Clearly we can't separate time from space, as indicated even in relativity, demonstrating the interchangeability of space and time, though this is a special case and limited by a 3D context of space plus 1D of time (the 4th dimension). The renowned philosopher Ouspensky achieved some profound thinking on dimensions, drawing the conclusion that this universe is six dimensional: three spatial dimensions and three time dimensions. We won't cover his analysis here as it is not particularly helpful; we are proposing a far more complex but complete model of time, manifesting from a fractal gradient, according to what fractals are being perceived. These are internal nonlinear fractals covered in previous articles.

As we consider the block of typing sheets again in Part I, the quantum or wholeness levels go from one page to two pages (pages 1 and 2), to three pages thick (pages 1, 2, 3), etc., all the way to all the pages experienced as one whole; they can be considered as inherent and superimposed within the block. This is only like imagining in our general model of the pyramidal company organisation that the second level up, the managers (which constitutes information) are superimposed on the groundfloor workers nonlinearly. In fact with all levels the information of the managers, executives, president are inherent within the output produced by the groundfloor workers. This is modelling a hierarchy of fractal levels.

Current science only covers observations at the 'groundfloor level' (of the environment/universe), the external world view. The nonlinear levels give different time scales and also represent inner space or hyperspaces. A spacecraft tuning into the 'manager' hyperspace will exceed the speed of light (the groundfloor level has the 3D speed-of-light limitation).

We mentioned earlier that there is no
time if there is no motion or activity of any kind, that is, energy. All objects/energies
have their own motions (and frequencies) and therefore their own time--of course
if two of them are made to reference clock time then we give them the same scale
or 'rate of flow' whether it's an atom or a planet. But inherently, all particles
basically have, and are, their own reference or context, *and* since they are under continuous creation (as per quantum mechanics)
they change their reference continually. This has remarkable repercussions; it
means that at every instant nothing *has*
to happen in that moment or the next, according to immutable, fixed laws. Miracles
could be the norm. We are referring to contexts within contexts, or references
within references from the micro to the macro, and we create from this an apparent
global time.

All this, means time doesn't have any particular direction or directions---it could be considered as going in all directions. Let us go back to the loop in step two. This represents the start of an action and its completion as we traverse the loop and come back to the starting point---one complete cycle. The assignment of time has now ended (since there is nothing else to reference). It might be the cycle of activity of moving a body and stopping, or a complete lifetime, birth to death.

All activities and events are cycles within cycles. The complex coordination of a keyboard musician is made up of cycles within cycles of motion of arms: fingers within wrists, within elbow, within shoulder. Our loop example (Figure 1) only gives us one direction, of which there are not only countless numbers that could begin this loop but there are then superimposed on these, higher-order times, just as the manager, executive and president information are superimposed on the groundfloor-worker information (or time). Time is like the surface of a hypersphere; all directions come back to the starting point. Can we diagram this in terms of loops? That is, loops illustrating time as individual cycles. Can we convert the analogies of the pyramid company organisation and the typing sheets into time loops, which means cover all directions, possibilities? It must be hierarchical though and nonlinear.

We have described the simple loop of time. Let us elevate this to higher orders. As we go from Figure 1 to Figure 2 we have the familiar spiral or spring-like structure. We might note that we have now diagrammed two orthogonal dimensions of time: the time of activity given by repeated loops, time A, but also a time dimension at right angles or along the length of the spiral. This is a larger cycle of action covering smaller ones--such as a complete period of work in a place and the subcycles of activity, for example individual tasks, which are within this. But this is only two levels. The coil itself must now spiral---see Figure 3. The start and finish of the coil must be displaced and continued as we did in going from Figure 1 to Figure 2, to form another larger spiral. This third loop system incorporates the two lower orders; those in Figures 1 and 2. We have now covered three dimensions (three directions at right angles). Note that these are, effectively, fractals. But this is negligible for the full requirement of a basic hierarchical fractal gradient, which is infinite. Also the gaps are too great.

We
now encounter the limitations of our tools and diagrams: pen, paper, two-to-three
dimensions, graphs, mathematics. The problem is that loop A, in Figure 1, jumps
from one dimensional direction to two, loop system B in Figure 2, which in addition
has *many* small loops; but
we needed many so that we could bend it. Before we go further let's consider the
computer programme equivalent of this (the reader unfamiliar with programming
can completely skip this part). If we only focus on the numbers and the programme
we can obtain quite a good simulation of this gradient and its continuation.

