Resolution Advisories of Hypothesis for the Root Cause of Loneliness Epidemic

I have never been educated in this way by my parents.
I have learnt some basics from them.
1. You can run 10 KM by yourself.
2. If you share than you can run 100 KM with your friends.

I think a social treatment program should plan for parents.

Basics:
1. If you work with your friends / team than you can success better together.
2. Sharing never hurt you.
3. Always malicious persons may exist in any community. If you want to protect yourself than you need information to be able to identify those malicious persons because they have specific behaviors.
4. Teams never race but share the study and success.
5. All games are designed to race. Life is not a game but learning, sharing process.
6. You can share the gain. 
7. You can share the wealth. This does not make you poor but not sharing makes the community poor.
8. Poor community is the root cause of all problems. Because you can not let a hunger understand of your luxury needs.
9. Tuned community is the shared community which is the key role of reaching to optimal social satisfaction.
10. One hand is alone hand but lots of hands can turn a desert to garden of eden.

Hope this helps to the future generations.


PS. to the future: (I know it is meaningless/ridiculus today in 21st century)
I am pretty sure you can design algorithm based on the basics above for any specific condition. However you should keep 5 perpectives in a balance which means preserve total balance!  
1. Individual
2. Community
3. Earth
4. Solar System
5. Galactic Balace
This 5 perspective is Total Balance. 

Hypothesis for the Root Cause of Loneliness Epidemic

There are tons of conversations & study about the side effects of loneliness however I couldn’t find a study about the root cause of loneliness but everybody is ready to put the blame on social media.

If you dive into health issues of loneliness than you can find many disease such as heart attack, stroke with percentages. Also you may find age group 17-22 is the hightest group in loneliness epidemic however the number decreases with age.

Well, what could be the reason?

1. All adults know that population increases and finding a good job is getting harder, even living on a better area, renting house or buy a house. 
2. All adults know that no one can live without earning well. This opportunity decreases because of the crowd.

These two option is very common and every one believe this reality.

Well, What can cause this simple reality?

1. It may effect all parents' perception and perspective to the life.
2. If this is true than How a parent induce (suggest) their children about to stand/behave in community (society), at school, at work?
3. You may find those; 

• This is a wild race.
• Keep your secrecy.
• Don't share your ideas with others if it does not gain to you anything.
• Do not open your heart to others easily. (I do trust you but I do not trust others. They may hurt you)
• If you want to live good than you must earn a lot.
• Or If you want to live good than you must find a rich person to feed all of your needs.
• If you want to be a person to be respected than you should be a winner / rich / accomplished person / successful.

Once a child to be induced with the ideas above than What do you expect to be?

As a conclusion;

My hypothesis is the fear from population and lack of jobs cause parents to effect their children. This fear and aims creates the root cause of loneliness epidemic in years in young generation.

So What happens? If this belief and behavior becomes normal and general (common) than it causes loneliness as a culture in young generation and in the future also.

This means; side effects of diseases are not based on loneliness but all those side effects (anxiety, depression, heart attact, stroke etc.)are based on the fears which has been fed by parents.

As a last word; Once belief become behavior than wealth become the barrier in community which cause more loneliness and social hierarchy.

Neden buradayız? Neden yaşıyoruz? Yaşamın anlamı nedir?

Bu soruları sormaya başlamadan önce bazı temel bilgilere sahip olmamız gereklidir.

Üzerinde yaşadığımız gezegen "dünya" güneşin etrafında döner. Güneş ise içinde bulunduğumuz gökadanın (galaksinin) merkezi etrafında döner. Samanyolu galaksisi ise sonsuz uzayın derinliklerine doğru yol alır. Dünyanın, güneş etrafındaki bir turu yaklaşık 365 gün alır. Aynı zamanda Güneşin, kendi turunu tamamlaması yaklaşık 226 milyon yıl alır. Galaksimiz ise saatte yaklaşık 792,000 km/sa hızla yol alır. Hızların toplamı ise yaklaşık 1,500,000 km/sa eder. Bu açıdan baktığımızda, üzerinde yaşadığımız gezegen "dünya", uzayın içinde bizi taşıyan ve saatte 1,500,000 km/sa hızla giden bir uzay aracıdır.  Bu arada, yalnızca samanyolu galaksisinde yüz milyarlarca gezegen ve yaklaşık 200 milyar adet güneş (yıldız) vardır. Bu sayılar, yalnızca tek bir galaksi içindir. Yani Samanyolu galaksisi için. Evrende hesap edilmiş 12 trilyon galaksi (gökada) bulunur. Aslında bu sayının çok daha fazla olma ihtimali vardır. Daha gelişmiş teleskoplar yapıldıkça, daha net sonuçlara ulaşılıyor.

