Michael F. D.

Are you sure? Then you should acknowledge as invalid a following facts, observations and theories: - within the range of the temperature ( -1C ... +1C ) a water can be in hard, fluid and gaseous condition; - all alive objects at the change of temperature does changes the program of operation - a plants throws the foliage, animals falls into the hibernation etc; - a local temperature of terrain forms the specific type of objects existing here; - a chemical reactions occurs under determined warm-up condition; - a physical nucleus reactions of the fission and merging occurs at super high temperature; - after BB, the universe passed all known stages of evolution in accordance with change (the reduction) of temperature; The Earth is a demonstrative and available for observation an example of complex system with automatic regulation. Here temperature, falling down to the range which is possible for life, holds at this range a billion years already. This is not a casual blind coincidence of external and internal conditions. This is realization of the program of existence of object, which is occurs in accordance with the law of conservation of life (time) cycle.

What about my thread? I am waiting the replies.

I wonder at your reaction. You reject my offer as invalid. Then you are talking the same thing, confirming that this faithfully. The USUAL WATER changes the state depending on the temperature. Exactly the temperature starts this process. This is a reliable fact.

A reason?

All things and phenomenas exist in balance. Any action meets the reluctance. This is a necessary condition of conservation of the cycle of existence of any object. So is created our universe.

Oddly to say such conclusion possible to do by using of existing theory. - A BB theory . - A theory of expanding universe. - A theory of the expansion of space at the speed of light. - A red shift in spectrum of the stars which "confirms" all these theories. So. Is it not strange, that the observer is residing on the Earth, of a thousand of the years does observes a not changed picture of starry sky? Considering "theoretically maximum speed of the light" with which occurs the expansion of space, observer must see enough a quickly changing picture of the location of stars. Accepting all enumerated above a theories as reliable, it is possible to expect several explanations why this does not occur. 1) The Earth founds in the centre of universe and all stars are slowly moves relative the Earth from this point. The red shift can be observed in ALL DIRECTIONS without exception. 2) Whole visible universe in process of the expansion runs at a speed of "c" to a one direction together with the Earth from a Zero Point. But, why to a one direction? If expansion occurs in the manner of 3D sphere then the whole matter must exist in the manner of fine shell of this sphere. Herewith with an each instant the shell must becomes some fine. This must be exactly so, since BB was began with a flashing of light. But we does not observe this.. And once again a red shift persistently exists on all directions. 3) Space enlarges at the speed of light without any object having mass. In the manner of light radiation and gravity field. Any Star does not takes the participation in this process . They are moves off from the Earth with a small speed . Consequently a space and stars are independent and comply with a different law. All objects having mass "has fallen out" from space and live its life. The Single reliable fact this red shift under unchanging picture of the mutual location of the stars. Considering this fact, variants 2) and 3) it is possible to acknowledge as not having sense. From these three variant the less absurd and confirmed by observations is a first . Existing on today a picture of universe could be formed , if the material from which were formed stars, was evenly portioned in a whole volume of universe SIMULTANEOUSLY. WITHOUT EXPANSION OF SPACE SUBSEQUENTLY. But how it is possible to combine this statement with a red shift? This is possible to do if do recall about "fourth dimension of spacetime" . This is TIME. It is exactly a moving of time which we observe as expansion of universe. In ONE DIRECTION ONLY. ALONG WITH ALL OBJECTS. The red shift proves that move of time has a different speed for miscellaneous objects i.e each object exists in its Time Cycle. But what is a Space? This is illusion of Time. Space exists in the limit of sphere with Plank's lenght diameter. Since a spatial volume of universe is close to a zero value, we can take any object as the centre of this "sphere" . The Earth is not a worse object by comparison any other one and can be correspond to this "spatial centre of universe". Thereby a one statement is proved with two completely different standpoint. Consequently it is a TRUTH.

Of course, even the most measly example "from life", which can not been explained by the theory, generates the equitable doubts in its faithfulness. Are you agree? Usually, for the such events, the paradoxes was inventing. So, what the next paradox?

I claimed, in my first reply, that nor one of other dimensions can not exist in our one. Are you agree?

The traditional "Whut?" is absent. So, I do not see the reasons for such displacement of my topic. Your explanation?

