* The resonance of Earth (Schumann Resonance)
has been 7.8Hz for thousands of years. Since 1980 it has risen to over 12Hz.
This means that 16 hours now equate to a 24 hour day. Time is speeding up!
- Gregg Braden

Are any of you aware of this? Do you notice that time passes faster and faster?  :o

Namaste,
Mairlyn ;-)

Fascinating Marilyn,
but from what I read the resonance and frequencies are not specifically tied to the perception of time, although the human brain's theta and alpha patterns apparently resonate with the earth's vibration frequency.  I'm going to look into this.


Matthew

Y'know Marilyn, the older I get, the more I too notice that time seems to be speeding up.  

However, as for the resonances associated with the Earth, let's compute a moment. First, we know that the planet is roughly 13000 kilometers diameter, or about 40000 kilometers in circumference. Since Cambodia hasn't been encroaching on England, and Brazil has yet to creep up towards Mexico, we can assume that this size has remained constant, at least so far as anyone can tell.

The speed of light is about 300,000 kilometers per second. Dividing this into the equatorial circumference we find that it will take light about 0.1333 seconds to make a trip around the equator, giving us a natural resonance of about 7.5 Hz (cycles per second) for a planet this size in a vacuum.

Now we can correct for the fact we have air, assuming that the Heaviside ionization layer and surface of the earth act as a waveguide. For a relatively typical waveguide in air, the actual velocity of propagation is likely to be about 95%, so actually, the probable true frequency should be about 7.13 Hz.  This will be variable by a few percent as the ionization layer moves about.

This indicates that the post stating that the Earth's natural frequency has changed is BS.

Nevertheless, I still have the feeling that last year has barely gone by, and here it is Christmas again. There is a formula that expresses time compression with age, or with the rate of activity, since it's a matter of the ratio of observed time relative total life experiences with which we compare it, but that doesn't make me feel better about getting older.

dave

I am not sure how standard time measurements are set, but I do believe this resonance frequency would not affect objective measurements (solar) of time.  

That being said, if our brainwaves can operate on various frequencies, how we PERCEIVE time may change in conjunction with our environment.

I need to think this one through a bit more.  

M

If physical time would speed up, we probably will not notice it, because time measurement is just comparing cyclic processes, and they would all speed up (well, compared to sth "outside") so that there would no inner acceleration of time noticeable. But how we feel about changes, whether slow or fast, long ago or like yesterday (how long ago you feel last christmas to be?) in fact is another thing.
Spooky

I need scientific proof of the earth's resonance speeding up.

MS

Dave,

I have been saying for years as a personal observation that the older you get, the faster time flies. This has been collaberated by many people I have talked to.

But now you say there is a formula for this? As much as I would like to ask you what that formula is, I'm afraid it involves higher level math, like the theories of Relativity, so I won't really ask, but can you say more about this?

Bob

Heres a saying for you.

Hear all, Believe Nothing.


The guy who posted that quote, is totally loco. Hertz has nothing to do with time.

It may have something to do with the rate at the earth vibrates.

Either way, time is time, and time aint speeding up, time is slowing down, because people are lviing longer, and therefore have more time then anyone else before them.

I don't know what Schumann Resonance is so I was trying to find out more, and I came across this:

http://www.2012.com.au/SchumannResonance.html

This article is disconcerting not because of what it purports to predict but because of the way it mixes science and speculation. How can the earth stop rotating and then begin to rotate the other way? What would cause it to reverse itself?

Yet apparently there is some kind of standing wave called a Schumann resonance?

Well this is a little more scientific but I'm still not sure what they are, though I like the spike caused by the Swedish railroads!

http://www.oulu.fi/~spaceweb/textbook/schumann.html

Actually, from this website, I would assume that the resonance fluctuates and the amplitude could depend on where the mesurement was taken. Now I wonder why Braden said what he did; what did he base it on?

http://www.ncedc.org/ncedc/em.intro.html

This page is from folks monitoring for earthquake info and they seem to freely share their data...

Thanks for those, lucy.  Any site that would say something like the earth stopped rotating has absolutely no credibility and no common sense at all.

MS

Were the earth to stop rotating SUDDENLY (before it switched direction) we would all be propagated eastward at around 1000 mph (and presumably killed.)
Were it to stop rotating GRADUALLY... well then, folks, we'd have one hemisphere of the earth frying, and the other freezing. Quite possibly we'd lose the atmosphere as it condensed, and then froze on the night side over the last week or so of the slowdown/stop before Earth reversed direction.
Either way, it wouldn't be fun, people. Which is why I'm glad to say...
"Ain't gonna happen."

B-man

Hi Bob-

The "other formula" is something I blundered into while doing some speculative research on subjective space time perception at Washington State. Rather than math, I'll describe it.

