Thursday, September 18, 2025

Objective Reality: A Non Collectivist Philosophy of Time, Space and Now

By David William Jedell UPDATED October 9, 2025
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” - Mark Twain.
There Is No Time But Now and Never Was in Normal Human Existence
Contents
Section One: Now
Section Two: Interactive Memory of Now
Section Three: Theory of Relativity "Time" Dilation
Section One: Now
The Following First Section Shall Be Designated as "Now" in this Paper, which affects normal human existence without complicated counter intuitive concerns of Special Relativity which is far removed from normal human existence and is confirmed only through quantum mechanical dilation comparison phenomena (see examples below). The facts are as follows: In normal human existence, it is always Now. Physicists, mathematicians and other scientists should accept this obvious objective fact, and disregard scientific propaganda of "spacetime" being related in any way to normal human existence. The idea of time began as an illusion of past, present and future; yesterday, today and tomorrow. We would approach a better understanding of everything by looking at what events are really happening and describe them as just that, rather than making up categories and labels like "Time". Normal existence does not require us to think about "Time", just "Now" and "Space" (which is hardly different from Now). See below Relativity discussion.
We exist at our local Space point reference (spacial area where changes in object, energy and wave position are within our conscious sensory perception). The delusion of Time construct follows as a result of our single point reference on earth, giving rise to the conscious inference of Past, Now and Future. Have you ever woken up when it was not Now? The ticks of a watch are only made by gears that are coordinated with a fraction of the earth's rotation we call a "second." It is not keeping track of "Time." It is keeping track of the relation of two motions using its own gear mecanisms. The "speed" of these motions is not inherent in Time as a thing in and of itself, but rather, in the ratio of the distance the object travels to an arbitrary fraction of the earth's cyclical rotation as a constant (i.e., the ratio of one to 24, or an "hour"), as the earth relates to the virtually stationary sun. It is only consciousness that creates the delusion of Time in normal human existence; without it the Earth exists in eternity.
When there is an event, like a collision of two objects in front of us, we store it in memory. When that event has moved out of our local Space, and there is another event in an ordered sequence, we delude ourselves into believing that the conscious perception of the first sequentially ordered event happened in the "past," as a result of the fact that the event is no longer generating sensory impulses (i.e., you no longer see it in front of you), but your sense of memory has recorded the event. However that event and its energies still continue in their effects in Space (and Now) that is non-local. Since our conscious mind can review the perceptions of memory and the lack of the same immediate sensory perceptions simultaneously occurring (i.e., you don't see it anymore), the mental construct is created that there is a past and a present. This is not factual but flawed. As far as the "future," the motions and coincidences in "events" (i.e., the paths of two objects colliding) have not occurred in our local Space reference. The future can only be imagined, predicted or hoped for, but if our future did exist, it would be in our local Space. There are motions of matter and a sensory "observer" however Space is always Now for a normal human being's existence.
A major obstacle to the general acceptance of the fact that Special Relativity time dilation is distinct from Now and is a mathematical convenience or a theoretical physicist's tool to compare relative motions, and not a thing in and of itself for a human life. It is that collective propaganda (and collective stupidity, see, Video: Why Critical Thinking Is Disappearing – The Rise of Collective Stupidity, https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=5NDotKQUqvc) and languages, such as English, are pervaded with words that express Time as a thing in and of itself, such as "happened," "was," "yesterday," tomorrow," and many other expressions of past and future tenses. Calendars, clocks and appointments are other obstacles to the comprehension of Space. Attributing a dimension to Time in normal human experience is analogous to attributing a dimension to a 12 inch ruler and calling it "Distance". In the same way clocks are not time itself. Moreover, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis postulates that the structure of a language determines a native speaker's perception and categorization of experience. It emphasizes that language either determines or influences one’s thoughts. The mental construct, e.g., of thinking that yesterday was in the past is a misunderstanding of Now.
Thought Experiment
Instead of trying to think this out with our flawed verbal language system, try to think in a spacial way of what is actually happening. Here is a simple example of spacial comprehension of this; a thought experiment. A jet located on the equator takes off due west. When it reaches 35,000 feet it is traveling 1,000 mph ground speed. The pilot has only a sun dial in front of the cockpit that he can see from inside. Nobody on the plane has a clock or watch. The sun dial shadow indicates it is 3pm upon reaching 35,000 feet. The sun can be seen high above. Subsequent to the plane traveling 6,000 miles, the sun dial is in the same 3pm position and the sun hasn't moved. Its still high in the sky. The pilot and everyone on the plane think that time has stopped during the flight. They even confirm this assessment when they land and take a few minutes to walk into the airport. All the clocks on the walls and all the people's watches indicate 3:05pm (including walking distance).
On the ground at the airport that the plane departed from, the ground crew personnel look at their watches and see that they indicate 9pm. It is also night, the stars are shining. They compare their memory of a sunny day with the present sensory input of night and no sun. They construct the delusion of time, whereas the pilot and passengers have current sensory input of a shining sun and a sun dial that has not moved during the flight. Finally, the pilot and passengers are informed that they are moving through Space from one area of Space to another, and that they passed 6 "Established Time Zones." The pilot and passengers accept this explanation after some thought. But the ground crew believes that it is 9pm and that 6 hours of "Time" have passed because the hands of their watches moved and the sun set and it is night.
The crew holds on to this delusion like people did when the earth was believed to be flat and the earth was the center of the universe, rejecting Columbus and Copernicus on his death bed, and burning Guido at the stake for heresy. The "Arrow of Time" in normal human misunderstanding can just as easily be reversed with no real difference, i.e., that "Time" moves from the future to the past or moves from past to future.
Theoretically, in order to travel into the "Past", all cause and effect vectors would have to be reversed, and it would take 150 years to go back 150 years. However, this cannot be done. Neither can travelling to the "future" because it would require an acceleration of all vectors of momentum, which cannot be done. Besides, these imaginary conjectures would be prevented by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Princople. See, Edward Teller - Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrHTqq_4mwQ
In Now you can picture a circle representing your conscious area of sensory perception. Arrows (momentum vectors) outside of the circle pointed inward to the circle represent sequentially separated events that have not affected your perception but are positioned to do so.
Arrows (momentum vectors) inside the circle (or sphere) pointed outward are events that affect your perception but are moving away from your area of sensory perception.
A sequence does not depend on "Time", i.e., the sequence 1,2,3 will always be 1,2,3 no matter how many instances that the earth has rotated or revolved. A sequence is (delusional) "Time" independent. Thus, in normal human existence, before and after does not mean anything but a sequence of vectors and events in Now.
The above diagram is placed here to compare the Now diagram with the Spacetime diagram; "Spacetime" will be discussed below in Section Three: Special Relativity. In 1908, Minkowski presented the above light cone geometric interpretation of spacetime special relativity into a single four-dimensional continuum now known as Minkowski spacetime in the absence of gravitation. Einstein initially dismissed Minkowski's interpretation as "superfluous learnedness".
"Serious critical thinking and skepticism addressed to new and even old claims is not just permissible, it is encouraged and desirable as the essence of science." - Carl Sagan
Section Two: Interactive Memory of Now
The Following Section Shall Be Designated as Interactive Memory of Now in this Paper (akin to the delusional idea of subjective "Time").
