 Simon, I'm very glad that you agreed to talk to me about chronos, because I was really not sure you had thought about this concept, you know, when we made programs back in the 90s. And at the very end of the last show we did on the radio in Israel, in Hebrew, from right to left, you mentioned the chrono, which was very surprising. So let's revisit the chrono, and we decided to call this talk its high time to define time. But I would also like to catch another concept, a small concept, the concept of God, which somehow seems to be linked to the question of time. And I'll open with a quotation from Sholamit HaLeven, who was a famous Israeli author, writer. And I once asked her what she thought about God, and she said, well, God is the other language. So, here I am. She almost anticipated my work, because my work is about language. Let's hear about chronons then. First of all, I hate to burst your bubble, but actually our talks were in the 80s. We are much older than that. In the 80s, you think? But late 80s, maybe. Actually mid 80s. But late 80s, I think you're right. And so my work, the chronon field theory, was first developed in my PhD, in my PhD in physics, in 1982, 1983. By the time we had our chats, it was already four years into its existence. But having tried to communicate it, even to physicists, even once to Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner. Possibly the second brightest mind in physics after Einstein. Having tried to communicate the chronon field theory and having failed consistently, I gave up on it. I gave up on it until a group of very, very talented, I would say geniuses, Israeli geniuses actually, all of them Israeli, picked up a copy of my PhD in the Library of Congress. They didn't know what they were doing. They were searching for time and they found a copy of my PhD in the Library of Congress and they picked it up. And they fell in love with the theory. And ever since then, this group of physicists, all of them are physicists actually, by now, well over 50 physicists from seven countries, they've been developing this thing. Not only Israeli. Not on Israel anymore. Not on Israel anymore. Although the main contributor to this very day is in Israeli, his name is Eitan Suchard. So he's in Israel. He lives in the United States now. So they took the theory further, way further than, I mean, it's no longer my thing. You don't mean Eitan Suchard, the one that is on L-Alflights, the one who presents all kinds of mental tricks? Oh, I don't believe so. No, okay. He's a computer scientist and a physicist. No, I don't believe he would be presenting tricks. Because his name is also Eitan Suchard. He didn't go that far. No, no. He's a computer scientist and a physicist. He lives in the United States. And others, there's both of them, there's others. And they worked together to develop the theory. And they took it so far that it's no longer mine. It's no longer mine. I was kind of a catalyst for the impetus for the development. Still, most of, if not all, of my original ideas are still in the evolved form of the theory. And so to answer your question, after this very long introduction, which I wanted to put a bit in historical context, what's going on. To answer your question, my work, what I try to do in my work is two-fold. I try to introduce a new language to describe reality, in other words, to do physics. And the second thing I try to do is to deconstruct Einstein and to say that time is not a dimension, but a force. It's a force. The test was this. Can we take these two underlying assumptions? And of course, in this limited time frame, and I kind of delve into the equations and so on. But can we take these two principles? Which two principles? New language, with one word, time. Not mass, not momentum, no other words. No vector. Nothing, just time. Time. If we take this monosyllabic new language and we couple it with a force field, the way we describe forces, which we call fields. If we couple these two, can we then derive all the equations in all the fields of physics that had ever existed? You were trying to create a tau theory? Yes, a kind of tau theory. A theory of everything. Yes, but there's a test for this. And the test is if you take your assumptions and couple them, can you, based on these assumptions alone, derive the totality of physics? And what these physicists succeeded to do over the past six years is to derive all of physics. Now I'm comfortable to say this, because they had completed the work about two or three months ago. And they had derived all of physics. Cosmology, particle theory, chromodynamics, electrodynamics. As large as cosmology. Everything. Let's cut it short. Everything. Newtonian physics, Einsteinian physics. You name it, they succeeded from these two principles. So the question arises, of course, now that we know that these two principles give us the totality and the entirety of physics. What are these principles? What are we talking about? So the first thing I wanted to do is not to repeat Einstein's mistake. Einstein's mistake was not in developing relativity theories. Relativity theories are not mistaken. Of course. They're very good theories. They've been proven time and again and so on and so forth. Are we 18 minutes into the totality? No, no, no, we're 18 minutes left. We are still 18 minutes left. But what I consider to be his mistake is that he did not invent a new language. Essentially Einstein's language is Newton's language. They're using the same concepts. Yes, Einstein looked at it from the left side, while Newton was looking at it from the right side. It's like the blind man and the elephant, you know? Yes, yes. Trust me, the elephant. One of them is holding the totality. They