Return to Main Page

So, if you've been around science communities, you've heard of "time dilation" as a consequence of relativity. This has always smelled like bullshit, and it is bullshit. I do not doubt that relativity in physics is observed. If you've been around enough, you've certainly seen the cranks that insist "Time is Absolute" and "Einstein was a lying Jew".^[1] Hilariously, if you actually believe in "time dilation", you are aligned with those cranks rather than physics as Einstein and his contemporaries largely understood it.

So just to recap, here is the infamous "Twin Paradox". Google AI has provided this (very wrong) explanation, so I will copy it verbatim, and include the reminder that if you put garbage into an AI, you will get a garbage result:

The "twin paradox" is a thought experiment in special relativity that explores time dilation, suggesting that a space-faring twin would return younger than their Earth-bound twin due to the effects of relative motion, but the apparent paradox is resolved by understanding that the journeys are not symmetrical, with the traveling twin experiencing acceleration and changes in reference frames.

Here's a more detailed explanation:
The Setup: Imagine two identical twins, one who stays on Earth, and the other who embarks on a long journey to a distant star at near light speed and returns.
Time Dilation: According to the theory of special relativity, time passes more slowly for a moving object relative to a stationary object.
The Paradox: From the perspective of the space-faring twin, the Earth-bound twin would appear to age more quickly, and vice versa. This leads to the apparent paradox: which twin is younger upon reunion?
The Resolution: The key to resolving the paradox lies in the fact that the journeys are not symmetrical. The space-faring twin experiences acceleration (to launch, change direction, and decelerate) and therefore, changes reference frames. The Earth-bound twin, however, remains in a single, inertial reference frame throughout the entire journey.
Asymmetry: The space-faring twin's changes in reference frame, due to acceleration, are crucial. This asymmetry means that the space-faring twin will indeed return younger than their Earth-bound sibling.
Inertial vs. Non-Inertial Frames: The Earth-bound twin is in an inertial frame (constant velocity), while the space-faring twin is in a non-inertial frame (due to acceleration).
Experiments: Experiments with atomic clocks have confirmed that time dilation does occur, supporting the idea of the space-faring twin being younger. [BULLSHIT]

To understand what is wrong, we have to overcome the sleight of hand that is central to the deception. This is that light, or photons or light waves, is synonymous with information and has some place of pride in the universe. Light has no such property, and the universe is not contingent on light being "prime matter" or any such conceit. Light and electromagnetism are phenomena we observe (and we must remain vigilant about the word "phenomenon" which has a well-attested philosophical meaning). From the outset, the relativistic problem is an observational one for us, rather than one that is "processed" by the universe in any way. No, the clocks on a spaceship do not move slower by some law of "absolute time". Within the frame of reference, a clock "measures time" just as it would if it were stationary. This is very basic, since every possible clock or time measurement would take place in such a frame of reference. The observational problem is created by relativity and asymmetry, but this is only a problem for the observer on Earth tracking the departed vessel. What does the observer on Earth look for to watch this vessel? The naive answer is that the observer views light from the vessel, or some signal transmitted from the vessel to Earth at the speed of light. It does not take great insight for the observer on Earth to see that something is wrong with naive sense... and this is exactly the astronomical error that the theory of relativity sought to correct. Whatever the eye sees through a telescope, a reasonable human knows the departed vessel's trajectory, since this is inherent to the thought experiment. We don't need to invoke the speed of light or special relativity to see the problem the observer faces. Any observer is aware that naive sense can be incorrect, and so the subjective observer corrects this sense through its knowledge of the world. If for example we were asked to measure the speed of a race car without any precise measuring equipment from the stands, we would know the length of some stretch of the race track, the time (from our vantage point) one line was crossed, and the time a second line of known distance was crossed. This is a naive "error correction" we would have, rather than just eyeballing by gut or immediate instinct what we think the speed of the car is. When observing the phenomenon of light emissions, we already know some things about light. We do not see large objects moving at the speed of light relative to our position, and so the crude "solution" provided here does not work, because we cannot pick two points by eyesight to provide the "correction". But, we know the trajectory of the ship, and we know Earth's position and what part of the sky we are observing. Given the knowns, we would simply correct for the observational error, just as we would correct observational error about the positions of the planets. The key discovering of special relativity was the constancy of the speed of light, since this was not ascertained until then with reasonable certainty. It's amazing how much effort is spent on inventing "time dilation" to defend stupid philosophical positions. The very concept of "time dilation" implicitly require "absolute time" by some reference, or an assertion about acceleration possessing magickal force to warp reality and thus "all movement is impossible", just as our old friend Zeno would claim. Suppose you had such a powerful telescope that you could see the person inside the departed ship. Would they appear to age younger? To naive sense, the traveller would appear younger, until you remember that what you are seeing is from the past. The real position of the vessel, which you on Earth are certain is a real position, is where it reasonably should be. You know on Earth, and the inhabitant of the vessel knows, that there is a real world position for these things. When speaking of "absolute position", the observer surmises there is a third frame of reference independent of either of them. Absent any compelling reason to believe otherwise, this frame of reference is "null". We know the Earth orbits the Sun, and the Sun rotates around the core of the galaxy, and we know with fairly reasonable guesses what those movements are. We are less certain of the movement of the galaxy relative to the rest of the universe. We can still use the center of the galaxy as a useful reference point to eliminate the "subjective observer" problem sufficiently to know the galactic position of Earth and the vessel.