Interactive Memory of Now makes your personal perception of the number of revolutions of the earth around the sun shrink as it interacts with memory. We will explore how the internal memory of now gets smaller as our body biologically ages and earth continues to revolve around the sun, each revolution known as a "year."
Getting "older" is correlated here with Objective Now subsequent to many of the earth's revolutions around the sun; however it is only the biological division of cells and other harmful health factors that are truly "aging."
Interactive Memory of Now is the interactive memory and recall of the distance between "events" in Now, and our current sensory perception of Now. Our largest subjective feeling of Interactive Memory is when we are first aware of being conscious, sometime in the first Objective Year of life, as will be discussed below.
Imperical Evidence of the Interactive Memory of Now
In 2005, Wittmann & Lehnhoff systematically asked large samples of younger and older people how they experienced time. In the study, 499 German and Austrian participants aged 14 to 94 were asked how fast so-called "time" (Interactive Memory of Now) usually passed for them. The study indicated that this set of people feel "time" passing more quickly as they get older.[1]
Wittman and Lehnhoff found that everybody, regardless of age, thought that "time" was passing quickly. The question, “How fast did the last 10 years pass for you?” yielded a tendency for the perception of the speed of "time" to increase in the previous decade. This pattern peaked at Objective age 50 years, however, and remained steady until the mid-90s.
Dr. William Friedman proposed a theory of Proportionality, originally proposed by William James in 1877 (labelled the "Father of American psychology"), to explain this phenomenon as follows[2, 3]:
“As we get older, each year is a smaller proportion of our lives. For example, a year is 1/10 of the life of a 10 year old, but 1/70th of the life of a 70 year old. Therefore each year feels shorter relative to all the time we've lived and thus seems to be going by faster.” This phenomenon is also colloquially known as "The Proportional Theory of Time."
Mathematical Treatment of Dr. Friedman's Statement and its Implications
The t-axis represents the number of revolutions of the earth around the sun colloquially labeled a "year";
y = f(t) = 1/t
Interactive Memory of Now for a point on the t-axis is designated as a point on the y-axis curve.
The cummulative Memory of Now = ∫ y dt.
dy/dt = the rate of change of y at each t-point on the t axis
The Interactive Memory of Now during the Objective interval (t1, tn-1) is the cummulative area (integral) of Interactive Memory of Now between (t1, tn-1)
∫ y dt
y
t =>
The curve represents the Interactive Memory of Now as a function of Objective clock t. The shaded area under the curve is the Area of Interactive Memory of Now remembered. The smaller the Area, the faster Interactive Memory of Now is perceived to pass.
At tn years, looking back to the Objective year t1, we find the Area of the Interactive Memory of Now in that interval.
tn-1
∫ y dt =
t1
This is a general number and subject to minor differences and aberrations with each different person.
Cummulative Interactive Memory of Now begins to become imperceptible from about 50 objective years to 90 objective years, because it is sufficiently small. This idea is consistent with the findings by Wittman and Lehnhoff, as stated above, that everybody, regardless of age, thought that "Time" was passing quickly and this pattern peaked at age 50, however, and remained steady until the mid-90s
The theory of Interactive Memory of Now under consideration is consistent with the empirical study. Dr. Friedman's statement that “As we get older, each year is a smaller proportion of our lives,” and that “each year feels shorter relative to all the time we've lived and thus seems to be going by faster.”
Graphs of ∫(y) dt Showing Decrease in Interactive Memory of Now (y = 1/t) as your t increases (shown on the graph as "x").
Cindy Lustig, a professor of psychology at the University of Michigan, found that the perception of time is influenced by memory and how much you’ve experienced. For an 8-year-old, a week is a big portion of their life. For an 80-year-old, a week is a much smaller portion of their life, which contributes to the feeling that it went by quickly.
Section Three: Theory of Relativity "Time" Dilation
The Following Shall Be known as the Relativistic "Time" dimension which has only been verified by the dilations of quantum particles (so is really a part of quantum mechanics and not at all related to the human perception of normal existence). There has been no confirmation of Special Relativity Time Dilation on a macro scale, only abberations of the relative motions of quantum particles with respect to speed or gravitaional field intensity.
Special Relativity
The thought experiment of Albert Einstein to explain time dilation is a space ship traveling at relativistic speeds (close to the speed of light 'c') with a photon moving up and down, from side to side, in a straight line within the space ship, from the emitter to the receiver and back. Relative to an outside stationary observer on earth, the photon is moving over a greater distance than just up and down (it is traveling twice the hypotenuse of a right triangle because of the spaceship's motion and length in the x-direction), but because light travels at 'c' in every reference frame, the photon must still travel at the same speed 'c' relative to the outside observer. Hence, according to the theory, because it travels a greater distance with the same speed, it must take longer to do so and hence time will appear to be running slower within the rocket relative to the observer outside. (It should be noted that there is no convincing evidence that a material light emitter could ever reach a speed that would cause the practically instantaneous quantum particle photon to appear to divert even to a small hypotenuse of a right triangle.) It will be shown that Special Relativity "Time" dilation has only been experimentally verified by relative movement and pulses of quantum particles on a nanosecond scale, just like the whole theory initially is based on the purported displacement of the natural path of a quantun particle (photon), which uses a leap of logic to claim that the "Time" in the space ship as whole is dilated.
Moreover, in accordance with Einstein's Special Relativity, light always moves in a straight line. In his famous thought experiment, the light leaves the emitter and heads straight up towards the receiver at an angle. This is impossible. Actually, the beam must be moving straight up and down. It is the space ship that is moving, that's all, and in the opposite direction, the "proper" frame is also "moving." Clocks are not "Time" itself, but rather, they measure and compare relative motions. The use of light (which is not "Time" either), with its constant speed in all reference frames, to measure the rate of clicks, is simply a convenient way to exactly compare the so-called proper frame number of clicks with the relativistic frame number of clicks. Even if Special Relativity did elongate clicks of a light clock, why does this prove time dilation, especially on a macro scale? Time does not tell the clock to change its frequency of clicks once the gears are set. Conversely, a clock moving at longer intervals does not tell time how to behave.
Spacetime Physics is counterintuitive, inconsistent and practically incomprehenible and will keep you up at night, for what, if you are not a physicist working on GPS or the dimension of quantum mechanics?: For nothing as a normal human being!
Note: in his paper on Special Relativity, even Einstein says, "We will raise this conjecture (whose intent will from now on be be referred to as the "Priciple of Relativity") to a postulate ... "Is the Principle of Relativity just a postulate? All of special relativity rests on it. How do we know it is true? What lies behind the Principle of Relativity? This is a philosophical question not a scientific one. You will have your own opinion; here is ours..." See, Taylor, Edwin F., and Wheeler, John Archibold, Spacetime Physices, MIT, https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Relativity/Spacetime_Physics_(Taylor_and_Wheeler)/03%3A_Same_Laws_for_All/3.01%3A_The_Principle_of_Relativity , p. 3.1 Special Relativity "Time" Dilation Formula (as Part of Its Own Dimansion)
At most, each photon in the Einstein rocket time dilation thought experiment has a sideways momentum (forward in the rocket frame) in addition to its forward momentum (side to side, back and forth) according to the view of an outside observer. Sideways momentum does not change the forward momentum "c". Velocity is not just change of end position, displacemet is, and in the case of the rocket, the rocket is totally responsible for the displacement of the photon receiver position. Exactly why is this situation any different from Galilean Relativity, albeit with a speed limit?
