (or nearby a ball), that a second observer (in the same frame as the first observer) sees no photon after 1.5 seconds (or nearby a ball) in that fixed coordinates for .866c by standing on the railway (X) in figure 0.4 A1 (or 0.4 D1), otherwise would that photon (or ball) travelling faster than light in the frame of the observer (all moments are simultaneously). If the local time goes slower, it is very logical you see objects delayed, but there is also no matter of a common space. Everything in motion (and everything is in motion) see its own sub space in which objects really are being detected. How greater the time differences in local time between that sub spaces, how greater the differences of a common moment, how greater the differences in locations for the same objects. So an unreal world in which nothing is real and everything have been controlled mathematically. How smaller the time differences in local time as in our daily life, how more all that sub spaces coincide and all almost have been seen at the same locations as cars on the high way. So you can see our universe as the first sub space after the Big Bang in which uncountable sub spaces for everything in motion. Then again I think to the fourth dimension in which can manifest infinite many three dimensional spaces, our sub spaces. This all fits exactly in my way of thinking (right or not, of course). In this way is in fact the Theory of Relativity easy to follow, have been designed intelligent (through coincidences?) I suppose that were one sees an object, it is really there for an observer, otherwise this should lead to many contradictions (e.g. a collision with an invisible object). But yet I still think that objects can being followed from the Big Bang, what their exact location is and their exact local time and so their exact energy, this all for calculations, the first or master sub space. After all has the Earth a real local time for its inhabitants, and that has to be relative with the Big Bang via many intermediate steps! After one sees from different frames of references that objects on different locations at the same moment, and one may consider that objects there really, but calculations are only valid for that situations. Think e.g. to the example somewhere on this webpage of the running man on the train, he seems to be stationary seen from the platform, but the really local time is different than the platform’s one. Everything have been controlled by vectors through the fourth dimension, I go again continue with the Quantum Mechanics. Would there something not being right, I see that later, it has no hurry. If this would be true is the "Lorentz transformation" been a bit easier because length contraction has now a real meaning, it is not only something visual. If you look to my examples of the photon or the ball, than you see the photon or the ball at the same location in the other structure (frame), that is with length contraction but the real location inside that frame, in each other frame you add the length contraction effect, and you see the location of the photon or the ball in the other structure. So in all sub spaces determines the length contraction factor new locations in that sub space compared with the starting structure. Now I thought a moment to the particles (if my thought would be true) seen at different locations at the same time in a structure when the temperature lies close to 0 Kelvin. So observers see in different frames of references same objects at different locations at the same moment (in this case an object from another frame of reference, so that is now just an event without comparable objects in the different frames of references). An observer in a frame of reference with a temperature close to 0 Kelvin, sees also a same object (a particle in this case) at different locations at the same moment. I think there must be a relation / connection to find. E.g. that at 0 Kevin, random frames of references coincides (time 0 or timeless) etc. Suppose that both photons (so at the side and from the open train wagon) are entangled, then it is possible for the observer to see arriving the photon in locations around .866c via an image (how is not important now) and from the open train wagon the photon around 1.5c via an image at the same moment (I think, because one can experience with time 0 or timeless the real moments, and is not the same as experiences through time dilations). So the locations must be the real locations inside the frame. Also if one wanted to believe this all, even then one don't find the world wonderful and one consider everything as a coincidence and one stay following the egocentric way! (01/11/18) One argues sometimes that something can originate from nothing, but that nothing is the fourth dimension and so yet something!

    (11/12/18 - 16/12/18) But possibly shrinks everything really in the thought 18/10/18. So materials shrink if its mass or energy increase, was already a thought above at the gravitational waves (and a thought 5 years ago which is coming back now). So you see not only length contraction but it really shrinks and in all directions, and of course as I think for what is really in motion since the Big Bang e.g. seeing shrinking a tunnel is nonsense because it is not in motion for you. Think to the fact that length contraction never has been seen experimental, but little objects in space with a high density of energy have been observed, and also objects disappear in a black hole to an infinite high density of energy. Length contraction was giving contradictions with calculations the other way around, but not shrinking, e.g. if a driving car shrinks (at the half of light speed) then a tunnel seen from that car may shrink also for calculations, because the proportions are still the same. So an object (e.g. the ball in figure 0.4 D1) is being observed with length contraction by humans / equipment (also in the open train wagon) and could you consider as shrinking materials (has more energy, even the open train wagon it selves) instead of length contraction, but for the meaning of calculations the other way around as seen from the open train wagon I am always been sceptic in the Theory of Relativity, that is only for calculations but has only a real meaning if there would be really something in motion compared with the Big Bang, the open train wagon with clock is really in motion in the landscape but the landscape isn't really in motion seen from the open train wagon, only when something is really in motion from the open train wagon like e.g. a clock with the same speed as the landscape (a clock at a tower in the landscape doesn't run slower, to check at stationarity, however that in the open train wagon runs really behind), so coming back to shrinking materials, would a tunnel shrink seen from the open train wagon?, the same story as I think because the tunnel is not in motion really, so thought in that way could materials shrink in all directions. Why I am thinking this technically seen? Just as time dilation isn't noticeable during motion, so I am thinking that shrinking isn't noticeable either during motion, also a ruler shrinks, only an observer "stationary" measure / sees all these effects. In the "Lorentz transformation" is it already clearly, at the same location in motion see you time dilation and at the same time in motion see you shrinking of materials. For the observer e.g. in figure 0.4 A1 you see the photon (light) at .75c (with shrinking), in the open train wagon at .866c, anyway that would an observer measure in the open train wagon (now with bottom). How would it be with time? A shrinking clock points to the same time I think, so .866sn, maybe also we have being measured the speed of light with a shrinking clock and ruler. And of course this all seen from how I think, I believe in a real situation after the Big Bang as our local time, the Earth has a real local time and don’t depend of observers observing the Earth, the rest is relativity seen from some observer and so conversions. The open train wagon in figure 0.4 A1 has a velocity v and seen from the open train wagon passes the landscape with velocity -v in the Theory of Relativity, because of time dilation in the open train wagon has light the same speed in a whole new second. How you have to argue shrinking now? for calculations shrinks the landscape, a ruler in the open train wagon shrinks also, so the velocity stays the same, a light beam after 1 whole new second shrinks also but with the ruler still distance c measured, same story again as above .. so now I am going really further with the Quantum Mechanics and don't think to this subject anymore for the time being otherwise I don’t come further ..

    (03/02/19) What is now in fact that fourth dimension as I see it? A dimension is a base which is totally independent from another base. This is a mathematically concept but you have of course dimensions in different kind of theories e.g. a vibrating string is being shaped by an infinite many basic vibrations which can also be called dimensions. But I write now about our space dimensions. E.g. a location in our space around us can be described from any point in 3 dimensions that is a x coordinate on a x-axis, a y coordinate on a y-axis and a z coordinate on a z-axis. That x-axis, y-axis and z-axis form 3 dimensions which are totally independent from each other. At every point belongs e.g. a temperature but that temperature forms no dimension because is always dependent form physical processes in that 3 dimensions. In science one works always with postulates, but that is the only possibility to make progress (because you can't know everything), is that postulate not right than mostly theory and/or prove is a dead-end, is that postulate right than one come further. So one thinks that all units in nature aren't unlimited small but limited and are being called quantum's. E.g. I think that time is a kind of natural resistance / braking from something, if there exist quantum's (units) e.g. also in space around us, than there couldn't exist natural resistance / braking within that units (quantum's). Something with speed jumps than literally from one unit (quantum) to the other unit (quantum). So that natural resistance / braking can't be explained in our 3 dimensions, or there must exist something else what that units (quantum's) explain and must be outside that 3 dimensions, and you may call that the fourth or invisible dimension. Besides that natural resistance / braking or time can't be explained totally physically yet. And so there are many things in our space which can't be really explained yet like particles, energy, entangled particles, gravitational force etc. and besides have everything originated with a Big Bang or at least from 1 point. In fact you can do something with these (again) postulates, because as I think is it totally not logically to think there have never been a beginning for everything, so there have always exist something, then it would be more logically there was absolutely nothing (everything have a cause and effect in our "environment", something what always has existed, have no cause, that is a little bit to easy thought without getting headache). For me it is most logically that everything have been originated from the fourth dimension or out of nothing. Also it need not to be possible to describe it mathematically, because all mathematics in our 3 dimensions need not to be valid in the fourth dimension (that is not our "environment", but of course I continue my studies). To be sure I should gamble on the unknown which we absolutely don't understand, and to create a better world in which for cowardness, apathy and only self-interest is no place anymore (so an UN without the veto power), so different than the carnivores (which are mutually also "friendly" for each other, only in their own group)!

