In the beginning E-Book

Christian Forscher

• Herausgeber: novum publishing
• Kategorie: Gesellschafts- und Liebesromane
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 859

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2025

Beschreibung

What options remain if we accept neither religious faith nor the theory of evolution? If the Big Bang is not a realistic explanation, as our research has now proven it to be completely untenable, then what remains? The many dogmas, whether religious or scientific, leave us with unanswerable questions. The search for reality begins with the recognition of false theories. This recognition provides a foundation on which real knowledge can be built. It is man's task to understand the world, to learn its laws, to learn what really exists. For us, everything is relative, as Einstein so aptly put it, but what really exists is not relative at all. The perceptible world is the result of precisely defined laws.

Leseprobe

Any inconsistencies in the text are due to the fact that it was translated using computer-aided technology for a company-wide study.

© 2025 novum publishing gmbh

Rathausgasse 73, A-7311 Neckenmarkt

[email protected]

Foreword

According to the current scientific view, the world began with the Big Bang. According to the standard model of cosmology, the resulting matterorganized into planets, stars, and star systems, and then the star systems formed galaxies. The galaxies, in turn, became larger and more advanced as they collided with each other.

Planets like Earth formed in the formed star systems, where the conditions were right for life to develop. Life emerged as a result of chemical processes and evolved into increasingly complex forms, which led to the development of humans.

Religions, on the other hand, place the formation of the world on a completely different basis. They assume a god who determined the world and everythingelse that is in the world, that exists.

God created, determined the foundations of the world, primarily the laws of physics, which laws created the material world. God determined the conditions of life, which laws created living organisms, and God also determined the conditions of conscious existence and created man, who is able to be aware of himself and the existence of the world. He is able to understand and know the conditions of the existence of the world, which are none other than the laws determined by God.

The foundations of religions are a document or book that describes to people how we can learn about the laws that are the foundations of the world. Therefore, religions treat these as sacred texts that are inspired by God, and the interpretation of these texts leads to the knowledge of reality.

The Western world is built on Christianity, the Bible is the holy book that is the foundation of our culture. Judaism is also the foundation of Christianity, so the Bible includes the Old Testament as the foundation of Christianity.

The conflict between religious belief and science has naturally developed as our understanding of the world has increasingly been coupled with the desire to change it. The reason for our scientific research is that we can shape our world as effectively as we want. The desire to shape our world in our own image has led to the fact that science has increasingly come into conflict with religion.

The New Testament is almost two thousand years old, and the Old Testament is at least hundreds, if not thousands, of years older. The people living at that time used a completely different language, had a completely different worldview, and certainly understood these texts in a completely different way than they do today.

The magic of the Bible is that it was just as valid then as it is now.“For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle will pass from the law until all is fulfilled.”The difficulty for today’s man is that interpreting a two-thousand-year-old text, and the even older Old Testament, in today’s world is not possible in black and white. The texts were written in the spirit of the times, but in such a way that they will always be valid and understandable in the future.

Now, from the perspective of thousands of years, and at the current level of scientific development, it is necessary to interpret the texts accurately, to define the terms accurately using our current knowledge, and based on these definitions, to produce a translation that gives us as precise instructions as the original texts did when they were written.

This may seem like a big task, but in reality, we just need to start, strive for understanding, and stick to the terms we have defined based on the texts. If a term in later texts does not correspond to our earlier interpretation, we need to trace it back to the earlier passages and find an interpretation that holds its place in all the passages. In this way, we will arrive at an interpretation thatwill be free from all misunderstandings, and this method will also protect us from explaining our own ideas with the biblical texts. In the Bible, terms have a clear meaning, which their appearance in later passages builds on, giving further interpretation to the given term, so that its meaning is even more understandable, even clearer. If this does not happen, then we must find our misunderstanding in the earlier passage in the basic interpretation.

The technique is simple and given, it just takes time and diligence to find the meaning of the already beautiful biblical texts for today.

Of course, the Bible itself is a complete, perfect description that should not be changed, precisely because the original Bible can be used to find an interpretation that is appropriate for the given era, and this will certainly continue to be the case in the future. What we are able to understand today by translating the text of the Bible into modern language will be just as incomprehensible in two thousand years as taking every word of the original Bible literally for modern people. They interpreted a particular expression completely differently when they still believed that the Earth was flat and supported by four huge elephants; completely differently when they believed that the Earth was the center of the universe, and completely differently when they believed that the Sun was the center of the universe. Today, thanks to earlier interpretations, many people consider belief in God to be superstitious, because earlier explanations make no sense according to our current worldview. However, this does not mean that the Bible is at fault, but that the interpretation is flawed. Just as our previous worldviews have lost their validity, so too have our previous interpretations of the Bible's content lost their validity today, but the Bible cannot lose its validity. The Bible is a presentation of the world that has exceeded the knowledge of humanity in all previous ages, and this is still the case today. However, by using our current knowledge, we get a useful and meaningful picture of the world in which we live. Even today, we are not able to understand what is in the Bible, only to the extent that we have come to know our world. Our intellect andthe picture of the world that we accept as reality determine how much we are able to understand what the Bible presents to us.

