The revised edition. Three dimension universe with characteristic time. No undulation can reach the target in the real world faster than photon. (At the second knot.). This was uploaded in Jun 28, 2016. It fixed this html about the inner link in Jun 27, 2016. Noguti Hiromasa. It fixed the former URL and so on which are on the last part, in Jun 30, 2016. Noguti Hiromasa.
Important notice; The universe it expresses here isn't three dimensional universe. This persistently is the universe with four dimension to be shown with three dimension. The above caution was written into this page in Jun 26, 2016.    To old Edition. Introduction.
To Japanese Edition.		We know that the words of four dimension often are used about space-time. And, it also hears there are scholars saying the universe is composed of more dimension than it. However, it gets caught to the strange feeling somehow or other whenever it hears the talk like that. It may be because it get bewildered because of the theory which becomes complex increasingly. Or, that strange feeling may be same as my negative feeling which wells up on the present situation that the elementary particle a scholar guessed gets found out one after another actually. Thereupon, it, putting aside the viewpoint of physics for the moment, started to think how the universe one's self sees should be described. Needless to say, since it is the subjective universe I see, it is natural that I am in the center of the universe. Since the universe always sends various information to me from the various direction, this conjecture would be right. Needless to say, the informations to be stated here aren't confined to the information a person sends. It should think that the material stimulus, chemical stimulus, and so on work as the information. And, in this case, it is certain that one which accepts the information like that, and processes that information to make oneself understand is me, even if I have accepted the other person's understanding whole. In other words, the real universe I see is always the subjective universe which is formed by my recognition. And, it is natural that the subjective universe each individual recognizes is different corresponding to each.
	But, it never be the illogical universe. Even if it is the subjective universe, it is natural that it obeys the characteristic rules which are based on the logistic formula of something though it seems that the formula in question needs not being false at least as the whole. Thereupon, it started to look for the common rules the universe each cognition-subject recognizes should obey. And, it found out the cone-shaped special three dimension universe which puts the cognition-subject on the top, soon. It is because it has to think cognition-subject always is on the top of the cone like that if light has certain quickness and if time always advances. The reason why it is so would become clear a little later. Then, it also noticed that the universe the cognition-subject can recognize directly is only the few parts of the surface of the cone in question. Furthermore, it also noticed that it has to think about subjective time in connection with the cone-shaped three dimension universe. Thereupon, it first will explain about subjective time here.
	contents     1: Time and the sense of time.     2: characteristic time and photon/ the quickness of undulation.     3: The talk important though it may digress from the theme.     4: subjective time and the life span of brain.     5: Cognition-subject and an object in motion.					Civilization and living body.
	1: Time and the sense of time. Recently it comes to feel that one day finishes faster as it ages. In other words, it feels that the length of time becomes shorter increasingly. If someone suddenly looks back at the past of oneself and compares the present situation of oneself and the situation of one's self who was the infant, he seems that it necessarily is caught to the feeling like that. It would be that it is the feeling common to us probably.
		However, why would we fall into the feeling like that? If it explains the thing with my psychological interpretation, it can say as follows. That is, we feel that time passes fast more than before because we almost automatically react with accustoming oneself to the stimulus which is brought from the outside world, as it ages. And, the thing probably means that the density of the infant's think generally is higher than the density of the adult's think, if the density like that is measured with making the objective time the base of the calculation. In other words, when we try to react to one stimulus, we tend to rely on the knowledge it once got, experiencing the similar stimulus. So, it gradually comes to be passive of the work called the think before noticing. And, since it gradually loses the curiosity about the outside world, it would be that it comes hard increasingly to do new discovery. It seems that the thing is the cause of subjective time's advancing fast more than before for the said observer.
	However, when we were the infant, our daily time always was filled with new discovery. It remembers there almost wasn't time it looks back at the past. It probably is because the phenomenon which catches the consciousness appear in front of the infant ceaselessly. In other words, it seems that the subjective time gets shorter or longer by the density of the stimulus a cognition-subject accepts as information. So, it would be that the adult's subjective time is shorter than the infant's subjective time considerably.