Complicating this experiment is that even though we claim confidence about the galaxy and "perfect knowledge", we really possess nothing close to that. This uncertainty, and the lack of access to reliable telescopes for ordinary people, is part of the sleight-of-hand trick of "time dilation". Where are these atomic clocks that "prove time dilation"? On military-chartered satellites that we will never access. We are taking the word of proven liars as dogma, and that is entirely the point. These experiments always assert that "time is absolute" while simultaneously upholding a vague "everything is relative" statement. It relies purely on essentialism. Every instrument for measuring time is an instrument that measures a relational concept rather than "universal time", and every instrument we possess is imperfect even for the conditions we establish for it. The proof for the satellites' atomic clock, if such an experiment did take place—and we must remember that the space agencies are proven liars and brazen about it—would be by communicating the result from the satellite to an Earth observational outpost by, you guessed it, a light signal. All that is proven by the experiment is that the expected relativistic error from Earth was reproduced in the communication, and the same error could be found on the satellite with Earth's clock. For the "magic trick" to work, "super-science" is invoked to make imperious decrees from the authorities not merely "above light speed", but sacrosanct and "above God". The simpler explanation is one a child could discern if he or she hears this story of proof, and certainly a child would ask, only to be met with beatings. If we could somehow "see" the atomic clock on the satellite or the clock on Earth from the satellite, we would have the same naive error described above, where the observer "sees" something that is erroneous. But, the signal transmitting in digital information the time on the clock is the real measuring instrument here rather than the clocks on the satellite which merely generate that signal to transmit.

The funniest thing about this "super-science" is that to believe "time dilates" implies a universal time or a "dimension of time", which was never the point of any claim in physics. So much of this rests on Sir Stephen Hawking and the claims of imperial logical positivists, and the same Popperian filth that destroy knowledge wherever they can. If there is a "dimension of time", it is merely a contrivance so that effects of gravity at astronomical scales—scales where this observational error exists—can be shown on a model elegantly. Eventually, someone moves away from what gravity is and towards abstraction. This is helped because we really don't know what "gravity" is, or what "mediates" it, if anything. The relativistic theory has implications for gravity as well as light, since gravity operates over very long distances. In principle, any distance is affected by these relativistic "observations" or the actions of bodies in space. This would break down if the bodies in question were molecules, but only for the predictive ability of our theories. The universe itself wouldn't care about our difficulties with measurement and Reason.