each touch a different part of the elephant's body. But it's the same elephant. It's the same elephant. It's the same elephant. Einstein and Newton are working on the same elephant. And I wanted a new elephant. I wanted to introduce a new elephant into the room. Like Shulamita Revan's new language. Yes, that's what I'm saying. It's very apt, actually. It's very apt what you said. Because I introduced a totally new language. And I said I am not going to use the old language. I refuse to speak Hebrew. I'm going to speak English, you know? So I'm not going to introduce... And the new language consisted of one word, time. That's all. That's the language with one word. I said to myself, I must derive all the equations of physics using one word and one assumption. Now, this is what is known as Occam's razor. Parsimony. If there is a multiplication of words and a multiplication of entities, probably your theory is wrong. That's Occam's razor. And what had happened in physics over the decades, especially the last 100 years, is an explosion, a supernova of entities, new entities, and supernova of new words and new concepts. Which is a very bad sign. It's a sign that we have lost our way. Give me examples of... I don't know if there's well over 100 and something elementary particles. There are models for particles and models for gravity. No, but that's about particles, not about time. Nobody thought of bringing in particles into the theory of time. Everyone realizes that physics is in crisis because it has too many concepts. Too many entities. Too many laws and rules. So everyone is trying to unify the theory. To reduce it, Einstein said we should have one equation. That's one equation, the God equation. Should have one equation. And I said rather than going from multiplicity to unity, I'm going to start with unity. Why do I have to go from multiplicity? I'm going to start with unity. And I said, what should I use? Maybe momentum. Should I use force? Should I use mass? Should I use energy? Should I use space? What would capture all of these? And so the only thing that captures all of these is time. Because in time, given time, all these things happen. If I give you... If I phrase out, had I decided on energy, energy doesn't give you time. Energy doesn't give you many elements in physics. Energy gives you mass. Energy is a form of mass. A form of mass gives you energy. Energy gives you momentum and force. But it doesn't give you many other things. Okay, so if I take space, space gives me gravity, curvature of space, gives me mass to some extent, but nothing else. So each of these concepts can give you some other concepts, can lead to some other concepts, but not to others. There's only one concept that leads to everything. Time. Given enough time, you have mass and you have space and you have force and you have momentum and you have everything else. Given enough time, everything happens in time, in due time. So I said, okay, so let me rewrite physics using time. But then I said, if I use time as a field of potentials, because it's a field of potentials where everything can happen, mass can happen, force can happen, momentum can happen. So it's a field. Field of potentials. Potentialities. But we know in physics that whenever we have a field, we have a force. There's no such thing in physics as filled without force. You have electromagnetic field. So whenever you have a field, you have a force. So I said, this should not be an exception. If time is a field of potentials, then it's a force. Because we don't have an exception. Okay. Okay, so it's a force. So time is a force. Time is a force, not a dimension. And then I went to Thrasda, I said, wait a minute. If time is a force, we know that all forces are mediated via particles. And or waves? Particles are described potentially as waves. Okay. Forces are mediated through particles. Particles. Even mass is mediated through a particle known as Viggs boson. So particles mediate the physical world. They are like couriers. They are like Federal Express. They have the small vans and they carry energy. Yes. They carry mass. They carry, you know. Right. They're like couriers. So I said time should not be an exception. If time is a field and time is a force, there should be a particle of time to mediate time. And then I came to Cronons. Cronons are these particles. But then I went a step further. I don't know if you're following me. I'm following you. So far I know that we've reached the, you know. I'm trying to make it as simple as possible. The particle called Cronon. Yes. And now I'm trying to understand what it does. But I'm showing you the heritage, the chain of thought. Of thought. The chain of thought. And then I said, okay, there's this particle. But time is a field of potentiality. So there must be a way for time to become mass. There must be a way for time to become momentum. There must be a way for time to become force and energy. There must be a way to realize these potentials in the field. Yes. How? So I said, well, the only solution is for the Cronon to be in different states. Not in a single state, but to change states. We call this process excitation. So the Cronon is excited. A little like me. The Cronon is excited. And when it passes through various excitations, and it disrupts the field. It disrupts the field. And it creates events. The disruption of the field is an event. This event could be, if we look at an event this way, it's mass. If we look at it the other way, it's energy. It depends on how you look at these events. They translate into the totality of physics. So Cronons are changed. You can think of it this way, if you want, in layman's terms. Cronons shape shift. They change shape. Okay. Cronons, so