    (19/02/19 - 03/03/19) ALL my thoughts are coming together now if it goes smoothly if right of course, shrinking of materials and so distances is the solution, mystery of length contraction maybe solved! I have to be always carefully with new statements because I never heard about this possibility from someone (so maybe is this thought not right, as soon as I have time again I go to look to it mathematically, for now it is just a thought, for the Quantum Mechanics is it important that the basics are right), or maybe you have to invest some time in the theory to come one little step further and have some thoughts to match coincidentally. The "Lorentz transformation" has been originated from the postulate that the speed of light always have been seen constantly from any location, from which a slower going time has been originated. Why the speed of light always has been observed constantly haven't to be explained, that is a given basis fact for our existence. The "Lorentz transformation" is completely right but through the odd locations argued above, I got the gut feeling that something is not right being implemented. Let us assume that everything have to be observed normally in our "environment" and so no odd locations can be existed as argued above. So the outcomes from the "Lorentz transformations" are right and because a photon (particle of light) in a train have to be observed by an observer at the same location as a photon outside that train, there is only 1 possibility left, all units are shrinking with the same factor as the time dilation. So in the examples above is the location .866c in the new shrinking length unit equal to .75c in the length unit of the observer and so the time .866sn in the new shrinking time unit equal to .75s in the time unit of the observer. So 1 new second represents that .866 second of the observer in above example and 1 new meter represents .866 meter from the observer. So distances and materials it selves shrink at motion or more energy per particle. Also that ball in the train if one carries that the moments are simultaneously in such a way, that the ball in the train can be seen at the same location as the ball outside that train. I assume that a shrinking clock (analog or digital) points to the same time. A problem with the length contraction was that the height of an approaching tunnel could be seen smaller by which one thought, one could not pass through that tunnel if both heights were the same (e.g. a truck), therefore could length contraction not be valid in all directions. Now is that differently. Assume you can determine seen from the Bing Bang what or who is really (more) in motion (with light), if the "Lorentz transformation" delivers a smaller number then is that which (more) in motion, by a greater number are you selves (more) in motion. At that which (more) in motion the units shrinks. In calculations one sees e.g. from that truck everything shrinking with the same factor as your selves, with other words nothing changes. So in this case there is still a visual effect, because the tunnel is not going smaller because not in motion, but it doesn't trouble you. But a tunnel in motion it selves approaching you, shrinks of course and can possible not go around you anymore (now you can argue that from both sides that this can be going wrong maybe). Think to that this all is theory and probably not can happen in practice that you approach a tunnel with half the speed of the light, but yet it gives an image of the reality. As already argued in this webpage, if you calculate the other way around how it could be if the tunnel approaching you, you are really in motion seen from the Big Bang (not the tunnel). This also means now that e.g. in a black hole something totally shrinks to nothing by increasing energy and time 0 or timeless infinite close approaches (fourth dimension) or that all particles adhere without spaces between if units are really limited, the other way around have everything been originated from a high density of energy out of nothing (fourth dimension), was the time also indeed 0 or timeless (so not right of me to suppose that time greater) and are materials or energy originated and so time. But there where are no materials, is also no time, something shrinks by a passing gravitational wave etc. etc. And again there is nothing to understand, but all is related to each other via connections / relations for us! I think that everything is possible as long you really believe in it, therefore one can solve so many things technically, that is the mystery of our existence.

    (06/03/19) Summarized what my thoughts are for now at the time being about the "Lorentz transformation", without to have it mathematically complete (if that would be possible completely, maybe only adding some postulates):
    • An observer sees at the other or materials in motion (extra energy) time dilation while the other is not being aware of that, so I think that an observer sees also shrinking at the other or materials, while the other is not being aware of that. Are there worlds existing on micro level, no I think, because this is all theory but proves the reality, probably is that micro level existing in a black hole. Something get extra energy through high speeds but in a black hole by other causes (chain reaction). Because everything travels through the universe with a specified speed since the Big Bang determines that about the time everywhere, only at odd energies varies the time and strong of course for heavy objects (high density of energy) and in a black hole.
    • The "Lorentz transformation" is a piece of mathematics which carries within two structures in motion for the constant ratio of two variables at simultaneously moments between that structures, in this case the speed of light. If you take over purely the numbers you get imperfections as represented above in figures, as photons (particles of light) are not observed at the same location. So there is still something missing yet.
    • From the postulate that the speed of light is always constantly, follows time dilation and shrinking, only therefore can this being constant under all circumstances.
    • I think that it really matters in the "Lorentz transformation" what is really in motion (more) since the Big Bang. The outcomes have to be interpreted differently. For that what really is in motion more the units shrink (a ruler shrinks), if argued from that what is in motion lesser, for that what really is in motion lesser units stretch, if argued from that what is in motion more. If that arguing is not possible in practice, you can't determine the difference but mostly this is possible.
    • What are now that changes in interpretations? That for what is really in motion, the time delays and materials shrink, and for what is in motion lesser, the time doesn't change and materials don't shrink (think e.g. to a passing landscape), this is correct from both structures argued. For that what is in motion more, time goes again slower (and shrinking) for extra motions within that motion. So the outcomes of the "Lorentz transformation" are the same from both structures argued (see examples above from the observer on a platform and from the train), but the moments of simultaneity need to be corrected and are identically how the length contraction is being calculated now, for that what is in motion more shrink materials, the other way around there is still a visual effect existing, one sees all normal (while it is bigger in reality and the time goes faster, so give no problems, probably you can observe shrinking and time dilation but not the other way around, but you can correct your calculations). In figure 0.4 B you see that correction already in view in this example, .75s instead of .866sn, same for .75c, in figure 0.4 C 1.299s instead of 1.5s, same for 1.299c. And of course you have that piece of visual effect also if an observer go in motion it selves, but the real shrinking is always to calculate. As I think determines an encapsulated variable in space the ratio "max. bridging distance / time" and has light no troubles with natural resistance / braking and can therefore per current time unit to bridge the max. distance. Materials (energy) in contrast have troubles with natural resistance / braking per current time unit, e.g. also a clock it selves. The reason that light for a slower going time a shorter path travels has to do with that encapsulated variable in space, so light don't shrink. It would not be needed that materials shrink at natural resistance / braking, but because light has also a function inside the structure of materials seems it logically to me that everything has to stay in ratio and therefore materials shrink (probably). That this all follows from the constant speed of light is amazing. Some under us thinks that space shrinks because of time dilation, that I see differently for the time being.