The greater contributor to this silliness is quantum bullshit, or the bad interpretations of quantum mechanics which posed very different questions about the universe. Nearly every bad physics notion comes back not the principle of relativity, that has been known for centuries, but to magical interpretations of quantum mechanics that insist that "chaos" and "uncertainty" are themselves foundational forces in the universe. This was never the intent, but the same imperial charlatans that gave up Popperism know the power of Lie when they see it. Those who first formulated the quantum theory in the German academy were certainly aware that reality didn't actually work in the way the magical thinking insisted it did. In quantum mechanics, there are no relativistic effects, and instead creative mental tricks are invoked to compensate for an inability to really know what the smallest strata of matter can be or do. These tricks were intended to place a stopper in the fantastical notions that were a favorite of the imperial Academy and its pseudoscience, until they became yet another vehicle for pseudoscience themselves, this time with a Germanic flavor. The tricks are useful for making sense of these small particles, except... they really aren't. The truth is that for all of the proclamations that physics is overturned, very little has changed from the days of Newton, and the same discovery of mechanics took place around the world with slight variations and sometimes for purposes apart from those Newton investigated. The tie between electromagnetism and chemical matter as we came to know it was the key here. It was believed that by inserting an imperious super-science in the mind of every subject, that reality could be controlled "at all levels", and that is precisely what educational establishments and firms set out to do. I am currently writing the historical section of The Retarded Ideology, and after taking this time to write on a piece of pseudo-physics bullshit that stuck in my mind this afternoon, I feel even more confident in my assertions that the root of so much malice in humanity has been the invention of corporate government, or the rule of the firm and the institution over the prior sense of virtue or autocracy that governed polities of the past. I certainly do not possess those virtues of olden times, but much of the pseudo-physics are an attempt to insist on the lowest version of scientific despotism possible, so that the rule of a depraved autocrat would appear wise and just by comparison. These pseudo-physics theories like "time dilation" and "many worlds theory" have always stuck in my craw. None of this is about doubting relativity or quantum mechanics generally, though in the latter case there are gaping holes in the theory that are fixed with new errors, until physics has become worse than astrology at the commanding heights—at least for the general public, who will only be lied to. It is the particular assault of bullshit like "time dilation" that retards public understanding, and the entire purpose of doing this is to shout "retard! retard!" until a society is engineered where every child is instructed to lie publicly and then lie to themselves about basic reality. Whether the child believes it or not is irrelevant. The entire point is to teach children that science and reality are arcane and proprietary. One great thing about Einstein, for good or ill, is that his popular writing is accessible and intended to be so, whatever you may say about the merits of the man. The finer details and why this was an issue are lost in the discourse, for it became inadmissible to suggest science itself was a practice of us with its own history.

The central problem remains, as I said, the conflation of "light" or "matter" with information, and then a belief that "super-communication" supercedes what communication was understood to be. What is at work is the foul art of Public Relations, and from whence does Public Relations arise? It arises from the needs of corporate government, which I am describing in TRI. I want to make sure my writing there is on the soundest possible footing. My aim isn't so much to provide an alternative theory or even a thorough critique. I don't believe "time dilation" needs a thorough critique because it was absurd bullshit from the first day. On the very terms of relativistic physics, it fails spectacularly without invoking "physics is relative, but not really", a favorite of every dumbass Mason chucklefuck thinking he has fooled the rubes. The infuriating and idiotic faggotry I have heard throughout my life from that corner upholds every fag conceit eugenics every upheld and celebrated proud wrongness. It is that stink that I smelled, and since this stupidity is relitigated and recapitulated often even today, I felt it was helpful to write this article. I ask you, the reader, to ask yourself some basic questions, rather than taking my word for it. I still have that supplemental book that I intend to finish one of these days, and that will probably happen after I finish Book 4 of TRI.

So, have I found a way to travel "faster-than-light"? Maybe, but to really understand travel requires speaking of what "moves", and there is no evidence of anything that can accomplish this. Light as we know it is a limited phenomenon rather than a universal one. Tying light and electromagnetic force to human sense and "subjectivity" has always been a sleight-of-hand trick, but the constance of light should tell us something about space and existence itself, rather than efforts to recapitulate the positions of bad philosophy... or, Einstein was simply wrong and so are our eyes. The final piece of the "trick" is invoking causality as foundational to the universe, when this is even more of a relational concept than "time" was and is only sensical to us. Why would the universe's cause and effect be tied to subjectivity? Retarded. The same people who invoke causality handwave their magic "expanding universe" theory, so that the imperial cosmology has an infinite and uncounterable number of galaxies to conquer. That has always been the faith of this Satanic eugenic creed. But, only "they" get to assert this, and it requires believing implicitly that the imperious dictator of "The Science" alone has the power of universal expansion, and the holder of this technology is "above God". That has always been at the heart of the eugenic creed's bastardization of science and reason. Either the galaxies aren't receding from us—which is highly likely since that "discovery" was premised on pseudoscience atop of pseudoscience—or there is one obvious violation of the speed limit that requires special, "just-so" stories that are conveniently monopolized by the interest that claims they are "Nature" defined. The same people crow that they will exterminate us all and attain a perfect eugenist hellstate, so we have a reasonable idea of what to expect from them. The people will only be lied to.

