The following is a complete record of my recent emails with Victor Senchenko. For an explanation and my comments on this exchange, please visit my main post on this subject: Victor Senchenko – Time Does Not Exist.
Please Note - Victor’s original emails came with many weird tags such as â€˜timeâ€™ and â€œtheory of relativityâ€ â€“. I assume that Victor compiled his emails in something like Word, and then copied them into a browser email front end. This frequently converts characters such as “ and ” and – to the odd characters shown. Victor’s emails were quite difficult to read like this, so I edited out the tags so that (for example) â€˜timeâ€™ became “time”, and â€œtheory of relativityâ€ â€“ became - “theory of relativity” - . Likewise, some of his emails had line breaks in odd places, again making his email difficult to read. I also edited these line breaks to make his emails easier to read. I’m pretty sure I didn’t edit anything incorrectly, but if I did I’m sure Victor will let me know and I will immediately correct any errors.
That said, here are the email exchanges, without any additional commentary from me. Please leave any comments you might have on the main post.
1) Original email from Victor’s “Media Team”
Looking over your website, you seem to present yourself as a rational thinker with liberal, humanist views. It is for this reason that the following Press Release may be of interest to you.
In your personal pursuit of knowledge, you may have come across an interesting phenomena: every year there are millions of children born, of whom many parents become aware that their children are very intelligent. These smart children are often given the chance – by either their parents or the society in which they live – to develop that intelligence, so that it could be used to enhance and improve human existence. This has been occurring, more or less, throughout human existence. Currently we find that never before in human existence has literacy been so wide spread. Never before in human existence have humans possess so much knowledge on how to communicate, heal, and duplicate. Never before in human existence have humans achieved feats of intellectual brilliance and physical endeavors, such as that of a space program, and sending of probes to other planets, so as to learn exactly what our Solar System comprises of. And yet, for all the widespread literacy, numeracy, and vast range of intellectual application advances in all forms of industries and fields of research, a simple but irrefutable fact remains: that humans, as a species, are no more humanely civilized today than they were thousands of years ago.
Human species, made up of races and societies, remains divisive, unjust and ignorant – prone to inflict suffering both on humans and other species – due to human selfishness, greed, and love of brutality. Take a random look at any part of this planet today, and there shall be a presence of human misery: death from hunger; suppressions and oppressions by military juntas and dictators; revolutions; mindless wars waged by bully nations – including those that claim to be democracies – and other military aggressions; retaliatory terrorism; crime with or without violence; degradation and theft of natural resources by desperate or greedy individuals; destruction and pollution of environment by uncaring populations and business companies. Lately, such human behavior has been so bad it has resulted in a vast and rapid degradation of living conditions on this planet, not just for humans but for all life forms.
So how can it be that at the period of being so intellectually advanced in knowledge of technical and chemical applications, this, the very brightest and the most educated generation of humans have brought upon themselves the most dangerous situation concerning their existence, the likes of which had never occurred to any earlier human generations?
The reason for this current human dilemma is that humans replicate the behavior and thinking of those before them. A younger generation accepts the teachings of the older generations, who teach the younger generation what they themselves had experienced at the hands of their own older generation who taught them. In this way, a perpetuation of the ideals held by older generation is guaranteed, so that when an older generation embraces lies, prejudices, and delusions, these lies, prejudices, and delusions are certain to be passed on to the younger generation, who then shall pass the very same lies, prejudices, and delusions onto their own offsprings. In this way, no matter how clever, smart, or intelligent the young generation may be, they are sure to be no wiser than their predecessors.
Needless to say, there are many well-intentioned humans who claim to seek the truth through reason, by exposing human misguided notions of superstition and other delusions connected with religions. The irony is that these individuals are also participants in delusions, without even being aware of this. This occurs because current humans, irrespective of their intellectual pursuits and endeavors, continue to accept the erroneous notions they were taught by their teachers; the very same erroneous notions their teachers were taught by those before them: notion based on misconceptions and fabrications rather than physical reality, but which they all accepted as being factual, and therefore, presumably requiring no examination. This is exactly how science became, and remains flawed: where principles invented by someone, continue to be accepted with no authentication by others.