    (07/03/19) Here I go slowly through the mathematics the coming days / weeks (if I not becoming stuck)
    • (18/03/19) Now to spent some time again. Figure 0.4 A2 is not right but have to be explained now differently. You have first to subtract the path of the open train wagon from the path of the photon near the open train wagon, that is .75c and this you have to compare with the path of the photon in the open train wagon. That is than .866 new units for as well time as distance for light (photon), the new unit is .866 from the observers unit outside the open train wagon, so .866 x .866 = .75c and .75s. So the shrinking of the units is for time the time dilation factor and for distance or length the length contraction. So the moments of simultaneity are different now, 1.5s outside the open train wagon is equal with .75s in the open train wagon (is .866sn). So for simultaneity you have to compare locations with regard to light (photons).
    • I think that the speed of light is the weak link in the formulas. Because the speed of light is always constant under all circumstances is possible in many ways. E.g. the speed of light in the open train wagon could mean that units stay the same, and that through natural resistance / braking time and so travelled path decreases in ratio, but that units could being also increased or decreased, under all that circumstances stay the speed of light the same, also for the observer. But because a taken measuring rod in the open train wagon is being observed shrinking, and the time is being observed dilated, so length and time units are shrinking, you can compare only our own earthing units. I think that in formulas is being calculated as that units stay the same all the time, e.g. .866 in the unit of the old second but must be .866 in the new shrinking unit and so .75 expressed in the old second.
    • (19/03/19) Conclusion for the time being: one must use the formulas as they are now but making a correction for the shrinking units, so there is being no matter anymore of length contraction but shrinking in all directions. This means that the time dilation factor and length contraction in fact double is, so effectively (1 - v²/c²) (in the formules still yet √(1 - v²/c²)) for which what is in motion more observed from an observer in which what lesser in motion is, in reference to the Big Bang. The other way around is the time dilation factor also double, but which what is in motion more sees the other site normal from the own shrinking. So which what is in motion more, shrinks in reference to the Big Bang. Some numbers for examples above: so the formula calculates .866 but must be .75, the other way around the formula calculates 1.5 and must be 1.124 (or 1.299 in the own units, than stays all also normal), so the local time in the open train wagon delays double e.g. at 1s for the observer is that .75s in the front of the open train wagon. The real local time and shrinking is right in reference to the Big Bang, only for extra motion in reference to the Big Bang, the local time goes slower and one shrinks more. So with shrinking sees an observer now light exactly with the same speed. Generally is known that local time and location forms together as so called a linear vector space (09/04/19 possibly linear properties if there are no enormous masses in the neighborhood, see copy link "http://web.math.rochester.edu/people/faculty/chaessig/students/Adams(S10).pdf", not read yet), so at the Quantum Mechanics with as base (linear) vector spaces maybe more ideas come up ..
    • (21/03/19) Some explanatory note. If you have e.g. a formula as "total distance" = x1 + x2, and a person measures via a measuring rod 2 + 3 = 5m, afterwards you set the whole in motion including measuring person and measuring rod at which everything shrinks (as I think), even than this person is measuring 2 + 3 = 5m in his/her perception, so if the unit shrinks the formula doesn't changes. Only a stationary observer sees the shrinking. Why I come to a double time dilation above (or length contraction), because the first dilation factor comes from the formula it selves because one have to see the same result seen form both sides at which the speed of light stays the same, the second dilation factor comes from the shrinking of units at which the formula doesn't changes. And how is it exactly with a shrinking clock? If a clock shrinks or become smaller in our environment stationary, than nothing changes to the time. If a clock shrinks because of increasing energy, than shrinks the unit and runs the clock slower, so not because the dashes on the clock are closer to each other, so inside runs the clock slower, because probably time undergoes more natural resistance / braking. (29/03/19) What could you determine with measuring? As I think you can only determine the single time dilation factor (as we know currently) in an object with speed, so in my examples above as that .866sn in the open train wagon, because the formulas don't change under speeds (time dilation, shrinking). In practice already proved with a clock in a airplane. Also is the single length contraction specified in a formula (as we known currently). The double time dilation factor is necessary in my example above to combine .75s with .75c for light observed by a stationary observer near the railway or at the platform. Light doesn't know a length contraction for a photon, only materials know length contraction but is not checkable under high speeds. So there stay only left the gravitational waves project where we have seen shrinking as well stationary. Shrink the materials in all directions, so as well in length as height? And is this full comparable with motion or dense energy? Shrinks measuring equipment also, as that we can speak about single length contraction? So with other words, is that double length contraction to measure practically? (06/04/19) There can be another interesting project in the future by letting travelling a very light sail (size of ping-pong ball) under high speed (compare with example open train wagon with half the speed of light) through space (initially "pushed" by laser light) with a mini camera and communication on chip level. Then it can be clear how everything will be observed! (14/04/19) In fact can all kind of Einstein experiments being done with a building in clock and which were not possible until now (kind of clock doesn't matter), because you can letting return that little sail into a spacecraft or e.g. on the Moon! (26/03/19) What is now my goal to be busy with these subjects such a long time? I think that astronauts who have watch the Earth from the cold and chilly space, this can understand as the best. My goal is to prove or to making a first move for others (young people), that everything have been originated from out of nothing and again can disappear in nothing or almost nothing eventually (e.g. in a black hole). We people are unfortunately no intellect species (yet) and are in fact constantly busy in the world to tease each other and to break everything down purely for personal gain, in the future I think also in space, it seems me therefore right that we can reach the age of 150 years in the future so we can't escape anymore from our responsibility, do we survive or not is the question, Stephen Hawking thought no unfortunately. If everything have been originated out of nothing, must that not giving a feeling that something very specially is happening? Therefore my goal is also through new understandings that we are going to cooperate via the UN without the power of veto and to carry all with our intellect for a better live into the future for people and animals (as far that is possible) in which everybody is really satisfied without the hasty haunting to illusions in our very short lives! (02/04/19) And how are that thoughts currently how everything can be originated out of nothing? Personally is it for me absolute not logically, that "nature" is an entity on itself, infinite long exist (so without beginning) and by itself is busy with diverse processes from which life has been originated (I find it even a ridiculous thought, although I don't deny evolution as a partly process). I find it more logically to think there is something else which we totally not understand (yet). Physically seen I think that everything has been originated out of nothing in 1 point (the Big Bang) and with an enormous density of energy and so time 0 (timeless). After the Big Bang is that energy transformed in materials and is the density decreased by space at which a specified time has been arise as we know currently everywhere in space, only there where that density of energy changes is the time also different, e.g. in a black hole goes this time again to 0 (timeless) in 1 point. Besides I don't believe in energy as something physically, but a purely mathematically something but for which the law of energy conservation is valid. So you have to do it with the gotten energy! Also I don't change texts on this website which are not right anymore because of my last thoughts, so is to follow how all is buildup slowly (right or not). (09/04/19) So I have this subject now enough studied in depth, now again with full force in the Quantum Mechanics. The relation between time and locations at a constant speed, is in fact the Special Theory of Relativity, by supposing this relation in each infinitesimal piece of space is the General Theory of Relativity originated. (22/04/19) I want this (as I think) for the time being closing yet for a while with the giving of a complete example what mostly the most clearness gives. If one simultaneously let departing a photon (particle of light) inside and outside the open train wagon (see examples above) than one would observe these photons always at the same location outside the open train wagon, because the speed of light must being observed always the same for each observer (and so it's travelled path). The formulas for the Lorentz transformation then delivers for the photon inside the open train wagon .866sn and .866c (measured from the beginning of the open train wagon, while that wagon already has travelled .75c by it selves) while that photon outside the open train wagon has travelled simultaneously 1.5c in 1.5s. So from the starting point has the photon in the open train wagon travelled .75c + .866c = 1.616c and outside the open train wagon 1.5c, so this is not right but with the aid of visual length contraction has the photon in the open train wagon man-made 1.5c travelled yet. So my thought is that everything with speed or a higher density of energy shrinks and length and time units also shrink (so I don’t argue about another kind of units). As I already explained is the photon in the open train wagon now simultaneously observed at .75c just as the time .75s, and has also travelled now the total distance of 1.5c in 1.5s (even the open train wagon it selves has been shrinking with the same shrinking factor).

    (15/08/19) This thought have I to explain better I find, that emergent energy as well mass as time is (amount versus density)!
    • I repeat firstly the statement at the top of this webpage. As I think of course, possibly for the time being. Energy is an emergent property, so exist at structure or macro level, but all particles represent a specified amount of energy. Increasing the amount of emergent energy increases the mass of a structure (through the amount of materials or emergent energy per particle), (local) time is the density of emergent energy per particle and so is being determined at structure or macro level (so an emergent property) and is inside a structure everywhere the same, "gravitational force" is the consequence of the Big Bang and is the binding (kind of glue) between the separated structures, "gravitational force" is being determined through the mass (so also through the amount of materials and locally proportionally through the amount of particles which present that mass, so can vary at locations) and so exist also at structure or macro level (so an emergent property). It seems if "gravitational force" is a reserved part of the emergent energy.
    • I want this now to explain more clearly with examples from daily live. Before the Big Bang was the (local) time 0 (timeless) and was there an infinite density of energy which had no materials shape yet, so this means already in fact that energy exists at macro level and so is an emergent property. After the Big Bang is these energy transformed in materials shape, and is its density not being infinite anymore and therefore the (local) time not 0 (timeless) anymore. All structures are in motion through space with a specific velocity and as long these velocities are not very different, belongs at these velocities a specific density of emergent energy per particle in that structures and so a specific (local) time. Mass is emergent energy and that emergent energy is being represented through all particles together, the most emergent energy by protons and neutrons in the atom's kernels. The Earth and the Moon are examples of such structures. The Earth exist out more materials then the Moon, so the Earth has more mass or emergent energy. But because all kind of particles have the same emergent energy per particle on the Earth and the Moon, the density of emergent energy per particle is the same for as well the Earth as the Moon and so is the (local) time the same. Because the Earth has more emergent energy or mass as the Moon, is the "gravitational force" on Earth greater then on the Moon. Because the emergent energy on Earth is being represented through all kind of particles, is the (local) "gravitational force" at some locations greater because of materials inside the Earth which contain more particles in the atom's kernels e.g. heavier kind of stones. You could consider these as structures inside the Earth. How could one change the (local) time of the Earth? E.g. by travelling through space with a higher velocity, the kinetic energy increases the Earth mass, so also the emergent energy per particle, so the (local) time goes slower through a higher density of emergent energy per particle. Now I have written only about (local) time without concerning the special effect of "gravitational force" because this is only a little bit. Through the "gravitational force" increases the density of the emergent energy per particle in a structure a little bit and so the (local) time goes a little bit slower. Through the "gravitational force" is emergent energy granted from the structure which causes the "gravitational force" to the attracting structure, so the amount of emergent energy stays equally. Take e.g. the Earth and something falling to the Earth. How closer that something is to the Earth how more emergent energy is granted, so that something falls accelerated to the Earth. The Earth gets that extra granted energy back again. But once at the Earth the extra granted emergent energy at height 0 is kept in the structure, so the density of the emergent energy per particle in that structure increases a little bit and the local (time) goes slower a little bit. In this example I supposes a structure from outside the earth with the same density of emergent energy per particle as on Earth. If such a structure want to leave Earth, is that granted emergent energy per height again returned to Earth, so once outside the Earth is the (local) time at that structure again normally and free of "gravitational force" effects. So this is the reason why clocks on earth running slower than in space because more and more emergent energy is granted by Earth to that clock at lower height. So probably if materials clot together as the Earth originated, a part of the emergent energy is used as "gravitational force" to bind structures to the earth, while that structures also belong to the emergent energy of the Earth after binding (emergent energy is being divided up again), so "gravitational force" is a reserved part of that emergent energy. Addition: but as we think to the running man on the train somewhere on this webpage, the emergent energy can be increased yet (and so a higher dense emergent energy per particle) while that running man is stationary for an observer, so in this way could (local) time also being changed on Earth. And if my last new thought would be right, materials (or a structure) shrink also for increased emergent energy. (29/08/19) Old thoughts repeated for this piece of text: real force is necessary for external energy, at the "gravitational force" one gets "free" (internal) energy from the gravitation field e.g. by jumping high you need force and so external energy, if you go down again you get "free" (internal) energy from the gravitation field, therefore no force is being felt. It seems at "gravitational force" there is attraction between energies. According the Equivalence principle of Einstein can "gravitational force" being simulated inside a rocket in space which is accelerated with a force (in value the "gravitational force"), that means already it goes only about energies. Because of that the thought that "gravitational force" is a reserved part of the emergent energy of a object like the Earth. Since I don't believe personally in energy as something physical, is energy so the connection with time, mass and "gravitational force" and closes the circle and further there is nothing more to understand than only the finding of connections (so a kind of unreal world), and that connections we use in our daily live without to understand it really.

