Is the Acceleration of Personal Time a Myth or Reality?

When considering the acceleration of time as a psychological or psychophysiological phenomenon, as opposed to the acceleration of historical time, it is referred to as the acceleration of personal time (APT). Today, attempts to understand and explain APT yield conflicting results. Some scientists, based on biochemical and psychoenergetic research, associate it with people’s real dependence on stress. Others, relying on the existence of the so-called “Schumann resonance,” believe it is an objective physical process of geomagnetic origin. Still others, considering it mainly a psychological phenomenon, link it to the psychology of human aging.

Alongside those who believe in the existence of APT, there are also skeptics. Let’s analyze each of the three main perspectives on APT and try to form our own opinion.

APT and Stress

First, let’s look at the relationship between APT and stress. Stress comes in two forms: sudden (acute) and chronic. There is little evidence in literature or personal accounts of APT as a result of chronic stress. However, there are testimonies of APT during sudden stress. These are often stories about bullets or shrapnel flying toward a person, where either the flight seems to slow down or the person’s reaction time seems to speed up.

It is known that during sudden stress, especially when danger arises, the amygdala in the brain is activated, which is responsible for fear. The amygdala stimulates the sympathetic nervous system, which, through the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, triggers the production of hormones—glucocorticoids (like cortisone) and increases the release of catecholamines (adrenaline, noradrenaline, etc.) into the bloodstream.

These hormones sharply increase metabolism, heart rate, and blood flow to the lungs, muscles, and heart. At the same time, the brain’s information processing capacity increases, nerve impulse transmission speeds up, and psychological inhibitions and restrictions decrease.

Let’s illustrate this with two examples. The first is about a young woman attacked by a thug. She ran straight through a flower bed to escape, something she would never have done before or after the stressful event due to the rule “don’t trample flower beds.” The second example is from the author’s own youth. During a heated discussion about nationality with a muscular peer, the peer said, “Too bad Hitler didn’t wipe you all out!” Overcome with indignation, the author, a generally peaceful and average-built person, unexpectedly punched the athlete and knocked him down. Later, he wondered, “How did I do that?”

In both cases, there was an instant drop in psychological rigidity or inhibition, leading to quick, decisive action without prolonged deliberation.

Many similar examples exist. What do they suggest? Most likely, that stress causes a very brief but real correction of a person’s psychological characteristics. This is possible because every such characteristic has two parts: a basic personality component and a situational one. The situational part allows for correction during stress. But is this related to APT, and if so, how?

To answer, let’s consider a previously discovered and published relationship:

(1) t = (R × A) / (H × (F / F₀))
(2) F / F₀ = actual frustration / threshold frustration

Where R is rigidity, A is aggressiveness, H is information processing capacity, t is the duration of the mental reaction to a single impulse (the “aftereffect”), and F/F₀ is the damping coefficient of the reaction (F is actual frustration, F₀ is the normal or threshold value).

If a single impulse is considered a stressor, these formulas allow us to calculate the reaction duration for a person with known R, A, H, and F/F₀.

Suppose a bullet (9.1g, 7.62 caliber, 800 m/s) is fired at a soldier 500 meters away. The bullet’s flight time is about 0.9 seconds. The shot’s flash signals danger, causing stress. Using Eysenck’s test to determine A, R, and F on a 20-point scale, let’s assume: A = 20 (max aggressiveness), R = 2 (rigidity sharply reduced), F/F₀ = 2 (assuming F₀ is the average value, and the damping coefficient is maximal), and H = 9 (as it usually ranges from 7±2). Plugging these into the formulas gives t ≈ 0.3 s. This is almost three times less than the bullet’s flight time, meaning the soldier can process the bullet’s movement almost three times during its flight, creating the sensation of time slowing down or personal time speeding up.

For an experienced soldier, whose psychological settings are less affected by stress, R and A are set to average values (10), F/F₀ and H remain the same, resulting in t = 0.9 s. In this case, the soldier doesn’t perceive the bullet until it hits him—no APT occurs.

Conclusions:

• APT during sudden stress is quite possible.
• The cause is a significant reduction in reaction time compared to the real aftereffect duration.
• Whether APT occurs depends on the person’s psychological characteristics.
• APT is greater when more reaction cycles fit into the real aftereffect time.

