found @ http://www.telegraph.co.uk
A scientist has put forward the suggestion that there are two dimensions of time, not the one that we are all familiar with, and even proposed a way to test his heretical idea next year.
Time is no longer a simple line from the past to the future, in a four dimensional world consisting of three dimensions of space and one of time. Instead, the physicist envisages the passage of history as curves embedded in a six dimensions, with four of space and two of time.
"There isn't just one dimension of time," Itzhak Bars of the University of Southern California in Los Angeles tells New Scientist. "There are two. One whole dimension of time and another of space have until now gone entirely unnoticed by us."
Itzhak Bars' two time physics diagram
Bars claims his theory of "two time physics", which he has developed over more than a decade, can help solve problems with current theories of the cosmos and, crucially, has true predictive power that can be tested in a forthcoming particle physics experiment.
If it is confirmed, it could point the way to a "theory of everything" that unites all the physical laws of the universe into one, notably general relativity that governs gravity and the large scale structure of the universe, and quantum theory that rules the subatomic world.
In the quest for that all embracing theory, scientists have been adding extra dimensions of space to their equations for decades. As early as the 1920s, mathematicians found that moving up to four dimensions of space, instead of the three we experience, helped in their quest to reconcile theories of electromagnetism and gravity.
Today, theoreticians are studying a theory of everything called M-theory that adds yet another dimension, taking the total to 11: 10 of space and one of time.
Until now, they have been reluctant to meddle with time because it can lead to unexpected consequences, such as time travel.
Changing our picture of time from a line to a plane (one to two dimensions) means that the path between the past and future could loop back on itself, allowing you to travel back and forwards in time and allowing the famous grandfather paradox, where you could go back and kill your grandfather before your mother was born, thereby preventing your own birth.
Bars first found hints of an extra time dimension in M-theory in 1995 and, when he looked into it, discovered the grandfather paradox and other fears could be overcome by using a new kind of symmetry - a mathematical property to work out the relationship between the quantities of position and momentum. It is this symmetry that might help reconcile the two mighty pillars of 20th-century physics, quantum mechanics and relativity.
Simply adding an extra dimension of time doesn't solve everything, however. To produce equations that work with the new symmetry that describe the world accurately, an additional dimension of space is needed as well, giving a total of four space dimensions, he explained in the journal Physical Review D.
According to Bars, the familiar four dimensional world we see around us is merely a "shadow" of the six-dimensional reality, just as a hand makes many different shadows on a wall when lit from different angles.
Although we cannot experience the extra time dimension directly, we can effectively notice it through the different perspectives of the different "shadows".
In this sense, he points to already existing evidence of physical phenomena at both macroscopic and microscopic scales. Furthermore, he believes that more evidence for his theory could emerge next year, when particles are smashed together in CERN's Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, Switzerland to create hitherto unseen "supersymmetric" particles.
The work poses a question: is his proposal a mathematical fix, rather than a real physical entity?
Bars insists his extra dimensions are more than mathematical sleight of hand.
"Absolutely not," he told New Scientist. "These extra dimensions are out there, as real as the three dimensions of space and one of time we experience directly."
Threads from the Message Board:
I used to think that multidimensional time was the answer as set out in my book "Eternity found". However I am now convinced that there is no time dimension but that 3D universe is moving along a 4th spacial dimension. The universe in fact being a 3D spherical "slice" of a 4D hypersphere. It is that motion along a 4th spacial dimension that gives rise to time, gravity, fundamental forces, agregation of subatomic particles into matter and matter into structures.This 4D hypersphere megauniverse can be described using quaternion mathematics and is fully discussed and described in my book "Real time and unification through 4D chaos." It is not possible to travel back in time because time does not exist as a dimension. Past present and future exist in the mind due to the formation of synapses in the brain but our memories do not exist as a physical reality outside of our brain. As I said in "Eternity found", if the past exists every fraction of a second the mass of the space time continuum is doubling, which is nonsense. There are in fact three kinds of time historical time which is past present and future existing along an imagined time dimension. This is not a physical reality. Subjective time as experienced.
This consists of all of the light and sound waves recieved at a particular moment and deemed to be in the present. This is a subjective experience only.
There is no absolute present moment. This also gives rise to the time dilation effect.The objective real time present exists only at the exact location of an observer and hence objective time is a composite of all of the real time presents for every point in 3D space.
Quite different from the currently accepted view of time. This is the solution.