Consider programme loops used in typical dimensional arrays. We have, say, X Y Z for the three axes or dimensions. Our time loop A, Figure 1, gives the path of X values by dividing this first loop into, say, 10 divisions, that is, X = 1 to 10. The whole of loop A though is Y and this has, say, values 1 to 10, given by 10 'A' loops in the spiral B of Figure 2. Similarly, spiral B when looped, say, 10 times, is represented by Z, also looped---see Figure 3, and has values, say, Z = 1 to 10. This means if we have, X = 5, Y = 3, Z = 2, we know which X division (point) to which we are referring, that is, precisely where it is. Similarly for any other coordinate, X = 10, Y = 7, Z = 4, etc. Now what if we wish to make X = 1 to 2, Y = 1 to 2, Z = 1 to 2, not 10 divisions, or 10 loops. Note that we can think of Z as giving the unity of Y, and Y the unity of X. Why would we wish here to make it binary? This gives a finer fractal gradient and eliminates the linearity caused by groups of 10 loops. Unfortunately we can't draw it---there aren't enough lower loops to bend into a higher one. It means for instance one Y covers X = 1 and 2, etc. or one manager has only two groundfloor workers in his department, giving the required fine gradient to cover all possibilities, and one executive has two managers, etc.

Thus the computer programme
analogy can give endless nested levels of the 2-point loop (X = 1 to 2, Y = 1
to 2 , etc.) but there will be many X's, a smaller number of Y's, and still less
numbers of Z's, etc. A single point of time has inherent within it, holographically,
all times; *but *there are many X's. One X corresponds to one groundfloor worker---there
may be an infinite number of 'groundfloor workers', say, particles (for each X
= 1 or 2, with different Ys and Zs). We must imagine the 1-dimensional arrow starting
loop A, Figure 1, also potentially starting in any direction. If we cover all
directions we trace out directions within a sphere, in fact, spheres within spheres,
as we continue with the looping system.

Thus there are not only all directions for loop A to begin (within its dimensional limitations) but also all directions for higher orders of the spiral. In a good model, however, we wouldn't want lower orders to coincide with higher ones (all we are saying here is that there aren't any fixed planes for these paths). If this appears unbelievably complex, remember it is all part of one whole; we are attempting to describe a breakdown of the time concept. On this basis one would expect that all directions and possibilities would be inherent in the unified field which will be found to contain it. All this is a good exercise in investigating time. However, as stated previously it is just a geometric contrivance simulating time with spatial coordinates (or in the case of the computer programme, a numerical contrivance).

We think of time as a line with a beginning, giving rise to past, present, and future. A further understanding would be circles within circles. However, it is more fully described as spherical, or spheres within larger spheres---no beginning or end: circles of time continuing on in matter and space, repeating loops of time, oscillations, periods, orbits, movements, growths, seasons. All cycles within cycles. Each has its own time because of its own rate of change but we observe and bring them together in a clock time. Thus with countless closed loops, time exists in countless frames of reference. Moreover, objects/people change reference each moment, and are not the same entity from moment to moment (supported by quantum physics interpretations).

There are thus infinite objective times superimposed but we naturally hook onto a rate governed by our biology and neuronal design. Just as we don't perceive atomic spatial magnitudes we don't experience atomic times. The narrow spectrum of our conscious minds arises from the template-like restrictions of the body's physiological and genetic processes. With greater freedom from these limitations we would be able to 'move' around in 'time' at will---from the discrete characteristics to the wholeness, no-time, simultaneous aspects.

Let
us now introduce yet another analogy which could be directly helpful in the above
understanding. Visualise a strip of film with subject matter, being shown on a
projector. Each frame can be seen as giving a still picture but at a sufficient
speed through the projector the scene becomes realistic. We perceive one frame
at a time, the next frame has the same subject but, say, slightly shifted for
a moving subject. We now imagine the same strip (film footage) duplicated and
placed behind the first one, superimposed and aligned. However, this second strip
is moved forwards and backwards a little, as in an oscillation, and this alternating
motion is superimposed on the forward motion of the film going through the projector.
Both film strips are visible as the light shines through. Envisage what it would
look like, assuming that perception would be capable of organising this. One will
begin to see a little of the future frames and past. Now add a further copy of
the strip behind the second one but with this one the forward and backward motion
is greater---the oscillation has a greater amplitude. As we continue with this
we can see that each frame being viewed, at any instant, contains all others simultaneously
(even though we have to imagine the oscillations as rapid---but note that the
idea of the oscillation is *not* significant). This again forms a hierarchy
of superpositions similar to the typing-sheets analogy (Figure 4).