	But, would it be that the difference of the subjective time between the adult and the infant is brought with only the above-mentioned mental factor? It probably seems that it isn't so. It is because it seems that to say nothing of the mental factor, a physical rule is related to this difference. Needless to say, since it is certain subjective time isn't objective time, apparently it may seem to not be related to the physical rule. But, it is that it may not be so. However, the explanation of that will be done a little later. The theory of relativity Dr. Einstein discovered shows us the conclusion that the objective time has relative length, corresponding to each observer. In other words, it would be that the length of objective time changes corresponding to the relationship between the observer and its object. Then, he says that time(objective time) of the object in motion becomes longer as the quickness of the said object in motion becomes close to the quickness of photon. But, it never mean that a person riding on the spaceship which is flying with the speed of photon can live more than several hundred years. Even if he in the spaceship could live considerably long, it would be at most one hundred years.
		However, even if it assumes the time more than ten thousand years has passed when he who became hundred years old returned to the Earth, it never be a impossible talk, if it thinks according to the theory of relativity. Needless to say, no one isn't doing the experiment like that, yet. But, the experiment similar to it once was done, using two precision clocks to compare time each clock indicates. It is that one clock was set in the airplane when another clock was set on the ground. And, the airplane took off. So, it is that the staffs of the research confirmed that time the clock in the flying airplane indicates becomes slightly late than time the clock on the ground indicates. To tell the truth, although it can't remember so clear whether this experiment was done actually it seems that it is possible to return to the Earth ten thousand years after it left the Earth, if this experiment is a fact and if there is the spaceship able to fly with the speed close to the speed of photon. However, it doesn't seem that he has a feeling of reality that this travel continued for ten thousand years. If it assumes that he got off the Earth when he was twenty years old, it seems that the thing this travel was continued for eighty years is the feeling of reality he at most can have.
	Thereupon, there is one question here. In above-mentioned case, which time is his time? Would it be time indicated with the clock of the spaceship he had gotten on? Or else, would it be time indicated with the clock which is on the Earth? In this case, the right answer is "his time is time of himself persistently". But, it is possible to think that his time is same as time of the spaceship until the spaceship makes landing to the Earth for the moment. In that meaning, it also is possible to say that his time approaches time of the Earth as the spaceship he is getting on approaches the Earth. Therefore, if that spaceship made landing to the Earth, for the moment his time can be confirmed with time of the Earth. In other words, it is that above-mentioned statement only was stated from the observer's viewpoint, not his viewpoint. When we recognize something, we exist as cognition-subject. Wouldn't it seem that we are apt to forget the thing as a time? Anyhow, time of himself as cognition-subject is his characteristic time. And, the thing made me think there is the relationship of something in subjective time and objective time. The detailed thing will be explained at the next knot.     2: characteristic time and photon/ the quickness of undulation.
	At the former knot, it explained that an object in motion has each characteristic time without the relationship to the observer whether that object in motion is consciousness body or not. In other words, it persistently would be that objective time common to us is time the observer confirms. And, the quickness of current of characteristic time, being different from objective time and subjective time, always is invariable because of relying on the quickness of photon. Then, if it thinks about the relationship of the characteristic time and the quickness of photon, while considering the above things, it can notice that those have common point. Since the speed of one object in motion is decided relative by the relationship with the speed of another object in motion, an object in motion hasn't its characteristic given speed generally. Then, since time an observer confirms, that is, the objective time gets shorter corresponding to the situation or gets longer, it can think that it is relative value. Since Dr. Einstein had said so, it must be the truth.
	However, the quickness of current of characteristic time is invariable as it stated before. And, the quickness of photon the quickness of current of characteristic time relies on is also invariable, being different from ordinary object in motion. Therefore, it would be that the light the spaceship with the speed close to the quickness of photon gives off arrives at the observer certainly. Needless to say, this statement is based on the thought that all objects in motion can't move with the quickness more fast than the quickness of photon. Although it hears there are the persons insisting that the undulation reached the target fast more than photon, would it be truth? I thinks that it may be right only about the half of that argument. Even if there is the evidence that some undulation reached the target faster than photon, since an undulation is possibility persistently, it is because it only can think certain possibility reached target. Since it hears that the undulation which reached the target in the situation like that brings no information to the real world, it seems that my conjecture is right. In other words, although undulation as some possibility by any chance may have reached the target faster than photon, it thinks that it isn't it materialized as reality. It should think that the undulation still is staying to some possibility. Or, it may be better to say that it mistook the possibility for reality. In other words, it is no undulation can reach to the target with the quickness more fast than the quickness of photon, in the real world. Therefore, because Einstein's theory needn't be rewritten in that meaning, the premise that an object in motion moving faster than photon doesn't exist is at the moment health. If so, it can think that the characteristic time and the quickness of photon are a absolutely invariable yardstick necessary to recognize this universe. And if it assumes that this premise is right, the characteristic time for the object in motion relies on only the quickness of photon. However, this universe isn't the universe which would exist immediately after Big bang if it thinks with the viewpoint of physics. That persistently is the universe able to see after an cognition-subject recognized the object. It seems that it needs other viewpoint and other way, to understand the universe which exists immediately after Big bang. It is because it is impossible that the experiment in physics is done without cognition-subject called an observer. In other words, cognition-subject and object still aren't distinguished in the universe which would exist immediately after Big bang. Or, would it be better to think that an information from an object doesn't reach a cognition-subject? Anyhow, it is certain that it is impossible to understand the universe like that with only usual physics.