they disguise themselves. They wear clothes. If they wear a certain type of clothing, they become mass. If there were another type of clothing, they become energy. Another type, they become force. So the excitation states disrupt the field, literally disrupt it, and create what we call reality. Is there a specific number of excitation stages? This is a question that is excellent. So, almost I could begin to suspect that you're a physicist. Because there is a Pauli principle that says that excitation states are quantum. In other words, they are not continuous, but they are disparate. So yes, the Cronon excitation states are disparate. They obey the Pauli exclusion principle. Disparate. But we can map each excitation state to the old language of physics. Like these excitation states were used to be called in physics mass. Mass, okay. And so on. So we have a dictionary. We have like a dictionary. Okay, so this excitation stage is mass and this excitation state is energy. This excitation state is force. If I may, there's another example. I learned many years ago that actually the Indian belief is a monotheistic belief. So I said, but you have Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu. And they said, well, there are only manifestations of the one Godhead. Holy Trinity. You don't need to go so far. Holy Trinity. You could even say that. Holy Trinity. It's one God, but it's three manifestations. So here we have... Exactly. It's one field of potential. Field. Which is where there is a single particle. Particle. And this single particle changes its shape. Where's different... Geises. Geises. And becomes what we used to call the old physics. Even Einsteinian physics becomes... So how does it become excited? Why would it become excited? And by what and by whom? Yeah. How would it... It acquires... It accelerates. It moves. The field of potential is a field of potential because it has kind of latent energy in it. So the particle... Think of it... The particle surfs the wave. Think of this field as an ocean. So the particle is surfing the waves. Okay. And he's accelerating. As it accelerates, it creates all these things. Mass and so on. So this is in a... In a natural. But here's the beauty. The beauty is that by using essentially two principles. Time as a force with a field. And a single particle in different excitation states. Which is infinitely simpler than current physics. Like infinitely. Simple. And current physics is an abomination. This is much simpler. If you use this, you can derive every theory ever invented. In physics. Including string theory. Including quantum field theory. The latest. The cutting edge theories in physics. If you use these two simple principles. You can derive them fully. You get them fully. So I give you an example to... Just to... I said that the chrono has excitation states. Yes. When the chrono gets excited, like me. It vibrates. It begins to vibrate normally. Yes. It accelerates. Of course, creates vibrations. These vibrations are what we call strings in string theory. Okay. Because strings in string theory are tiny vibrations. Vibrations. Tiny, tiny vibrations that look like strings. So they are tiny vibrations. So when the chrono vibrates, gets excited, accelerates. Never mind how you call it. It becomes a string in effect. In other words, the two theories intermesh perfectly. Simulously. And my theory yields all the equations of string theory. Without any effort. I have another question. And this will prove that I am not a physicist. Has anybody ever seen a chrono? No. You don't need to see... No one has seen a quark. Okay. No one has seen a quark. We don't pretend in physics, at least good physicists, don't pretend that they are talking about reality. Physics deals with one subject matter. Physics. That's a subject matter of physics. So that's a language? It's a language that deals with language. That deals with language. And then there is a correspondence theory of truth. This language should somehow resonate with our observations. Okay. And we have processes, the scientific method, falsifiability. We have ways to test how close is the language to our observations. But we don't pretend to put our finger on quark, on a quark. A quark is a useful language element. It's a useful language, a useful metaphor. Okay. Why it's useful? Because it yields predictions that we can then falsify by observations. End of story. Same with my theory. It's not a question whether there is a chrono. A chrono is a language element. And if the chrono theory yields all the other theory in physics which are already tested, these theories are verified. Yes. For example, you can derive relativity theory totally from chrono theory. Okay. No problem whatsoever. That was actually one of the easiest tasks. But deriving string theory and quantum field theory was much more difficult. But it's also... All the theories of physics can be derived from this and because they are verified, chrono field theory is verified, actually. So it's like Esperanto. I would come with some language. And this language would live one word and one... Well, Esperanto has many words. One word and one grammatic principle. Imagine. I come with one word and one grammatic principle. You can't express... Right, exactly. This language is useless. And then I show you that through clever manipulation you can actually derive not only Hebrew but all the languages of the world. Okay, okay, okay. And not only all the existing languages of the world but every possible... The artificial languages. Every possible language. Including artificial languages. Including what we call formal languages. This is chrono field theory. That's the power of chrono field theory. Thank you.