    (07/09/19 - 28/09/19, rewritten) As I think of course, are there infinitely more points in space being a singular point, so just as that only point in a black hole where the time 0 is (timeless), but has around an infinite density of energy? These are only ideas. Why is that only point in a black hole, a singular point? Qua time is it not singular, because the local time around that point goes slower to 0 and finally is that 0 (timeless) in that point (so graphically bending). But qua energy it is a singular point, the energy around that point has an infinitely high density so that the local time goes to 0, but in the point it selves is the local time 0 (timeless) and is there no energy (so graphically no bending). Therefore is there a difference between the local time almost 0 and the local time is 0 (timeless). If the local time is almost 0, goes the time very slow, motions go with more difficulty. But if the local time is 0 (timeless), there are no motions anymore, one can be at the same time in more locations (under special conditions, objects it selves must also being timeless I think, so time 0). Think e.g. to entangled particles with the local time 0 (timeless) between, every change gives immediately that change to the other side independently of distance. Or think to particles which can be on more locations at the same time if the temperature is close to 0 degrees Kelvin. One can think why can there so many energy being compressed in such an infinitely little area, because I don't believe in energy as something physical, is that mathematically possible only to be it explainable for us. To make it yet better imaginable mathematically seen, I would say that energy have being gone to the fourth dimension and stays perpendicular as an mathematic hollow vector on that singular point, energy is possibly a vector in the fourth dimension with components in 1 dimension and therefore as numbers to add as in our dimensions. In such a point could also the Big Bang being started ever, a point in which the local time is 0 (timeless) but around an infinite density of energy independent of the amount of that energy, in a black hole it ends again in that same circumstances. That point is than a point from the fourth dimension, compare e.g. with a flat area originated in a point in our three dimensions. Above I had explained how I see the "gravitational force", but something what is in motion in space far from the big objects (so no impact from other "gravitational forces") undergoes natural resistance / braking, of course also in the neighborhood of "gravitational forces" but then come that "gravitational forces" on top by which also acceleration occurs. By what can something be in motion in space? I think that space is timeless (time 0) by which entangled particles can communicate timeless (so e.g. that timeless point in a black hole is just an ordinary point from space, would a black hole being in motion also, it is always another point with that energy around), but objects in motion also across that space (I think that local time only exists for materials or materials energy). For an infinite density of energy around a point, need that energy not to be infinite, it is right for every value of energy, because mathematically seen is (infinite density) x (infinite little volume) for that value of energy, that energy it selves again. So around such point is the density of energy infinitely high, so the time goes infinitely slow around that point but not 0 (timeless), because only in that point it selves is the time 0 (timeless). Mathematically seen you can never be in 1 point, because there is no space, you can however a point approaching infinitely closely but so never to be there. Space is therefore an emergent concept, it exists out of imaginary points, but only that points together form space, e.g. also for a line, rectangle, circle, cube etc. By seeing the natural resistance / braking in space as the "gravitational force" of all materials in space, is for me not logically because than would an object in motion being going to accelerate finally (or a little bit) and is the energy of that object increasing etc. So seeing differently, an object in motion must continuously to over bridge a space unit, but from unit to unit dependent of its velocity. Therefore you could imagine a space unit (quantum) as an infinitely collection points with a specified shape, and e.g. in the edge an infinitely density of energy in an infinitely little volume, the value of energy for such an unit can be anything, within the edge of the space unit it is timeless, the edge it selves is mixed with some singular points so that entangled particles can communicate timeless with each other. All space units are connected with each other via the edges and therefore are being entangled timeless (e.g. see the units as little cubes). All energy of all space units together care for a fixed (emergent) natural resistance / braking in space, so if an object has to 'cross' a space unit, this is always blocked by the edge (I think how higher the density of energy in an object, how more natural resistance / braking), after the edge is the 'crossing' timeless, how faster this process goes, how higher the velocity of the object, for light and other electromagnetic waves the same. So the edge of a space unit can be seen as a barricade, as a kind of collection of little valves which are not opening immediately for an object (materials), so for entangled particles is there always a timeless connection possible, I think that valves can only being controlled by the fourth dimension, and also the total energy from all space units together. And possibly like that, at the edge of space where something rotates with too big velocities according the current physics, maybe is that unknown dark energy, this emergent energy from all space units, which can be any amount to whish needed in calculations. And possibly one can also consider elementary particles in the same way, specified shapes with timeless space and so the local time 0, and with an edge just as for the space units, the energy contributes only to the emergent energy of the belonging structure, time exists only on emergent level and is everywhere the same inside a structure (so also for the smallest particles in a particles accelerator, the local time of that particles is 0 and stays 0, the increased energy has no influence on the local time, but eventually only on the environment to which they belong but is practically not much I think, also e.g. for electrons through a wire, finally energies are being transformed so the total energy of the environment (structure) stays the same so also the local time of that environment). A photon (particle of light) has a specified amount of energy by which light can be travelling with the speed of light, maybe (so maybe) is it possible ever too increase the speed of light, if one can decrease the energy of such a photon. Why can photons (particles of light) creating an entangled connection between other particles, I think because they can be move freely in contrast with other kind of particles. Why is space expanding faster at the moment as one thinks, maybe because the total amount of energy must be equal according the "The law of conservation of energy", and much energy disappears via black holes to the fourth dimension, so maybe more space units have to be created.

    (10/09/19) Conclusion for the time being again, before I go fully into the Quantum Mechanics) As I think of course. So after 8 years I come finally on the same thoughts as in the beginning, but now more argued. Dense energy per particle in an object in motion (possibly there are more particles for more energy) via extra delivered energy or through a higher velocity, gives a slower going local time. So time is dense energy, for time is also motion needed. But that still does not explain time. Than you come finally on space units with a little energy valve from the fourth dimension and also a timeless passage and also for timeless communication. So now very interested in the Quantum Mechanics which can possibly this all refining more. That this all is not arranged accidentally by nature it selves, is 100% clear for me!

