New Energy, Really?!!

Every where you look these days you find someone talking about energy. Some would clam to work on Green Energy, others call it renewable energy, and almost all of them call to think creatively when it comes to our energy options.
That all sounds pretty nifty and dandy, but to be honest, I think they are all wrong or not being honest.

Let me take them one at a time, let us start with the clam of green energy. Those who use that word imply that these energy sources are environmentally friendly and do no harm to nature (unlike the old bad carbon based or nuclear sources). And that is just totally misleading.
As they say, there is no such thing as free lunch. all that you are doing is replacing one harmful effect on nature with another. Let me explain how.
Solar PV for example has multiple harmful effects on nature (and I would argue that for now it is more harmful than any fuel). Here is a list of some of these:

1. Many scientists clam that it takes more energy to produce a solar cell than it would generate in its entire life, that means that we consume some other energy (fuel) to make the cells, but then the return is much less that the energy we spent in the first place. Shouldn't we have just used the fuel directly?
2. The chemical composition of the cell is toxic and harmful to the environment, so when we need to replace them in 20-30 years we will have to introduce a toxic materiel to the world.
3. To generate electricity with solar cells, we need to cover large landscapes. These lands had wild life that depended on the solar energy that was there, so we are harming them. Also, new wild life will now move in under the shade, creating an even bigger instability the the natural order of things.

If we go to Solar thermal, will my guess is that we might get rid of 1 & 2, but we can never solve 3. And I can go on about every single so called green energy source.

Secondly let me talk about a clam they all make by stating the word "Energy". They might all say energy but what they really are talking about is "Electricity". You might think that they are one and the same, but the reality of things is they are not.
You need energy to move your car, and that energy is kinetic energy. Today, we use fuel that has chemical energy, we brake it down to get thermal energy that in turn is converted to the kinetic energy we need to move the car. Replacing our fuel with Electricity solves nothing really, in fact I would argue that it is way less efficient than fuel and creates far more problems.
You see every time you convert one type of energy to another you lose part of it in the process, so in the example of our car, we made 3 conversions, chemical -> thermal -> kinetic (or that is what you think, it is actually much more complicated if you think about how we got the fuel).
What if we replace the engine with an electric motor? will you will get a much more complicated process, starting from the end we will get Kinetic <- Magnetic <- Electrical, and the electrical (at least so far) comes from Chemical -> Thermal -> Kinetic -> Magnetic -> Electrical, so we have a total of 7 steps from fuel to our desired Kinetic energy rather than just 3. And even if you replace fuel with any other sources of energy to get electric, you will still need more steps than fuel would. This makes the efficiency of an electric system very low, the only thing that can try to make up for that lost efficiency is the mass central production, by having large scale electric generation facilities.
The other issue with electrical energy is that it issues when stored on a large scale. Electricity can be stored in capacitors and coils, these are nice on the millimeter scale, but if you want to use them on large scale they turn into deadly nightmares. So the solution to this so far is to convert it to some other type of energy and store it, then convert it back to electricity when you need it. Batteries for example is a chemical energy storage. This means that you lose part of the energy when you store it, and again when you want to use it. And unfortunately you cant generate electricity exactly as you need it, the moment you generate it you have to either use it or store it, otherwise you lose it all together. There are many ways to try and manage that, but all in all, this dramatically effects the efficiency of electricity. And it is even much worse when the electrical generation is uncontrollable (solar, wind, etc.).

So why Electrical? will that is very simple, we have already spent lots of money on the infrastructure for Electricity and we want to keep using it. And this would help us focus all our research on just one type of energy rather than investigate all of them.

Is there any other way?
I honestly do not know, but here are my thoughts on the matter:

1. Since there is no such thing as green energy, we should not be so possessed by making every thing green. What we should be doing is diversify. I mean by focusing all our energy on one source we concentrate the damage on one part of Earth's echo system, and that can be hard to repair. But if we have small levels of damage on every system, will chances are that the natural immune system of Earth would be able to repair the damage.
2. Use and store the energy as you need it. Why not work on new technologies that transmit & store Kinetic energy for example and then supply that to cars? So we take the Kinetic energy from the wind, store it, transmit it to the car, use it as is. Store the thermal energy from the sun and use it for cooking or the light from the sun to use instead of bulbs. You get the picture. We will still need to generate electricity for all of our electronic devises, but that is but a fraction of what we use electricity for today.