Posted by Georgina Parry on June 15, 2008 11:08 AM
Can somebody explain why time dilation occurs? I don't understand why the faster to the speed of light you are going the slower a clock physically moves. It doesn't quite make sense
Posted by matt on June 11, 2008 9:35 PM
Everything travels through time and space. Without that understanding, we would never be able to send a rocket to the moon, or understand the motion of the planets or the atomic structure of matter. Plus, I could miss my bus the next day if I don't pay attention to its timetable an how will I explain that to my boss? That time is not a 4th dimension?
Posted by veggiedude on June 4, 2008 1:23 AM
William, time is relative. It changes in relation to something else. You will still age 80 years whether the earth is travelling at half the speed of light...the only thing is as an observer looking at you, I will be ageing relatively faster. So clocks can be trusted as long as you are not comparing it to a clock travelling at different speeds.
Posted by Francisco S on May 30, 2008 2:03 AM
If time keeping devices and the perception of time are effected by the speed at which it is moving, and the perception of movement is all relative, then how accurate can time keeping be? and if our time keeping instruments are used as reference for measurements, how accurate can those measurments be?
I see reason that there could be two time dimensions, one perceptual, the other real, the real one, can only be measured accuratly by someone outside of our universe.
Lets say, that or 3D physical universe also has a 4th physical dimension, and lets say, that the 3 Dimensions we are familiar with are in motion, traveling along the 4th Dimension at the speed of light.
Now any motion by an object within the 3D universe, is in the opposite direction of motion as the 3 Dimensions along the 4Th Dimension.
In other words, if I am in a spaceship, traveling at 1/2 the speed of light, I would actually be traveling along the 4th Dimension at 1/2 the speed as the rest of the universe.
My clocks would slow down relative to someone back on earth, my ship would shrink in size, mass would increase, etc etc, but my perception is that everything is normal.
If i could increase my speed to the speed of light, ( i know, impossible) Me and my ship would just become energy, so energy, is zero, no time passes here, no mass, etc.
So what I am getting at, is simple, our clocks, and the perception of time and everything is governed by the speed at which our 3D world is traveling along the 4Th Dimension, this speed could be increasing or decreasing and we would not know it.
We may notice certain anomolies in measurements, such as the universe actually seeming to increase in expansion speed instead of slowing down, fact is we cannot trust our clocks.
Posted by William C. on May 24, 2008 1:22 AM
I beleive that there are ultimate amounts of time lines and ultimate amount of dimentions and that for every decision made there are an ultimate amount of variables that happen in other demensions at the same time
Posted by Cameron Baldie on April 30, 2008 3:54 PM
Peter B nails it
Physics does NOT tell us what the universe *IS*... It simply seeks ever more accurate models for its BEHAVIOUR.
Now, time MAY be an actual dimension but then you have to explain its exclusivity. Science has yet to find ANY evidence of a temporal dimension. However, it is a VERY good mathematical tool for quantifying rate of change. If you want to graph change you draw a temporal axis.
Similarly, we plot data on a graph and give that data X and Y coordinates to aid analysis but one could equaly plot the same data in a polar notation, or in and arbitrary dimensions... depending on which is most useful for the purpose. But such constructions are entirely arbitrary.
As for the Grandfather 'paradox' it is NOT a paradox. It is a result of trying to 'have' your cake and eat it. Let me explain:
To travel to a prior time you must conclude that each moment is concrete rather than transient. If not, there is nothing to 'travel back' to. Burdon of evidence aside... if this were the case then we do not strictly encounter a causal paradox... no more than a moebus strip is a paradox. A moebus strip is a 2D surface curved through a 3rd dimension it doesn't display. Both sides of a moebus strip exist concurrently causing a paradox for any 2D creatures who live upon its single surface. The paradox of the oscillating cycle only appears when you ignore the dimension it is 'curved through' and try to explain it in 2D terms.
Do you see the problem? To travel backwards a strip-dweller would have to curve their strip through a third dimension. They may cause what in 2D terms is a paradox, however, by performing the act they confirm a 3D universe and thus the paradox is resolved.
Expand this to a 3D structure... the only way to set up a time travel paradox is by positing a 4th physical dimension through which one can travel... and the paradox does not arise until you later deny try to explain the situation caused in the terms of a now redundant 3D understanding of the event chain.
Of course, if time is NOT a physical dimension (and no evidence exists to say it is) then the question itself becomes irrelevant and no paradox arises.
