All days do
not contain the same number of minutes. Speed does not always equal rate
divided by time. Time can depend upon direction, as a vector; however, it
is used as a scalar. With so many inconsistencies, is time really a
reasonable quantity for accurately describing physical phenomenae?

The answers
to these, and many other puzzling questions, lie in revolutionary
discoveries by Howard Lawrence Schriefer in pursuit of a Unified Theory of
the universe.

Logic

Notice the
analemma, shown at left, as on a globe of earth. It's the figure-eight-shaped legend which
indicates for a given date, how many minutes more or less than 24 hours
the earth's rotation is. That's right, only four days of the year contain
exactly 24 hours. viz., April, 16; June, 14; September 2; and, December,
25. All the other days contain more or les minutes than the 1440 minutes
it takes to make 24 hours.

All other
days differ from twenty-four hours by anywhere from about 16 minutes less
to 14 minutes more. The actual variation of length of days is given by the Equation of Time, which can be computed. For convenience and
simplicity, society including scientists, adopted an artificial system of
time wherein every day is said to have exactly 24 hours.

Traveling
1042mph at the equator from west to east keeps one neck-and-neck with the
sun. Traveling 1042 mph at latitude 39° from west to east for one hour puts
one way ahead of the sun, about 232 miles into the next time zone. Or, was
it an hour, since the time zone was used up and then some? Notice some
complexity in the "simple" rule that speed equals distance divided by
time?

Time, on
earth, also appears to depend upon direction, because the speed of
rotation of the earth needs to be added when traveling west to east and
subtracted when traveling east to west. A time zone of one hour on earth
is 15° of longitude, or roughly 1042 miles at the equator. The number of
miles between time zones decreases from the equator toward the poles of
earth. At latitude 40°, say near Denver, CO, the time zone is
approximately 798 miles long. Halfway across this time zone, or 399 miles
represents a half hour. About two hundred miles represents about 15
minutes. Subdividing the time zone into football field lengths of 300 feet
requires 14045 subdivisions of the time zone; or, 1/4 of a second
difference from one end of the football field to the other. That is, if
the football field is laid out east-west. The difference in time from one
side of the field to the other is very close to zero seconds. So, time
depends upon direction?

Wait, it gets even better. Say you are sitting at the
fifty yard line. A runner is at each goal line. The east goal line is a
quarter second away from the west goal line. The runners start at your
given signal, and sprint toward opposite goals at the same "speed", and
check the stopwatches at the end. The east-to-west runner reads his time
less 1/4 second. The west-to-east runner reads his time plus 1/4 second.
They both ran the same "speed", but their times are 1/2 second apart. Did
they pass each other exactly at the fifty yard line? Suppose they ran the
same "speed" at Bangor, ME or at Brownsville, TX? What effect does all
this have on radar guns and speed limits at different latitudes and
longitudes? Bottom line is, we don't know what "speed" means, even though
it is based upon distance and time. Since distance is a basic tangible
quantity for science, how reliable is the quantity known as "time?"

Equation of Time

With such inconsistencies in time associated with direction
and location variability, it is too inconsistent for use as an independent
variable in the design of such devices as altimeters and heart monitors.
What was Einstein thinking about when he claimed that mass and length change
with "speed", when "speed" is so interwoven with time? Why does science
predict changes in tangible quantities such as mass and length (matter and
space), while maintaining a fabricated man-made definition, "time", as
all-controlling and absolute?

Caution

Since time is
defined as a quantity of absolutely equal increments, which have been shown to be
directionally dependent, it is improper to apply it to the irregular phases
of a three-dimensional universe as a scalar quantity. Perhaps instead of a
quantity such as "time", we should use the inverse of a standard universal
frequency, unrelated to the misinterpretations of "time" which have been
artificially assimilated into our cultures. Thus, time would be a real and
scalar quantity, not subject to dilation.

TIME IS TOO INACCURATE TO BE USED
AS AN INDEPENDENT VARIABLE