		* Cognition-subject in this case isn't confined to living things having wisdom. The refference : Evolution to be brought by chance and inevitably.; The complementary explanation about the ego. By the way, as it stated before, the quickness of current of characteristic time of the object in motion and also the quickness of photon directly are related to recognition. Therefore, it can assert that those are the fundamental yardstick always having an invariable value necessary to understand the universe. Then, in connection with the thing, it is necessary to not forget the thing that subjective recognition is the premise of objective recognition. Even if it is the recognition of physical phenomenon, it always at first is the personal recognition. In other words, it is that it is subjective recognition persistently at least until it is confirmed by the scientific verification.
	3: The talk important though it may digress from the theme. But, by any chance, there may be persons saying "I'm always objectively thinking about any things". However, such a person doesn't seem to be fit for scientist. It is because the thing that it thinks objectively almost means that it thinks with always using other person's logic. Therefore, it would be hard to expect him to discover new theory or other. I think that the most important thing for scientist is the characteristic subjective recognition with logical consistency he should have. Therefore, to keep the consistency of one's think, it is natural that it has to pay attention to all things, not only scientific things. In passing, the thing can be applied to any peoples, not only an individual. For example, in recent Japan, it tends to think it is important to learn English than Japanese language. It would be because it was possessed to the shallow thought it can't be accepted to the world if it can't speak English well. But, this is terrible mistake. We have to notice Japanese characteristic idea able to be accepted to the world is born of the right Japanese language. Needless to say, it is because the Japanese people's thinking rely on the characteristic logical circuit of Japanese language. Even if it can speak English well, if his Japanese language is poor, he only can become the imitator of American or other. In spite of that, if it continues to be passive of learning Japanese language, since it seems that the Japanese characteristic idea is lost, the original Japanese culture and also the worth of Japanese would be lost gradually. And, persons who can become no one else but to become imitator of foreigner of somewhere would overflow to all of the streets of Japan. By any chance, that already may be starting. Can you recollect when the Japanese company created quite new products which charms the world? Certainly, Japanese technology is fine in all the fields. But, since it looks to not be based on a new conception, it feels uneasy of the future of Japan. Wouldn't the thing we should do to make Japanese characteristic idea active be the right understanding of Japanese language which is the footing of Japanese culture? Oh sorry, since my uneasiness about Japanese culture became strong recently, the talk has digressed from the subject. It will return to the subject at once.
	To tell the truth, I'm of the opinion that all stimulus which include the material reactions work as an information. And, one which receives the information like that including so-called substance has each inborn and characteristic way of reaction, that is, each characteristic logistic formula. Needless to say, it is natural that the creature's behavior and the material actual reaction are based on the logistic formula like that. And also it is natural that the logical calculation like that the creature does is done among the brain and each organs or cells, or the cells and the genes. Needless to say, the first reaction to be based on such logical calculation is subjective reaction. To tell the truth, I'm of the opinion that even the material reaction is based on subjective recognition. Needless to say, it never be as a joke. Therefore, I think that for the natural science, it is very important to examine the relationship of subjective world and objective world.