Take ‘time’, for example. ‘Time’ was, and remains, an early human invention: a notion intending to explain the physical process of change, which inevitably includes a deterioration – or ‘dispersal’ – of every physical object or body. This includes a physical process that can be observed in humans as an aging of the body, leading to death. This physical process of change can also be witnessed in the continuous rotation of Earth on its axis (by that producing a day and night effect), and the planet’s ongoing orbit of the Sun (producing seasons on Earth’s surface). But instead of understanding that change physically occurs from all the surrounding physical influences of all the surrounding objects and bodies, early humans gave in to a presumption that change was caused by an unseen and unfelt force of mysterious ‘time’. A supposedly, powerful, mysterious entity very much like those of gods; an entity capable of manifesting itself in all that it influences to age and deteriorate.
With the development of science, scientists did not bother to examine the notion of ‘time’ seriously. They simply accepted it blindly. After all, were they not taught to accept ‘time’ to be an integral companion of space: a togetherness of time-space continuum? From that blind acceptance, the non-existent entity of ‘time’ had become a valuable commodity to aid the expanding imaginations of scientists and academics. So instead of ‘time’ being simply a ‘measure’ of any duration of the physical process of change, (not unlike a mile or kilometer being merely a measure of distance between two separate points in space, or on Earth’s surface) ‘time’ had been awarded flexible qualities, making it supposedly capable, in its own mysterious way, of fracturing, warping, accelerating and slowing.
Oh, yes, there have been some paltry experiments conducted to establish the physical existence of ‘time’, by examining the effects produced on some elements with a constant rate of decay. But all that these experiments could show, if examined properly, is that physical change can and does occur according to the levels of physical influence imposed upon the decaying elements, causing a speeding-up or slowing-down of decay. This does not, in any way, shape, or form, provide any physical proof to existence of ‘time’, but mere that physical change occurs from other physical change.
Were ‘time’ to physically exist, then, a simple experiment would have long ago provided physical proof to physical existence of ‘time’. That experiment would consist of a refrigerating unit standing exposed to the Sun and the elements of the weather, and of two leaves being removed from the same branch of a tree. One of the two leaves would be placed on top of the refrigerating unit, exposed to the Sun and the elements. The other leaf would be placed inside the refrigerating unit. Were ‘time’ to exist, then the two leaves, few centimeters or inches apart (one on the outside and one on the inside) would be affected at a similar rate by the surrounding-them same speed of ‘time’. As ‘time’ does not exist, but the physical process of change does, the exposed leaf on top of the refrigerating unit would soon disintegrate – disperse – while the leaf incased in the refrigerating unit would remain virtually unchanged indefinitely, for as long as the refrigerating unit continues to function, despite that the refrigerating unit itself is exposed to the Sun and the elements.
There are other such flaws to the current understanding of science. But despite them being flaws, delusions, or simply lies, it will not be easy for current humans – be they also scientists and academics or not – to acknowledge them as such. Having based their sciences on such delusions, the full scope of human knowledge depends for those non-existent entities to exist. So much like theists depending on their non-existent gods to exist. For that reason, blinded by their faith – despite proclaiming their allegiance to logic and reason – those in sciences shall (and do), belligerently refuse to admit their delusions, just like theists who refuse to acknowledge the non-existence of their gods.
Despite such opposition to physical reality, sooner or later humans will have to recognize and admit that their current delusions apply not just to religions, but to sciences as well. They shall also be required to admit that the reason why they find themselves, as a species, in such dire straits, is totally due to them structuring ABSOLUTELY ALL of their societies on their flawed, erroneous, and deluded perceptions of themselves and all that surrounds them, despite of their individual high intelligence. Humans had devised their societies according to their own, flawed perceptions of physical existence, rather than doing so based on absolute rational of reason.
There is, however, an alternative to this situation. It is now possible for anyone to learn all there is to know about humans, the reasons for their behavior, and all that physically surrounds them. A book, “Revelations of a Human Space Navigator", by Victor Senchenko, discloses all the human delusions, which continue to afflict human existence. This book reveals the very basics of who and what humans actually are, and why they behave as they do. It explains exactly from what all that is physical is physically made of, and why in the process of being they produce resultant physical functions, such as gravity and electromagnetic fields. By providing all this information, it becomes quite simple to understand exactly why ‘time’ and gods not only do not physically exist, but exactly why they cannot physically exist.
Of course, there is no compulsion for you to either accept the claims made in the book, or to purchase the book. The only important factor is that of your awareness: should you ever choose to acquire the knowledge humans had always claimed to want, without any illusions, delusions, fabrications and lies, then you should know that such information is available to you.
Furthermore, in defending the uniqueness and originality of the information presented in the book, the author issues a challenge to Any and Every person on the planet who purchases this book: were that person to provide the author with a physical proof that his revelations had already existed at any period of the Human Age, (as knowledge not derived or sourced from this book), then the author, himself, will refund that person the full purchase price of the book.