    (20/04/20 - 03/08/20 and later) Yet another overall picture which came up recently, it's time going to study again. I think that everything originated from nothing and that all has a meaning, otherwise we would only biological machines the whole day busy with programmed surviving, and enjoying, love, goodwill, social behaviour etc., are then programmed biological processes without a meaning, in short we are then nothing at all but we think we do (and that is the contradiction), in short this is not my logic. So out of nothing is energy in motion (materials) and space originated (without space is no motion possible) to a 3 dimensional world, energies attract each other to form greater energies, but there is also anti-energy (together 0) which energies in motion push off / slow down. This anti-energy is for each energy in the same value available, and is responsible for the concept time. So this anti-energy is the natural resistance / braking for objects. This anti-energy exists in the fourth dimension, so the 3 dimensional world can exist in this way. Mass and local time exist only at energy level and are being determined emergent through the average energy per particle. A particle alone has no local time and no mass, but so together they have. The average energy from a photon determines the speed of light, the energy of light or the intensity is being determined through more photons, but the speed of light doesn't change. What does it mean that the local time of light is 0 in a specified system e.g. on Earth? That a photon on top of another photon is not in motion anymore in relation to that other photon, both travel with the speed of light. If the energy of a photon in that system leads to the speed of light, it means furthermore that a photon has the smallest part of energy possible in that system. (26/04/20) Maybe it is possible that all orbits of objects in the universe (close to other objects) could being explained with an equilibrium of the anti-energy fields and (borrowed) energies of all objects involved. And e.g. so also for objects somewhere in the universe rotating with a high speed. Space is timeless and in empty space is therefore no energy. If an object is being attracted by Earth, energy is being borrowed by that object, by which the average energy per particle is being greater and so the local time of that object lower. In motion the energy for an object become greater, so the average energy per particle, but also the anti-energy, so there is more relative energy necessary through the extra braking, the local time goes slower, a local clock undergoes more braking. But the energy of an object can also increase by other causes and having still the same speed, then also the braking become greater through the anti-energy and the local time goes also slower. In a singular point of a black hole, is the energy and the anti-energy infinitely great, so the local time is 0. In this writing there are no forces used, it goes only about energies. And energy is a fictive value in an unreal world to keep it all logically for us! I don't enjoy lesser .. The problem is unfortunately that the imaginative power of the most people is low, e.g. one sees many Hollywood disaster movies but one can't imagine it for real in the reality, also science plays a big role in that to be sure that everything is a coincidence for 100% sure, nature is busy just like that on its own and for an infinitely time, and scientists are also ordinary people with relatively less knowledge, the most people call everything difficult to imagine nonsense, and in contrast with myself with 100% certainty .. it is just like that, but to create a better functioning world that insight have to be changed, otherwise there is not much changing .. (10/05/20) Extra explanation: this anti-energy around an object you can call it gravitational force as we know, but this anti-energy carries also for braking of the object itself and so for its local time (so thereby is not the total anti-energy important but the average anti-energy per particle). This anti-energy is in layers around the object available, for which in the closest layer to the object the braking at the maximum is. E.g. take the Earth as an example. The Earth travels through space, has a specific amount of energy and so also anti-energy, which determines the local time (average anti-energy per particle, and so average energy per particle) and carries for braking of the traveling Earth in space. A little object from space have been provided more energy by Earth as the way around, that little object provide just a little energy to the Earth, so on balance increases the energy for that little object and is being pulled to Earth, and possible to break through the anti-energy of Earth. But for bigger objects is this different I think. The Earth provides energy to the Moon, and the way around, on balance increases the energy of the Moon a little bit at a specific distance, but not enough to break through another layer of anti-energy around the Earth and chooses for the way with the least natural resistance / braking and follows the contour of such layer. Of course if the Moon originally should travel to Earth with a great velocity, a collision would follow, but so it hasn't happened I think. (12/05/20) For the local time is the average (anti-)energy per particle important, for braking the object is the total anti-energy important, I think how more anti-energy, how greater the density progress above the surface, think e.g. to the gravitational force as on Earth and the lesser gravitational force on the Moon. (16/05/20) So you could call the local time of an object A the average (anti-)energy per particle. And this is inclusive the effects of the anti-energy field (gravitational force) around that object A. So a clock runs (example of another object B but convenient it is also a clock) on the object A slowest (local time) and further above object A faster (but minor differences), because a clock as being object B energy returns to object A by which the clock's average (anti-)energy per particle is being lesser. If the other way around that clock as being object B, would coming closer to object A, object A gives (anti-)energy to that clock as being object B, by which the time yet goes slower (see in this website my thoughts about giving energy in a gravitational force field). So the natural resistance / braking of an object B on the surface of object A is not the same in all directions, because in the vertical direction is the natural resistance / braking greater. But a clock gives the time as the average natural resistance / braking of all these effects, and so that is the local time at object A. (18/05/20) I have also to underline as I think, that anti-energy is responsible for 1) the gravitational force field around an object, and 2) that object (so energy) brakes and with the last I mean the natural resistance / braking what forms the local time. So with that natural resistance / braking I don't mean the gravitational force field, that is responsible to keep the materials together. Local time is as I think the average (anti-)energy per particle. E.g. if one want to bring a piece of materials (energy) A from Earth into space, one must use extra materials B as energy to escape from the gravitational force field, but the average (anti-)energy per particle of that piece of materials A stays practically the same (a little lesser by which the local time, once in space, goes somewhat faster, if the velocity of A is the same as Earth to keep it simple for now). (03/08/20) So the Big Bang could you imagine from the fourth dimension as splitting nothing in energy and anti-energy. But because this process also cost energy seen mathematically, could you think that the rest energy in our space is going together with more anti-energy to bring its total again to 0 or nothing seen from the fourth dimension. In formula we work with energy to argue motions, but in the most cases this may be also anti-energy, after all equally in value. But if there are (far) locations with more anti-energy than energy, are such formula not right anymore and could there e.g. reached higher velocities before something is shot out its orbit. (05/09/20) According the current theory photons (particles of light) can vary in energy (through different frequencies of light). Therefore I would think that the anti-energy of photons is always the same by which the speed of light is always equally for everybody in his / her own system. This fits in the idea that there is more anti-energy than energy. Possibly is this anti-energy also needed for controlling the speed of space expansion. What is now exactly time, better formulated? Time is a by ourselves defined standard motion which goes slower through a natural resistance / braking if the whole (say e.g. a clock in which that standard motion have been constructed) travels faster through space (or gets more energy per particle in another way). (12/09/20) In formula you could say : total energy (E = m . c², e.g. from Earth) / quantity of particles (e.g. from Earth) = progress of time (e.g. on Earth)! (13/09/20) So for a particle (photon, electron etc.) is the progress of time always 1, with other words there exists no time anymore on a particle, the particle itself is in motion in the time of the system in which it is located. So all objects, even light, undergo that natural resistance / braking, so also the concept time. So when you see a spaceship in motion through space, undergoes this the same phenomenon as time. The same natural resistance / braking do we have on Earth also, but through the gravitational force is time or natural resistance / braking a little bit different (but a slightly small), for objects we have also an extra friction. So far from big gravitational fields in space you have a purely natural resistance / braking. (14/08/20) This anti-energy idea fits also in the principle of equivalence from Einstein (I think). If a rocket flies accelerated far from the big gravitational force fields somewhere in space, a gravitational force field have been originated inside that rocket as we know. So that gravitational force field is in fact the natural resistance / braking but accelerated. So the anti-energy close to Earth is increasing and increasing, and therefore gets an object more and more energy (gotten as I have once described before, so provided temporary from Earth) proportionally (because of more anti-energy). (23/08/20) Gravitational force once again more clearly explained (as I think). So an object coming from space gets energy provided from the Earth (as example), and goes to accelerate through the increased anti-energy closer to Earth (by which it more and more energy have been provided proportionally). In this way one doesn't speak about force because one gets energy. If an object tries to leave Earth, so the other way around, energy have been given back to Earth through the decreased anti-energy, it is understandable if an object loses energy, its motion is being braked or slow downed, and that is the feeling of the "gravitational force".. Therefore extra energy must be delivered to compensate that loose by which that object can leave the Earth (think at a rocket). For extra externally to delivered energy is force needed, in value of the opposite gravitational force. Originally one thought that the gravitational force was a real force, but so that isn't, but the energy provided or giving back can be calculated in the same way as a force. So because an object gets more energy in direction Earth and the other way around lesser, therefore runs a local clock at that object first slower and the other way around faster (if one wouldn't compensate the lost energy). (27/08/20) So a gravitational force field around an object A exists out of anti-energy layers (suppose that object A is the Earth). When one places a stationary object B in such anti-energy layer (let's take a clock for example, than goes the time slower through more average energy per particle) gets that object B more energy provided by object A, one can calculate that extra gotten energy with a factor, independent if object B is big or small, it get proportionally the same extra energy (that is the reason that two different objects C and D released at the same height above the Earth's ground arrive at the same time (in vacuum, otherwise friction plays a role too). So a falling object B gets more and more energy. Arrived at object A the provided energy have been giving back again, only the original energy of object B is being increased by the last anti-energy layer of object A. The other way around if one brings object B to a higher anti-energy layer, loses object B energy, but through the extra energy (e.g. fuel) one can compensate the total to loose energy. When would object B again to fall down (?), if only the original energy have been left and not all anti-energy layers are passed yet. (08/09/20) Is it right that the time is going faster again if one brakes (in speed)? (as I think of course) Of course, after all the average energy per particle is decreasing, so the time goes faster again. (17/09/20) But braking is only back to the energy level per particle (average time, we call that stationary) in your own system e.g. the Earth, more braking is not possible, after to be stationary you can be in motion again in all directions and increases the energy per particle again. But in the free and empty space is the point in which the Big Bang started the only referring point for to be stationary. And than you come to the following .. (12/09/20) And how it will be if one something brakes until the total energy have been disappeared? For example you brings an object (thought experience) with rest mass ½ m in free empty space with a coupled rocket engine that tries that object to bring stationary (in a reference point of start Big Bang) in opposite direction (e.g. straight direction Big Bang). Than the total energy of that object must be at least m . c² (so inclusive rocket with fuel). But because that object can never be reaching the speed of light (c) there will be always energy left (the rest have been transformed in another form e.g. among others radiation). An observer on a trapped object A sees the velocity of that object increasing and increasing, the observer sees the energy increasing with almost ½ mw . c² and a rest mass mw wich can have an unknown value (with energy mw . c²). In both cases the total energy must be the same. I would think the velocity becomes c, m and en mw 0, and there will be a photon left with the smallest energy (maybe the formula for energy starts with this smallest energy as a first factor)! (13/09/20) The other way around observes one the same and sees one object A finally as a photon. And that is again my thought that one observation is real in the Theory of Relativity and the other not. So the materials really in motion backwards direction Big Bang are transformed totally in energy and a photon left, the other observation would only be real if object A really was in motion backwards (but that's not right, so object A is still there). Also another thought was that you as a photon can't "see" materials, and that's right here also, you "sees" as a photon only the other one. With searching, this formula for energy is really existing. So E = ep + m . c², if m is 0, is ep de energy of a photon, if m is not 0, is ep 0. So you could say: if you tries to go back to the start of the Big Bang, you disappears as materials and ends as a photon (so light) with the speed of light.