			By the way, when it looks at the illustration of the cone-shaped universe, cognition-subject seems to be moving along the time axis, that is, the center axis of the cone-shaped universe to the future from the past. However, it isn't exact expression. The right expression seems to be "time from the future always is colliding against photon which comes from the past at a cognition-subject which is in the mathematical speck called present". And, the relationship between characteristic time and photon resembles the relationship between an electric current and a current of photon in that meaning. That is, if it compares the current of photon to the current of time, it can compare photon to the electric current. And, if it considers above-mentioned things, it seems to be certain that characteristic time is based on the quickness of photon. Therefore, time in that case would have to be confirmed by the length of a straight course which is drawn between cognition-subject and the object which gives off or reflects light. Needless to say, it is because the quickness of photon which moves along that course is invariable. Reference : "The physical world the cognition-subject sees. " But, since recently it noticed it may include several mistakes, it needs to take care.
	By the way, would it be possible that we see directly one's self who existed in the past? By any chance, it may be possible to do so if it considers the fact that all of light which arrive at me come from the past. However, is it really? Unfortunately I haven't the experience like that even one time. You also would be as well as me probably. But, since I always can see my hands or body, it can say that it is possible to see one's self who existed in the past. It is because light reflected by my hands I'm now looking at comes from the past and gets in my eyes. However, I assumed about the situation of the past older than it in this question. Then, in the same reason, my appearances reflected by the mirror also can be said to be one's self who existed in the past. However, since it is same as the photograph, it can't think that it saw directly one's self who exist in the past. In other words, if it thinks within the assumed extent, it is that it is impossible at all to see one's self who existed in the past. About a cognition-subject who apparently is moving toward the future along the time axis, the seeming quickness of its characteristic time is invariable. Needless to say, it was because the quickness of current of characteristic time is invariable as well as the quickness of photon. Therefore, the cognition-subject who always is in the top of the cone-shaped space-time can perceive an object in motion exactly only in space-time able to keep the situation the quickness of photon always is an invariable number.
	If not, the consistency between recognition and space-time would collapse at once. In passing, in this case, the recognition gotten from books or other is indirect recognition. Therefore, the universe we directly can see is only the surface of cone-shaped space-time. And, in reality it is that we only are looking at a little part of the surface like that. Therefore, if it thinks in the viewpoint of the direct perception, it can say that space-time is the true dark except the part he could see barely. By the way, how do you think about the quickness of cognition-subject which seemingly moves toward the future along the time axis? My answer is "it is same as the quickness of current of his characteristic time, and also is same as the quickness of photon". In passing, it is natural that the vector of current of characteristic time is the converse vector of photon though those vectors have the same absolute value. As it was stated before, if those relationships often are changed, that would bring horrific confusion to us and this world.
	By the way, I said many times until now that some photon arrives at cognition-subject, coming from the past. However, it seems that in reality, one which arrives at me is the undulation of light, not photon. Not until the undulation of light arrives at cognition-subject, it is recognized as photon. In other words, it seems that the undulation of light as one possibility materializes as photon not until the undulation of light gets perceived by someone or something. Therefore, it has to think that the undulation of light belong to possibility world, not reality persistently. Needless to say, since it is certain that the undulation of light is the real existence, above-mentioned statement never deny the usual opinion on photon. But it seems that it needs to be revised a little.     4: subjective time and the life span of brain. As it stated before, the subjective quickness of cognition-person which moves along time axis toward the future becomes faster than before as it ages. And, it was because the amount of information the said person accepts decreases acceleratedly because of the reason his curiosity to various phenomenons becomes thin gradually as he ages. That resembles the situation which often is seen where a person who is sleeping on a bus arrived at the destination. That is, it is the situation which should be expressed like "Why, did I arrive, yet?". By any chance, don't you think that the situation a person falls into such impression is similar to the objective sight of this universe? I'm caught to the impression like that. Although it necessarily can't say it is the clear reason, it is because it seems that the information the universe gives off decreases as the universe ages.
		Anyhow, subjective time becomes shorter as a person ages. However, it can't assert that the subjective time like that isn't related to objective time at all. It is because it seems that the amount of information cognition-person accepts per unit time of characteristic time is related to his life span of objective time. If it imagines the sense of time a rat with the short life span has, and compares it with our sense of time, it seems that it can understand this opinion of mine at once. Anyhow, as the amount of the information you accepts per unit time of characteristic time increases, your subjective time gets longer. And, your objective life span also would get longer probably.