For any additional information, please visit http://www.victorsenchenko.com
VictorSenchenko.com Media Team,
[Email address removed]
2) Skeptico’s reply #1
Were ‘time’ to exist, then the two leaves, few centimeters or inches apart (one on the outside and one on the inside) would be affected at a similar rate by the surrounding-them same speed of ‘time’.
Surely this doesn't show that time doesn't exist? Surely this just shows that organic matter takes less time to rot in sunlight than it does in the fridge?
Richard aka Skeptico
3) Victor’s reply #1
My media team had passed on your questions.
Were “time” to exist, then the two leaves, few centimeters or inches apart (one on the outside and one on the inside) would be affected at a similar rate by the surrounding-them same speed of “time”.
Surely this doesn't show that time doesn't exist? Surely this just shows that organic matter takes less time to rot in sunlight than it does in the fridge?”
Please understand that in the book I do not use just logic to explain why “time” does not physically exist, but also explain exactly what all that is physical is physically made of, and why from that it all physically behaves as it does. This explanation makes it relatively easy to grasp the understanding of the non-existence of “time”.
Meanwhile, I’ll endeavor to use the very suppositions made by Einstein, in his “theory of relativity” - on which the current “quantum” theories are based, and which all current physicists embrace - to explain why, were “time” to physically exist, the two leaves (one exposed to sunlight and one hidden in a refrigerating unit) would disperse at a similar rate.
According to Einstein’s “theory of relativity”:
A. nothing, supposedly, moves faster than light.
B. A body or an object is supposedly experiencing a slowing down of “time” with increase of speed, so that a human high-speed space traveler would return to Earth from a long journey a younger person to that of an identical twin, who remained on Earth. Furthermore, according to the same theory, a space traveler moving faster and faster than the speed of light would become younger and younger, because beyond the speed of light “time” supposedly moves backwards. In other words, according to current scientific principles, a physical body or an object not only experiences slowing down of “time” with higher speed but can experience a physical reversal of “aging” by moving faster than the speed of light. Therefore, it is accepted by current humans that “time” has a direct physical effect on each and every physical atomic particle, chemical, nerve, muscle, organ and tissue of a human body; a body (or a leaf) that can be made to function for longer periods if influenced to function at a slower rate over longer period.
With me so far, Richard? Good.
While I could make many inferences on the subject of “time” - for instance: what is the “standard” “time” in the first place? Is it the day-night sequence of Earth rotation on its axis? Who has ever given or received proof of this? - I shall instead come right to the point.
First, however, let us agree that light is a physical entity. (While this is acknowledged to be true by current physicists, if you would care to know exactly what light is, and why, this is explained in the book.)
Now then, if the speed of light is a benchmark to “time”, then light itself must be the point of the slowest “time”. Therefore, if light is a physical entity with the point of slowest “time”, then, were “time” to exist, anything that light would physically cover with itself would be subject to experiencing slower “time”. To experience slower “time” would mean to retain its contents for a longer duration without loss (that is, not to age). After all, if each and every physical atomic particle, chemical, nerve, muscle, organ and tissue of a human body is supposedly dependent on “time”, and if the region of slowest “time” is the physical light itself, then light - as THE source of slowest “time” - would need to physically slow down the process of growing and aging of all life forms it shines upon. That would mean that all that the sunlight contacted on Earth during daylight hours would be slowed down in growth and deterioration during that period, and accelerate their growth and deterioration only at night.
So that is my point, Richard. Were “time” to physically exist, any light would be a rejuvenator or at least a slower-down of dispersals, because being light - traveling at the ultimate speed of light - light would possess the essence of the slowest “time”. But as “time” does not physically exist, the rate of speed of sunlight is inconsequential to the level of deterioration it produces, only its quantity, and the lengths of duration, even if all levels of heat radiation (also light in their own right) were to be removed from sunlight.
It is for this purpose I had stated in my imaginary experiment that were “time” to physically exist, then an object exposed to sunlight and the one hidden would have to maintain an equal parity in their individual rate of dispersal. As this does not physically occur, then even by simplest of logic it’s possible to show that “time” does not physically exist, and is merely another invention humans use to delude themselves in their, so-called, sciences.
The reason that there would be a difference between the two leaves’ levels and rates of dispersal is purely physical and nothing to do with any non-existent “time”. This applies to all physical change that occurs to all physical objects and bodies. It is all a physical process of change occurring due to physical contact between all the physical objects and bodies, no matter how large and how small and how numerous. Without a direct physical contact no physical change can take place. This applies even to the existence of gravity and the so-called electro-magnetic fields, which are no great mysteries if one knows exactly how, and why, all that physically exists operates upon physical principles of attraction and repulsion.