The Bible has always provided guidance for man; moral guidance primarily, but much more is hidden in the texts. It provides us with a moral basis through which we can make our lives better and happier. Not by making it a “code of conduct” for today, but by understanding why moral guidance is useful and beneficial for our lives, which, through understanding, automatically becomes part of our personality and becomes a part of our lives. Studying the Bible itself makes everyone who puts their mind to it a better person, but this is not the only purpose of the Bible. Of course, the state that characterizes us now is not accidental; whoever reads these lines is here in their lives because they are looking for a way of healing and return, and in this God comes to the aid of everyone who strives for this.

The interpretation of the Bible has given rise to many contradictions throughout history, which is why there are so many different churches. What is common in Christian churches, however, is that believers seek God and His laws, and it is thanks to these churches that the Bible has survived to this day, and is now available to everyone in all languages.

First of all, we owe thanks to the Christian churches for preserving this great work for us. Beyond that, however, we are forced to take control into our own hands, because no church has been able to change humanity, has failed to create the conditions for peaceful life, even in a small area, let alone in the whole world. The interpretations of the text of different churches also differ, which is why there are conflicts between churches. What is common in the interpretations of the churches is that they are quite dogmatic, their interpretations are authoritarian and they treat the interpretations as laws, which they adhere to to the extreme. The problem with this attitude is that it hinders development. However, development is a part of our life, continuous and unstoppable. We cannotaccept certain biblical interpretations and explanations as laws, because the explanations are not the laws, but the text of the Bible contains the laws. The interpretation always reflects the given age, the level of development of the given age determines what is understood from the biblical text. This understanding is constantly deepening, at least if we do not treat previous interpretations in a dogmatic way. This is a hindering factor that hinders the understanding of the Bible, and therefore the gap between the interpretation of the Bible by the churches and the sciences is growing.

So what can we do now?

The Bible is full of statements, concrete statements, which, according to our previous knowledge, did not correspond to our worldview as described by science, but now all this has completely changed. The latest discoveries in physics are becoming more and more well-known, and they reveal a completely new picture of the world in which we live. The previously mocked statements of the Bible suddenly make sense, and as physicists penetrate deeper and deeper into the structure of matter, they increasingly arrive at results that are communicated to us as facts in a declarative form, in a formulation that does not tolerate contradiction, in writing thousands of years old.

What is even more strange is that the books of the Bible were written by many, many people, not by a single author. If there had been only one author, it would not have been possible for it to describe the latest achievements in physics in such concrete terms that even today physicists dare to state only vaguely, almost out of fear, but we are talking about dozens of authors who did not know each other, did not even live in the same era. They may have known each other's works, but no one has ever become an expert in modern physics by reading a single book or the whole of the Bible, so we can assume even less about people who lived thousands of years ago.

With extraordinary care and attention, we have been uncovering the secrets of nature for centuries, even millennia, examining living and non-living matter, their composition and structure, trying to determine the forces operating in our world and from these to create a complex theory that encompasses all our knowledge, but during the great search we have lost something that is moreimportant than anything else. We have now reached the point where matter, under the influence of the laws of physics, is organized into increasingly complex forms, and living organisms, formed under the influence of chemical reactions, are also assembled into increasingly complex organizations. The result of this development is also consciousness, which is now able to perceive its own existence.

What led us to these conclusions is that in the midst of great inquiry we rejected everything that we could not examine, measure, or observe. Even if the above conclusion were correct, that natural evolution created life and consciousness, we should still recognize that with our scientific approach we have created serious limitations for ourselves, which will definitely hinder our understanding of the world. We perceive our world through the senses of our bodies, but since according to the above theory we only accept what we can prove, our senses are also our limitations. We cannot form a complete picture of the world, nor of the forces operating in the world, since our perception is also limited, limited. And it is not possible to get a complete picture of the world with limited perception. (We will talk more about this later.)

On the other hand, here we have a theory that seems rather superstitious to modern man, according to which the world was created by a “being” and that our world is the way it is because “He” made it that way. From a scientific point of view, it is an irrefutable assumption, but it is also unprovable. Since we cannot prove the existence of God in any way, nor can we verify His existence with any measurement or examination, humanity has increasingly distanced itself from belief in God. We cannot find God by examining the components of our world, just as we cannot find the potter by studying a clay pot. The painter is not on the canvas, even if he painted a self-portrait. However, this does not prove that the potter or the painter does not exist. Since the clay pot and the picture on the canvas exist, the one who made them must also exist. This explanation is of course not enough for any scientist to recognize the existence of God as a fact, but it is certainly thought-provoking.The above analogy certainly proves that rejecting the existence of God is not exactly a scientific position, as it is the result of a completely logical conclusion.

In the study of matter, we have now come to the point where irresolvable contradictions and inexplicable experiences hinder further understanding. We have reached a point where the results of our experiments are incompatible with the world we experience with our senses. And the conclusions of our physicists sometimes exceed the imagination of science fiction writers, and this seems completely chaotic. Each new theory further complicates the already complex system, which has long been no longer generally accepted. Above, or rather below, a certain level, research in the world of microparticles has resulted in theories that are very diverse and often mutually exclusive, but since they can no longer be proven or disproved in black and white, they cannot be rejected unequivocally by a scientist.