People (even scientists) get so wrapped up in the mathematical tools that they tend to forget that time, though useful for calculation, is not a known feature of the universe but an abstract applied to measure change.
To this scientist I say - before telling us there IS a second dimension of time... please demonstrate the first as this has not yet been established.
However, I think you'll find that he is actually saying that the behaviour of the universe can best be modelled if one uses a second degree of time in the calculation. This may indeed turn out to be the analytical tool we've been waiting for for decades... but it does not follow that it has basis in reality... just that it provides for a more intuitive model.
Just as graphing data in X/Y coordinate space on a graph is a darned useful tool for analysis... but the data itself neither knows nor cares.
-Gary
Posted by GaryUK on April 30, 2008 12:31 PM
I do not believe that time can be regarded as a dimension at all. Time is a concept that we use to measure different "points" in our existence. It is a concept that has been manufactured by human beings to gauge changes to our environment. I believe that the universe is a constant and that changes experienced within the constant do not move the universe along a "4th dimension".
Furthermore I believe that the whole concept of dimension is fictitious. 1 and 2 dimensional objects do not even exist within our universe. If you were to use the dimensional concept to describe physical things within this universe then I would have to argue that everything has an infinite number of dimensions.
Posted by Peter B on April 17, 2008 12:47 PM
Time cannot be explaine using a particular term because its in the mind also your particular situation defines your own time at a particular point in your own frame. Also how big your are defines your own time in relative to any object external that is small in relative to your own time.
for example, a boy of 20 years and a boy of 4 years cannever arrive at the same conclusion of time when they covers the same distance. So time is in the mind and also goes with the size of an object
Posted by chidi iheanacho on April 9, 2008 1:46 PM
In Sura Asr(Chapter 103 of The Qura'an) the Creator swears by Time!!!!!
Posted by Masayr on March 11, 2008 10:34 PM
It seems obvious that time is not a mere line. Why should it only be 2 dimensions? I suggest that time is 3-dimensional. Surely it must have at least as many dimensions as anything that is affected by it?
I am saying that Space and Time are intermingled, hand in glove.
Change (as we know it) is impossible without time so, if anything exists that is in no way affected by time it more than likely is constant. Being within space and time we might have no way of detecting anything outwith space or time - if there is.
If there is indeed anything unaffected by time maybe this is the key to any ‘theory of everything’.
If there is anything unaffected by time is it possible that this ’thing’ still affects time, matter or space?
Posted by Fiona on March 7, 2008 3:48 AM
Time has dimension? Why not first define time?
Here is one definition I find realistic: Time is presence of motion and forces and is due to the expansion of space. I found this at link
According to this concept time is slowing down with slowing of expansion of the universe. As we measure the distant faster expansion from our slower time the universal expansion seems to be accelerating. Time is slower in gravity as space is expanding slowly. Time is slow with increasing velocity as total motion given by expanding space is a constant therefore as we increase linear velocity the internal motion slows which is percieved as slowing of time.
Posted by WhizMD on February 27, 2008 1:52 AM
Sometimes I wonder if time is something we are completely mis-analyzing because evolution has forced our brains to think in terms of it. What if there is no time? What if there is ONLY space and the particles or strings or whatever move through it (and their state). Time as we know it is defined by the particle itself for itself and is local only to that particle. "Now" would be the state and location of every particle in the universe. Since time gets defined by the particle for itself, perhaps the act of traveling from point A to point B defines a second for that particle. If there is any resistance (say for example, gravity) the particle has a harder time getting to point B, the second is different than the same particle with no resistance.
Since there is no time, only state and location of every particle in the universe, time travel is and isn't possible. Time is local for a given particle, so all you can do is set that particle to a state and location. To go back in time as we think of it, you'd have to set every particle in the universe to a desired state and location. Because you've done that, fundamentally a clone of you can't exist and you'd lose all memory of a given outcome. You could perhaps set every particle in the universe to a state and location except a few key ones (such as yourself, your particle manipulation machine, etc, etc).
The reason I really like this idea is because there's no grandfather paradox. If you kill your grandfather, it doesn't matter, because there is no time. You've killed him, but you still exist, fundamentally. It doesn't matter that your mother will never give birth to you. All she'd do is give birth to a clone of you anyway and two instances of a person would exist.