What I did was to obtain, through the great kindness of the analog computing lab, an assortment of little lines of random length that moved across a video screen at a known, but random rate. Then I got people to sit down and make their best guess at the length of the line.

Now Special Relativity - if we move something faster and faster, toward the speed of light, then it seems to become shorter (with respect to us observers at rest).  The general relationship, as told to me by a young lady scientist with whom I didn't quite have time to get involved (which is quite another tale), goes like this:

"The faster it goes, the shorter it gets, the more it gains inertial mass."

Now we ask how come Special Relativity happens that way. The answer is that the universe is granulated, everything, including the way we perceive things, is in terms of quantum units of some kind. Just as a tree is a tree, and does not slide off into also being a bush or a vine, all objects in our world have a nominal, discrete existence, right down to a single photon that illuminates your eyes.

This physical aspect can be studied more closely by looking at Max Planck's studies of black body radiation, where he asked what happens in a hot closed container. If all the rays of light get together and mix in the manner of smoothly continuous waves, they will eventually generate x-rays, thn cosmic rays, and finally waves of such high frequencies that each wave will carry enough energy to melt down the apparatus, or leak out through the sides. But this doesn't occur. It doesn't occur because each wave is discrete, and can be expressed as a single event, with wavelength equal to some multiple of the Planck length, about 10^-35 meters long.

It turns out that this is the shortest wave that can exist in our universe, because the mass density equivalent for its energy and size causes anything of higher frequency or shorter wvelength (the same thing) to vanish into a microscopic "black hole". Thus, there is a discrete unit of time, or "chronon" that has a real, measurable magnitude about 10^-44 second, and is the sequence interval at which the fastest transition across a material object can be made, where the object is the Planck length.

Our senses are also limited. You have two properties, in this case for the visual senses, that are defined by a visual threshold of sensitivity, and by an incremental sensitivity. The threshold is simply how much light it takes to wake up your senses to the fact tht light is actually happening. With electronics it can be as sensitive as a single photon, but our eyes require several photons, the actual number varying with the specific range of color (frequency) in which we are seeing. Yellow-green is the color of greatest sensitivity, like lime green fluorescein dye.

The incremental sensitivity of the eye (and of all our other organs) is a proportion of the stimulus level. This is a generic nervous system  phenomenon independently studied by Weber and Fechner who wrote nice mathematical expressions for it. The easy explanation is for our hearing, rather than sight.  To tell the difference ion loudness between two sounds, they must have a two-to-one difference in power. (That's why appliances with linear knobs seem to be very sensitive near very low power levels and insensitive at high power levels.  This makes a great lab experiment for psychology classes.) In other words, to hear a difference in sond level that is just noticeable, you have to either increase the sound to twice the power level, or reduce it to half the power level.  This difference is just barely noticeable, so we call it a Just Noticeable Difference or JND. (If you're curious, the threshold sensitivity for hearing is so low that it corresponds to eardrum motion on the order of the diameter of a hydrogen atom - about 10^-10 meters.)

Now let's consider our senses. All our senses have some proportion at which we can detect an incremental change in stimulus level. The JND varies with the sense, so we have one ratio for sensing heat, another for hearing, another for light and so on.  This is a great advantage, since it vastly increases our dynamic range for sensation in just the same way as increasing your computer screen colors from 8 bit to 24 bit gives you 2^16 more colors. It's a logarithmic scale.

In the same way, we also have rate JNDs for the input of informtion. These JNDs are the proportional increments at which we can tell the difference between the rates of two information streams.  As an example, you can hear one person talk easily, but when you try to follow two conversations, it gets difficult, and three different speakers all at once usually exceeds the information rate maximum, and we get overload and chaos. (This is one of the areas in which I do a lot of my own research. For example, I ask what is the JND for our psychic senses?)

For conversations, you can discover your own JND for conversational data input by taking two speakers,  get one of them talking at normal rate, and then start the other talking at a progressively faster rate until you reach the point that you can tell that you are losing bits and pieces of the conversation. The two rates then give the ratio, hence the JND for talking.

OK, using this kind of thinking, I ran my video of lines crossing the screen at various rates, and I asked people tio tell me how long the lines were. Then I plotted the errors that they made. What I discovered was that as the lines moved faster, up to a point, errors increased as if the lines were getting shorter according to the same math function as if the lines were subject to Special Relativity. Then there came a point at which chaos set in from overload.

In the same way, since we sense things in accordance with rates, while you are sitting doing almost nothing, waiting for water to boil, for the clock's hands to move, or some similar task, the reference information rate you experience is extremely  small.  The JND is a proportion that is the same for all information rates. It takes only a tiny change of information flow rate to sense a change of information rate. Time is sensed according to the number of JNDs of "time sense" we experience in a given moment, so in some interval measured by the clock,  we tend to experience a lot of JNDs of time which we interpret to be "a lot of time".  