The Bible, however, has been here for thousands of years, and it has given us an opportunity that no one has taken advantage of until now. It might not have been possible before, because science based on the study of the material world and religion, faith in God, have become so far apart that this was not a realistic possibility, but this seems to be changing now. The results of our physical research reveal a picture of our world that we could not even imagine until now, yet it is not completely unknown to us. If we begin to analyze the information collected during scientific development in such a way that we assume the existence of God, then we come to completely different conclusions. And the books of the Bible set an even more specific direction for our analysis, if we are able to understand its contents in such a way that we determine the data, concepts and names contained therein based on our current knowledge.

Let us consider that God's intention, beyond moral guidance, was perhaps to give man a perfect description of the world, from which we can understand God and the world in every age and time. God could not have usedconcepts and names for thousands of years that no one would have understood at that time. The Bible had to be formulated in such a way that it accurately describes the world, but with expressions whose meaning people could always find. However, it is easy to get lost in the process of interpretation. We can easily start to support our own ideas with the texts of the Bible. We can avoid this by carefully interpreting every word and expression and adhering to these interpretations. It is therefore necessary to prepare a glossary in which we record the interpretation of the expressions and indicate exactly where they occur in the text, and going further, we must also indicate every place of occurrence. We will see that our interpretations are not only supported by later passages, but also build on and clarify earlier interpretations.

Since the Bible is over a thousand pages, our interpretations will be thoroughly scrutinized; no misinterpretation can stand in every passage of the Bible.

The Bible begins with the book of Genesis, so we can rightly assume that the creation story describes the formation of the world, but in a way that could have been explained to people living thousands of years ago. Today, if we want to find the meaning of the first chapters of the Bible, we must first examine the results of modern physics. The results of physics and other sciences are reflected in the texts, but for this we must first change our point of view. If we begin to examine our scientific results in such a way that we do not place the Big Bang as a starting point, but that God created the world, space, time and everything in the world, then it becomes possible to reach conclusions that are not only in harmony with the Bible, but also help us in understanding physical problems.

Let us examine what is at stake when we compare the statements of modern physics and the Bible, so that it becomes clear why we must examine the Bible if we want to learn more about the world and its origin, the foundations of its existence, and its meaning.

Comparing scientific findings with the Bible

Physics

Classical physics practically destroyed religious faith because it only examined the world within a very narrow framework. The results of classical physics are solid and excellent, but they are only valid within a certain range. Our previous worldview did not allow us to consider anything as reality from a scientific point of view that we could not measure, observe, or prove. Perhaps this is no different today, at least it is difficult to overcome this, but its limitations are already clear.

A fundamental problem in studying our world is that the human body enables us to have a certain, limited knowledge. Man is given the sense organs with which he can perceive the world in which he lives, and based on these information he creates a picture of the world. Let us think about what kind of picture we would have of the world if we did not have eyes, we would not perceive light, but radio waves would be perceived by a sensory organ on our forehead. Our brain would transform radio waves into images and sounds, and through this we would perceive the outside world. We would also communicate with each other; perhaps we would not have mouths and ears, but could generate radio waves with another organ, and the “radar” on other people’s foreheads would pick them up. We would have no concept of light, no one would accept the existence of light, it would just be a whimsical theory, just like sound. In any case, we wouldn't have to spend money on TV and radio, we could easily watch the World Cup, we just had to tune in to the broadcast.

What does this little digression about our perception lead to? We know for sure that there are living beings on Earth that have fewer or more sensory organs than humans, and there are also living beings whose perception we stilldo not have precise knowledge of, yet they perform actions that clearly indicate that they perceive space and communicate with each other. If they did this in a way that is also perceptible to us, we would have figured out long ago how this is possible. Books are filled with such observations, but since there is no explanation for them, they only reach the level of “interesting literature” in the eyes of a scientist. Observations, however, are practically experiments, and we cannot reject their results. It is not that it could not be proven that certain life forms on Earth perceive and communicate in ways that are incomprehensible to us, but that there is no explanation for them, we are unable to understand them. We must draw the logical conclusion: scientifically speaking, there must be things in the world that we cannot perceive, that we cannot measure, but that have an impact on our world and we experience the results. There are aspects of the world that we are unable to perceive due to the lack of the necessary sensory organs, but whose impact is proven by the observation of other life forms living on Earth.

So, what good is this observation for us? It fundamentally changes our attitude! Let's take an all-encompassing physical "law" that we accept because we have reached the limit of our perception. The highest speed is the speed of light according to our current knowledge. 299.796 km/s is the absolutehighest speed, but of course, there is no way for a human to reach even a fraction of it. Speed also affects our perception of time, the faster we move, the slower we perceive time. These are proven facts, we use these calculations every day - for example, GPS positioning is also based on calculations where distance and speed must be calculated in proportion to the slowing down of time, and it is necessary to calculate the slowing down of time in order for the results to be accurate.

The astronaut

We have at our disposal a widely known thought experiment that presents the properties of spacetime in a comprehensible way, which we need to expand a little here, so that we can understand not only the effect of speed on time, but also the speed of light itself. Speed will be what will provide us with answers even when viewed through physical glasses, or more correctly, that the speed of light is not the highest speed, it is just that we humans are not capable of perceiving higher speeds. At least according to our current knowledge. This may seem a rather strange statement at first, based on our previous knowledge, but we also have to doubt that time stops at the speed of light. This would be a logical conclusion anyway, because if the speed of light is not the highest speed, but the perception of time continuously slows down as the speed increases, then time cannot stop at the speed of light. Light needs time to travel through space, and based on the aforementioned, approx. 300,000 km/s, it can be well-defined. We also measure great distances based on how many years it takes light to travel that distance. If time stopped at the speed of light, then light would not need any time at all to travel that distance, but this is not the case. What we can really establish is that humans, the human body, are incapable of perceiving speeds faster than light.

