Elvis Sibilia's Philochrony theory of everything

To your first statement ; fundamentally yes .

To your last statement ; duration is the essence of time . And the essence of duration is based on Real Physical Objects , moving within an Object and in Macro , Galaxies and Quasars .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Nothing .

No Something and no Object . Hence No Movement , Hence No Time .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Time is a variable?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Of course , time is based on movement by real physical objects . And stable . Cesium Atomic clock . ( Yttrium is the most accurate clock , number 39 on the periodic table . ( crystal structure hexagonal ) .

 

OK, does it tick faster than a photon can travel ?

IOW, travelling @ SOL, does the Yttrium clock tick at all?

 

Its not about speed , its about consistantancy of travel .

 

You're avoiding the question.....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

If time slows down relative to speed, do all clocks stop ticking @ SOL?

Would Yttrium stop decaying inside a spaceship traveling @ SOL?

 

↑

No . Because time in and of its self , can not effect , affect nor cause a clock to any change its " ticking " .

 

We perceive changes and manifestations of time, but, for example, we don't perceive one hour (an interval). The nature of time is the change-interval duality.

 

Highlighted ; based on ?

 

As pointed out many times, absolute crap!!!
Space and time evolved together at the BB....no space, no time: no time, no space.
Plenty of evidence for that in the sciences river, and obviously many reputable links if you really want to learn.

 

BB is wrong then .

Mathematics , the bane of thought .

Mathematics has its place .

The Real Physical Object , is reality .

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You keep saying that and yet still have no evidence.

Mathematics is the language of physics and a language you are obviously ignorant of.
It also invalidates the many other drag em out of your arse claims you make.

The reality of the BB, and the reality that supports it, is well known by those interested and knowledgable of cosmology.

 

Word salad.

 

That you couldn't digest. Too special for you.

 

No. Too vague, empty, ill defined, ambiguous, unsupported and unstructured. You need to try harder.

 

That is the reflection of your mind. You have had a psychoanalysis.

 

Prediction 11:

Two observers (A and B) located in two different frames of reference, A must have and objective point of view, and B must have a subjective point of view.

Someone explain to me why both observers are right.

 

It's your prediction. You explain it.

My explanation is that your logic is wrong.

 

Confucius he say, "Far better to have a psychoanalysis than an ongoing psychotic episode".