Now consider going to a wonderful party. When we are active, talking, dancing, having a great experience at a party, then we are experiencing time at a high rate of information flow. The JND proportion is the same, but the information flow is so much greater, that the JND proportion now involves a lot of information. Thus, it takes quite a while for us to notice that time has passed. So in the same interval by the clock we expereience few JND of time. As a result it seems that time is passing at a much faster rate.

Now consider how time feels to a person with respect to age. The JND is a fixed proportion of the age of the person. When the person is very young, then the JND is a small number of days. As the person grows older, the same JND proportion increases so it takes a larger number of days to make the same JND proportion. As a result, more time passes, according to the calendar, before one JND is sensed. Thus, us old farts sense that time is zipping by while youngsters still find time to be moving slowly, and our grandchildren who are only one or two years old find a wait of more than a few seconds to be just as intolerable as I  would find a wait of weeks or months.

There is also a JND of "math anxiety" which can be reduced by verbal explanations, I hope. So there's the explanation - now you can derive the equations and whatever on your own, when you have time.

dave

Actually, Fred & Chumley, the last time the earth stopped rotating for me was when I finally sobered up.
d

Thanks, Dave, that was great!

Bob

Quote:

That being said, if our brainwaves can operate on various frequencies, how we PERCEIVE time may change in conjunction with our environment.

Yes, it may,Doc.  Though, can you move into a perception where time is not perceived? A perception of no-time?

faster and slower are differential time.  Time itself bends and fluctuates in certain situations and the experience of time bends and fluctuates in certain situations.
Though, in what type of experience would you perceive no-time?  

Hi Dave
Interesting explanation. It's an old idea of course, that the way we experience time is a function of how much time we have experienced; interesting to see it expanded and mathematized. The first time I recall reading it I think I was in 6th or 7th grade and it was the anecdotal subject of one of those little compositions that used to accompany the spelling list for the week. The grownups got to
"indoctrinate" alot with those little paragraphs! They don't use those spelling books any more....

It does appear to be a factor, but is it the whole story? Last week waiting for a car repair when I "should" have been at work reduced me to the level of a two-year old for a bit until I distracted myself with some reading material I had brought along and also caught what was on the TV in the background, which was amusing. Multitasking is another complex phenomenon; I thought I had read women were better at it than men; whether or not I agree with that depends on whoich shopper is ignoring the misbehaving child while concentrating on buying all the "crap" in the stores, and it seems to me women are as good a smen at this.

I do sort of recall making that shift to adult thinking where one asks "Has another year gone by already?" so I agree in part with your assumption is it, that "The JND is a fixed proportion of the age of the person. " But I can, as I said above, lapse into other proportions, or maybe ages, who knows. In the day to day stuf..I don't know how this applies. I am highly skilled at this point in distracting  myself from watching the time. Young chiuldren are not. I can read. They cannot. I can daydream. I'm not sure when young children learn to daydream. So I can play with time in ways they cannot or at least do not. So then is the JND for time so fixed? Then too there are those moments when time stands still, or I lose connection with the hands on the clock. Moments of awe, or moments of great physical pain. What you experience with time is dependent on what you focus on. Great physical pain feels eternal...no time.

(and there are other shifts in adult hood...like changing what you think of as old.)


Younsters lack perspective...is perspectibe merely having achieved a certain ratio of one second to X years? And how does age affect how one is able to learn intervals...

Also there are undoubtedly many personal variations in here, based on biochemistry even...maybe those with ADHD have a different intrinsic JND ratio of whatever.

But ever since reading that spelling essay I have periodically pondered this. I don't know if my growing up felt longer than my child's. I wanted me to grow up but (as a parent you won't misinterpret this I hope) I want my child's childhood to last longer..so that desire figures in to how I experience the time...and when I ask myself which interval feels longer, I can't formulate an answer. I just think there is physical Grennwich Mean Time, and there is personal psychological time. And I'm not sure they correlate.

Hi Lucy-
As far as I can tell, every sensory event has its own JND, which is a fixed fraction of stimulus level. The JND varies between observers (or between electronic gizmos) depending on viewpoint, past history, the phase of the moon and the color of your shoes. Further, because granularity of reality occurs through creation of hierarchical structures (like one molecule of silicon dioxide on top of another to make clay, then one glob of clay on top of the other to make a brick, then one brick on top of the other etc) each level of the hierchy has a different "natural grain size" and a different "natural time association". Thus a brick lasts a few thousand years, but with a very high JND for changes, since it has to break, while a sequoia or redwood live a few thousand years and are relatively sensitive to soil changes, or the May Fly that lives only 24 hours, and is very sensitive to the motion of its swarming neighbors etc. All of this can be traced backwards to an initial eigenstate (rigorous logical commonality) at the Planck level.