	However, it isn't the life span necessarily gets longer only with getting abundant knowledge. Even if it learned various knowledge, it is because it always doesn't mean that it accepted abundant information. Rather there are many cases that the amount of information it gets with directly facing the nature or society is more abundant than the amount of information it gets with learning something. In other words, when it tries to think about this problem, it should think that the amount of information accepted unconsciously is considerably abundant than the amount of information accepted consciously. Then, since in this case, the information includes the information which is born of the think which is done at the brain or other, it is natural that many of the informations like that are the information accepted unconsciously. Furthermore, it has to consider the thing that the amount of informations which are made in the brain is decided, corresponding to difference of the way of reacting to the accepted information. In other words, it is whether the accepted information makes the think in the brain active is decided, corresponding to the cognition-person's understanding of that information and also curiosity. Then, it also has to consider the thing that the cells of brain or neurons which aren't given information at all die, soon. Although I understand the concept of information in this case includes not only so-called information but also nourishment and neurotransmitter or other, it hears that it is hard to survive even if only nourishment is given.     5: Cognition-subject and an object in motion. Then, there is the thing it forgot to say about characteristic time. It is it isn't that the characteristic time of object in motion immediately is subjective time whole. It should think that characteristic time is the footing of subjective time and of objective time persistently because subjective time gets longer or shorter corresponding to the amount of information a cognition-person accepted per unit time of objective time. The quickness of current of characteristic time is invariable persistently.
		Then, above-mentioned "object in motion" includes not only a person and a organism who generally are recognized to act as a cognition-subject but also a so-called substance. It is natural that a so-called substance also acts as cognition-subject because all substances have the ability to perceive the other substances, and react with its characteristic logical calculation. However, to tell the truth, it isn't that an object in motion is a cognition-subject whole though it isn't a cognition-subject is the existence independent of an substance. An object in motion is only mere phenomenon showing a cognition-subject is inherent in a substance itself. Therefore, in this case, the "object in motion" is the concept which is based on the major-premise that one cognition-subject as an observer with perceiving the phenomenon, would notice other cognition-subject also is inherent in an object in motion. As it stated before, subjective time often gets longer or shorter, as well as objective time. Furthermore, there isn't the limit of the getting longer or shorter since subjective time, being different from objective time, isn't time of the physical world. Therefore, at the characteristic three dimension universe, time which is supposed to move with the quickness of light can move faster than the quickness of light. It is because the information a dying cognition-person accepts is supposed to decrease acceleratedly. In other words, for the dying cognition-person, it is it becomes hard to perceive the information physical media brings because he is about to move faster than the quickness of light toward the future. And, when he becomes unable to accept the information supposed to be brought from the outside world, that is, when the quickness where he moves toward the future gets faster than the quickness of light, it is that he went into the next world.
	Needless to say, in this case, his body still is in this world. Therefore, his body which already became a mere substance would act as other cognition-subject which isn't him. And, as it gets rotten, it, broken into pieces gradually, would act as many cognition-subjects. Furthermore, it is that the process like that continues at least until the universe collapses. Anyhow, all of various reactions are done, based on the logical calculation corresponding to the stimulus brought as information. If so, wouldn't it be natural that it thinks that all phenomenons act as cognition-subject? Our life span in objective time is about one hundred years. But, it seems that as for the life span measured with subjective time, it is different corresponding to each individual considerably. And, it seems that the amount of information some person accepted influences not only his subjective life span but also his objective life span considerably as it thought before. It probably doesn't relate to whether the accepting a information was done consciously or unconsciously probably.
	Well, as it was stated before, if the amount of information accepted becomes abundant, subjective time gets longer. Conversely, if it is a little, subjective time gets shorter. And, in this case, the quickness where cognition-person moves toward the future gets faster. However, in the viewpoint of the theory of relativity, it is said that time for object in motion gets longer because of the increasing mass as the quickness of object in motion becomes near the quickness of photon. In other words, it seems that subjective time shows the converse sight of objective time. By any chance, subjective time and objective time may be symmetrical with respect to characteristic time or other axis. And, the thing may be suggesting there is a fundamental concept of something common to both subjective world and objective world though it isn't clear what is it. By any chance, there may be the possibility that the concept like that is found out sometime. I hopes that it gives the recognition an important influence, found out.
	The old history of this homepage; This first was written in Japanese language and was translated into English soon and was uploaded in the URL of "homepage3.nifty.com/kotosiro/eblak.htm" as the title "Relationship between the black hole and me". Refference ; The oldest edition translated into English is "Relationship between black hole and me" which was uploaded with the URL "homepage3.nifty.com/kotosiro/eblak.htm" in December 13, 2003.
End.
Cotosiro English Home