Special relativity time dilation equation
Special Relativity "Time" Dilation Graph Due to Speed
It should be noted that it is an unjustified fallacious leap of logic to assume that "Time" slows down for everything (on the macro level) within the (impossible) spaceship, simply becaiuse the completely untested impossible and imaginary speeding space ship causes displacement of the photon. Moreover, Einstein doesn't apply his own postulate that all inertial frames are equivalent. So, the observer on the (impossible, moving close to "c") space ship sees the clock on earth going symmetrically slower while the observer on earth sees the clock on the spaces ship going slower at the exact same rate. Since all inertial frames are equal, when the two observers are joined back together, the number of clicks of their clocks are physically the same. Otherwise, the observer on the space ship would see the earth spinning like a top. This is symmetry.
Moreover, in accordance with Einstein's Special Relativity, light always moves in a straight line. In his famous thought experiment, the light leaves the emitter and heads straight up towards the receiver from one side of the ship to the other at an angle. This is impossible. Actually, the beam must be moving straight up and down. It is the space ship that is moving, that's all. [4]
Understanding photon (also a quantum particle) behavior on a moving space ship.
When considering a different photon shot straight from the back to the front then reflected straight back to the back of a space ship traveling at high speeds, the principles of special relativity become contradictory. Einstein says the speed of light in a vacuum is constant for all observers, regardless of their own motion.
Here's a breakdown of what happens from different perspectives:
1. From the perspective of an observer on the space ship, the photon travels from the back to the front at the speed of light, c. To the observer on the ship, everything appears normal, just as if the spaceship were stationary.
2. From the perspective of a stationary observer outside, the space ship is moving, so during the time it takes the photon to travel the length of the ship, the front of the ship will have moved further forward. However, the external observer will still measure the speed of the photon as c. This is because to maintain the constant speed of light, the stationary observer will perceive length contraction of the ship appearing shorter in the direction of motion, according to Lorentz. The contradiction lies in considering length contraction at the same moment of the extended light path as a result of a non-contracted ship because the contraction would cancel out the purported time dilation effect. (It should be noted here that light speed and distance cannot be measured one way but only back and forth. So there really is no need for a Lorentz contraction because from back to forward, the photon moves L + Δx, and going back travels L - Δx.) This, 2L/c is the distance and speed of the photon.
A clock is made by having a pulse of light bounce back and forth between two parallel mirrors separated by a distance.
Lorentz Contraction of the Length of the Ship = L’ = L(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2
Time Dilation = t' = t/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2
The photon is moving within the ship and the "Time" dilation depends on the ship's length insofar as the presumed displacement of the photon moving from the emitter to the opposite side then reflected back to the receiver at a point that was displaced as a result of the length (and speed) of the ship. Thus, the length of the ship cannot be ignored because it is the basis of the claim that the light (photon) moved a greater distance than the speed of light "c" would allow, incorrectly "proving" that time itself had to slow down. Putting these two effects together, the length of the ship and the sideways displacement of the photon, the Lorentz shrinkage and the lengthened "allowable" distance that the photon traveled, the two cancel out time dilation:
T' = T(1 – v^2/c^2)^1/2/(1 – v^2/c^2)^1/2 = T X 1 = T.
Problem with Michelson-Morley experiment resulting in the idea of the Lorentz contraction
It should be noted that in the Michelson-Morley experiment, a single light beam was split into two, with each beam traveling back and forth along one of two perpendicular arms of an interferometer before being recombined. The expectation was that the Earth's motion through the hypothesized "ether" would cause a difference in the travel times of the two perpendicular beams, leading to a shift in their interference pattern upon recombination. However, no such shift was detected, indicating that the speed of light was constant regardless of direction, a finding that challenged classical physics and supported the foundations of special relativity.
Assumption: If the Earth were moving through the ether, one arm of the interferometer would be moving with or against the ether wind, while the other would be moving across it. The light traveling with and against the wind was expected to take a different amount of time than the light traveling across the wind. This time difference would cause the two light beams to recombine slightly out of phase. The out-of-phase beams would create a shift in the observable interference pattern (fringe shift). Despite careful measurement and repeated experiments over several months, no fringe shift was detected. To Michelson and Morley, this "null result" meant that the speed of light was the same in both perpendicular directions, regardless of the Earth's motion. This fallaciously contradicted the prevailing ether theory.
To explain this "null result", Lorentz came up with his contraction explanation and formula. It seems totally unnecessary! If a light beam travels at "c", then goes in one direction where the reflecting mirror is located and moving farther away, then the emitter-receiver must be moving precisely the same distance in the same direction. The overall speed back and forth is "c", but on the initial trip the light travels L + Δx (further), while on the return trip travels L - Δx (shorter). Thus, the overall speed is still "c" in either frame of reference. The Michelson-Morely interpretation supported Einstein's idea that the speed of light is constant for all observers, a fundamental postulate of Einstein's theory of special relativity. Special Relativity is thus on shaky ground because you cannot measure the speed of light soley in one direction because of the principle of relativity of simultaneity. It's generally considered impossible to directly measure the one-way speed of light, as it requires two precisely synchronized clocks at two spatially separated points, and synchronizing these clocks necessitates knowing the one-way speed of light in the first place.
Special Relativity Postulated Mass Increase Formula
Special Relativity Mass Increae Graph
Objective Experimental Confirmation of Time Dilation
Muon Decay and Distance Decrease:
In special relativity, the proper time in the muon’s frame is dilated in the Earth frame (t = γt). For v = 0.999cv = 0.999cv = 0.999c, γ ≈ 22.4 nanoseconds, so the half-life appears as 2.2 × 22.4 ≈ 49.3 μs, allowing more muons to reach Earth’s surface.
Experimental Evidence: Cosmic ray experiments (e.g., Rossi-Hall, 1941) and accelerator tests (e.g., CERN muon storage rings, 1970s) show muon lifetimes extended by exactly γ, matching time dilation predictions. Other particles (e.g., pions, kaons) show similar lifetime extensions at relativistic speeds, proportional to γ, regardless of their rest mass.
If mass increase altered decay, we’d expect different particles (e.g., muons vs. pions) to show different decay behaviors at the same velocity, due to their different rest masses. Instead, all unstable particles show lifetime extensions proportional to γ, consistent with time dilation. Muons have a short mean lifetime (~2.2 µs in their rest frame) before decaying into other particles. At non-relativistic speeds, they wouldn't travel far enough to reach Earth's surface from the upper atmosphere.
General Relativity Space Curvature
Spacetime curvature accounts for tidal accelerations of objects.