Şimdi bu soruları tekrar soralım. Neden buradayız? Neden yaşıyoruz? Yaşamın anlamı nedir?
Bilim hakkında yeterli bilgiye sahip olunmadığı zamanlarda; anlam bilim yani ilim icat edilmiş. Önce Mezopotamyalı ve çok daha sonra  Antik Yunan düşünürleri bu konuya kafa yormuşlar. Yaşamın bir anlamı olup olmadığını; ellerinde hiç bir bilimsel veri olmadan anlamaya çalışmışlar. Dinler, bu konuda bazı fikirler vermiş elbet ama dinin asıl görevi gereği dünyada dengeli ve mutlu yaşamı işaret etmişler. Fakat, insan bununla yetinmeyip anlam bilimi icat ederek; kendince çıkarımlarda bulunmaya başlamış. Böylece fraksiyonlar oluşmuş. Her düşünür, kendince bir anlam "mana" yüklemeye çalışmış.

Şimdi gezegenimize yani dünyaya dönüp bakalım. Dünyadaki yaşam bitkiler ile başlayıp hayvanlar ile gelişmiş. Bir ormanı analiz ettiğinizde şu verilere ulaşıyorsunuz. Ağaçlar ve bitkiler evrimsel süreçte en gelişmiş türü temsil ediyor. Ardından böcekler, karıncalar, arılar ve kuşlar geliyor. Bir ormanda hayvan hayatının oluşabilmesi için zemini bitkilerle ortaklaşa çalışan bu canlılar sağlıyor. Böylece hayvanların doğmasına ve gelişmesine imkan sağlanmış oluyor. Elbette akarsu, yağmur yani su diğer çok önemli faktör. İnsan, bu süreçte epey sonra oluşabilmiş bir canlı türü. En zeki ve yetenekli olduğuna inanan bir canlı türüdür. Oysa, ağaçların yanında evrimsel gelişmişliği çok geridedir. Bizim teknoloji ile yapabildiklerimizi ağaçlar milyonlarca yıldır zaten yapıyorlar. Örneğin iletişim. Toprağı kullanarak, çok ciddi uzaklara haber gönderebiliyorlar. Kendi aralarında iletişim var. Anıları var. Ebeveynlik yapıyorlar. Görme yetenekleri oldukça gelişkin. Elbette her canlı besin zincirindeki rolüne göre görme yeteneği kazanır. Dalga boyu yani spekturum açısından bakıldığında bizden çok daha geniş bir aralığı görebilirler. Böylece mevsimlerin değişimini, henüz değişmeye başlamadan bilirler. Koku alma yetenekleri olağanüstüdür. Neyse, bitkilerin muhteşem dünyasını anlamak yerine konumuza dönelim.