Also, there is no convergence. Say I "go back in time" to what we know as six hours ago. If I setup the universe to have a copy of me, he will not disappear magically after six hours.
There are 3 choices regarding copies of yourself. 1) Literally setting every particle in the universe to a given state and location. This would be pointless however because the particles in your brain that eventually make up memories would not be the same, and you'd probably take the same course of events anyway. You'd lose any memory of knowing the outcome. 2) Setting all the particles in the universe to a state and location EXCEPT yourself. No clone of you exists. You have a memory. 3) Same as #2 but with a clone. This is pointless because the clone never converges and there would exist two copies of you.
Posted by Rick Astley on February 25, 2008 7:32 PM
Time keeps on Slippin.....Slppin.....Slippin.....In to the Future!!!!
Posted by zach fletcher on February 14, 2008 3:27 AM
At last, real Science is beginning to realise! I've always felt that if Space is composed of three dimensions, then Time must be as well, we've already theorised the linear dimension of Time, backwards and forwards, now this theory links into Dr David Deutsch's of the multiverse, that there are parallel Universes, where all decisions thought of are carried out. But as I stated earlier, I believe there to be third dimension of Time, so someone must come up with a theory for what 'up and down' Time might be.
Posted by Darren M Gomes on February 12, 2008 4:02 AM
Would assuming that everything is relative be the answer to a unified theory? What if the speed of light is not constant? What if time has a constant value sometimes? Like right now! Perhaps we can only travel "with" time, not "in" time. This would answer the time travel paradox. Perhaps the speed of light is different in a different time. Would these assumtions answer our need to search for dark matter? Does gravity behave differently relative to time? Could the mathamatical equations be worked out if quantum mechanics and relativity were a function relative to some other constant than the speed of light. I guess this would imply the nesessity for an infinite number of relative constants as well as the possibility of an infinite number of universes. Any comments would be appreciated as I only have nomial education in physics, especially the mathematical equations to prove any of this.
Posted by Donald J. Shirley on February 1, 2008 5:14 PM
after years of studying everything from ancient indian texts to ninjutsu, i finally succeeded in travelling to the past; i moved to turkey! it was wonderful! no electricity, no rush. i got whiplash when i went to the future; they had these little card swiper things at the cash register...everybody just looked at me like i was crazy while i tried to operate this complex bit of futuristic technology. but i've grown tired of "tomorrowmorrow land". i think i'm headed for afghanistan next.
Posted by taj kramer on January 29, 2008 8:37 PM
It's not so terribly bizarre. Time having multiple dimensions does not necessarily imply humans can travel through time. Consider this:
An ant moving across the surface of a ball believes, for all intents and purposes, that he is walking on a 2 dimensional surface. Yet if he walks in a straight line, he will eventually end up where he started because it has curvature in a 3rd dimension.
Who's to say time isn't exactly the same? Perhaps trillions upon trillions of years from now the universe will collapse to a singularity only to experience a big bang again with events happening again exactly the same way to the point I'm typing this again. That seems to me to be a natural curvature of time, implying another dimension.
Posted by pinchy on January 13, 2008 4:38 PM
By Aether Wave Theory the vacuum is formed by foam composed of thin membranes. The tighly connected surface gradients of these membranes is what the double time concept means. It means, here's nothing strange on such model from inertial environment perspective.
Posted by Zephir on January 11, 2008 2:07 AM
people laughed at people who thought you could make lightbulbs and record sound - so it's all relative. Maybe oneday people will just think "yeah, time has two dimensions!! how did those stupid berks get by in the 00's??" interesting!
Posted by Sophie Power on January 10, 2008 1:37 PM
This is of course complete nonsense designed with the sole intention by the author of getting his name in the papers to boost his ego.
Posted by Mr Completely Mad on January 8, 2008 1:26 AM
Hmm.. maybe the "Aliens" we see aren't aliens to this Earth, but to this time!!... In other words.. maybe those "UFO's" we see in the sky are actually human driven but are actually human technology from the future and we are just experimenting with them here in our own backyard. WOW!!. That's a crazy thought... Huh, and maybe we did go way back in time to teach the incas and the Egyptians... etc etc.. so we as humans could suceed in the future.. but you know it makes you wonder though... if we are on a plane of time... in some poor dimension of time for humans, the Egyptians and etc, would've had to have progressed without the aid of "Aliens/Humans from the future" so maybe that's why we as humans said to ourselves, how about if we go back in time and these poor bastards out so they can get a little head start and progress a little quicker... and also the reason why they had human bodies but animal heads is because we as humans recognise that the Incas and so on were very Religious, and we knew that we had to disguise ourselves so they won't question our notions, and ideas... since they thought we were gods here to help them they beieved everything we told them with out a question... WoW!!..I should become a scientist.. ha ha.. actually it does make sense though...
