What do you think of these ideas?

This website is filled with ideas. I am inviting you to collaborate with me to help make the ideas better.

I am not interested in thoughtless, close-minded criticism of these ideas. I am interested in thoughtful, open-minded criticism of these ideas and I am interested in your related ideas.

Collaborate with me and others in testing and revising these ideas.

Jump in anywhere. There is a place to reply at the bottom of every page.


I believe so strongly that there is no universal truth and that no person or species is superior to any other that I have tried to establish a scientific basis for my belief.

I have tried to write a theory, a hypothesis, that I believe has a basis both in humanities and in science. It is my wildest dream that my hypothesis will be challenged by scientists and philosophers and at least part of it will survive.

I know that my theory cannot be proved. Indeed, the theory itself says that no thing can be proved to be universally true.

Yet, does the theory ring true for you? Does it make sense to you? Can you imagine that it might be true? Or some small part of it true? If so, tell me! Write a comment. Offer a little encouragement. Share a story or experience that illustrates the theory. I would love to hear your story!

And if the theory were to be true, what would be some implications? How would it change our thinking about the world? How might we change our behaviors in light of this way of thinking? Tell me! Help me out here.

If you think that the theory, or some part of it, is not true or does not make sense, why not? What about it just doesn’t work for you, and why? Can you actually prove that it’s not true, or that part of it is not true? If so, tell me! Write a comment. Show me and others me that any part of what I am saying cannot be true.

Relative Understanding Video Graphic - RequestHow about the algebraic equation? Any takers? Anyone care to help me in refining the equation to make it more accurate and more defensible? I have more specific ideas about the correlations between the factors so if you are interested, write a comment below and ask me. Anyone want to experiment with some real numbers and test and refine the equation? If so, tell me! Write a comment. I would so love to have some help and collaboration to make the equation, and indeed the whole theory, better.

Can you prove or disprove any part of The Theory?

What do you think of the ideas?

2 responses

  1. Hi Craig,
    You are making a lot of claims but doesn’t explain what you are based on:
    How a thing is “make-up time”?
    How they “make up space”?
    What the space that created made of?
    Where this time and space are created?
    And another thing, you keep saying “the nature of…” on things that don’t have nature, but nature has them.
    I can tell you how to measure its relative “pace,” but I will need to know that you won’t go and publish my stuff (this explanation can lead to winning awards on behalf of the scientific community, and I don’t want anyone else to win through theories I have developed on my own.
    I have no problem that we will develop your theories/opinions together, and we will both get the payoff for them).
    I’m t sure if are getting the magnitude of the misunderstandings that it will account for.
    I found out some misunderstandings that it can correct, that will have such a change that it is still hard for me to believe it is possible.

  2. Hi Craig,
    I apologize in advance if there are any errors.
    I just used “translate google” here without going through the translation and correcting it. If you can’t understand or you have questions, or you want to contact me: +972528310766 (for WhatsApp only), golank26@gmail.com
    About The pace of time:
    The right way to explain It is to say that time is a dimension of space.
    As such, live things can move on it and also be moved on it at different speeds.
    And the proof of this is that we are witnessing other animals moving at a different time rate than our own.
    For example, according to our time count, a mouse lives one year.
    But if you accelerate a person’s heart to the normal speed of the mouse’s pulse, the person will die quite immediately.
    How can it be that the mouse “suffers” from this rhythm for a whole year, and how can it be that it is enough in one year to do the whole normal life cycle that also includes creating the next generation?
    This is because the mouse not only experiences time at a faster rate than us but also passes through time at a faster rate.
    And the same is true for a fly.
    The “smoking gun” lies in the fact that the rapid movement of these animals does not result from a greater exertion of their muscles, as opposed to an increase in the rate of movement of any animal on its own (e.g., trying to kill a fly by moving the hand fast to hit it requires us to activate the Muscles faster and put more effort than the relative effort the fly has to put in to escape our hand).
    We see the opposite situation in turtles, which pass in time more slowly than us, and therefore it seems to us that they move slowly, but for them, we are the ones who move fast.
    Theoretically, you can even go through the speed of light if you create a machine that will allow you to move through time at a faster rate (like we use an airplane to move in geographic space at a much faster rate than we can move on our own).
    I calculated the time difference in time so that I could correctly see the ages of other animals in relation to our age (it is impossible to uniformly count the time of animals not passing in a time at the same rate) and also gained additional insights into some of which contradict the natural thought of People (because they do not see how things work the right way).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.