So let's first look at the thought experiment, which is free from any physics jargon and therefore easy to understand.

If we leave Earth in a spaceship that travels only 0.05% slower than the speed of light and return, 100 times the time on Earth will have passed. In practice, 0.05% means that while light travels 1,000 km, our spaceship will have traveled 999.5 km, or just 500 meters less than light on its thousand-kilometer journey. Let's expand this well-known thought experiment by sending not one, but two spaceships. What if we set off with two spaceships, one in one direction and the other in the opposite direction? In both cases, it is theoretically true that 100 times the time on Earth will have passed, but if we compare the time on the two spaceships with each other, we will no longer be able to reach an interpretable result. The two spaceships are moving away from each other at a speed faster than the speed of light, our spaceships are moving away from each other at only 0.1% of twice the speed of light, i.e. one thousandth less than twice the speed of light. This is logical, but it is impossible according to accepted views. Our physicists consider it impossible because at the speed of light, time stops according to theory. So, the two spaceships are almost two light years apart after 1 year of travel, but from one spaceship's perspective, the other spaceship has barely moved away from the Earth, i.e. it must be less than one light year. This is of course impossible. What about time? Since the passengers of the two spaceships were moving away from each other at a speed faster than the speed of light, after a year of travel in one spaceship, they will think that practically no time has passed in the other spaceship, because compared to them it was moving away from them at the speed of light (or in this case, at a faster speed). The same is true in the other spaceship. So, while a year passed in one spaceship, no time passed in the other, but from the other spaceship's perspective, the situation is the same, only in reverse: while a year passed in theirs, no time passed in the first spaceship. Of course, this is also not possible.

How can we explain this contradiction? The limitations of our perception described above will provide a satisfactory explanation, namely, if we understand that it is not true that there is no speed greater than light, it is just that the human body cannot perceive speeds above light: it is not capable of perceiving an object faster than the speed of light in any way. In this case, however, the assumption that time stops at the speed of light is also wrong. But we cannot draw definitive conclusions either, i.e. the effect of speed on the perception of time still exists, only our assumption that the speed of light would be the highest speed that exists, andthat time would stop at this speed is wrong. Since we are not able to perceive speeds greater than light, therefore, as a result of the above experiment, as soon as the spaceships start moving, they cease to perceive each other, practically no longer exist for each other, they are imperceptible. We have no information about what conditions and forces govern the speed of light, because modern physics has not even recognized its existence.

What if the spaceships stopped after a year of travel? Since they were traveling very close to the speed of light, they would see the Earth when they looked back, but not the other spaceship, since its light would have to reach them from beyond the speed of light. Since the spaceships were traveling close to the speed of light, after stopping they would detect the photons that left Earth shortly after they left. Since they were traveling only 0.05% slower than light, they would only see the state after their departure for two-thousandths of a year, or just over 4 and a half hours. By then, however, the other spaceship had already been on its way for 4 and a half hours, so they would only be able to detect it after another 4 and a half hours, and they would observe it for almost a year until it also stopped, since it was also moving away from Earth at a speed only 0.05% slower than the speed of light.

What's actually happening here? When the astronauts stop after a year of travel and look back at Earth, only 4 and a half hours have passed, but of course this can be explained, because a year has actually passed there too, but since our astronauts are light years away, they only see events from a year's perspective, since light also needs time to reach them. However, due to the high speed, time passed 100 times slower on the spacecraft, so 100 years have already passed on Earth, and what the astronauts have to see is a world that will exist 100 years after their departure. And the other spacecraft has really ceased to exist for them.

It's already quite confusing here, it's becoming increasingly incomprehensible what's actually happening, but don't give up, it won't be difficult to understand the gist, just examinewhat's happening from all aspects in order, and the end result will show a completely sensible picture.

What happened during this time, observing the spacecraft from Earth? The spacecraft were not traveling at nearly the speed of light as seen from Earth, in fact. The observer on Earth will see that the spacecraft accelerated only to about a hundredth of the speed of light, and are moving away from Earth at this speed. On Earth, 100 years pass before the spacecraft reaches a distance of nearly a light year. If it were possible to observe the astronauts, they would see from Earth states in which the astronauts were practically “frozen”, their pulse is so slow that it cannot be measured, since every atom has slowed down for the observer on Earth, so “frozen” would be a very apt statement. After 100 years, our astronauts could still show signs of life, and then it would be a great surprise that the space journey that was thought to have failed 100 years ago was still successful. Our astronauts could even be informed from Earth that the other spacecraft has not disappeared either, even though they are unable to perceive each other. In fact, after a sufficient amount of time, the two spacecraft should become perceptible to each other at a predictable location, meaning they will reappear to each other after the speed difference relative to each other has decreased below the speed of light, in this case to zero.