Anlam bilimciler, kendilerinin anlattıkları anlamların ulaşılmaz nitelikte üstün olduklarına inanırlar. İnanç, komik bir ifadedir. Çünkü elinizde hiçbir veri, delil olmadan yalnızca inanırsınız. Onlar da yüzyıllar boyunca böyle yaparak peşlerinden yüz binlerce insanı sürüklemişler. Fakat hiçbirinin aklına aynı soruyu örneğin karıncalara sormak gelmemiş. Hey karınca kardeş; yaşamın anlamı nedir? Zor şartlara hazırlanmak, çalışmak, korunmak, öğrenmek, sistemler geliştirmek ve üreyerek neslin devamını sağlamak diyebilirler. Aslında biz insanlar için de durum benzerdir. Biz de toplayıcıyız. Karıncalar, tarım yaparlar. Biz de yaparız. Sonuç olarak benzer amaçlarımız var. Bir canlının yaşama amacı; onun varlık nedenini de oluşturmaz mı? Diyebilirsiniz ki;  bizler içinde bulunduğumuz uzaya da ulaşabiliyoruz. Evet! Bunun öğrenmek ve anlamak dışında nasıl bir anlamı olmasını isterdiniz?
Fakat biz insanların ruhları var. Peki. Eğer bizim ruhumuz varsa; diğer tüm canlıların da vardır. Ne farkımız var ki? Yok hayır. Onların ruhları yok. Yalnız bizim var. Vayy! Ego hissediyorum. Bizi içten kemiren ve öldüren ego'dan başka nedir ki? Savaştıran, hep daha fazlasını isteten; yetinme duygusunu körelten; durmadan daha fazla, daha fazla...yetmez, bu da yetmez daha fazla dedirten nedir? Ego! Büyüklenme. Böbürlenme. Kendini önce diğer canlılardan daha sonra da diğer insanlardan üstün görme hastalığı.

Sonuç olarak lafı çok uzatmadan bağlamak istiyorum. Anlam ve ruh peşinde koşmak yerine daha fazla öğrenme ve öğrendiklerinizi anlama peşinde koşun.

Bu arada şu videoyu izlemeyi ihmal etmeyin :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4y1WDl-WP8

Klasik Müzik Akademileri

Dünyanın en ünlü kentleri, başkentleri klasik müzik akademilerine ev sahipliği yaparlar. Böylece her yıl on binlerce genç bu akademilere girerek müzik dünyasında bir yere sahip olabilmeyi hayal ederler. Bir yere sahip olma ifadesi; genelde ünlü olma, kabul görmüş müzisyenler arasında olabilme, dünyayı konserler sebebiyle dolaşma ve zengin olabilme hayallerini besler. Eğitimlerin temelinde müziğe değer katma, geliştirme, ileri taşıma gibi konular yer almaz. Daha çok eskiler alır, eskiler satarlar. Mezun olana dek bunu sürdürür; akıllarını eskilerle doldururlar. Bu açıdan bakıldığında bu akademilerin tamamı müzik tarihi öğretmektedir. Aslında müzik akademisi değillerdir. Tarih okullarıdır. Bunu ifade ederken; lokal folklorü dışarıda bırakıyorum. Çünkü folklör, ilgili toplumun kültürel parçasıdır. Gelişmeye yönelik çok bir çaba harcanmamasını kısmen doğal kabul etmek mümkündür. Çünkü folklörü derleyip, yeniden yorumladığınızda, folklorik çağdaş müzik elde edersiniz. Toplumun eski kültürünü, yeni kuşaklara aktarmak istemesini anlamak mümkündür. Ancak klasik çok sesli müziğin folklorik bir yapı olarak algılanıp, nesilden nesile aktarılması bana göre anlamsızdır ve hatta müziğin gelişiminin önünü tıkayan bir anlayıştır. Bunun yapılması iki nedene dayanabilir. Ya eğitim politikası köhnedir. Ya da emperyalist politik bir amaç güdülmektedir.

Örneğin Avusturya'nın Arnold Schönberg'e sahip çıkmaması çok anlaşılır değildir. Modern müziğe en büyük katkıyı 12 tonlu yapısı ile Schönberg sağlamıştır. John Cage, Henry Cowell, Vincent Persichetti, Sergei Prokofiev gibi müzisyenlerin katkıları da ayrı tutulamaz. Klasik müzik, temelde dans figürlerine dayanır. Bu nedenle movement'lar yani hareketlerden (yürüyüşlerden) meydana gelmiştir. Bu movement'ları (müzikal yürüyüşleri) eski Avrupa saraylarındaki dansların müziği olarak ifade edebiliriz. Daha eskiye gittiğinizde Bach döneminde kilise için yapılan müzikeri bulursunuz. Daha da eskiye gittiğinizde Pagan müziklerini görürsünüz. Pagan ve kilise ikilisinde madrigallleri görebilirsiniz. Avrupa kıtasında daha eskiye gitme şansınız yoktur. Artık Mezopotamya tarafına dönmelisiniz. Burada mezopotamya müziğinin köklerini bulabilirsiniz. Neyse, burada müzik tarihini tartışmak istemiyorum. Fakat elbette müzik tarihini bilmek önemlidir. Çünkü insan, mağaralara resimler çizdikten hemen sonra müzik ile kendini ifade etmeye başlamıştır. Hatta konuşma ve yazı dilinin gelişmesinden bile eskiye dayanır.