Thus we have modelled simultaneity of time ranging down to viewing only the single film strip representing clock time. Both the universe and consciousness will contain this complete range, potentially, but before commenting on this, let us finalise the analogies with a simple one which relates to what has been called 'horizontal' time and 'vertical' time.

Clearly from what we have described so far, horizontal time is the linear, regular and constant aspect, and the vertical is the nonlinear variation as we move into inner space (the groundfloor workers to the president). Figure 5 shows a straight horizontal line of a set length representing linear time. We envisage compressing it at either end to cause the folding up, or waves. We see that gradually the line is occupying more and more nonlinear vertical space and less and less horizontal linear space. This is just a manipulation of geometry but nevertheless we see the line or extended objective time compressed towards a point, representing no time (actually at the top of the scale) and in doing so the waves go into higher frequencies---the actual situation. Thus the highest forms of time, that is, vertical, could be considered to be in the direction of higher frequencies, which is the path of true evolution/ascension.

A highly simplified and contrived analogy for the application of Figure 5 would be to imagine looking down on a flat surface on which are placed countless probable, potential and actual events scattered about the surface. We now envisage being in the surface and moving forward in 'time' selecting the next probable event. Thus we see a zig-zagging line going across the surface. This could represent one's 3D life. At the level of simultaneity, such as a collective state, or God-like state looking down from above, it is more or less all perceived at once. One sees the past; events which the linear experience has gone through, and we see the present and future to be, which are different probabilities to be selected. However, the programmes of this higher state and the influence from the constant reception of information from the linear life on the surface will vary the selection of probabilities as a whole, anywhere (relevant) on the surface; even if they are of the past, from the viewpoint of the linear life. Thus there is a vertical time due to changes from the overseeing viewpoint; future and past incidents can be interrelated and altered simultaneously.

We may still
wonder at the objectivity of any of the upper levels, or is this all psychological
time? There will be more harmonious processes of the mind, or in nature, which
have these higher objective times inherent, but they will only be perceived by
a corresponding consciousness. As we move up this hierarchy of *nows*, or
dimensions towards simultaneity, objectivity simply decreases and takes higher
forms.

Our clock time is 'automatically chosen' in accord with the relationship between rates of information in the psychological mode and rates of information in the environment. An acceptable level of rate of motion is experienced as an average or norm. We can't select an environment of atomic times and processes, or motion at the speed of light.

Even the struggle in theoretical physics today to resolve the paradoxical inconsistency between the two contradictory theories, general relativity and quantum mechanics is indicating that local time can be chosen without incurring a global time, with the prospect of reconciling these two theories into a relativistic quantum mechanics. The point we are making is that there is no global time (an absolute passage of time) but there are infinite possible local times. Nevertheless we must add that 'global' times exist for single global (large) entities (quantum states). Not as the resultant of local times but as a result of the undivided whole aspect. The global time of a galaxy would manifest a 'higher' local time (further up the fractal-gradient 'now' hierarchy), than the stars and planets within it.

Unfortunately
current quantum mechanics, relativistic or not, would appear completely inadequate
to handle higher quantum states (fractals, *nows*).

Regarding
the 'complete range of *nows*', mentioned above, for both consciousness and
the universe, this would give rise to higher dimensions (quantum states) of objectivity
but ultimately all would be subjective. Figure 6 can be used as a guide for this
hierarchy, which also illustrates the ratio of objectivity to subjectivity roughly
by comparing in the diagram, at different levels, the ratio of surface area to
volume of the 'spheres'. Highest objectivity and smallest time units exist on
the lowest level, but decreasing as we go to greater quantum states---such as
solar systems or galaxies. Compare Figure 4.

Our consciousness (in 3D) operates on a certain frequency range which perceives aggregates of low quantum states enforced by the 3D framework, biology and neurophysiology with a relative absence (except in art and music, depending on the individual) of perception of unity, and thus creating objectivity (separation from the environment). Note that in Figure 6 we have not actually used binary (geometric progression) but fixed the pyramid configuration to give a finer gradient 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. from the top down. It is logical that nature wouldn't have any gaps in this underlying virtual-state fractal gradient.

It could be expected that the study of time would be extremely complex for the simple reason that it is not an independent variable and must be observed as an effect of material and energy manifestation, thus requiring essentially an understanding of the universe and its parts. Nevertheless even though time is not an independent variable, it is one of the most important factors, since without it there would be no life or existence.

In endeavouring to evaluate time, what have we really described? It would be the nature of consciousness; its action within and on itself. The infinite fractal gradient will be recognised to be inherent within the nature of the unified field of consciousness' energies.