If our astronauts return to Earth under the previous conditions, then the above things will repeat again, with the proviso that the two spacecraft approach each other at a speed greater than the speed of light. In this case, we must again assume that they become imperceptible to each other, practically ceasing to exist. Another year will pass for our astronauts, but from Earth they approach again much more slowly, only at a hundredth of the speed of light, and our astronauts will “freeze” again. Then when they return, they will again become “viable” and we can communicate with them. Our astronauts have practically traveled forward in time by two hundred in 2 years, considering the conditions on Earth, even though they wanted to create something great in space and approach the speed of light.

Let's assume that astronauts were also given the opportunity to observe the Earth while they were traveling. From one spaceship,the Earth begins to move away from them at a speed of only 0.05% slower than the speed of light, while the other spaceship simply disappears. The Earth begins to spin wildly, at about 100 times the speed, and people live their daily lives at this speed. It seems impossible to communicate with them, because it is incredible to perceive the conditions on Earth. As they experience the changes in space-time, it becomes clear to them that they will return to a completely different world than the one they started from. At the same time, the Earth's incredible speed in its orbit around the Sun would also increase a hundredfold, according to observations, not only would its rotation speed increase a hundredfold, so it is also possible that they would perceive the Earth as just a glowing ball, perhaps thinking that the planet had been permanently destroyed and the other spaceship had simply disappeared.

What good is this thought experiment for us? Based on the above, reaching the speed of light is just a nice dream, in fact the faster we move through space, the slower time passes. According to the theory, time stops at the speed of light. It stops, which means that for an object moving at the speed of light, there is no change, everything is constant. For an object moving at the speed of light, the world moves at the speed of light, or vice versa, it stops completely. We claim that it is impossible to reach the speed of light because time stops, that is, we reach a state of rest in which only we move, everything else is stable. It is so stable that nothing changes, and for us any amount of time can pass until we slow down. However, speed is always relative, since everything is in motion. A spaceship moving away at the speed of light would only go slightly faster than the spaceship presented in the thought experiment above. Based on the above, it would only travel two thousandths of a mile farther in a year, but for it, time would simply stop.

Any amount of time could pass on Earth, but for astronauts traveling at the speed of light, time would stop. How can we imagine this in practice? After all, the sense of time would remain the same for astronauts as it does on Earth, the change does not occur in the sense of time, but in relation to each other, that is,between astronauts and people living on Earth. Our astronauts would have to age one year in the course of traveling one light year, while on Earth, according to calculations... well, according to calculations, it is impossible to calculate how much time would pass on Earth, because according to calculations, time stops for astronauts, so the only explanation would be that infinite time passes on Earth.

Let's examine the situation in reverse. The spaceship is moving away at the speed of light, and if it looks back at Earth, what should it see? The astronaut would see nothing, the planet would disappear, because the Earth and the solar system would be moving away from it at the speed of light. And since the Earth is moving away from the spaceship at the speed of light, time would cease on Earth, that is, no time would pass on Earth while our astronauts are moving away at the speed of light.

This is the biggest contradiction in the theory, but it is also the explanation. At the speed of light, time ceases to exist, but what does this really mean?

While the astronauts are traveling, nothing on Earth would change. Our astronauts would age by two years each way, but on Earth, only time would pass by in acceleration and deceleration, otherwise the entire journey would be the work of a moment.

From Earth, the spaceships would start to accelerate, and the moment they reached the speed of light, they would disappear, or rather, reappear where they would start to slow down again after leaving the speed of light. From the spaceship's perspective, the Earth would simply stand still while they travel through space at the speed of light, but it would be imperceptible because of the speed. From Earth, our astronauts, once they reach the speed of light, are imperceptible, meaning that no matter how long they may fly among the stars, the Earth will "freeze" and await their return - they may spend generations on their journeys, but not a single second will pass on Earth.

Until the speed of light is reached, time continuously slows down for the accelerating body, but when the speed of light is reached, time does not stop, but rather, it can go anywhere and appear anywhere, leaving the limits of time. It seems paradoxical, but it is completely logical and follows from the theory of space-time. Theseparadoxes are the ones without which we cannot understand our world. However, understanding them is not impossible, in fact, the correct explanations provide answers to all our questions. The only thing that hinders understanding is that we have accepted theorems in physics without any evidence, which are not real, and we are simply unable to prove their unreality with concrete measurements due to the limits of our perception.

The speed at which we assume that time ceases is not the speed of light, but a much greater speed. Light travels nearly 1013km in a year. It does not disappear, it does not become imperceptible, it just needs time to travel through space. This is a fact that can be verified by measurements, so it has been known to us for a long time, i.e. it is clear evidence that time does not stop at the speed of light. However, the relationship between time and speed does exist, our thought experiment above describes real conditions, but the speed at which time stops is not the same as the speed of light. This is also the reason why we were unable to obtain any interpretable results when comparing the two spacecraft to each other.

Our thought experiment above becomes truly exciting if we do not start moving away from the Earth, but rather imagine moving in a circular path at the speed of light, or based on the above, at a speed greater than light.

So what happens to an iron ball if we start spinning it and spin it at a speed faster than light? Based on the above, the ball will stand still, simply existing statically on its spinning path, but if it reaches a higher speed, our ball would simply disappear, like one spaceship for the other in the previous thought experiment. However, here our ball is spinning on a fixed path, so it is not possible for our ball to disappear, i.e. there is no point in theoretically increasing the speed, because it is not our ball that will spin faster, but the circle created by the ball that will simply become a real circle, a solid body. At a speed faster than light, time ceases for the ball, and without time, speed loses its meaning andinterpretability, i.e. the circle on which our ball theoretically revolves will simply exist. It is not even about orbiting, but about our ball being constantly present at every point on the path it is orbiting, because time has ceased for it. Time is the key to understanding, because the speed has reached the point where time stops, so the ball is always present everywhere on its path. Without time, speed has no meaning, our ball is not orbiting, but is constantly present everywhere.