And while this physical truth can be ignored, and even ridiculed, by humans who prefer to imagine that physical change can take place without a physical contact - presumably due to their gods being able to “create” all in existence out of nothingness, or due to influence of “time” whose physical presence no-one has ever physically seen or felt (so much like that of their gods) - nothing in all physical existence can alter physical truth; for it, as a physical process of change, is a constant that’s eternal.
4) Skeptico’s reply #2
What does “the speed of light is a benchmark to time” mean?
And what does “light itself must be the point of the slowest time” mean?
Richard aka Skeptico
5) Victor’s reply #2
Oh, yes! Richard by name; skeptic by self-presumption; child by choice with a typical childish behavior: anything explained to be questioned "why?", without any conscious intent to work out for oneself the information presented. Simply continue to ask "why", or "what does that mean?", as a substitute for reasoning.
Well, Richard, I shall quickly indulge your whim for questioning. But after this assistence from me you may have to read the book to obtain all the answers to your questions.
Your question 1: What does “the speed of light is a benchmark to time” mean?
A. "speed of light" - relates to the presumed speed at which light travels. If I were you, I would have hundreds of critical questions - and I do - as to current understanding of light, such as:
all that physically moves in space and vacuum space has an impetus of physical casting off - which is a cause for an instant of acceleration. In vacuum space this acceleration is ongoing and neverending, as vacuum space has no physical restrictions of any kind, by being a nothingness. So then, why does light not accelerate from a standing start: that is: incrementally increase its velocity, rather that being always constant at its speed?
(This is explained in the book).
B. "benchmark" represents a standard or point of reference against which things or functions may be compared or assessed.
C. "time" represents averything that humans currently relate to an unexplainable entity that supposedly has a physical effect on all that physically exists.
Ergo: "What does 'the speed of light is a benchmark to time' mean?" means that according to the 'theory of relativity' light is the standard or point of reference of speed, against whose speed speeding objects and bodies are presumably affected by experiencing the slowing down of 'time'.
Your question 2: And what does “light itself must be the point of the slowest time” mean?
Well, Richard, let's reason out this question together. If in trying to reach the speed of light supposedly means experiencing slower 'time' then that would equate to: the faster the speed the slower the 'time'. So if the fastest physical entity is light, then light, by all reason, should be expected to possess the slowest 'time' from possessing the fastest speed.
I trust I had resolved the quandries you had regarding my previous communiqué.
6) Skeptico’s reply #3
Oh dear. I guess you're not used to being questioned on your brilliant, new, earth shattering theory then? Of course, a mark of the crank is that he develops his ideas in isolation, away from critics or anyone who would ask awkward questions, and so his theory, untested, is usually garbage. As I am afraid yours is. In asking my two questions, I thought maybe I was missing some profound point that would justify the conclusions that followed, and so instead of dismissing your wording as sophistic drivel, I asked you to explain what you actually meant. In other words, I gave you the benefit of the doubt. But your petulant response showed my instinct was right - your words are just empty drivel. All you were doing, in the bits I questioned, was restating a conclusion of relativity, namely that time slows down as speed approaches light speed. That you were unable or unwilling to do this in clear and unambiguous language is hardly my fault. But even then, you misstate relativity. What you should have said is that for objects traveling at light speed, time stands still. (Or, the objects experience the slowest time, if you like.) But saying this is the "point" of slowest time is meaningless. Time is not a point. Nor is light. Of course, an open minded person would ask you what the "point" of time means, to see what you really meant by that, but as that would probably elicit another meltdown from you, I'll content myself by just saying it means nothing.
I also see now the error in the rest of your logic. You think that if light "covers" an object then that object is somehow speeded up to near light speed and experiences slower time. But that is nonsense. Light bounces off us or is absorbed, and we stay at the same speed. (Well, with no measurable difference, anyway.) Light is not the source of the slowest time, does not "possess the essence of the slowest time" (which is more meaningless sophistic drivel anyway), nor does light slow things down. Time just slows down for things that approach the speed of light. And that would be true even if there were no light present. Light doesn't make it happen. And unfortunately this rather obvious blunder you have made invalidates everything else that follows.
And you found a publisher for this drivel? I hope for your sake it sells well and you make enough money to purchase the psychological help you so obviously need. If not though, it hasn't been a complete waste of time - your flawed arguments and spectacular meltdown will at least provide me with material for one new blog post.