    (03/08/20) And what is now in fact the similarity as I think between materials and our capability of thinking / consciousness? Materials exist out of little particles, and that seems the limit which we can reach. The Big Bang has set all in motion and through kinetic energy, that little particles have been becoming energy and so we have materials (mass is energy) with a shape. What exactly energy is, knows nobody. With brain research recently one have been coming so far that one can store (scaring) memories at mice, so one knows exactly in which braincells stored, and one can activate these (scaring) memories again so that the mice undergo the same (scaring) experience (this all thanks to knowledge in other areas as with DNA etc.). Because humans want to know everything, so one goes far and that is unpunished possible with mice. So you see people already think, there you see we are only robots, we can reproduce it all. But that is again that similarity with materials, we shall reach a limit and no further. Just as materials have physically a shape for us in our world, in that same way are human memories physically stored in their brains, because they belong at him/her in this world and coming out of that world. Also for a near-death experience at which one have pleasant memories, seems to be a function available in our body, seems to me logically, because that experience is in our world, but the question can be why that function is there. In the same way shall it go with brain research, one can improve parts of our brain because of diseases, and why not, but the necessary link needed for making something out of nothing human shall never be found.

    (03/08/20) And what is now in fact the similarity as I think between to believe in "something" (as Einstein did) or totally nothing? It amazes me always very that so many around us can talk about live so cool and call everything a coincident, and totally not having the urge to improve our world generally so that others also can have a good live, by which we get ourselves also a better live through preventing of wars and disasters. Many haven't that imagination to see or it just not getting through, that we live in a very special world existing in that big space. What we do with it, is our own problem. When someone believes, very often is that being made ridiculous immediately with childish thoughts from youth which one can't release, a hereafter where we would walk all around, a God with a human face on a throne, that Jesus from the year 0 who shall probably also being fictitious etc. I think you can believe in something without having an idea what it could be, so a reason and motivation to make the world a better place. In that way was Einstein also believing. But the most who believe in nothing, by which maybe the level of thinking is not that deep, can be made just ridiculous in the same way. They believe that all exist infinitely, so without a beginning, and by billions of coincidences after each other out of nothing our world have been originated with its many complex functions. So they believe also in a miracle! And besides is one heavily interested in dinosaur before one dies, also originated coincidently. You can also think that you are here, the history proves nothing as long you know not everything and very probably never shall know (in this live)! (07/08/20) But if you think like that, than you admit that "nature" also owns an excellent brainpower or an excellent AI neural network, after all are our complex brains in that way originated. And where could we find that complex network, maybe in the poisonous ground of Mars etc.? It seems maybe if I am negative, but that isn't. There are many things improved in our world by many people who are doing one's best really. But at the same time it looks if the mental emptiness increases with the up going welfare, one don’t see the limits anymore and it seems just to go about money and selfinterest, one must have more and more to be satisfied yet. (14/08/20) Both options are difficult to understand, to believe in something or in absolute nothing. Therefore I believe just as Einstein did in the first option, to believe in something, this seems for me personally the most logical. What would the live on Earth being more pleasant, if everybody could being considered as a trustworthy fellow-creature with the right mentality. And nobody was busy anymore to study humans as microbes, to suck as much as possible money from them. And not that pathetic and morbid tendency anymore to being rich! What is the risk trying to live like that? Never can this being achieved by a little group of people in the world, this can only being achieved through intensive cooperation, so an United Nations without the veto power!

    (01/09/20) What did I personally learn from this individual study about the Theory of Relativity? That the progress of time (fast, slow) at an object (e.g. the Earth) only dependent is of the velocity of that object or via other ways increased energy per particle. So the Big Bang have everything set in motion at which a time belongs as we know, The progress of time can only be strong varying if the differences between velocities of objects are very big (or average energy per particle). Because the velocities of all objects through the Big Bang are not varying strongly, you could say in fact that our time is almost universally (surely within 1 generation). All motions undergo a natural resistance / braking in space, how faster that motion how more natural resistance / braking. That same natural resistance / braking is also responsible for the progress of time. And of course the statement of part (2) : one sees the path of motion for an object from another system in the own system in that way, if that motion with the same kinetic energy stored in that object, in the own system would be originated. Energy is an absolute value. This is also for light. How more natural resistance / braking how slower the time, and how slower light passing, but is keeping the same velocity in that time. In a black hole is the energy infinitely and therefore timeless, besides I think (see above somewhere) shrink materials through increased energy and disappears in that way in a black hole (or eventually only the particles left). I go with pleasure again to study the Quantum Mechanics going to deepen the timeless effect as observed (and predicted by Einstein, indirectly I suppose) at the entanglement of particles. (05/10/20) But that timeless effect shall be only possible at micro level, because time is as I think an emergent concept, it exists only at macro level (materials, so all particles together), just as mass and energy. (09/10/20) And it seems me logically if a big process in space needs data / info from all the edges, this doesn't take 1000 lightyears, but timeless or immediately.

    (19/12/20) My final personal conclusion about the Theory of Relativity (now I can continue with the timeless in the Quantum Mechanics)
    • This in response to : (23/10/20) see also "Some formulas for the interested reader a.o. light" in part(2) with an own visual simple to follow mathematical derivation of √(1 - v²/c²) and (1 - v²/c²), light goes from the slower going local time faster to the faster going local time, light goes from the faster going local time slower to the slower going local time
    • I have still to correct text in red (or already done) in these webpages in line of these finally thoughts
    • The local time is dense energy, so more or lesser average energy per particle (so slower or faster going local time)
    • 1) If one wants to calculate the new slower going local time as an observer, is this possible via the velocity from the starting location of the observer where one knew its local time OR 2) one have to determine the increased average energy per particle (if possible via one of the other formula) compared with the location of the observer
    • So the Lorentz formula is only valid for the first situation how one can calculate the new slower going local time with the velocity, if one wants to calculate from the new slower going local time the other way around the faster going local time, one must use the second situation that is, to calculate the dense energy from the other location unless one already knows that time and velocity from that starting location. There is only 1 object which is really in motion from a location, the other way around is that not the case!
    • So only to calculate time dilation with the velocity is not always correct if one don't know the starting location
    • Think e.g. to the running man on the train who is stationary to an observer, with the velocity (and is 0) one comes to the same local time, nevertheless to calculate the dense energy of that man (via another route, his real path of motion) you find indeed a time dilation from the observer
    • What is now the big difference? If an object A is really in motion from another object B, the local time goes slower at object A, but seen from the other way around goes the local time at B not again slower (but faster), if one can't argue the local time from a real motion (since the Big Bang) one have to determine the difference in dense energy seen from an observer
    • (08/01/21) But in the derivation for the time dilation factor and other formula is symmetry being used, are that formula not right anymore? No (so right), if there is increased energy in the direction of the motion the time dilation factor is right, but in the other way around is the mathematics still valid to use, because the time dilation factor is only dependent of the velocity (and not from mass, because the increase of energy is pro rato for alle mass the same), so if one would suppose there is a mass in motion the other way around even it is not right, the mathematics is still valid.
    • Also I think that materials really shrink through dense energy. (10/01/21) See extra explanation (technical proof in this case) at the bottom in part (1), at 4).

    Before I make the summary in part (0) I go firstly to read all webpages (as well in part (2) as in part(1)) and to make little corrections when necessary which can give confusions or contradictions, so the texts remain mainly the same (my argumentation from the beginning, right or wrong), e.g. if I correct something you see old text new text or only new text added. (03/10/19) Also could specified statements extra being explained below or even technically proved (derivation), in that statements is than a reference included in part(2) of part(1).

    .. continuation 0.1 (text too long) but now more pointed to the Quantum Mechanics ..

    *) some derivations (can be already known but I haven't found them, so now I know them too!)

    12/08/17 (time is a pure form of energy just as materials, emergent energy is as well mass as time)

    √(1 - v²/c²) is the time dilation factor, γ = 1 / √(1 - v²/c²), Ek is the extra kinetic energy, Et is the total energy of a structure

    Ek = Et(new) - Et(old) = γ . m . c² - m . c² (E = m . c²) =>

    Ek = γ . Et(old) - Et(old) =>

    Ek = Et(old) . (γ - 1) =>

    γ = (Ek / Et(old)) + 1 =>

    √(1 - v²/c²) = (Et - Ek) / Et

    19/02/19 (if right, materials shrink under high speeds or dense energy)

    √(1 - v²/c²) is the time dilation factor, but (1 - v²/c²) is the effective time dilation factor or shrinking factor (length contraction in all directions) ((23/10/20) see also "Some formulas for the interested reader a.o. light" in part(2) with an own visual simple to follow mathematical derivation of the time dilation factor √(1 - v²/c²) and the effective time dilation factor (1 - v²/c²))

    (03/10/19) Extra explanation specified statements or eventually technical proof (derivation), referenced from that statements in part(2) or part(1) or part(0).

    1) Statement, from part (2): so generally how faster something goes, how more extra natural resistance / braking experienced. This is also the case within systems it selves. E.g. without Einstein/Lorentz (so Newton) two speeds could be added or subtracted. With Einstein/Lorentz the sum of two speeds gives a (bit) lower speed (because there is more extra natural resistance / braking, cost more kinetic energy than available), and for the subtraction a (bit) greater speed (because there is lesser extra natural resistance / braking, there is more kinetic energy available).

