Meta-mechanical approach to time...

The need to address philosophical concerns about the nature of time. Intersecting indigenous time keeping methods, that are subjective vs objective, then in comparison time keeping methods of modern physics measurements. These when organized take upon inherent overlap; whereby relativistic interplay via particle accelerators take on a very similar causal role as the role of the mind in the act of observing. Then there is comparison in external influences upon the nature of time, and what changes the qualitative function of time, thereby creating only superficial homogeneity. That is we know time is analytically a rate of decay of isotopes, but we have no idea where these isotopes go, but they follow vortecular trajectory, and are definitely influenced by background radiation. That is if background radiation changes, the decay rate changes, which is redundantly expressed throughout C14 decay during Solar active periods. One such known period occurred around 3000BC and was far larger then Solar activity seen relative to our own solar maximums. These are termed as super solar maximums, and according to Solanki (et al.) occur less then 3% of the last 10,000 yrs. So here we have established a time arbiter in the analytical sense, which is controlled exclusively by the Sun. Can we find now a functional characteristic that can be defined within cognitive time? Persinger (et al.) suggests that cognition occurs ~ 3-4ms, and specefic characteristics of consciousness are interfacable within artificial magnetic fields attached to cranium. He has tested a variety of sensory feed  back loops, including sense presence, remote sensing, behavioral influences, and found that they can be disrupted or enhanced depending on the magnetic field. Which leads us to one possible conclusion that magnetic fields, and their respectively associated psychotronic resonance are mimicking natural feedback loops that the Sun and our Moon-Earth geomagnetic field create already. We all know about the full moon as a viable statistical outcome, which is found in crime stats, psyche ward admins,   and historically it was stooped in ritual and sacrifice. Shortly after Einstein's death we discovered there was an electromagnetic field surrounding the planet, and  more recently we have been able to verify that is harboring antimatter particles-fields. In neuro-science there is the 'top-down' method-theory, which addresses how the brain may behave like a electrical antenna. Piggy backing on the same calculations used by Schuman to calculate the standing waves in the ionosphere,  Nunez shows us that we can also do the same with the cranium cavity. This shows the skull to act as a perfect harmonic transducer, which is set-up to operate off of these ambient EMf frequencies. Let us assume that the action potential across the cranium is then identical to the action potential to the ionosphere, i.e. they are invariably linked. If this is even partly correct, then it would seem worthy to consider drivers or modulators of said rhythms. Some of these cycles are easily predictable, such as diurnal, circadian (i.e. daily, seasonal), but others are less easy to explain. Such as the 11 yr solar cycle, and possibly many higher octaves of different energy potentials. That is what qualitative aspects of the energy change, it is one thing to mention of outputs, as per number of sunspots,  or total solar irradiance, but little to nothing is known about the smaller amplitude energy, which is riding the wave so-to-speak. What the Sun's plasma carry's onward to Earth via the Solar wind is complex, and it's interaction with the geomagnetic field is even more complex, and that interacting with the human brain antenna system even more. Because we know very little about each of these fields independent, let alone acting synergistically, hierarchically, and or antagonistically together as a dynamic feed back loop, it is safe to say that we need to approach cautiously, yet open minded. It is here we enter the "spooky action at a distance" kinda stuff. Where we need to consider something quiet interesting, which is every ancient culture had very elaborate stories, mythologies, folklore, buildings, rituals, calendars, deities, as core beliefs. But is it just beliefs, or is there some higher knowing encoded as ancillary data within the belief structure itself? If this was so, you would think at some point we would bump into immutable laws, or constants that represented celestial mechanics that were timeless. What if our inability to understand ancient stories is based upon our inability to understand these complex systems, and once we do, perhaps it is then (as Einstein asserted) very simple. That is Einstein believed the Universal laws could be explained to a bar-maiden, and when you look into all corners of the world, it was average people telling stories. It was through the efforts of Von Descend and Santillana (Hamlet's Mill) that helped us re-realize that many of these ancient stories did in fact carry extensive amounts of ancillary data, of which the authors concluded that a keen scholar of history should also be expected to understand a significant level of celestial mechanics. All expectations of history are slowly pushing back when the earliest battery was used (i.e. knowledge of charge, capacitance), and when the earliest compass was used (i.e. knowledge of magnetic field), and when the earliest computational devices were used (e.g. Antikythera Device). To what point can we limit who our ancestors were? Have we been sanitized in our perception from years of antiquated traditional thinking? What happens to our modern identity of who discovered when, where?  Would it end the European centric model of asserted intellectual dominants? How would it impact the world religions, and their respective timelines of origins? We have been so hyper critical of open minded historical interpretation, that we will even undermine the scientific rationality to assert the old model of thinking. If we are willing to spend billions on the theoretical hope of logic--that may be admittedly flawed from the get-go, why would we not give our ancestors the benefit of the doubt. That is maybe they had some knowledge that we did not. Let us consider a possible inversion example. Currently we are very accurate at measuring all bands of the EM spectrum, we have labels, units, error, calibration, performance statistics, and yet we do not understand very fundamental questions about matter. We do not know if... The speed of light is fixed. What aspects of Quantum building blocks produce mass. If the Sun is nuclear power based, why there is far less Neutrino's measured. Why our distant satellites (Voyager, Pioneer) are not at their respective predicted positions (function V(t), d). In juxtaposition, consider now a different type of scientific values--whereby you are not familiar with all the subsets of particles, and radiations, but you do understand what gives objects there mass. And you do know what type of energy fuels the Sun. Therefore we assume these tenants are actually easier then expected, and perhaps the reason we haven't found them yet, is because we have made it too complex, too analytical, and it defies complexity, it defies thermodynamics, etc. The Chinese proverb of the man who points to the heavens and stares at his finger misses all the heavenly glory... i.e. man's involvement has been predominantly to reduce and analyze, and avoid any holistic approaches that attempt to use philosophical treaties, and thought experiments to simplify complex systems. Perhaps we may consider where the chaos in the order has come from--the observer! If we know our expectation of measurement can produce an outcome (i.e. particle-wave duality), then why is it so hard to see that same causality on a bigger scale. This then becomes a psychological psychosis, where we want to believe to the point of projecting our opinion as the  only version of reality despite of negating the tenants of scientific protocols. We approach a time of great humility, were six decades of scientific pursuit to understand atomic structure as a basis to fundemental forces comes to a funnel-crunch. Perhaps as we approach the daunting notion of multi-dimensions and how they might operate, we must reflect on the fact that we know very little about how we operate within this obvious feedback loop. Further within this inquiry, we might wonder why a monk who has meditated for most of his/her life shows a sense of effortlessness and yet his brain shows higher activity levels. This same phenomena has been seen within human calculators, savant's, etc. So as we struggle to contain our projected assumptions within mathematical syntax, the sense of grasping for knowledge seems more apparent. Conclusions When will we seriously consider training ourselves to optimize effortless approach. Considering we may have it wrong, perhaps there is a neuro-hormone that releases when we have entered this place of quietude, which then allows us to see more of the big picture, therefore a more simplified picture? Now we are including human, animal, plant life into this picture.