Local curvature adding up to the appearance of long-range gravitation. The shortening of distance between any one pair, and, of ball bearings is small when the distance itself is small. However, small separation between each ball bearing and its partner demands many pairs to encompass Earth. The totalized shortening of the circumference in any given time - the shortening of one separation times the number of separations - is independent of the fineness of the subdivision. That totalized pulling in of the circumference carries the whole necklace of masses inward. This is free fall, this is gravity, this is a large scale motion interpreted as a consequence of local curvature. Example:
Original separation between A and B -and every other pair: 20 meters
Time of observation: 8 seconds
Shortening of separation in that time: 1 millimeter
Fractional shortening: 1 millimeter/20 meters = 1/20,000
Circumference of Earth (length of airy necklace of ball bearings): 4.0030 X 10^7 meters
Shrinkage of this circumference in 8 seconds: 1/20,000 X 4.0030 X 10^7 meters = 2001.5 meters
Decrease in the distance from the center of Earth (drops by the same factor 1/20,000):
1/20,000 X 6.371 X 10^7 meters = 315 meters.
This apparently large-scale effect is caused - in Einstein’s picture - by the addition of a multitude of small-scale effects: the changes in the local dimensions associated with the curvature of geometry (failure of to remain at rest as observed in the free-float frame associated with A).
Curvature of spacetime and nothing more is all that is required to describe the millimeter or two change in separation in 8 seconds of two ball bearings, originally 20 meters apart in space above Earth, and endowed at the start with zero relative velocity. Moreover, this curvature completely accounts for gravitation.
See, Taylor, Edwin F., and Wheeler, John Archibold, Spacetime Physics, https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Relativity/Spacetime_Physics_(Taylor_and_Wheeler)/09%3A_Gravity_-_Curved_Spacetime_in_Action/9.06%3A_Gravitation_as_Curvature_of_Spacetime
Many local reference frames, fitted together, make up the global structure of spacetime. Each local Lorentz frame can be regarded as having one of the ball bearings at its center. The ball bearings all simultaneously approach their neighbors (curvature). Then the large-scale structure of spacetime bends and pulls nearer to Earth (illustration shown above). In this way many local manifestations of curvature add up to give the appearance of long-range gravitation originating from Earth as a whole.
The Einstein field equation (EFE) of General Relativity:
where Rμν is the Ricci curvature tensor, R is the scalar curvature, gμν is the metric tensor, Λ is the cosmological constant, G is Newton's gravitational constant, c is the speed of light in vacuum, and Tμν is the stress–energy tensor.
Confirmation that Mass Curves Space
Gravity as the curvature of space was experimentally verified in 1919 during a solar eclipse, where stars behind the sun appeared to be aside the sun.
Thus, bending, warping and flexing of space-time goes on to tell matter how to move. In general relativity, everything from bits of light to speeding bullets to blasting spaceships want to travel in straight lines. But the space around them is warped, forcing them all to follow curved trajectories; like trying to cross a mountain pass in a straight line, but following the peaks and valleys of the topography. So-called gravitational time dialation (slowing relative to an outside observer somewhere else) in a strong gravitaional field is as follows:
Einstein concluded gravitational time dilation by imagining an accelerating rocket with a man inside. If the rocket accelerated at 9.8 m/s^2, then the man would feel the equivalent of gravity. So Einstein postulated that gravivty is quivalent to acceleration. Since a photon emitted up from the back of the spaceship would reach the person slower (because the person is moving away from that photon) then the photon emitted from the top (which moves towards the man) would get to the man first.
Hafele-Keating Experiment
The Hafele-Keating Experiment: The Airplane Test of Time with Cesium Atomic Clocks. The "airplane test of time" refers to the famous Hafele-Keating experiment conducted in 1971, which tested Albert Einstein's theories of special and general relativity using cesium atomic clocks aboard four commercial airliners plus one in the "proper frame" on earth to compare with. Military GPS adjust for time dilation caused by both special (speed time dilation) and general (gravitational time dilation) relativity, as this correction is crucial for accuracy; the adjustment is made by pre-launch atomic clock frequency adjustments and ongoing recalibrations performed by ground control centers to compensate for the differing effects of speed and gravity on the satellites' atomic clocks. Without these adjustments, positioning errors would accumulate rapidly, rendering the system useless.
E = mc^2
E=mc^2 existed before Einstein.
David Hilbert was a leading mathematician who worked alongside and corresponded with Albert Einstein during the development of Einstein's General Theory of Relativity in 1915. While Einstein conceived the core physical ideas, Hilbert developed rigorous mathematical foundations, even publishing his version of the field equations around the same time as Einstein's final paper. Einstein acknowledged Hilbert's mathematical genius and the resulting priority dispute was resolved by Einstein's gracious letter and a shared understanding that both were vital contributors to the theory's development.
The photoelectric effect (For which Einstein won a Nobel Prize)
German physicist Heinrich Hertz
The photoelectric effect was discovered in 1887 by German physicist Heinrich Hertz in 1887 when he observed that shining ultraviolet light on a metal could cause it to release sparks. While Hertz made the initial discovery, it was Albert Einstein who provided the theoretical explanation in 1905, introducing the concept of photons and earning a Nobel Prize for his work on the photoelectric effect.
French physicist Jean Perrin and Brownian Movement
The person who helped confirm Albert Einstein's theory of Brownian motion and used it to determine the size of atoms was French physicist Jean Perrin. The conclusive experimental evidence provided by Perrin's work ended the long-standing scientific skepticism about the physical reality of atoms. For this achievement, Perrin was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1926.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the idea that there are three separate dimensions involving the misnomer Time is to deal with the misconceptions involved in the misapplied delusional use of the word "Time." In reality, these are three different phenomena fictionally subsumed under the rubric of the common notion of "Time" which only experimentally applies in quantum mechanical experiments of relitivistic "Time Dilation", otherwise humans only live the Now of Space.
References
[1] Wittmann, M. and Lehnhoff, S., (2005), Age effects in perception of time, Psychological Reports 97: 921-935 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7266174_Age_effects_in_perception_of_time
[2] Lewis , Jordan Gaines, Why Does Time Fly as We Get Older, Scientific American, (Dec. 18, 2013). https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/why-does-time-fly-as-we-get-older/
[3] Based on Aging and the Speed of Time presented by Dr. Friedman on 10/14/2010 at Oberlin College. Ibid.