    Extra explanation: (06/10/19) The new formula in the Theory of Relativity for the addition of velocities is vn = (v + u) / 1 + (v . u / c²). Suppose that for an observer v is the velocity of a train, and u the velocity of a running man on the roof of the train but seen from that train, and that both velocities are pointed to the right. The observer sees than the velocity from that man on the train as vn. In the formula you can see that vn is always lesser than v + u. If you let the man on the train running in the other direction, so to the left, u gets negative, as long u as positive value is lesser than v, vn is greater than v – u, if the negative u as positive value greater is than v, vn is more negative than the negative v – u, vn is than pointed to the left but the lesser extra natural resistance / braking exists in all directions.

    2) Statement, from part (2): I think in one of two systems the time is really going slower and living beings will be older. But it can't be specified which system goes faster if you were not there. But if you consider two systems with equal speed and one uses energy for the second system to go faster in its travelling direction, the time will be going slower in the second system. But for recalculations between the two systems is not important in which system the time is really going slower, because time dilation works in both directions for the exchange of objects and signals.

    Extra explanation: (06/10/19 - 10/10/19) Anyway it is logically that if in 1 of both systems the time goes slower, that in the other way around motions are also slower observed, one can't pass faster going time in a slower going time. So for both goes the time slower at the other side, if it is only because your own time goes slower. To see this kind of slowness at the other side is difficult of course, but because time is dense energy (as I think), think to the man on the train who is stationary probably for the observer. As well the observer as that man observe motions mutually slower, but for that man is this normal, he don't know its own slower going time. How is it possible that the man gets more dense energy while his total energy doesn't change? If the man have eaten enough, his food is transformed to kinetic energy, the man loses particles, but the energy in the remaining particles is more dense! If that man was a robot, that kinetic energy came from a battery. Time explained differently yet: time is a standard motion in A, if the time goes slower somewhere in B, than goes that same standard motion from A slower in B, in A one could follow what in B happens but the other way around is that not possible, for sure receiving light images eventually what had happened in A. Again a full example worked out: from object A is object B in motion to the right (the real path) with velocity v seen from A so in the time of A, than goes the time slower in B, the other way around sees B in that same slower time, A with a velocity -v (why exactly -v, because the basic thought is in the Theory of Relativity, that the speed of light is being observed / measured by everyone the same, so per whole second and per whole delayed second is always 300.000 km being overbridged, therefore is the transition time pro ratio in the own seconds between A and B for the same distance, for as well seen by A as seen by B exactly the same, so therefore the same velocities v and -v), so sees B everything in A also slower than the reality. So A sees everything in B and the other way around with the same time dilation factor (depended from v or -v), but the time in B goes really slower. It seems a symmetric situation, so relative, but only in 1 location goes the time really slower (as I think)! Only when something is really in motion from B to A (the real path) goes the time at that something once again more slower. (07/11/19) How sees one light, so events, from both sides at which the local time goes faster / slower? It going slower once again different explained, now with light. Where the local time is really going slower, goes everything slower. So in the faster going system happen events in 1 faster second while simultaneously in the slower going system events happen in e.g. 0.6 fast second, so in the slower going system one runs 0.4 fast second behind, how more fast seconds passing how more one is running behind in the slower going system. Would one to see the events from the faster going system, these arrived with delayed light signals. Than you could think but that light signals from the faster going system are much further meanwhile, how can they arrive delayed. Because that dilation takes place during the faster going time, so after 1 fast second, 0.6 fast second is also being passed, one sees the remain 0.4 fast second not during that 1 fast second, but in the next fast second. If it would stop immediately at both sides, one could say that all events in the slower going system have taken place during the passing time in the faster going system, but so not the other way around, in the slower going system one have just simple missed some events. In fact are the moments of simultaneity changed between the faster going system and the slower going system. Personally I find the best example to make this visually, my own train example from part (1), at which the light beam outside the train follows the light beam in the train for an observer outside and inside the train. In the path of the light beam outside the train one sees repeatedly another light beam which has started later and represents a pixel from the starting point, suppose the pixel represents a changing color, the frequency of the light beam changes repeatedly. And suppose both light beams as well inside as outside the train are laying infinitely close to each other. Than one sees inside the train that light beam outside the train at the same speed passing as the light beam inside the train. From the starting point inside the train (the wall) one sees repeatedly passing a changing pixel, not the next light beams, but that events (changed pixel) are already the past outside the train! At the running man below in 3) happens the same through dense energy, but is not to make visually in this way because the reality is simply not to understand .. probably it would than explainable with an observed long wave length of light etc. ..

    3) Statement, from part (2): one sees the path of motion for an object from another system in the own system in that way, if that motion with the same kinetic energy stored in that object, in the own system would be originated. Energy is an absolute value.

    Extra explanation: (06/10/19 - 10/10/19) Consider first the answer for statement 1), so velocity u belongs to the object in motion (as the man on the train) in another system in which the time is going slower. The observer sees velocity vn for that object in motion in his system. If the observer considers the same energy belonging to that object in motion with velocity u (the real path of that object), and that stationary object had the rest mass m in his own system (so object was really stationary in his system although e.g. the man was standing near the observer), than you can argument that the observer sees now as rest mass for that object in motion m . ((γv . γu) / γvn). So if that object is the running man on the train, and seems to be stationary for the observer, than is vn = 0, γvn = 1, and sees the observer as rest mass, the same mass as that object in motion has with velocity u, so with velocity vn = 0 is that again the same energy. With other words, for the same energy another velocity but also another rest mass is being observed (yes, but how determine you a rest mass of something passing from another system). Before the Theory of Relativity you had the law of conservation of energy, mass and impulse. Now you have only the law of conservation of energy and impulse, so indeed the rest mass can change as for a collision, because since the Theory of Relativity mass is energy (E = m . c²). The rest mass from something in a system, so is the stationary mass from that something, e.g. the mass of a box which is stationary on Earth (for the sake of clearness is above γv = 1 / √(1 - v²/c²), γu = 1 / √(1 - u²/c²), γvn = 1 / √(1 - vn²/c²), so with all time dilation factors). (25/10/19) Sometimes you could think, if the energy in a system have been increased by which local time goes slower, could one motions and so a clock increase in speed, after all one had more energy available, it could be possible but is pointless, because one have chosen a local time in a specified system like the Earth, and which one compares anytime, also the speed of light follows the comparable local time, there is a specified natural resistance / braking which we have called the local time, and that physics never changes, we can of course always increase velocities with energy. (07/11/19) And how is this for light? At the frequency of light (determines the color) belongs a specified amount of energy for a photon (Einstein). The intensity of light has being determined through more photons. By the observed Doppler effect changes the frequency of light and so the energy for the photon, by what is I think not clear yet. So in my energy story I have also to describe for light how someone that sees from motion because the energy changes for the photon, possibly is this also a standpoint that this is different for light than for materials just as the speed of light. But ok, for the observer of the running man on the train who emits light for which the source is stationary for the observer, is the energy of the photon and the frequency the same as for an observers stationary source, if a passing object coming from somewhere that emits light, is the frequency for that light first increased observed and once passed decreased, so that energy for the photon has been observed different, but I think not the total energy of object + light (still the same). The fixed speed of light and Doppler effect is eventually imaginable for motion, but as an object is stationary for an observer like the running man on the train, his energy is more being dense and there is also a time dilation factor, which is not expressible in velocity in this case but an increased dense energy. Therefore sees the running man everything around him going slower. (04/09/20) Observing of changing energy for light? The most logical seems to me, because the observed frequency of light changes through the Doppler effect, that the energy of photons don't change but the distance between photons have been observed differently. The natural resistance / braking brakes also the photon (with the same energy) for increased natural resistance / braking (so slower time), so that the local velocity of light stays equally. In case the energy of photons could also varying, than I would think that the natural resistance / braking for light (in contrast with the energy of materials) reacts the same on a series of energy values for photons. (05/09/20) But with the above idea of anti-energy at this webpage there is one solution more, the anti-energy of photons is always the same (see above).

    4) Statement, from part (1): I think that materials really shrink through dense energy.