Fakat üzerinde durmak istediğim müzik akademilerinin tarih dışında bir bakış açısına sahip olmamaları ve öğrencilerine gelişmeye açık bakışı veremedikleri için müzikal yaşamı kapitalist anlayış satın almıştır. Böylece "pop" çağı doğmuştur. Popüler müzik, hızlı üretilen ve çabuk tüketilen, sahne şovlarına dayanan bir yapıdır. Çiğne ve tükür içinde üretilir ve tüketilir. Rock müzik pop müzikle aynı kaderi paylaşır. Jazz başlı başına ayrı bir konu. Hatta ayrı bir kültürdür demek doğru olur. Onun için burada o konuya girmeyeceğim. 

Eğer dünyanın önde gelen müzik akademileri, müziğin gelişimi ve halka ulaşması konusunda programlara öncülük etmezlerse büyük ihtimalle yüzyıl içinde tarihi eserler müzelerine dönüşeceklerine inanıyorum. Elbette kendini elitin eliti zanneden bir takım primitif entelektüel lümpenler olacaktır.

Physics in Wonderland - Collection of some of my tweets.

* Antihydrogen and hydrogen are similar in spectrum results. Well, when antimatter and matter collides creates another particle + energy. However it is invisible to eyes. So this creates another question. Why dark matter & dark energy should be different? At the very beginning there were tons of collisions. Some of them may be create matter and some of them antimatter. Matter and antimatter collisions might be create another particle and energy. Dark! Because we can not see with telescopes and can not observe. Dark means who knows. Dark means we can not observe. Dark means we can not test. Dark is a funny terms in physics.
OK. Let’s turn to reality. Observers have observed 2 things and put predictions for it. Galaxies are rotating faster than expected. Also red shift says galaxies are getting far from each other and universe is expanding faster than expected. So what were the predictions? Dark matter triggers galaxies rotate faster. Dark energy triggers the expansion. So what did they do? We have 2 unexpected reality so they have put 2 unknown variables into formula. Well, what do they expect? Now they expect to solve 2 unknown variables instead of 2 unexpected phenomenon. This is not a brilliant way to solve the problem. Isn’t it? Well, new observations showed some galaxies have no enough gaps for dark matter. This caused impact on the predictions. No, I can not say the solution but I can say 2 options. Predictions are may be incorrect. Observers should create more sensitive telescopes. If predictions are incorrect than some formulas are incorrect. If formulas are incorrect than some models are incorrect. If model is incorrect than start from scratch.
Also I can put 2 optinal hypothesis. Let's forget blackholes for a minute because I think blackholes are whirls in space and those are not stable and infinite. Well,
1. If there is no big bang and all galaxies are in a orbit around the center of universe than you may observe they are getting far from each other depends on our lifetime. Because our lifetime is not long enough to observe whole orbiting movement. But We observe similar red shift according to the orbit of each galaxy. You may understand this system as self feeding and infinite.(We are all authority-centered thinking creatures which cause to think there should be starting point and all others should follow or orbit around a massive something. But may be orbits of all galaxies are jut angular momentum orbits. The center of universe is a virtual center and may change according to angular momentum of vortex orbit of billions of galaxies in a long long process.)
2. If big bang had really happpened and if there is no center of universe than each galaxy may break magnetic buble force (in other words in daily language: gravity)of other galaxies which makes galaxies are getting faster once magnetic bubles force effect getting less depends on velocity of galaxies and distance among them. However superconductivity should be added into electromagnetic power theory of gravity to reach full understanding. Thus we can observe that universe is expanding and getting faster according to red shift.
* The question is why quantum world vs normal matter world should be different? Is it just a perception of us? Well, gravity! Electrons(fermions) orbit around the nucleus (not fully correct but different energy states of fermions around the nucleus). Earth orbit around the sun (not fully correct but vortex orbit. May be we can it different energy states of earth around the sun). Why should different physics work among those examples? What kind of energy keep electron in the orbit of nucleus? So what kind of energy keep the earth in the orbit of sun? Another question. Electrons has two states. Matter and wave. Earth? Well, electron & positron collides and w boson produces. Why should it be different in normal matter world? What cause us to think all those are different? 