[4] Ricker III, Harry H., Refutation Of Einstein's Principle of Relativity, General Science Journal, (May 28, 2011) http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Relativity%20Theory/Download/3494
Other Resources
Taylor, Edwin F., and Wheeler, John Archibold, Introduction to Special Relativity, ia800503.us.archive.org/22/items/SpacetimePhysicsIntroductionToSpecialRelativityTaylorWheelerPDF/Spacetime%20Physics%20-%20Introduction%20to%20Special%20Relativity%20%5BTaylor-Wheeler%5DPDF.pdf
Taylor, Edwin F., and Wheeler, John Archibold, Spacetime Physices; https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Relativity/Spacetime_Physics_(Taylor_and_Wheeler)/03%3A_Same_Laws_for_All/3.01%3A_The_Principle_of_Relativity
Sutter, Paul, The Universe Remembers Gravitational Waves — And We Can Find Them, See, Space.com (12-6-2019) https://www.space.com/gravitational-waves-memory-space-time.html
The Theory of Relativity, Ch. 24.3, LibreTexts Physics: Time Dilation, https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/University_Physics/Book%3A_Introductory_Physics_-_Building_Models_to_Describe_Our_World_(Martin_Neary_Rinaldo_and_Woodman)/24%3A_The_Theory_of_Special_Relativity/24.03%3A_Time_Dilation
Bergmann, Peter Gabriel; Einstein, Albert, Theory of Relativity, Englewood, N.J. : Prentice-Hall, Inc., (1942) https://librarysearch.hillsdale.edu/discovery/fulldisplay?docid=alma991001361489707081&context=L&vid=01HC_INST:01HC_INST&lang=en&adaptor=Local%20Search%20Engine&tab=ALL&query=sub,exact,%20Relativity%20&offset=0
Susskind, Leonard, Stanford General Relativity Lecture Series, https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JRZgW1YjCKk
Mann, Adam, What is Space-Time, Live Science (Dec. 19, 2019) https://www.livescience.com/space-time.html
Wilson, Jillian, Time Flies By Faster As We Get Older. Here's Why. quoting Lustig, Cindy, professor of psychology at the University of Michigan (12/19/22) https://lsa.umich.edu/psych/news-events/all-news/faculty-news/time-flies-by-faster-as-we-get-older--here-s-why-.html
Copyright © 2025 David William Jedell
Email: d.w.jedell@gmail.com

Wednesday, September 7, 2022

Epigenetic Theory of Evolution Unifying Mind and Body when Looked at Through the Generations

By David William Jedell Updated October 2, 2025
The Answer to the Great Question : Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
Answer: It had to be the egg because there would be no chicken without it. However, there could be an egg without a chicken if two other, and different, bird species mated and the offpring was a new species; a chicken.
Darwin's theory of evolutionary selection holds that variation within species occurs randomly and that the survival or extinction of each organism is determined by that organism's ability to adapt to its environment. He set these theories forth in his book The Origin of Species (1859). Epigenetic Theory of Evolution herein departs from this notion as the exclusive or even primary mechanism of evolution.
Moreover, Jean Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829) is one of the best-known early evolutionists. According to Lamarck, organisms altered their behavior in response to environmental change. Their changed behavior, in turn, modified their organs, and their offspring inherited those "improved" structures. For example, giraffes developed their elongated necks and front legs by generations of browsing on high tree leaves. The exercise of stretching up to the leaves altered the neck and legs, and their offspring inherited these acquired characteristics. Conversely, according to Darwin's theory, giraffes that happened to have slightly longer necks and limbs would have a better chance of securing food and thus be able to have more offspring -- the "select" who survive. [1]
Carl Jung
The main ideas herein were originally written into a college philosophy paper by this author in 1988 under the title, "Carl Jung's Archetypes and Jean Piaget's Schema; Uniting Body and Mind," using only the relation of Jung and Piaget's theories, as well as logic. At the time, inherited evolutionary changes, rather than solely survival of life's random mutations, were not accepted by scientific consensus. Now, we have minor acceptance and a lot of science to back up the accepted neo-science of epigentetics.
Jean Piaget
Epigenetic Inheritance and Its Role in Evolutionary Biology - DNA methylation and histone modification alters how genes are expressed without altering the underlying DNA sequence.
Darwinian evolution focuses on genetic mutations as the primary driver of evolutionary change; epigenetics examines how environmental factors can influence gene expression without altering the DNA sequence itself, essentially providing another layer of variation that can be acted upon by natural selection, thus complementing Darwin's theory rather than contradicting it; in simple terms, Darwin's theory focuses on changes in the genetic code, while epigenetics explores how the "reading" of that code can be modified by environmental factors.
Someone’s lifetime can change the way their DNA is expressed, and how that change can be passed on to the next generation. This is the process of epigenetics, where the readability, or expression, of genes is modified without changing the DNA code itself. Tiny chemical tags are added to or removed from our DNA in response to changes in the environment in which we are living. [2]
Understanding of epigenetics has evolved significantly over time, moving beyond its initial connection to development and evolution to encompass the idea that epigenetic changes are heritable modifications to gene function that occur without changes in the DNA sequence itself, and these changes can be passed on through cell division. There may be an “epigenetic advantage” to phenotypic switching by epigenetic inheritance, rather than by gene mutation. An epigenetically-inherited trait can arise simultaneously in many individuals, as opposed to a single individual with a gene mutation. Moreover, a transient epigenetically-modified phenotype can be quickly “sunsetted”, with individuals reverting to the original phenotype. Thus, epigenetic phenotype switching is dynamic and temporary and can help bridge periods of environmental stress. Epigenetic inheritance likely contributes to evolution both directly and indirectly. Doubtlessly, the presence of epigenetic markers and the phenotypes they create (which may sort quite separately from the genotype within a population) will influence natural selection and, so, drive the collective genotype of a population. [3]
"Collective Unconscious" (German: kollektives Unbewusstes) refers to the theory that the unconscious mind and shared mental concepts. It was coined by Carl Jung.
With the help of clinical examples, the author tries to show how the therapeutic process works in Jung's theory of Unconscious: in the course of transference, the Unconscious generates Images which are coming from the Archetypes of Collective Unconscious. The interpretation of these Images and dreamer's associations trough transference, leads the patient to elaborate Symbols as carriers of a new sense for himself,
Archetype symbols connect the individual to the collective unconscious through visual images and symbolic imagery. They prompt the participants to experience emotional resonances that transcend individual experiences and affect their state of consciousness. [4]
Schema
Jean Piaget's schema theory is a theory of cognitive development that describes how mental structures called schemas organize knowledge and guide behavior. Piaget believed that children develop and modify schemas through interactions with their environment.
Here are some key aspects of Piaget's schema theory:
Jean Piaget's theory of cognitive development includes the idea of schemas, which are mental structures that organize knowledge and guide behavior. Schemas are the building blocks of cognitive development and are constantly changing as a person gains new experiences.
Some key ideas about schemas:
Definition
A schema is a mental template or category of knowledge that helps a person understand the world.
Development
Schemas are developed through experience. For example, a child might initially use the word "dog" to refer to the first dog they meet, but over time the word will come to represent all dogs.
Assimilation
This is when a person uses an existing schema to interpret a new situation or object. For example, a child might call a skunk a cat when they first see it.
Accommodation
This is when a person changes or creates a new schema to fit new information. For example, a child might initially include a cat in their schema for "dog", but will eventually adapt their schema to include the differences between dogs and cats. The term "schema" comes from the Greek word for "shape" or "plan".