Posted by Harvy on January 7, 2008 2:20 PM
Could we not find out that Space,Time and Thought all may be the same thing?
Posted by DrWhoSit on January 5, 2008 9:28 PM
It is a great question that we must love or we would not be commenting on it.
Some have asked if time travel is possible 'why hasn't someone from the future travelled to the past'? Why do you think that has not occurred? We have knowledge that the Incas, the Druids of Stonehenge and pre Egyptian people who constructed Pryamids had superior knowledge of space, astronomy and mathematics in the ancient world. Where did this knowledge come from? Modern man has only recently discovered the accuracy of the ancient world's knowledge using very advanced technology. The ancient people did not have these tools....so were their minds that much superior to our minds of today? Were there time travellers or did aliens visit from other universes or dimensions?
Mankind will seek and discover these answers. Our curiousity and desire for knowledge and the truths is what advances mankind.
Who knows ever individual may have a unique journey and time path. Our journeys do cross pathes of others. sometimes we may follow or travel in parallel with others, eventually we separate and travel our own route as constantly changing energy.
Posted by Larry Hallatt canada on January 3, 2008 10:05 AM
I'd simply find out ways to go backward and forward in time to play and win lottos all over the world... then play the stock markets and become richer than The Rockefellers/The Oppenheimer/The Rothchilds/and British Royalty combined and then pay reparations to Africans, Native New World people (brown/red), Dream Time people, Oceana, and......... cause some trouble.
Posted by Dr. Who Time Traveler on January 3, 2008 8:58 AM
Two dimentions of time: tick and tock! Happy New Year from Newport Beach, California!
Posted by Allbert on January 3, 2008 5:30 AM
Double time concept can be explained by the foam concept of Aether Wave Theory easily (the foam has a two surfaces in it's membranes). In general, the two time concept is the common manifestation of Aether dualities.
Posted by Zephir on December 31, 2007 5:12 AM
May be the ToE is something very simple and obvious we know already.
If we turn to Holy Scriptures, it could be symbolised there. Genesis contains, in symbol, many laws of nature, and the ToE, or Great Law of the Universe could be symbolised by the Trinity: Father, Son, & Holy Ghost ---> Force/Energy, Matter, and Dimension(form or geometry). Is there any mental concept not described by or contained within this framework?????
Posted by shane lloyd on December 30, 2007 11:24 PM
Great article, well written and thought provoking. Yet I still cannot imagine time as anything but an analytic construct, an idea without an independent ontology. I wish I knew an expert to correct my view.
Posted by Will on December 30, 2007 11:07 PM
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so. --Douglas Adams
Posted by james k polk on December 30, 2007 9:10 PM
Most interesting article; I haven't read all comments yet. I seems to me this theory could even explain the collective subconscience of Jung in some way... BTW, female periods are maybe an other proof of the second repetitive cycled time continuum.
Posted by jansegers on December 30, 2007 4:38 PM
@John, Bremerhaven: The thing is that you're theory assumes that all our cells can tell the time. Time travel could (read: COULD) be possible if we assume that our body runs in a time stream linked to, but not completely dependent on, the main 'Universe' timeline.
I know, I know, makes very little sense when I write it that way.
If you think of our 'cell renewal clocks' (I could make great product names) as measuring time relative to our body/mind/thing as opposed to measuring time absolutely against the present, then time travel is still possible.
Nonetheless, it certainly is a fascinating theory. And the ramifications are huge. And cool. Really cool.
Of course, while one must remain skeptical at all times (we're talking about scientists here), it's better not to dismiss it immediately should it turn out to have some merit.
Incidentally, I believe the Telegraph needs better spam comment filtering.