    Extra explanation: (11/01/21) This is a daring statement, because maybe I don't see something right, but ok I go to explain what I think. First I want to discuss about "Some formulas for the interested reader a.o. light" in part (2) with an own visual simple to follow mathematical derivation of √(1 - v²/c²) and (1 - v²/c²). An observer sees things which somebody in motion not observes. So the observer sees that the person in motion sees only the factor (1 - v²/c²) from his/her mirrored light, this is how I think the time dilation factor for the person in motion seen from outside. Than the observer sees that the person in motion that factor must experience via the double factors √(1 - v²/c²) but he/she is not aware this of course. The first factor delays the time and shortens the traveled path of light according the Lorentz transformation for which the units of observer and person in motion are the same. The second factor delays the time again and shortens the traveled path of light, but this time expressed as shrinking of materials and so of units for time and distance and of course the person in motion is not aware this. The consequence for the person in motion is that a meter has been shrunk (so a ruler has been shrunk really) and also the unit of time (suppose that a light clock with a length of 299.000 km indicates 1 second and the light clock has been shrunk). Take now the example of the photon above with the first material shrinking idea, that derivation in part (2) was following months later. Replace the person in motion through the open train wagon in motion. For the open train wagon in motion is the location of the photon still at .866c with as time .866sn according the Lorentz transformation, but the observer sees shrinking an sees .866c as .75c and .866sn as .75sn. This has now 1 consequence for an observer on the open train wagon in motion, he/she thinks that the shrunk light clock is still pointing to a new slow second at dash 1, but that’s now in reality .866sn. The observer near the railway must correct this by calculations, however because the digits stays the same for the open train wagon in motion, can these used in calculations with the Lorentz transformation to determine the position of the photon of the observer near the railway (in bigger units). If this all is right, so something can shrink in a black hole to nothing (through increasement of energy) or something can shrink temporary through passing gravitational waves (temporary increasement of energy). (10/04/21) I can't determine or you can measuring this all with an ordinary clock, because in that case the clock must be build for all these properties. A light clock is the most pure clock, an atomic clock seems to me also a pure clock for all these properties as shrinking. Therefore there are no changes for the experiment with an atomic clock in an airplane, in motion one measures .866sn (one knows this is in fact .75sn), but once stationary as the shrinking have been gone, the time (which was stopped) shall still point to .866sn, so just according the Lorentz transformation.

  • (07/03/16) Have objects just been somewhat bigger / smaller for a short period with gravitational waves (detected on 14/09/15) or is it just a change in local time for a little moment (see my own thoughts in 2.8)!

  • (18/04/16) Read in 6.0 that the so called Belltest in fact fits in the time 0 or timeless entangled connection between particles! You have to learn to think distinctive to understand more (I think)!

  • Read in 3.0 there is probably more existing (just physics, just a new thought), it is hidden in light!

  • The speed of light is the greatest speed in the visible universe .. but not in the invisible universe!

  • To think in quanta of motion (the most little units in nature) is in fact the same as thinking in a visible and invisible universe, so a coincidence (see in 5.0 + evidence quanta used in theory of Quantum Mechanics by Chinese scientists)!

  • Just read (28/04/15) that indeed (as I thought in 3.0) 1 photon is enough to entangle many particles (experiment in March 2015 : thousands of atoms entangled with a single photon, copy link : "http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2015/thousands-atoms-entangled-single-photon-0325"), why don't see physicists yet the possible connection with the local time 0 or timeless of a photon? It is unbelievable that scientists can work on this scale, I would like to see this ever! Is the entanglement of particles a natural function, e.g. for the entangled spins of particles, and is these entanglement by humans an extra entanglement, because the spin is from nature already opposite in situations and is the same channel used for the relocation of elementary particles (so no atoms) in situations (was a radio wave ever also not spooky)? I suppose the measured time is only the time for the spin changing in the visible universe! Yet another interesting copy link (1998) : "http://www.volkskrant.nl/dossier-archief/gedoofd-licht-bestaat-meteen-elders~a458323/" (unfortunately Dutch). Sometimes you can have a right thought without knowing the details (but have not to be right of course), until now I have not read anything that my thought disproves, I only watch it from another corner (without formulas) and can give a result which would be found much later otherwise. All strange effects in the Quantum Mechanics are as I think all effects from a mixed universe without time. It could not be otherwise than that a real physicist know somewhere too that it is all no coincidence (we have the phase of monkey passed)! There is a day coming, we know suddenly much more .. and I hope it will not be only stupid technically but an important step further for the world ..

  • Just much read on Wiki (10/07/15) about that particles present themselves also as a wave and many other interesting things about the Quantum Mechanics. Copy link: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave-particle_duality". Looking to an experiment with particles make the results different in that experiment (watch the double slit experiment). That have of course to do with light (own thought). In the entanglement of particles is indeed no time element involved (click within the page on ERP paradox). Outside our universe is the time 0 or timeless (click than on Quantum Entanglement and read Mystery of Time, experiment in 2013). Just before Mystery of Time an explanation is given by physicists for the entanglement of photons by using their local times of 0. The time 0 or timeless "signals" are coming closer! If more people think in the same way, it proves only the logic! We have reached the boundaries of science for us!

  • Just read (12/08/15) that Chinese scientist already in 2013 have measured the time of info over an entangled connection, and say indeed it can be instantaneous (immediately), so time 0 or timeless, nice to see your own thoughts confirmed! Copy link "http://www.livescience.com/27920-quantum-action-faster-than-light.html".

  • A thought. Maybe is our universe 1 big field presenting a different kind of fields at the same time. Nobody knows in fact exactly what is a field. For light an electromagnetic field, for a specific kind of particles another unknown Quantum Field etc. According the Quantum Mechanics are all particles a mix from as well a wave in a field (a wave is a disturbance in a field) as a particle (a little heap of energy). As if the energy below the maximum and minimum from the wave in the field have used for the particle, as if particle and wave are one entity!

  • In 6.0 I am analyzing my own thoughts by studying the Quantum Mechanics (slowly), a last thought (21/12/15) energy don't need to exist really, or Higgs fields don't need to exist really!

0.2  After this short insertion (written in 2015 and unchanged) "Stop Veto Power United Nations" (between lines) starts the explanation (see also summarized in an overall picture at the end of 3.0; at the bottom of this page you find all the other languages for this insertion):

Last new thought (read in 3.0), there is an invisible universe with time 0 or timeless only used in situations by particles and (or through) a "high speed or immediate" signal (the hidden "God's?" channel to communicate immediately with everybody and anything in the universe, at least if one discover how to use, can take ages), and a visible universe (Einstein still valid, particles visible here, the same particle even on more places at the same time, and don't make the mistake in formulas to calculate with the distance in the visible universe while the particle was in the invisible universe) .. this invisible universe with time 0 or timeless can't exist on its own, only interwoven with the visible universe .. what qualified physicist dare this thought and writes history if everything is truth (think of Mr. Higgs, follow your own thoughts)? .. if you have contacts in the science world, let them look to this idea .. why is Einstein famous, he was using a fact offered by Lorentz (NL) who did not know what to do with it (it was a "confusing" fact, no theory but a hard fact, how more natural resistance / braking how slower the time, even time 0 or timeless, took a long time until acceptance) .. the Quantum Mechanics deliver also "confusing" facts (also no theory but hard facts, no natural resistance / braking at all, time 0 or timeless, takes also time for acceptance), where is the physicist like Einstein who transforms that hard facts (typically how the brains can work, I really don't read much about these subjects because too few time because of my work, but I think much about these subjects outside my work, a part of physics where you can come far with logic, in fact my view on time is fully based on the Lorentz formula, in the night on my balcony on Jan. 2015 smoking a little cigar I got this idea above described suddenly if it was whispered in my ears, I was thinking if there would be a God existing how could he/she controlling the universe with its big distances, a magically moment for myself, but that says nothing of course even it sounds logically, by somewhat reading on the internet covers this idea, what others can have too already, the concept nonlocality in the Quantum Mechanics) .. now I find it myself also being exciting (but not enough time) to discover / read where in the theory "totally no natural resistance / braking" have sneaked into (or a coincidence?) ..

I have no religious background, I am a humanist. With this possible discovery ever (there is possibly more) the downward spiral from our world can be ended, arrogance and the dominant thought "it goes only about me or my group, about our own self-enrichment, I use my cleverness only for me or my group, this is my only goal in life, after me or my group the deluge, I do everything to reach my goal, via secret means or mass psychology, I give nothing about others in the world but use them only for expanding of power and/or self-enrichment, I want children but have no real interest in their future, to rule over others with own ideas, power is an obsession for me, money is an obsession for me, I don't rest in my short live before I have just as many money as 10000 people together even it make me not happier and can I do nothing with it etc.", humans have proven to be able to create everything but somewhere there is no progress. Stimulate the thought to think about the welfare of other people as well as animals, treat both well, stop with primitive behavior and to be cruel (e.g. not throwing living lobsters in boiling oil in the year 2015). Via a strong improved and justified United Nations without veto rights (a world government) and related education (and controlled growth in populations), we can create together a nicer world (by which everybody have to follow the rules of The United Nations for humans and animals e.g. a limitation in personal assets, no exploitation on basic goods as houses, everybody a chance on self-development etc.). Together we are really in a strong position and be able to cope with anything!

This insertion have been translated by myself and checked by volunteer: Régine TEMAM / copy link "http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/member211853.htm".

Easy / simple explanation of Einstein Theory of Relativity (2)

Only this short insertion "Stop Veto Power United Nations" above has been translated in different languages by volunteers or paid, see at the bottom of this page.

The idea of this project is to spread a thought in physics but also to spread thoughts about the UN, both coupled, both alone are not strong enough, it is just a way to bring a thought to people, there is more, to give more power/reasons to improve our world as a group and not to think only at yourself, finally this will end in nothing.