We could do the same thing with a ball attached to a thread and spun around in theory. As it approached the speed of light, it would become more and more stable, until it finally appeared as a solid disk. And moving in three dimensions, like an electron orbiting the nucleus of an atom, the result would be a solid sphere.

The problem with all of this is that none of this happens at the speed of light. Time doesn't stop, and things don't become static, and time doesn't stop for a particle moving at the speed of light. If it were, we wouldn't be able to perceive light, we wouldn't be able to measure its speed, because light wouldn't have time, so the speed of light would be a meaningless statement, and light wouldn't need any time to be anywhere in the universe.

However, the solution to the problem of the speed of light and time is much simpler than we might think, if we let go of the assumption that the speed of light is the fastest speed in the universe.

Light travels at a speed of 299,796 km/s, as our physicists are increasingly able to determine. Since light needs time to penetrate space, and a time specifically determined by the definition of the speed above, it is not possible for time to “stop” at the speed of light. However, the theory of space-time describes reality based on experience, so there must be a speed at which time “stops” for the traveler.

This speed at which time will stop cannot be determined in km/s, because no matter what value we write in front of the unit, it will be less than the speed we are looking for.No time passes during the distance, so /s, i.e. time, loses its meaning, but since without /s the distance simply exists, the distance also loses its meaning, because it can be any size.

One way to do this is to accelerate or accelerate a particle to a speed at which it disappears. To disappear is to cease to exist for us, since we experience the world in time, and our particle is beyond the constraints of time. This speed will be the value at which time stops for the particle, and it can then be anywhere in space. Since time continues to pass for us, for the particle, the moment it reaches the desired speed can last until the “end” of eternity, and it can go anywhere in space without anyone knowing it exists. We would only be able to perceive it again if it began to slow down. For the particle, however, the world would be just a still image, nothing would change for it anymore, since in earthly terms not a single moment passes, i.e. nothing changes, we might think, but for the particle our world would cease to exist just as the particle has ceased to exist for us. We can state this because then for our particle, from the perspective of our particle, the entire world would move at such an enormous speed that it would be impossible for the particle to perceive the world.

This speed, where time ceases, must be clearly greater than the speed of light, since we can perceive light, but we do not know by how much. Since the speed of light is very close to 300,000 km/s, therefore, as a theory, we can safely assume this speed, which is a nice round number, or even its double, square, etc., but in reality we must understand that the speed is not important. The point is that the speed reaches a point where it jumps into infinity, but even this is misleading, because the speed with which we can calculate is not enough. For us, the observers, the speed will be infinite, because with the cessation of time, the particle can appear practically anywhere when it starts to "slow down". It is unpredictable and unpredictable. Sure, aparticle moves in a given trajectory according to our assumptions so far, but since there is no time limit anymore and everything else remains unchanged in its present state of rest, this loses its significance. We might think that it is still possible to calculate something, but without time and change, as the world continues to exist for our particle, it would have no meaning. So we only need the concept of velocity to understand what is happening. Later we will also examine the space we perceive, and then we will be able to understand the above without using the concept of velocity, but let's go step by step.

Where does all this lead? What good is this to us? Starting from our previous example, we can examine what happens if we reach this “speed” above light in a circular orbit, or, to stick with reality, in three dimensions, i.e. the correct formulation is not a circle, but a sphere – in a spherical orbit. Electrons orbiting the atomic nucleus perform exactly this kind of movement, and it is customary to represent the atom as a sphere. A very apt representation, based on the above, this representation is actually perfect.

If we look at our previous experiments with a clear eye, and do not accept the speed of light as the maximum possible speed, then we can answer dozens of questions with our assumption that have puzzled us so far.

Let's see what properties an atom must have if its electrons "move" at this speed above light, at which they can achieve the stopping of time. In this case, the electrons disappear according to the current explanation of the theory of relativity. However, since they orbit around a point, what happens is that in the absence of time, the electrons are everywhere in their spherical orbits in a single instant. We have established above that no matter how much time may pass for the electrons, the outside world does not change anything, so we cannot have any influence on them, they simply exist, but not anywhere in the world, as in our previous experiment, but in a specific orbit, which is limited by the atomic nucleus. In space, we have fixed infinity around a single point.

Depending on the number of electrons, this sphere, which is created by the electrons of the atom, has different properties, because the atom that has more electrons on its outer shell is always present at every point on the surface of the sphere, “thicker”, or rather “more dense”. The electron shells can be explained in the same way.

So what will we perceive? The electrons are not somewhere on their orbit, but thanks to their speed, stepping out of time, they are everywhere where this is possible based on their orbit. It clearly follows from this that we will perceive the electrons orbiting at the given speed in a timeless state as a solid sphere, a ball that is perfectly constant, unchanging, statically present. It is timeless, to be precise, meaning that it has neither a beginning nor an end to its existence.