Richard aka Skeptico
7) Victor’s reply #3
Thanks for another response, Richard, and may I say that you do amuse me, even if your previous and latest communiqués were both standard issue for people who claim to be skeptics. They pretend to be knowledgeable and shrewd, but in fact they are just like those of other humans: intellectual cowards. As with the rest of humanity, skeptics love to quarrel and reject, but constantly do so without having examined for themselves the full scope of any newly presented information, such as mine. They consider themselves so clever, they dismiss any notion foreign to them without actually examined that notion. That is, they are apt to savage a book without actually having read the book.
Instead, they - as you - often become indignant, abusive and threatening - simply because, as humans, they hold onto what they had been taught by their teachers. No different to theists being taught to accept religion and then defending it. It is for this reason that humans have remained their own worst enemies, despite having the largest numbers of educated in all of human existence.
But what is the essence of my amusement you may ask? It is your inability to comprehend what I had written to you, due to your insistence on altering what was written to your own interpretation.
For instance, in all that I had written to you (and please do reexamine my emails), you shall not find me stating that “time” had a point. What I stated, and I repeat: were “time” to physically exist, light itself would be the point of the slowest time. Unlike your assertion that: “Time is not a point. Nor is light.” a light stream does have a point of a beginning and an end-point. For example, an electric flashlight emits no light when switched off. Once it is switched on, there is a definite point - if unseen by humans - when light is emitted by the electric globe of the flashlight, with the beginning of the light stream moving forward, and in moving forward temporarily filling space with its presence, which previously it did not fill. When the same flashlight is switched off, the stream of light moves on, with the cut-off point to the steam of light being the end-point to the light stream. If the speed of light is supposed to be the benchmark (point of reference against which things or functions may be compared or assessed) of slowest “time”, then light (which physically moves at a supposed speed of light) is the only physical entity that could possibly experience the slowest “time”.
(Incidentally, your presumption that: “What you should have said is that for objects traveling at light speed, time stands still.” would have meant that if time was to stand still at the speed of light, then light itself would not move forward but would stand still at a point of its release, as a standing-still-”time” would not permit it. That is why I did not say this.)
Of course, I could go on with this discourse, but what’s the benefit? You only want to listen to yourself, in the process accusing me of saying what I do not, because of your inability to apply logic, and belittle me and my knowledge: something that you did not even bother to examine in full. So like a skeptic.
But what do you actually know, Richard?
- Do you know exactly of what all that is physical is physically made of? No? I do.
- Do you know exactly why all that is physical physically behaves as it does? No? I do. This includes gravity, and all else that currently baffles the so-called physicists.
- Do you have any notion of three-dimensional thinking? No? I do.
- Do you know who and what you are as a human? No? I do. I know exactly why humans behave as they do in all that they do humanely and inhumanely. I even know why you behave as you do, way beyond any psychobabble and chemical influences.
I know why humans have caused the current havoc on Earth, and why they shall continue to, until they learn who and what they are. To do that, however, they shall first need to obtain some intellectual courage. This means: don’t throw stones just because you are able; examine information before making an INFORMED decision; ask questions not as a child but as an astute adult, and digest the answers rather than spitting them out because they are either complex or personally disliked.
Can I achieve such a change in humans? The probably of me succeeding in my efforts is virtually nil. But at least I provide a potential for human change to their selfish and ignorant attitudes. That is all I can do. The rest is to humans such as you.
To return to your first sentence of your latest response, what I can say is that I am used to being questioned by those who are absolutely ignorant of the information I provide, but who ask questions not out of genuine curiosity but for purpose of instigating a conflict for the benefit of their own insecurity, amusement, or in support of their current delusions, even when they pretend in providing for themselves a “benefit of the doubt”. Very rarely do I receive questions from those who have read the book, because after reading of the book all the questions are answered within the book. I actually welcome questions and scrutiny from those who have read the book, because we can communicate on a level of full understanding: like two people communicating in the same language. But it does take intellectual courage to became such a knowledgeable person.
Talking of intellectual courage (or intellectual cowardice), you had mentioned that our correspondence shall be added to the material of your blog. By all means. But I would challenge you to do that not as an intellectual coward - which you currently show yourself to be - but as a courageous intellectual. This means, post our complete communication on your site. Include my web address. I doubt very much that you will have the courage to do that. I do. I shall have no qualms in posting our complete intercourse on my site. I have no fear of being judged or of any verbal opposition. Just like Copernicus or Galileo, or Columbus. If you don’t use sticks and stones your delusions shall never harm me. That’s because I know I’m right, while you may believe I’m wrong. That’s the difference between knowing and believing.
