# The Myth of Math

Here we are in the year 2009, at least that’s what the calendar on the wall tells me.

But there is something more to this, which we seldom consider and that is the validity of something as commonly accepted as one year, ten years, a hundred years, a thousand years, a million years or a billion years.

A year is measured in terms of one complete anual cycle…once around the sun equals one year.

But our planet earth is not the only planetary body circling the sun and a year is different for each and every one of them.

Of course this counting the years is helpful and somewhat convenient for those involved in the various aspects of business, but how did it get stirred into the scientific mix of things?

Just how scientific is it to refer to thousands of years, millions of years or billions of years?

We have this perception of the earth’s age, the age of the universe and the age of man etc.

But does it have any real meaning?

We assume time to be arranged in a uniform sequence of linear durations, but there is no evidence to support such an idea.

Such an assumption does appear both rational and logical, but is it?

I don’t believe it is, because time is continually changing in value if for no other reason than the dynamic nature of universe.

In physics we find that both past and future exist simultaneously with something we call the present stuck in the middle, but even the present moment is somewhat uncertain as there is no absolute present moment by which to distinguish past from future.

If the past and future exist simultaneously, there is no linear sequence of time extending back into the past or ahead into the future, as all time exists at the same time.

Yet, we find it necessary to ignore this annoying fact and count the years gone by and the years still to come.

Where we really fall off the rails is when we use this process of accounting to determine the age and size of universe.

In this respect we employ astronomical units or light years to express the age and size of universe, both of which are based on the assumed accuracy of our accounting.

We even have astronomers suggesting it possible to observe the early history of the universe through the Hubble, as though time remained uniform from one end of the universe to the other and distance was of little consequence.

I can see the past says the astronomer…as it took billions of years for the light of these distant galaxies to reach the lens of the Hubble.

Say what?

If the past and future exist simultaneously how should it be possible to look through a telescope and see a past condition of universe?

In reality we are viewing a simultaneous condition of universe remaining relative to the Hubble and that view involves both past and future conditions associated with those bodies observed in space.

So what exactly is going on here?

We are being sold an invalid bill of goods, a bogus perception void of scientific meaning.

The universe is dynamic and in a constant state of change, which includes time, space and motion.

And up until quite recently science was certain that the expansion of universe was slowing down, but now realizes that the rate of expansion is accelerating.

Since then it has been stated;…the rate of expansion was slowing prior to 5 billion years ago.  Of course no one can explain why this sudden change occurred 5 billion years ago, but that’s the story.

Why anyone would think the expansion of universe would be slowing is beyond me, as it seems quite clear that the rate of expansion should be accelerating.

And when you consider the fact that there are distant galaxies expanding at close to the apparent speed of light you have to wonder how anyone could seriously consider it possible for the speed of light to be a governing factor in determining the size and age of universe.

Perhaps the whole purpose of the exercise is to assure a lot of stupid people that they are indeed quite brilliant…if only because they can in fact see the emperors new clothes.

The numbers don’t lie…of course they don’t…that’s what makes the myth so convincing.

But keep in mind…we invented the numbers, we invented the terms of reference, we invented the concepts of accounting and in the process created the myth of math.