E=mc2, the problem here is that ac2is a physical constant that we formed from the speed of light. However, the speed increases in the spherical orbit until it ceases, and a statically present mass is created. So c2is replaced by a value that ceases with the increase in speed, so it can only be realistic ac2, in theory, but this does not cover reality, because it is a matter of time ceases for our particle. There is no speed at all, instead of speed there is existence, static existence, and that is timeless, i.e. eternal existence. So we simply have to put an equal sign between energy and mass, E=m. c2is a constant value anyway, so the mass of the matter determines the energy in the first place, so the essence of our formula does not actually change. Energy and mass are characteristics of matter. By themselves. Without any kind of speed. This is existence itself. What about speed after this? We have excellent experiments at our disposal, which are also not well understood by anyone in the world, and are inexplicable according to our current knowledge, and based on them we can examine whether the above theory holds up in reality.

We need to deal with the concepts of infinity and timelessness separately to understand the above, but this is alreadypossible in the field of mathematics, physics is not able to work with such concepts, but this is the most essential statement based on the above. Matter has no time of creation, nor does it ever pass away. What exists exists because it is not confined to the limits of time. Therefore, we will not arrive at correct calculations by squaring c (the speed of light), or by any other multiplication, nor will physical constants show reality, but by omitting speed, since speed loses its meaning without time. This “speed”, however, since it occurs around a given point, is a perfect description of what exists. The word – exists – thus not only entails the cessation of the concept of speed, but also the cessation of the concept of time, because with the acceleration or deceleration of time we reach a point where time ceases to exist for the existent.

What exists is what it is, it did not come into being at some point, but exists, there is no time or speed for it, it exists because we have defined the space in which it exists. We have clearly defined its location. Our definition is not a point, but a trajectory practically, but this trajectory forms a sphere, which is located around a specific point in space. This will be of importance during the examination of space, which is why the concept must be clarified here.

The Standard Model and Gravity

The above outlines require a new concept, a name from us, so that we can think further about the consequences of the above. This concept is the speed at which time stops according to the space-time theory. Let us call this, in the example of the electron orbiting the atomic nucleus above,the Limiting SpeedorSolid-State Speed. This speed cannot be given in any unit of measurement, since when time stops, speed has no meaning, it cannot be interpreted physically. What we can establish is that time ceases. The definition is what is significant. At the limiting speed, time ceases for the “matter” and it will be present everywhere where thisis possible due to its trajectory. It becomes a solid body by the fact that time, and thus speed, ceases. The limiting speed, or solid-state speed, is therefore the speed at which speed ceases to exist with the cessation of time, so the distance becomes infinite, which is why distance also ceases. So far, our calculations have failed to describe reality because we have calculated with speed, distance and time products. And to understand reality, that is, existence, we must step out of these concepts. Theory becomes reality at infinite values, which we can no longer calculate with. We could also say that where mathematics ends, reality begins.

In physics experiments that study microparticles, to put it simply, they accelerate particles to enormous speeds – theoretically – and collide them with other particles, from which they then draw their conclusions. The enormous speeds, however, appear to be sub-light speeds, but in fact these speeds were determined based on data and theories that do not recognize speeds faster than light. From the results, it was possible to create the Standard Model, which describes the motion of all particles, in theory. The Standard Model unifies the electromagnetic interaction, the weak and strong interactions, and the quantum theory describing fundamental elementary particles. However, it does not explain gravity, and it does not explain why classical physics loses its meaning in the world of elementary particles.

On the basis of our theory above, however, the differences make sense and the problems are solved, because the problem so far was that we thought the speed of light was unattainable and that speeds above light were not even assumed. The standard model is certainly approaching reality, the reality we define, with all its problems, and thanks to the diligence of our physicists, it is developing into a concrete theory that answers all questions, but only in the world of elementary particles, which is thus a non-existent world. And its research cannot bring results that would provide an explanation for the existing world. Later works will show thatwhat we do in the research of elementary particles is not research, but rathera definition. Defining a world that does not exist is why it is so difficult to find a theory that answers all the questions we have so far, because we are investigating a world in which everything is possible in the study of elementary particles, and elementary particles do not actually exist until we have defined them, so each new definition complicates the theory, but nothing can be ruled out, because we are trying to define something that someone else has already half-defined, but has ignored the inaccuracies and differences, so increasingly complex theories always clash. So when describing a non-existent world, theories clash, not reality clashes with theories, and since there is no consensus among theories yet, it is not possible to create a perfect theory that encompasses everything.

Gravity is not present in the world of elementary particles, it cannot be incorporated into it in any way. In the world of elementary particles, however, time is present, in theory, which must be taken into account based on the theories. This is what causes the problem. By calculating with the speed of light, we cannot determine something that moves much faster than the speed of light, and in fact, since time ceases with increasing speed, the speed practically ceases as well. However, a gravitational field can only be for something that exists, that has mass, i.e. according to the above theory, only something that exists at a point in space, exiting time, by having a specifically defined trajectory, which is not infinite. It is not infinite, so in the absence of time, the elementary particle is always, everywhere on its trajectory.