3 quarks + gluon creates an atom in short explanation. OK. What are all normal matter world made from? * Why Albert Einstein had refused & deprecated Quantum Mechanics? Some says He had never understood QM. I think he had understood perfectly that QM would have explained truths which might be destroyed his science fiction world who sown into science mind. Can’t you understand? e is faster than c in Cerenkov radiation. What does it mean? C is not the top limit. Second, e= mc2 fails again. Also you may aware about the CERN Opera detector experiment about neutrino. The result was "The Neutrino Anormaly" because results were showing that neutrinos were faster than light. Observers had found the results shocking because they were under the ridiciculus influence of Einstein's physics in wonderland. So this bias shocked observers and now they are searching "errors" in the experiment and detectors.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yk5LrJnuXw&t=29s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFz3fJMJ-yA&t=54s How many times Einstein’s wonderland should fail to let you understand and let you turn to reality? There is no real time. Time is a measurement unit like meter, kg. There is no speed of light limit. There is no space&time fabric. E=mc2 does not work. General Relativity is not law of physics but a shiny useless product had been marketed to naive scientists. You may understand Albert Einstein = Sigmund Freud. Both put useless & ridiculus wonderland into science world. However Psychology was lucky because they understood that Freud laws were ridiculus and rejected from Psychology decades ago. However physics is not lucky enough so physicist should only understand after many decades and test results. Only after that point they will reject Einstein's wonderland and clean the Physics from ridiculus bias (hopefully). * Mind blowing Question : The hardest thing is observing& identifying in physics. If you observe the movements of objects than it is easy relatively.But if you observe yourself? For example if you are looking at yourself in the mirror;in fact it takes nano secs the mirror to reflect you. So are you there? Or you were there? Who is observing if you have passed away? Light reflects from the mirror + you see (observe) + identify (you realize the reflection when it arrives to the brain. There are several operations in the brain)= total process! * What was there before big bang? This question is not only physics but it is basically archeology of astronomy. * @NASA @esa @esascience @Harvard @BillNye Please teach people and remember me as Mr. Time when I am gone. Let me explain what is time? Any molecule component should be decomposed when lost its own energy if any other decomposition process has not been happened. That molecule component is you. Each move you take gives infinite possibilities and stand in front of you. You chose one and move. Always you learn and have a reason choose one of those possibilities. Once you have chosen one than others disappear. Sometimes you choose a painfull path. You learn fear and pain which leads you to choose boring but safety path. So you start to choose same boring path everyday. Meanwhile you remember the paths you walk. Because your brain records every step you have taken. This is your past. Once you realize all of your movements than you describe it as time. This is time. So asking qustion “is time real?” is like asking “is mile real?” Or “is litre real?” Those are all rulers we use in our daily lives and science😊

* Ridiculus Questions:
What are the evidences of BB? GN-Z11 red shift and gravitional waves from the beginning.
1. gn-z11 has been observed and can’t observe beyond that isn’t it the proof of radius of universe has ever been observed. Red shift says kinetic and angular momentum still works.
2. Gravitional waves says there is or there was magnetic buble almost 13.7 billion light years away. It does not make sense for the BB. Because it says there were huge objects to able create magnetic buble waves.
3. If BB is correct than why CMB is elliptic? Shouldn’t it be spherical?
Homo sapiens mind can not imagine and understand infinity. Human has never required to identify infinity in shaped and finite world to feed itself/invent/move etc.to live. So brain development and brain evolution has never needed to understand infinity. Anyway; From quantum world to astronomical world all are orbiting. So why we don’t think galaxies are orbiting instead of BB & linear kinetics to nowhere?
As last question. Why we don’t think the universe is self-feeding galactic ecosystem? So all can focus on the system we live in and the actual problems in solar system and earth... we know very less yet.