8) Skeptico’s reply #4
Wow - you seem to know everything. Your Nobel Prize must be a mere formality. Strange, then, that you blew up after a couple of simple questions.
I'm not sure that I want to publish everything on my blog - you have written so much, and most of it is really worthless. I don't want to completely bore my readers. I'll think about it. I'll certainly publish a link to your site though. And you'll be free to comment.
Richard aka Skeptico
9) Victor’s reply #4
Well, well, Richard, still collecting your material for your blog?
But why not post every word of our communication verbatim? Why not be absolutely transparent and honest? Are you embarrassed of your degradations you unjustifiably cast upon me? Unjustifiably, because you have not read the book, yet, have chosen to degrade its contents by trying to denigrate me; by presuming that what you know supersedes what you don’t know and I do; and by presuming that I can fully explain in an instant - while you can fully grasp in an instant - all that requires the sequential reading of the book: which cannot be done. But that’s not it, is it? I know you. You’re the kind of human who likes to belittle those whom you don’t understand. You want your version to be seen as the only true version. If you presumed I was blowing up while I was grinning your version has to be it. You want to be seen right no matter what. So much like a human. A Mugabe in the making, perhaps?.
That is one of the reasons that humans like you fear to read my book; which, incidentally, has a subtitle: “What humans fear to know: the physical truth of all in existence, including themselves.”
At this instant, you may be grinning as much as I am (from different perspectives, of course), but then I’m always grinning: I’m always happy. But in being happy does not mean that I’m oblivious of all the misery that exists on this planet, most of it directly due to human inhumanity, caused by human selfishness, self-importance, greed, and ignorance; directed not just at their own species but all other species. Even the most educated, and those who perceive themselves to be just, rational, socially conscious - as I’m sure you are - are duped by human past.
The past human inventions are still with us today, dominating our lives as social customs and national laws: including religious doctrines propagating subservience to their faith and state as being ideals of earthly life, with reward of obtaining an afterlife; including scientific doctrines that had evolved from religious teaching, and which propagate subservience to their faith of promises of unlimited earthly life, with reward for those who pursue this scientific path with award of the Nobel prize, whose consequence are that of human overpopulation: which is by far the largest cause of all human despair and global environmental depletion and destruction.
(From the above observation you may now have some idea what I think of Nobel and his legacy.)
So, now in finality, Richard, allow me to ask you a question: after you had, of your own volition, responded to our Press Release - in the process having been upset by being told that you are an intellectual coward (a statement of physical truth and not malicious hurtfulness you like to apply), where do you go from here? Do you prove to yourself that you are not an intellectual coward by reading the book? After all, after reading the book you shall be privy to its knowledge, and from that you can either pan it - and me - INFORMEDLY, to kingdom come (which never shall), or realize for yourself that all that I claim is a physical truth, and you too become as knowing as I am. What shall you now do?
I will not dispute that acquiring this knowledge, in the first instant, is not a daunting experience - it is; after all, I had to go through it, so I should know. It requires not a blind acceptance but a great deal of rational perseverance, questioning, and working out for one self. In short: it requires some mental effort. And the reward? Nothing financial, I’m afraid. And no Nobel bullshit. Just the irreplaceable satisfaction of knowing all that physical is physically made of, and why it all physically behaves as it does; and more importantly: who and what humans are.
But there are some dangers to knowing everything: it means to be informed, surrounded by billions of humans who are not. So what’s the problem with that, you may ask? The problem is that once you know everything, you shall be motivated to pass on the knowledge you have for an unselfish reason of assisting human species - those billions of unknowing - to extend their existence on this planet into millions of years, rather than short period they continue to erode.
Ah, decisions, decisions:
to be or not to be: perchance to think; to reason; to explore;
perchance to learn the score of melodies of life,
and so for end of life,
for all there is behaves as in a Shakespeare’s play:
from life to end of life, that end of life the cause of other life,
for that’s the structure of the cycle, or the ring;
not really understood by humans now and then,
from being so different to a Tolkien ring and ring of master Wagner.
So what shall it be? Shall you turn into an all-knowing human, responsible for all of the humanity, or remain a parrot of other opinions, sitting on a fence squawking their ignorance as your own? Ah, decisions, decisions.
Return to the main post - Victor Senchenko – Time Does Not Exist.