Psychological Types
Personality Type Explained
According to Carl G. Jung's theory of psychological types [Jung, 1971], people can be characterized by their preference of general attitude:
 Extraverted (E) vs. Introverted (I), their preference of one of the two functions of perception:
 Sensing (S) vs. Intuition (N), and their preference of one of the two functions of judging:
 Thinking (T) vs. Feeling (F)
The three areas of preferences introduced by Jung are dichotomies (i.e. bipolar dimensions where each pole represents a different preference). Jung also proposed that in a person one of the four functions above is dominant – either a function of perception or a function of judging. Isabel Briggs Myers, a researcher and practitioner of Jung’s theory, proposed to see the judging-perceiving relationship as a fourth dichotomy influencing personality type [Briggs Myers, 1980]:
 Judging (J) vs. Perceiving (P)
The first criterion, Extraversion – Introversion, signifies the source and direction of a person’s energy expression. An extravert’s source and direction of energy expression is mainly in the external world, while an introvert has a source of energy mainly in their own internal world.
The second criterion, Sensing – Intuition, represents the method by which someone perceives information. Sensing means that a person mainly believes information he or she receives directly from the external world. Intuition means that a person believes mainly information he or she receives from the internal or imaginative world.
The third criterion, Thinking – Feeling, represents how a person processes information. Thinking means that a person makes a decision mainly through logic. Feeling means that, as a rule, he or she makes a decision based on emotion, i.e. based on what they feel they should do.
The fourth criterion, Judging – Perceiving, reflects how a person implements the information he or she has processed. Judging means that a person organizes all of his life events and, as a rule, sticks to his plans. Perceiving means that he or she is inclined to improvise and explore alternative options. All possible permutations of preferences in the 4 dichotomies above yield 16 different combinations, or personality types, representing which of the two poles in each of the four dichotomies dominates in a person, thus defining 16 different personality types. Each personality type can be assigned a 4 letter acronym of corresponding combination of preferences:
The 16 personality types
ESTJ ISTJ ENTJ INTJ
ESTP ISTP ENTP INTP
ESFJ ISFJ ENFJ INFJ
ESFP ISFP ENFP INFP
For example:
 ISTJ stands for Introverted, Sensing, Thinking, Judging
 ENFP stands for Extraverted, iNtuitive, Feeling, Perceiving. [5]
Epigenetics and Aging
This statement highlights the dynamic nature of epigenetics, where our genetic expression can be modified by environmental factors throughout life, meaning our epigenetic profile at birth is not static and will evolve as we experience different life events, similar to how new information that aligns with existing knowledge ("like a square") can be readily integrated into our understanding through a cognitive process called assimilation.
Key points:
Epigenetics are not fixed:
Unlike our DNA sequence which remains largely constant, our epigenome, which controls how genes are expressed, can change throughout life due to environmental influences like diet, stress, and lifestyle choices.
Developmental stages impact epigenetics:
Early childhood is considered a particularly sensitive period where environmental factors can significantly influence epigenetic changes, potentially impacting development and health later in life.
Assimilation analogy:
Just like when encountering a new shape that resembles a familiar one (like a square), our brain can readily incorporate it into existing knowledge structures through the process of assimilation.
Phyloepigenetics
Epigenetics has provided significant evidence that CpG dinucleotides (CpGs) within genetic material are of particular importance for the annotation and function of the genome and the formation of the phenotype, which is continuously shaped by evolutionary interaction with environmental factors. Based on this, it can be concluded that CpGs follow a distinct rate of evolution, compared to all other nucleotide positions. Epigenetics has, meanwhile, provided significant evidence that CpG dinucleotides (CpGs) within genetic material are of particular importance for the annotation and function of the genome and the formation of the phenotype, which is continuously shaped by evolutionary interaction with environmental factors. Based on this, it can be concluded that CpGs follow a distinct rate of evolution, compared to all other nucleotide positions. CpG dinucleotides play a crucial role in epigenetic regulation, which is significantly influenced by environmental factors and has a direct impact on gene expression, they are likely to evolve at a different rate compared to other nucleotide positions in the genome, meaning their evolution is more tightly coupled to environmental changes and phenotypic adaptations. [6]
Postscript
Epigenetics, Health, and Disease
Epigenetics refers to how your behaviors and environment can cause changes that affect the way your genes work. Unlike genetic changes (mutations), epigenetic changes are reversible and do not change the sequence of DNA bases, but they can change how your body reads a DNA sequence.
Gene expression refers to the process of making proteins using the instructions from genes. A person's DNA includes many genes. Each gene includes instructions for making proteins. Additionally, there are other sections of DNA that are not part of any gene but are important for making sure the genes work properly. These DNA sections provide directions about where in the body the protein is made, when it is made, and how much is made.
While changes to the genes (mutations) can change the protein that is made, epigenetic changes affect gene expression to turn genes "on" and "off." This can mean that genes make proteins in cells and tissues where or when they normally would not, or that genes don't make proteins where and when they normally would. It can also mean that genes make more or less of a protein than they normally would.
There are several ways an environmental factor can cause an epigenetic change to occur. One of the most common ways is by causing changes to DNA methylation. DNA methylation works by adding a chemical (known as a methyl group) to DNA. This chemical can also be removed from the DNA through a process called demethylation. Typically, methylation turns genes off and demethylation turns genes on. Thus, environmental factors can impact the amount of protein a cell makes. Less protein might be made if an environmental factor causes an increase in DNA methylation, and more protein might be made if a factor causes an increase in demethylation. [7]
Conclusion
Clearly, it is submitted that there could not exist Schemata without starting with Archetypes of the Collective Unconcious. Just as clearly, there could not exist the Collective Unconcious without Schemata. Thus, when viewing the entire discussion herein, one cannot help but theorize that repetitive emotional experiences in the life of an individual will cause the body and mind to adapt for the individual's survival chances and that of its progeny and its species. This seems to be the underlying "purpose" of life, in addition to providing "existence" (which itself is instantiated solely as a conscious concept) to the presumably eternal "inanimate" universe through deleloping more intricate consciousness, without which there would be no "existence". Mutations alone, in Darwin's Theory, cannot account for evolutionary changes or mind and body adaptations. Evolution is not solely limited to survival of life's random mutations, but may work together with epigenetics, archetypes, adaptation and accomodation.