* Why do some people believe predictions (hypothesis + unproved theories) are the laws of physics? I think the main reason is education and bias of teachers. Quantum Field is a theory not a law of physics. Physics need ideas to figure out some actual problems but sometimes those ideas create more complex problems. I think all you know Heisenberg’s experiment about electrons. The result was unexpected. So Heisenberg’s uncertainity principle had come. Well, others tried to explain it with Quantum Field Theory which is  a theoretical framework that combines classical field theory and quantum mechanics and is used to construct physical models of subatomic particles and quasiparticles.

However laws of physics are determined once tests results proved (in sigma 6).
Also you need to understand deeply that physics is not a social science which does not work according to perception of human being. Reality and perception are not the same or not even similar.

* If I was a dreamer than probably I could say "Our consciousness and memories are recorded at Quantum Field as a pattern & it might be accessible millions after we are all died".
And billions years after solar system died, our genetic foot print may born on a different planet of a different star, somewhere in the universe. So our memories could be written back to our minds if there is a correlation between quantum field pattern and genetic code.
But I can not imagine it...

* We know our telecommunication system does not work fast enough in large scale. If we would like to keen for Mars than we should find another solution. Todays tech is like a smoke communication. Neutrino is a possibility. So physicists should focus on a new communicaiton 

@NASA

* Again. If there is no scientific facts than man creates hypothesis and even hyper-fart-hypothesis which helps him to believe. In psychological point of view belief helps him to accept to be a mortal. Otherwise he can not find meaning in the life.

Whereas it is ridiculus to load extra meaning to life but he can not stand without meanings, love, heaven and hell because he thinks he is the most important and a great species.

This is the main problematic aspect he has ever believed.

But science is nominative and speaks only facts which has been proved min.sigma 6 and recursive. Science tells him who is not the most important compound on earth or in universe which makes him unhappy so he holds fairytales as strong as he can.

As a conclusion life is a miracle and magnificent beauty but he is the only one tiny and short part of it.

* Question. Why space probes do not use oxygen crystals? It covers less space but much more amount than liquid. It can be injected to fire place and a small amount of solar panel electricity might be ignited. It absorbs oxygen 160 times greater than gas form. @NASA

Contemporary Music Notation Problem

In this short article I am not going to discuss contemporary & avant-garde music history. Only you need to know it is not very new. Arnold Schönberg or John Cage may be the pioneer of contemporary music. Nowadays IRCAM is leading the new music style and sounds.

Contemporary & avant-garde music gives freedom to express feelings and thoughts together at the same time. Also composer can discuss any idea or criticize an incident or phenomenon at the same time. This makes contemporary & avant-garde music very powerful language.

However there is a big problem. Which is notation. If there is no notation you can not carry the music to orchestra and even to the future. Classical notation is not enough for contemporary music. So some composers & orchestra use graphical notation and some use graphical and classical notation together. However this technique makes the composition unique. But to be unique is not good to carry to other orchestras and to the future. 

So there should be common & global language for notation as happened in the past with classical notation.

I think I have an idea may help all composers and orchestras.

If you dig the problem than you will find two important missing parts in classical notation why it is not suitable for new music. Those are articulations and pitch at the same time.

If there are all possible articulations of an instrument with smybols than it may adapt into classical common notation. However free areas should be added also with symbols to be added in the future and/or for the musician improvisation.

Let's take violin.
Composer would like to add knocks. So articulation should be kn.
Composer would like to add knocks and E minor at the same time. kn and e minor should be written into paper for violin. So What do we need? We need standard notation lines with G Key or F key but also Articulation lines.

Well, if composer would like to write the sound from upper high tones to lower tones slowly not fast for example you need to add another symbol bow-up-down (in short bud) but also slowly (in short budS). Composer can not write the exact movement of bow but express how musician should play.

Graphical notation does not help very much to be common notation language however symbolic expression may add into classical notation so this makes it global notation for any musician and orchestra. Symbolic expression may come across to graphical symbols like used in maths. 

 Hope this helps.

Time and Mass. Two misconceptions in physics!