Based on this, in the real world, which is perceptible to humans, gravity is present because atoms "spinning" at the limit speed exist timeless, they step out of the range that can be interpreted by time. They exist only because they are forced into a spherical orbit, but in this way they always exist everywhere on their orbit, that is, they become solid bodies, and thanks to this they become a stable reality, they have a mass, which is already affected by the laws of classical physics, including gravity. Whenan elementary particle is constantly present in a specific, limited part of space, then this continuous presence creates the effect that also influences space by the fact that our particle is constantly there at every point of its orbit. When its orbit is not defined in such a specific way, then our elementary particle is practically nowhere, because thanks to its speed, there is no place in space for a single moment where we could determine its position. Therefore, it has no effect on space, it practically does not exist in space, and the laws of classical physics do not affect it, because they only affect what is present in space. Similarly, gravity cannot affect an elementary particle, because it does not exist until it has a defined orbit.

When the limiting velocity or solid-state velocity is reached, time becomes incomprehensible. This is an important problem that we need to find an answer to, because in our world time exists, and solid bodies, matter, also exist. We will have to devote a separate section to this later.

Fortunately, however, the above theory and practical experience provide a self-evident answer to the problem. The key is the word “limit”, which I applied to the limiting velocity, at which the velocity reaches a point where, according to the space-time theory, time stops. Here, velocity ceases to exist, loses its meaning, as does time. It is precisely because of the cessation of time that we can no longer speak of velocity. We must speak of existence by examining the electrons of the atom, which exist beyond time and become a solid body when the limiting velocity is reached. The fundamental properties of our known world therefore seemingly cease to exist at the limiting velocity, namely time and velocity. Gravity acts on the matter that has come into existence at the limiting velocity through other matter, and it itself has its own gravitational field, like all existing matter, i.e. existing matter acts on each other, and this becomes the field of classical physics.

The time that we measure in the existing world cannot be the same as in the world of elementary particles, because in the existing world all matter exists after reaching the limit speed.At the level of elementary particles, matter exists timeless. The above name – limit speed – is therefore very misleading, we only had to use it for understanding, and the solid-state speed is just as misleading, because there is no speed at all, since there is neither time nor distance. The correct formulation after understanding the above is thereforeexistence.

In our world, however, time does exist, so there is an apparent contradiction here. However, let us draw logical conclusions, and the contradiction will not make sense. Matter that has become a solid body and has become an entity at the limiting velocity has left the world of elementary particles, and different laws apply to it than in its previous state. In our world, there is time, but this time is incomprehensible in the world of elementary particles, because for particles moving at the limiting velocity, a particle moving at the limiting velocity forced around a single point does not even exist. For us, in this world, solid bodies are particles moving at the limiting velocity, which are forced into a spherical orbit, but for particles they are objects, relative to which they are capable of not only the speed of light or the limiting velocity, but of any speed, because they have left the time valid in the world of elementary particles by reaching the limiting velocity, and without time their speed is infinite. Their speed is infinite, which means that they simply do not exist. To put it more simply, in the world of elementary particles, a particle that orbits at a finite speed – i.e., the real world, which does not exist – cannot "perceive" an atom orbiting at a finite speed, because it does not exist for it.

After drawing these conclusions, it is an even greater, almost incomprehensible achievement that our physicists know about the existence of elementary particles at all, they did not stop at the opinion that the atom is one and indivisible, but by further research they discovered even smaller elements of our universe. These elements practically do not exist, we are only able to perceive them thanks to the fact that with the help of huge particle accelerators we approach the speed necessary for their existence, at which we could then examine them, but in fact aworld picture is revealed to us of the world of particles where nothing exists. Later works will also explain this strange situation.

However, our existing world really exists, and it does not only do so at the speed of light, but also beyond it, by reaching the limit speed. However, in this world, the laws of classical physics already apply, which are meaningless in the case of elementary particles.

What we can also establish is that everything changes when the limit speed is reached, because a completely calm, stable state is created from movement and acceleration. The previous world practically ceases to exist, and a new world opens before our eyes, in which different laws prevail than in the previous state.

We can conclude that the limiting velocity is the basis of existence, at which motion and time stop, and matter becomes real because our electron orbiting the atomic nucleus is present everywhere it is possible in its orbit.

The components of atoms are "particles" that can only be perceived by us because their "movement" is centralized, i.e. they are forced into a spherical orbit, through which they become existent. Without this constraint, i.e. if their orbit is not specifically defined, they do not actually exist. Later, we must also determine: what is spinning at the end of the string, i.e. what are the basic elements of our existing world. Based on our current knowledge, the spherical orbit is not an accurate formulation either, because according to the wave functions, it is not only possible to determine the electron "orbiting" around the atomic nucleus on the surface of the sphere, but practically everywhere inside the sphere. We must therefore assume a solid material, a ball practically, but this is a matter of detail. The above theory determines the foundations of existence, not its details.

To move forward, however, we need to find an explanation for another interesting physical experiment, and then we return to the question of existence.

The double-slit experiment

Based on the above, perhaps there is no need to explain much about what happens during the double-slit experiment, but there is a very important aspect of the experiment that demonstrates a phenomenon that will be essential to understanding what is contained in the Bible.

The experiment is widely known. Given an electron gun that shoots electrons. In front of the gun, at a certain distance, there is a wall with two slits. The wall does not let our electrons through, they can only pass through one of the slits. Behind this wall, there is another wall, into which our electrons, which we shoot with the gun, will be visible after hitting it.

It is a logical conclusion, knowing the laws of our world, that the electrons will either hit the first wall or, passing through the gaps, will form two thick lines on the second wall, which are precisely defined by the two gaps.