Posted by The Man With No Credentials on December 30, 2007 1:25 PM
So if you 'went back in time' what would all the matter that makes you (which would also be existing simoultaneously in other forms 'then') and/or energy that your body converted from matter for however long you had been alive be doing in the same space that you were 'now' suddenly occupying? Methinks the universe would protest-eth too much. But, you know, fighting entropy IS an uphill battle. Of course you could just bounce off the past and wind up in some convoluted version of this universe. We could call it the 'raisin-bran, a shriveled up version of the original. I think that if I could travel across the mysteries of time that the first mystery I would check out is whether I was still around the day AFTER I planned to venture into the past...just to MAKE SURE I didn't muck up my existance [and for the sake of the (future) children] and all that. But then if I actually looked (at my future self - and not necessarily the man that I WANT to be) then I could never be sure that I was really there when I wasn't looking.
And of course it begs the question of why any idiot would want to kill their grandfather BEFORE their father was born in the first place...just to see what would happen?????. Doesn't sound too wise. best to make smaller changes. Swap baseball cards or something.
Either way it would certainly be a mess.
Posted by S Holly on December 30, 2007 10:18 AM
The so-caled grandfather paradox can be eliminated by defining all transitional-transformational states in terms of cybernetic informational feedback loops, which as waves forms result in constructive and destructive interference patterns.
Opening a communication portal between "Now" and "then", limits informational exchanges to those that constructively interfere or reinforce any specific timeline; anything else will cancel out that time line. This underscores the evolution of information flow as being a context-energy dependant state. But there are an infinitude of simultaneously exiting virtual states along with converging and diverging timelines, which are affected by human decision-making. (There are many timelines in which "You" do not exist;) The moment you attempt to initialize your time machine these virtual states become more actualized, and you could find yourself literally frozen at the controls or become like a ghost at the beginning of any journey that would result in the death of your grandfather. Very likely you would simply vanish and the rest of us would exist in a timeline in which you never existed; another universe.
Posted by leon fletcher on December 29, 2007 4:58 PM
I don't know of we are missing a demension of time but I'm sure there are more dementions than we knows.
Posted by Wim Kloeg on December 29, 2007 10:02 AM
The Keeper of Time link
Posted by lacarolina on December 27, 2007 11:45 PM
Why does this topic attract so many kooks? What is it about time travel that is fascinating to psychotics/schizophrenics? Is it simply that it harmonizes with their internal feeling that reality isn't what it appears?
Posted by Bob Onya on December 27, 2007 4:36 PM
Once again modern scientists trying to justify their budgets by inventing/fantasising new ideas about the universe and time.
Posted by paul houghton on December 27, 2007 1:01 PM
erm to the guy who said we cant travel forward in time, what are you doing right now? and why isnt it possible to just reverse it? i want to be a kid again where life was as simple as eating sweets and climbing trees :)
Posted by bilster on December 26, 2007 3:14 PM
what if you could compress matter into the size of a few molecules and send it by a electrromagnetic coil to a recieving point like an email in a compressed ziped folder the size of an atom
Posted by hlarcome on December 26, 2007 6:48 AM
my answer to your question are we missing a dimention of time? is this, take the current speed of the redshift of th furthest observed objects in space and extrapilate back to this point the acceleration rate speed and distance covered in miles per hour or kmh ,or per year and the answer could be possibly be attained with a super computer
Posted by hlarcome on December 26, 2007 5:57 AM
i believe that the redshift and blueshift that you see in the instruments that you now use only tell us what was accelerating away or toward us in the far distant past and there is no way at present to tell if the big crunch is even a light year away from hitting us because everything we see is in the past. if the sun was eclipsed in the next second we would not know about it for 8 ans a half minutes so there is no way for us to tell whether the known universe is still expanding or it is about to crush us out of existence in the next hour or day or year so that blows all of your theorys out the window (what is your response} id love to here someone explain thier way out of this sincerely a very intrested researcher
Posted by hlarcome on December 26, 2007 5:02 AM
Trish:
you are pretty close..(there is a bit of truth in everything). But as they say "Close, but no cigar!"
There is no time in the Ultimate Sense, and you can prove this assertion right now..or any "time" by asking yourself where am I? Or who am I? One can only be in the Present.. wherever you are, at any particular 'time'..
Therefore: the paradox of eternity is solved by looking inside and seeing there is only the Eternal Present. It's totally subjective, no way to prove it externally or even mathematically probably..
So by definition, Eternity means: never began, and never will end.. (and if it is real) then we are already in Eternity...
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site may contain copyrighted material, the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.
NOTE TO AUTHORS: If you are the author or owner of an article or video that I have made available through THEINFOVAULT.NET and you do not wish to have your article or video posted on theinfovault, please contact me and I will remove the item.