We have learnt space and time & mass and also inertia mass in university.
However non of us have queried if all are true? In fact No!
Why? and How?
Ok. Let's talk about it.

First, I will write basic concepts of science.
Hypothesis : It means an idea but no way to test it.
Theory : The idea written in math and possible to test. (However if no one can test it than it turns out Hypothesis)
Law : These are reality of science. Which means theories have been test with many testers (labs and universities) and proved in sigma 6.

Well, let's start with time. What is time? It is not mechanical or atomic clock. In terms of physics it should be particule, wave, energy, magnetics or electromagnetics. However nobody had achieved to observe and test the time.
So what we will say about time? It is hypothesis. Well, it is true. However we are all humans and have brains. Brain has ability to record all our movements and what we see, what we talk etc. Also our brains has ability to recall those fragments and combine together. We call this process "remembering". If we can remember past than how are we going to explain that thing? So we have started to call it "time". However we use time in our daily lives and science as a ruler like "kg", "meter". You know that kg and meter are not exist in reality. We have invented those measurement units to identify the world outside. So time is the similar measurement unit we had invented.

In reality universe, light, stars, galaxies, energy... in large scale or in quantum scale none of them require "time" as a variable to move or to exist. Movement and energy are the only realities in universe.

I am not sure if I give more examples to prove about "time is not exist" however "time is a measurement unit" we use in our lives and science.


Well, now let's talk about mass & inertia mass.
All you know mass is the output of gravity. If there is no gravity than there is no mass. For example if you are in among galaxies. Very hard to identify the mass. However inertia mass is always there. Is that true? 

OK. First all of we need to identify what is gravity? Contrary to popular belief that gravity is magtenic + electromagnetic + weak + strong nuclear forces of planets and stars on the quantum level of each molecule. In short force field is gravity. 

But I can give a break and give some simple examples :

What did we learn at school (university)? Einstein's special and general relativity. Space-Time. Huge massive objects bends the space... OK. If it was correct than orbit of earth should be more different. Fist of all, the closest position and farest positions should have been diffent than reality; so close and so far. But it is not. If you look at the size of Sun and all other planets than you can easily realize. On the other hand; orbit of moon around the earth. Sun bends the space-time 99% according to the whole solar system mass. If it was correct than why moon is still with earth in the position C? It should have dropped into Sun's orbit? Angular momentum can not help to the moon... Also if relativity was correct than total solar eclipse could have never been existed. Why? Because Sun bends huge amount of space so earth should be at very high orbit. When it dives in the orbit into the Sun than it should be more closer. Again, Earth is bigger than the moon so earth should have bended the space more than the moon. So moon's orbit should be at very high position which makes impossible total solar eclipse.
We can ask more stupid questions once we have accepted Einstein's ridiculus relativity understanding! 

Well, gravity is not working as Einstein had imagined.

Now, If we are all agree about gravity than we can continue.

If you have still questions in your mind than this Fermilab video may help :
Nature of matter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt8-ndOGSUk&t=29s

If we are trying to identify whole universe by the feet on earth than we can understand gravity and mass. Because we can feel it and test it. However if we are far enough from the earth and sun than mass is an enigma! If the gravity on the molecules are so small than how can we describe it? 

OK. One more question. How can we identify the mass of sun? It is also orbiting around milky way in 226 million years. Yes. So as you see it is getting harder and harder to describe the mass itself even for any star and any object in universe. 

As you see "space - time" explanation is a nice science fiction movie in our minds.

The other concept was iternia mass. Well, how can we understand this concept? Do you mean in terms of quatum mechanics? Molecular level or quark level? What ever you say than you are trying to say the volume and density of an object. 

If you ask deeply than you will find volume and density. So it does not matter how you call it. Internia mass and volume and density. But for me, calling it as volume and density is more intelligible. Density means the quantity of quarks and molecules the object has in itself. This view identify the iron and gas or hydrogen compounds.

If we come back to gravitional mass than we must say it is very relative to the position of an object where it stands or orbiting. So this arise another question. Is it necessary to calculate the gravitional mass of an object? For me; No! It is not. I don't see any useful area to use that quantity.

Physics is really joy and everthing however we must ask more questions about the things we think we know!