Eternal Inanimate Universe
References
[1] Corbis, Evolution PBS, Jean Baptiste Lamarck https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/02/3/l_023_01.html#:~:text=According%20to%20Lamarck%2C%20organisms%20altered,inherited%20those%20%22improved%22%20structures
[2] Henriques, Martha, >Can the legacy of trauma be passed down the generations? (26 March 2019) https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190326-what-is-epigenetics
[3] Burggren, Warren, National Library of Medicine, NIH, PubMed Central, Epigenetic Inheritance and Its Role in Evolutionary Biology: Re-Evaluation and New Perspectives (2016 May 25) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4929538/
[4] Brasseur, E., The collective unconscious: from image to symbol (1995 Jan-Feb) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7502672/
[5] Carl G. Jung's Personality Types Explained, https://nja.gov.in/Concluded_Programes_2015-16/P-975_Reading_Material/Session%205%20Personality%20Types.pdf
[6] Santourlidis, Simeon, PubMed Central, Phyloepigenetics (2022 May 15) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9138650/https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9138650/
[7] CDC Genomics and Your Health, Epigenetics, Health, and Disease (JANUARY 31, 2025) https://www.cdc.gov/genomics-and-health/epigenetics/index.html?CDC_AA_refVal=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cdc.gov%2Fgenomics-and-health%2Fabout%2Fepigenetic-impacts-on-health.html
Notes
Burggren, Warren, National Library of Medicine, NIH, PubMed Central, Epigenetic Inheritance and Its Role in Evolutionary Biology: Re-Evaluation and New Perspectives (2016 May 25) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4929538/
https://www.google.com/search?q=epigenetics+v+darwin+evolution&sca_esv=c278979780704cdd&sxsrf=ADLYWIJXYOv7fDyQRchvS2MqrXmOR_-Fbw%3A1728760234491&ei=qskKZ53MHfqo5NoP84jI4QQ&oq=epigenetics+&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiDGVwaWdlbmV0aWNzICoCCAEyBBAjGCcyBBAjGCcyChAAGIAEGBQYhwIyCBAAGIAEGLEDMgUQABiABDIFEAAYgAQyBRAAGIAEMgUQABiABDIFEAAYgAQyBRAAGIAESJpVUKQKWOUbcAJ4AZABAJgBmQGgAfkBqgEDMS4xuAEByAEA-AEBmAIEoAKRAsICBxAjGLADGCfCAgoQABiwAxjWBBhHwgILEAAYgAQYkQIYigXCAgsQLhiABBiRAhiKBZgDAIgGAZAGCpIHAzIuMqAHsRA&sclient=gws-wiz-serp
https://www.google.com/search?q=NIH+piaget+schema&sca_esv=2572e02829722a4f&ei=t75tZ8CtEYjm5NoP37WdyQM&ved=0ahUKEwiA5eCapcaKAxUIM1kFHd9aJzkQ4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=NIH+piaget+schema&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiEU5JSCBwaWFnZXQgc2NoZW1hMgUQIRirAkjUH1DWCFjlG3ABeAGQAQCYAVCgAewDqgEBN7gBA8gBAPgBAZgCCKACgQTCAgoQABiwAxjWBBhHwgIGEAAYDRgewgILEAAYgAQYhgMYigXCAggQABiABBiiBMICCBAhGKABGMMEwgIKECEYoAEYwwQYCpgDAIgGAZAGApIHATigB6QU&sclient=gws-wiz-serp
https://www.google.com/search?q=Your+epigenetics+change+throughout+your+life.+Your+epigenetics+at+birth+are+not+the+same+as+your+epigenetics+during+childhood+or+adulthood.+When+new+information+is+similar+to+what+we+know%2C+say+a+square%2C+it+can+enter+the+brain+through+assimilation.&oq=Your+epigenetics+change+throughout+your+life.+Your+epigenetics+at+birth+are+not+the+same+as+your+epigenetics+during+childhood+or+adulthood.+When+new+information+is+similar+to+what+we+know%2C+say+a+square%2C+it+can+enter+the+brain+through+assimilation.&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBBzM4MGowajSoAgCwAgE&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
https://www.google.com/search?q=The+history+of+epigenetics+is+linked+with+the+study+of+evolution+and+development.+But+during+the+past+50+years%2C+the+meaning+of+the+term+%E2%80%9Cepigenetics%E2%80%9D+has+itself+undergone+an+evolution+that+parallels+our+dramatically+increased+knowledge+of+the+molecular+mechanisms+underlying+regulation+of+gene+expression+in+eukaryotes.+Our+present+definitions+of+epigenetics+reflect+our+understanding+that+%3Cb%3Ealthough+the+complement+of+DNA+is+essentially+the+same+in+all+of+an+organism%E2%80%99s+somatic+cells%2C+patterns+of+gene+expression+differ+greatly+among+different+cell+types%2C+and+these+patterns+can+be+clonally+inherited.%3C%2Fb%3E+This+has+led+to+a+working+definition+of+epigenetics+as+%E2%80%9Cthe+study+of+mitotically+and%2For+meiotically+heritable+changes+in+gene+function+that+cannot+be+explained+by+changes+in+DNA+sequence%E2%80%9D+(Riggs+et+al.+1996%3B+Riggs+and+Porter+1996).+More+recently+added+to+this+definition+is+the+constraint+that+initiation+of+the+new+epigenetic+state+should+involve+a+transient+mechanism+separate+from+the+one+required+to+maintain+it&oq=The+history+of+epigenetics+is+linked+with+the+study+of+evolution+and+development.+But+during+the+past+50+years%2C+the+meaning+of+the+term+%E2%80%9Cepigenetics%E2%80%9D+has+itself+undergone+an+evolution+that+parallels+our+dramatically+increased+knowledge+of+the+molecular+mechanisms+underlying+regulation+of+gene+expression+in+eukaryotes.+Our+present+definitions+of+epigenetics+reflect+our+understanding+that+%3Cb%3Ealthough+the+complement+of+DNA+is+essentially+the+same+in+all+of+an+organism%E2%80%99s+somatic+cells%2C+patterns+of+gene+expression+differ+greatly+among+different+cell+types%2C+and+these+patterns+can+be+clonally+inherited.%3C%2Fb%3E+This+has+led+to+a+working+definition+of+epigenetics+as+%E2%80%9Cthe+study+of+mitotically+and%2For+meiotically+heritable+changes+in+gene+function+that+cannot+be+explained+by+changes+in+DNA+sequence%E2%80%9D+(Riggs+et+al.+1996%3B+Riggs+and+Porter+1996).+More+recently+added+to+this+definition+is+the+constraint+that+initiation+of+the+new+epigenetic+state+should+involve+a+transient+mechanism+separate+from+the+one+required+to+maintain+it&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBBzM5NmowajmoAgCwAgA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Copyright © 2025 David William Jedell
Email: d.w.jedell@gmail.com

Thursday, May 5, 2022

False Memories are a Psychological Reality that Result in Wrongful Convictions

By David William Jedell Updated June 25, 2025
Although our memories seem to be a solid, straightforward sum of who we are, strong evidence suggests that memories are actually quite complex, subject to change, and often unreliable. We reconstruct memories as we age and also as our worldview changes. We falsely recall childhood events, and through effective suggestion, can even create new false memories. We can be tricked into remembering events that never happened, or change the details of things that really did happen. Malleable memory can have especially dire consequences in legal settings; highlighted areas of interest are children as eyewitnesses, sexual abuse, and misidentification. One of the more influential researchers in this area, Elizabeth Loftus of the University of California at Irvine, has been known to work on numerous high-profile legal cases including that of murderer Ted Bundy, the McMartin preschool, Scooter Libby, among many others. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/false-memories
Just because someone tells you something with a lot of confidence and detail and emotion, it doesn't mean it actually happened. You need independent corroboration to know whether you're dealing with an authentic memory, or something that is a product of some other process.”
1. Memory does not work like a video camera, accurately recording all of the details of witnessed events. Instead, memory (like perception) is a constructive process. We typically remember the gist of an event rather than the exact details.
2. When we construct a memory, errors can occur. We will typically fill in gaps in our memories with what we think we must have experienced not necessarily what we actually did experience. We may also include misinformation we encountered after the event. We will not even be consciously aware that this has happened.
3. We not only distort memories for events that we have witnessed, we may have completely false memories for events that never occurred at all. Such false memories are particularly likely to arise in certain contexts, such as (unintentionally) through the use of certain dubious psychotherapeutic techniques or (intentionally) in psychology experiments.