Solving the Time Travel Paradox

Time travel has always been my favorite SciFi topic. But it has inherently one main issue, the PARADOX.
A simple version of a paradox (to explain it to those of you who for some strange reason are still reading and yet do not know what a time paradox is) would be, say you travel back in time, and while you were driving around in the car you stole (shame on you), you have an accident and kill a kid, who turns out to be you!!!
Now, the problem is, if you just killed your self when you were a kid, that means you never grew up, thus never actually traveled back in time, therefore you did not kill your self, that means you actually do grow up AND do travel back in time to kill your kid self, leading to the point that you did not grow up, ...... you get the drift.

So now, if we are to assume that time travel is a possibility (or at least if we want to build a mathematical module for it) we must resolve this paradox issue.
And I assume I have (although I am pretty sure I created a few other issues in the process) solved this issue by changing a few things we are currently assuming about time.
these changes and some of their implications are as follows:

• Time is 3 Dimensional: this means that time is not just one access with forward and back as our only options. I propose calling them tX, tY & tZ.
• Time is expanding: starting from the Big Bang, time is expanding outwards in every direction just like the physical 3D space is. Forming a sphere that has its tX,tY & tZ center is 0,0,0 AND its radius is the amount of time since time began.
• Movement in time (just like movement in Space) is vectorial.
• Awareness is a single point in time and is the only thing that moves in 3D time, physical objects do not move in time.
• Awareness is only active when our awareness occupy the same 3D time as our physical object.
• There is a natural force (T) in 3D time, just like gravity the physical space, that is constant and is pushing outwards from the center.
• There is a second natural force (P) that is on a plane that is always vertical on T. The exact direction of P on that plane is determined by our actions
• The faster a physical object's speed is, the more it is effected by T and more resistant to P.
• The more an object conscious of the physical world, the less it is effected by T and more effected by P.
• Unconscious objects are equally effected by both forces.
• Unlike normal space, an infinite number of objects can occupy the same 3D time location.
• Every object has a shape and location in 3D time. And a single physical object can have multiple objects in 3D space.
• Objects in 3D time are fixed. In other words, you can not move any objects location in 3D time, you can not change its movement in 3D time, you can not change its shape in 3D time.
• What moves in 3D time is our perception/awareness.
• By interacting with any object in 3D time, you apply a force to you awareness' vector in 3D time, causing it to change direction in 3D time.
• Time travel would be defined as moving your awareness from the edge of  one of your 3D time objects to the edge of another.
• Actual time (AT) is the distance from the tX,tY,tZ point and the center 0,0,0 (radius)
• Time passed (TP) is the difference between between the actual time of two points.
• Our perception (OP) of time is measured as the distance our awareness travel in 3D time.
• Measured time (MT), is the distance an unconscious object travels to move from one Actual time to another.

This might all sound very complected, but let me try to explain it with a few examples:

1. Normal life: in our day to day life, Our perception of time is the same as the measured time, the reason for that is that we just flow with things with a very low frequency of interactions with the physical world.
2. Deep thinking: we always find that when we are in a deep thinking mode, we find that time fly's very fast, the reason being our disconnect with the physical we are less effected by P. This results in a shorter distance to travel between two AT spheres than the measured time between the same two sphere.
3. Boredom: as you are highly attached to the real world and are noticing every aspect of it, we are effected strongly by P. this forces us to travel sideways, meaning we need to travel a much longer distance to get from one AT sphere to the next.
4. Speed of Light: when an object travels @ the speed of light it would theoretically not be effected by P. In reality, P's effect can never be zero. Meaning you can never travel on the exact direction of the T vector. This allows for increased speeds to try and come closer to T. The line that falls on the T vector is the shortest distance between any two AT spheres. (if you want the mathematical explanation of how this fits with the relativity equation just comment here)

This is the time relativity equation
If we move it around we get

This looks like a trigonometric function.
And that means we have at least two dimensions here in time.
What you also would see is that the triangle turns into a line as v approaches c.
This basically means that at that speed we only see the intersecting line as a dot from our single time dimension point of view.

Its my life

Here is a thought, a strange one I am told
I will tell you what I think if I may be so bold

This is my life so my choices are my own
What I say, What I do, they reflect on me and me alone

I do not want to offend you, nor show disrespect
I just see things that you somehow neglect

This is my life so my feelings are my own
What I love, What I hate, this feeling in my bone

I have my calling and mark to leave
I am not boring, I got things to achieve

This is my life so my actions are my own
What I value, What I ignore, to the world I will make it known

I learn what I want so I can excel
I do what I love, don't care if it wont sell

This is my life so my thoughts are my own
What I dream, What I create, I am not another clone

The future I see, is mine to grasp
Once I am there I am sure you will gasp

This is my life so my assets are my own
What I make, What I produce, this is my throne

I change the world and make it anew
Am I so wrong to follow my hugh

This is my life so leave me alone
Stop forcing me to live it as if it was your own