When you do "something", you are involved in tens of dozens of individual component activities. Each has its own JND so that you experience 3-space as a sort of multiply overlapping sequence of minute changes that have a general flavor of seeming continuous.  

Now let's look into n-space, where we are free to interact in other ways as well.  I was sitting with a friend a few nights back and discussing the way plants "move". If you meditate deeply (or take a number of dangerous mental modifiers) you can reach a state in which you are sensitive to not only the 3-space of everyday experience, but additional spaces as well. (I tried to explain a way to get there by meditation on my site as Seeing in 7-Space www.mbs-hypnoclinic.com although it's not very clear.) In that state if you relax away your preconceptions and simply look at a plant, a rose, a bromiliad, ferns or various other flora, you get two impressions. The 3-space impression is that it's sitting still, and the n-space perception is that it is growing, uncurling and variously wiggling and moving. At this stage, you now have reached the JND  for multi-dimensional vision. It has to be multi-dimensional, because a 3-space camera can't see it, even though you can.

Because the nature of dimensions, for purely formal logical reasons having to do with generating them ex nihilo in the Beginning, is an hierarchical series of Lie congruent eigenstates (heaps of heaps of heaps that all have the Beginning in common) the next eigensystem has 7 dimensions. Three of those are everyday 3-space, and the other 4 are new. We can add one, two or three of the "new dimensions" to everyday experience so as to obtain four 4-space (physical, not space-time) dimensional systems, and we can inhabit all of them all of the time. As an example, my wife told me that when she meditates she sees four quasi-independent realities extending in front of her. I found them too. I also find that I can manipulate these by moving in 3-space, or in other ways, not in 3-space.

So here we are in a 3-space world, from which we are easily capable of extension into numerically higher spaces. In these other spaces we can move in many dimensions at once. Each motion has its own sensory JND, each object in these spaces has a quantum granularity etc.  Each of these can be eventually traced back to its logical roots in the Beginning at the Planck level (or some equivalent, if you are in a different space). That's your GMT constant.

I personally think that kids are wide open to all of this when they are born, but get talked out of it as they get older. "Hey, Johnny, don't talk about Gran'pa Max. He's dead, so you don't really see him. Stop that." So they do. In the end all we believe in is what other people tell us is real for them. "You Mom and I live in the same world and we can both see the same things, and what we can't see doesn't exist. So stop telling us that there's a ball of light coming through the doorway. We don't see it, so it doesn't exist. - Stop talking about those daydreams and go see what's bothering the dog, making it bark so much."

My wife asked my grandadughter, "Where'd you come from?" She replied, "Mommy's tummy." My wife continued, "And before that?" The child responded, "Oh, I was a cook." Since she's a dead ringer for one of the grandparent chefs of years gone by, that kinda stopped all further conversation. Now? She has no interest in looking there.

I strongly suspect that if we were to recover the awareness of childhood we'd live in a far richer and more varied world!

d

just thinking...about the downside to the way a year is shorter to adults than to kids...from an article on tsunami survivors:


Quote:

The emotional trauma of the disaster lingers throughout the tsunami zone. For artist Round Kelana, 70, who was one of a half-dozen painters now exhibiting their images of the tsunami in a Banda Aceh government office, the day of the deadly waves remains the topic of conversation in coffee shops. ''For adults, it seems as if it happened yesterday, even though it is a year now," said Kelana, whose long white hair stuck out of his black beret in a hundred directions. ''When people tell their stories, sometimes they make jokes, and laugh. I do, too." Sitting underneath one of his paintings, in which two women are screaming as they struggle in chest-high water to save their children, Kelana remembers vividly floating in the rush of tsunami water ''when a house floated by me and I said, 'God, save me by putting me on that floating house, so that I can someday tell my children and grandchildren what I had witnessed,' " he said, his eyes twinkling. ''God saved me!" Kelana said most children seem better adjusted than adults. ''I went to a camp of displaced people," he said. ''It seemed many children had forgotten the tsunami completely. Their memory is erased."

from http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2005/12/25/slow_rebirthcomes_to_a_wounded_land/?page=1

j(ust to list source)

I personally believe that both the rate of time's passage and the intensity of Earth's gravity have increased sufficiently in the last five years to at least be minutely observable...but of course, this is nothing that I can prove in any quantifiable way.

Whether it has to do with the Schumann Resonance however, I do not know.  I am inclined to believe that it has to do with us getting closer to the radical change to physical reality as we know it which will occur in 2012.