4. There is no convincing evidence to support the existence of the psychoanalytic concept of repression, despite it being a widely accepted concept.
5. There is currently no way to distinguish, in the absence of independent evidence, whether a particular memory is true or false. Even memories which are detailed and vivid and held with 100 percent conviction can be completely false.” https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/what-experts-wish-you-knew-about-false-memories/
Summaries of 46 Cases in Which Mistaken or Perjured. Eyewitness Testimony Put Innocent Persons on Death Row https://dpic-cdn.org/production/legacy/StudyCWC2001A.pdf
The 10 Worst Failures of Eyewitness Testimony https://www.theinvestigators.co.nz/news/the-10-worst-failures-of-eyewitness-testimony-part-one
Loftus and Palmer (1974) showed different videos of a car collision to different participants. Some saw a video of the car crashing at 20mph, others a video of a collision at 30mph and the rest a video of a crash at 40mph. The participants were then asked the speed of the collision in a survey question. The question was identical for each participant except for the verb mentioned when describing the crash. Some verbs suggested that the crash was a minor collision, others a full-blown crash. The experiment results showed that the verb used to describe the crash had more effect on the speed estimated than the actual speed of the car that the participants witnessed in the video. In a second experiment, participants were shown similar videos of a car and later questioned about what they had witnessed. The question asked the subject whether or not they had seen any broken glass following the collision, and again, the verb describing the collision was altered to suggest varying degrees of severity. Both studies suggest that the framing of questions following an event can affect our recollection of it, even after it has been remembered. Even seemingly slight changes, such as verb alterations in Loftus and Palmer's experiments, can create false memories of events. In fact, Loftus found in a later experiment that even the switching of 'a' and 'the' in a question can influence respondents' recollection of an object. Loftus, Miller and Burns (1978) showed participants a number of slides of a car at a junction. They were later questioned regarding the scene. Some were asked whether they had seen 'a' stop sign, others 'the' stop sign. Lotus et al found that those participants asked about 'the' stop sign were more likely to recollect it than other group. The use of the definite article seems to assure people that an object exists without them needing to question its accuracy.
All of these experiments support Loftus' misinformation effect on our memories - the manipulation of past event recollection by misguidance following it; a case of what the German psychologist Georg Müller (1850-1934) may have identified as retroactive interference of information on our memories (Lechner, Squire and Byrne, 1999). Inventing an entire event. We have learnt from these experiments that our memory cannot necessarily be relied on for the recollection of specific details of an event. But we would know if we had been lead to believe that an entire event had been suggested to us - or would we? This question was answered by one of Elizabeth Loftus' psychology students in an experiment to gain extra credits at university: James Coan (1997) produced four booklets containing recollections of events from childhood and gave each to a family member. The stories in the booklets were true except for the one given to Coan's brother - a description of him being lost in a shopping mall as a child, an older man finding him and him then finding his family again.1 Each family member was asked to read through the booklets and familiarise themselves with their contents, after which they were asked to recall the stories. Coan's brother recalled the story with additional details invented by himself, and was unable to identify his as being the falsified story. This lost in the mall technique of implanting false memories was further tested in a formal experiment with Loftus and Jacqueline Pickrell (Loftus and Pickrell, 1995), and shows how we can even adopt rich false memories that are entirely invented. https://www.psychologistworld.com/memory/false-memories-questioning-eyewitness-testimony
Eyewitness testimony, which relies on the accuracy of human memory, has an enormous impact on the outcome of a trial. Aside from smoking pistol, nothing carries as much weight with a jury as the testimony of an actual witness. The memory of witnesses is crucial not only in criminal cases but in civil cases as well--in automobile accident cases, for example, eyewitness testimony carries great weight in determining who is as fault. Implicit in the acceptance of this testimony as solid evidence is the assumption that the human mind is a precise recorder and storer of events. Human beings hold fiercely to the belief that our memories are preserved intact, our thoughts are essentially imperishable, and our impressions are never really forgotten. Sigmund Freud believed that long-term memories lie deep in the unconscious mind, too deep to be disturbed by ongoing events and experiences. Truth and reality, when seen through the filter of our memories, are not objective facts but subjective, interpretive realities. We interpret the past, correcting ourselves, adding bits and pieces, deleting uncomplimentary or disturbing recollections, sweeping, dusting, tidying things up. Thus our representation of the past takes on a living, shifting reality; it is not fixed and immutable, not a place way back there that is preserved in stone, but a living thing that changes shape, expands, shrinks, and expands again, an amoebalike creature with powers to make us laugh, and cry, and clench our fists. Enormous powers--powers even to make us believe in something that never happened. Are we aware of our mind's distortions of our experiences? In most cases, the answer is no. As event sequences unfold memories gradually change, we become convinced that we saw or said or did what we remember. We perceive the blending of fact and fiction that constitutes a memory as completely and utterly truthful. We are innocent victims of our mind's manipulations. The danger of eyewitness testimony is clear: Anyone in the world can be convicted of a crime he or she did not commit, or deprived of an award that is due, based solely on the evidence of a witness who convinces a jury that his memory about what he saw is correct. Why is the eyewitness testimony so powerful and convincing? Because people in general and jurors in particular believe that our memories stamp the facts of experiences on a permanent, non erasable tape, like a computer disk or videotape that is write-protected. For the most part, of course, our memories serve us reasonably well. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/dna/photos/eye/text_06.html
Over time, faulty memories may actually be rewired physically in the brain. Not so long ago, neuroscientists used to think the human brain was 'hard-wired' with fixed circuits of neurons. Now we know better. The brain is actually soft-wired, meaning it is plastic and malleable, undergoing significant changes as we learn and age. https://www.sciencealert.com/profound-brain-changes-of-pregnancy-revealed-in-scientific-first
Researchers estimate that eyewitness error plays a role in half or more of all wrongful felony convictions. https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1140&context=scholar [2]
Two eyewitnesses confidently testified before the San Diego Superior Court that Uriah Courtney was the perpetrator of a monstrous crime. These witnesses maintained with certainty that they had seen this very person, that they remembered him accurately and could identify him from a single photograph. They maintained not simply that Courtney’s was the most familiar or likely face among the lineup photos, but that—against all odds—he was the one. Knowing well the consequences for the accused, and discounting any possibility of error, Erika pleaded to the Court for retribution. The evidence incompatible with Courtney, but the DNA instead matched a former convict living not far from the crime scene. Based on this new evidence, Courtney’s conviction was vacated and he was released from prison in 2013, after having served 8 y behind bars. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5544328/
The leading cause of the wrongful convictions was erroneous identification by eyewitnesses, which occurred 79 percent of the time. In a quarter of the cases, such testimony was the only direct evidence against the defendant. https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/23/us/23bar.html?ref=us&pagewanted=print
Copyright © 2025 David William Jedell Email: d.w.jedell@gmail.com

Objective Reality: A Non Collectivist Philosophy of Time, Space and Now

By David William Jedell UPDATED October 9, 2025 “It's easier to fool people than to convince them th...