The original theory for the constancy of light-speed derives from electromagnetism, and so we may ask if the electromagnetic theory was just, you know, wrong, or limited, or doesn't apply to light let alone all that can move. What can be easily dismissed are the arguments of "breaking causality", because time does not dilate and and it's insane to believe it does. The greater problem for physics is that if matter is comprised of the same electromagnetism, and we have no reason to doubt this, then "true light speed" is a limit for the transmission of any matter we know about. I know that if there were evidence of "faster than light", the imperial dogma will insist and invent every story possible to deny what observation and Reason would independently claim, because the imperious habit of "The Science" has become absolute and violation is punished with humiliation at the least, and death for those who doth protest too much. If the grand theory does not work, the eugenics cannot be valid and "there is no Christ". Every one of these lies are not the result of ignorance or errors in the best of science. They are always efforts to recapitulate the central dogma of Eugenics: that effect precedes cause, and that this article of faith is the Absolute of Absolutes, "above God", indivisible, with slavery and humiliation for all but the monopolists. It is that which is the central "bug" in the total system, and it has devoured over a century of investigation into physics. All of this is intended to strip humanity from a material existence it once knew and had to navigate, so it can be replaced with pure ideology. It really is Satanic. If, however, we understood the invariant "speed limit" as a property of certain types of substance we know well, then the causality excuse is irrelevant. We would correct for "faster-than-light" observations when we can assert such motion is demonstrated for a substantive thing, and that is a very particular proposition. We would not insinuate willy-nilly that such a "limit breaking" feat is common and make the imperious, anvilicious "proof" that Eugenics always relies on. In our systems of knowledge, for their own sake, speed can be as high as we can imagine. It is very different when we purport to describe a substantive world outside of us, as we must for science to be worth anything to us down here. All of our notions of coordinates in space are ultimately from systems of knowledge rather than "Natural coordinates" mandated by some arbiter. So, in the example of two objects moving in directly opposite directions at 0.66c, we "naively" observe a distortion when asking how fast the other object moves away from us... until we remember that it is our subjective distortion, and that we can't help but be limited by light-speed for the transmission of information for us. We also know, based on our knowledge, how to correct that error to the best of our abilities. The greater problem as any physicist will tell you is how to stop objects moving that quickly. In any case, information as we understand it requires dyads for us to speak of relations, whether that dyad is between like objects or an object compared to an abstract concept. It is the distortion of information and a large pseudoscience around it that produces this retardation, rather than the imperious will of Eugenics insisting it is "just so", "above God", and all other such faggotry Eugenics always recapitulates to its dying breath. Of course, "knowing" this, it would be possible to "communicate" without substance by implicit knowledge on both ends... except this becomes nothing more than a conceit in the minds of both subjects, who believe on faith they are communicating with someone and predict the other's movement and future. This is something different than communication as an act in the real world, which always requires some substantive signal, and that signal is limited by whatever we can use to generate it, which in this case would be electromagnetism. If we had another notion of what substantive things did, could demonstrate it, and could reproduce it in some machinery, we would have a very different conversation. Yet, we remain objects comprised of that same type of matter, and so this travel is useless for us, as we are now and for any version of "us" we can claim has a substantive existence, which we must claim for "us" to be a real thing. The trick of Eugenics is that they alone claim they are above this, regardless of any reality of their condition, and imperious science trains someone to turn off their brain before they can call bullshit. For that, the human race damned itself to what we see today.

Return to Main Page