A notion "time" has been arised at everyday life of people for indication of occurring events and periodic changes in life and surrounding their world. We can observe the existence of time on occurring changes or at events only. For orientation at time, people are using the reiterative events, such as the orbiting of moon, a rising of sun or the sundown, tide of water on seeshore, and a clock, later. Thereby, the CYCLES this is an integral, main characteristic of time. Each object in universe (the universe also) has the inherent to him Time Cycle (TC). Indeed, time shows itself as TC of object. What starts all events? I claim - the time. Since the time contains necessary information and energy for realization of events. This a strange at first thought conclusion, I can motivate by using mathematical transformation and logic . For these purposes, I use known mass-energy relation: E=mc^2 (1) Here c is a speed of light. If we speak of speed, in any event, this means the attitude of the way s to time t. So, c=s/t (2) Bearing in mind c=const this attitude defines "the linear expansion of space " in accordance with the existing "analog" (non digital) theory. Having substitute (2) in (1) we get: E=m(s/t)^2 (3) Whence t=s/sqrt(E/m) (4) or t=s (sqrt m/sqrt E) (5) That can we see? Obviously that time has a complex structure and contains the space, energy and mass (information) . SPACE, MASS And ENERGY EXISTS AT TIME ONLY. TIME CYCLE is the UNIVERSAL SOURCE and a SINGLE ACTOR OF ALL EVENTS for ANY OBJECT. It is A PROGRAMM of EXISTENCE . © 2003 Michael F. Dmitriyev

If for acknowledgement of theory is needed to apply the paradoxes , this theory is paradoxical itself. Time is "terra incognita" in the science hitherto. So, I don't see the reasons for unconditional rejection of any theories.

Exactly, what does have do with a quantum number, sub shells and transition metal complexes to change a colour of paper in this instance?

Explain the result of following experiment, please. If take the sheet of the white paper and drip on it a water, then we'll see the gray spot. We note that a water is transparent.

Seems, you want to make the collection of my topics (I see at first, that my topics are settles down in Pseudoscience & Metaphysics.) . Well, we'll leave the poetry at rest. Then all of dividends will be my. I expect of disclaimers of my point stated in original thread. So?

Why no? It is possible to consider the poem as the reliable observation of nature. It not worse than observations which made with microscope, for instance. The birth and death this a most conclusive evidences of existence of the cycles of time for all objects.

The nucleus of atom contains the bounded protrons and neutrons. The characteristic of complex object is not just an amount of characteristics of the component objects. This already other object with the other characteristic

Because the great poets and writers much more finely perceives our world. Their philosophical assotiations much closer to realities, than all an academic investigations. His the words are just caused for the delight in my soul, finally. They are assonant at my thoughts. I'll translate his thoughts on a language of physicists. He has said, that since a moment of appearance in realities of a certain object , the countdown of time of its existence (TC) begins.

Robert Burns: Whence we came? Where we leave? A death leers in a birth already I don't guarantee the literal accuracy in quote, but a meaning is valid. What he had meant ?

It is possible to consider the temperature as a signal which starts up an corresponding program of operation of object. This is graphically seen on example of water. In the small range of the temperature, it can be in three different conditions - hard, fluid and gaseous.

The nucleus of atom has a greater energy and , accordingly, the greater time of existence. All other the more complex objects are a systems which unites atoms. The relationships in these system are weak and time of their existence can be small.

Is it means YES? Or , may be NO. Of course, for universe only. Not for us. Or for us also? Explain, please.

Live long and prosper. But cease such funs, please.

You will be too. Soon.:cool2:

Certainly you right. In this event. I have brought this example as an private event of more general law. To the more complex object corresponds the more complex reaction at external influence. However, a characteristic of conservations of its structure is inherent to the most simple object also. For destruction of the object or for creation of new one, an energy require . Herewith, the energy can stand out also. The most demonstrative example this a reactions of fission and syntheses of atomic nucleus. The energy,which stand out in reaction, this just a difference between Time Cycles of the source object and new one. Is this a casual coincidence, that object having greater energy has a greater time of existence or life? I think that is not. The value TC of object defines its energy. Its energy decreases with reduction of TC. So, where the time is directed ?

Do you want to say that I must prove the existence of the self-preservation instinct in alive nature? I find no sense since this had proven already. It is possible bring the ensemble of examples confirming this statement. Check out the Biology and Zoology. I spoke already, that my theory does not disagree nor one of existing experimental data, but she explains their from the other points. P.S. You have done the statement, that all of you are a scientist here (refer to topic which was locked by you ). So you should know that prediction is not the proof itself. In the topic named " My predictions" I have brought the list of the predictions only. Proofs and examples always are located in the description of theories. I asked do not the "killing" statement, before reading the corresponding topics. You have ignored my request and have preferred to do a lot of absurdity claim, and close the topic. I understand, that my glance too unexpected for you. But this does not justifys your behaviour.