APT and the Schumann Resonance

The Schumann resonance refers to standing low and ultra-low frequency electromagnetic waves encircling the Earth between its surface and the ionosphere, forming a giant resonator. When the natural frequency (W_C) matches the forced frequency (W_B) from lightning (about 2,000 times per second, with 50 lightning strikes), resonance occurs at W_Sch, the Schumann resonance.

W_Sch has several harmonics, the first five being approximately: 8.5, 14.7, 20.8, 26.8, and 32.9 Hz. These are close to human brainwave frequencies: alpha (8–13 Hz), beta (14–25 Hz), gamma (30–100 Hz). This led to the idea that human brain evolution is influenced by the Schumann resonance, which determines normal brain function. Even minor desynchronization can cause headaches, memory loss, blood pressure fluctuations, etc., so the brain always tries to restore synchronization.

For millennia, W_Sch frequencies remained stable, and desynchronization was random, caused by geomagnetic and heliomagnetic instability. However, since about 1980, W_Sch frequencies have systematically increased, especially the first harmonic: 7.83 Hz in 1994, 12.39 Hz in 2012, 20.53 Hz in 2020, and 38 Hz in 2023. Meanwhile, human brainwave frequencies (e.g., alpha rhythm) have remained at 8–13 Hz. Thus, the idea of synchronization between W_Sch and brainwaves is now invalid. This is important because some APT proponents claim that as W_Sch increases, Earth spins faster and days are now only 16 hours long instead of 24.

While the Schumann resonance does affect brain and nervous system function and may have influenced evolution, directly linking W_Sch to our perception of time is incorrect. Time is a subjective concept reflecting our perception of process duration. The connection is indirect, informational-psychological, not direct electrical.

Thus, we should view W_Sch’s effect as informational, and personal time as the duration t of the mental reaction to W_Sch. Synchronization should be considered between W_Sch and W₀ (the natural frequency of a person’s information processing system), not brainwave frequency.

It has been shown that the natural frequency can be expressed as:

(3) W₀ = H × (F₀ / F) / (R × A)

The best synchronization occurs when W_Sch ≈ W₀. Transforming the formulas gives:

(5) t = (R × A) / (H × (F₀ / F) × WSch)

This shows that as W_Sch increases, t (personal time) accelerates, but only when F₀² > F². Otherwise, the formula is meaningless, meaning that as frustration increases, the effect of W_Sch weakens. Highly frustrated people (F near F₀) are not affected by W_Sch.

Example: Suppose a person has been in business for years without much success. On Eysenck’s 20-point scale, F = 9, F₀ = 10. From 1994 to 2023, as W_Sch increased from 7.83 to 38 Hz, t accelerated from 0.029 s to 0.006 s (by 0.023 s). If this person relaxes at the sea and F drops to 5, t accelerates from 0.106 s to 0.022 s (by 0.084 s).

Key points:

• Halving frustration quadruples APT.
• If APT expands a young person’s opportunities, they can accomplish more in the same time, making APT from increased W_Sch potentially beneficial.
• However, the actual numerical effect is very small and likely similar in other cases.
• This disproves claims that Earth’s day has shrunk from 24 to 16 hours.

APT and Aging

Most elderly people feel that time accelerates as they age, but this is usually explained as an illusion. Still, what exactly is this illusion, and why does it occur?

There are two main hypotheses:

1. People perceive equal time intervals as relative, not absolute: for example, one year is 5% of life at age 20, 2.5% at 40, 1.66% at 60, etc. This feels like APT.
2. The number of significant events in a given time period decreases with age.

But what does “significant” mean? Significance for a specific person is a combination of:

• The strength of the event’s informational impact
• The duration of the mental reaction to the event
• The effect of repetition on the impression made

According to I.V. Smirnov and colleagues, events and messages can be grouped by importance:

1. Events posing danger or threat to life (18 points)
2. Events/messages changing overall mental state (12 points)
3. Messages activating core personality elements, especially early socialization (7 points)
4. Messages about key past emotional or affective states (4 points)
5. Information significant only in combination with key elements (2 points)
6. Messages with taboo information (1 point)

The duration t of the mental reaction can be calculated as before. The effect of repetition is characterized by:

K = T / m

where T is total reaction time, m is the number of repetitions.

Using Hartley’s information theory, the overall significance Z can be calculated as:

Z = r × log₂ K

This allows us to track how the number and quality of significant events change with age.

For people aged 44–65, group 2 events (12 points) are most important. For those 70–80, groups 3 and 1 (7 and 18 points) become more important. With age, rigidity (R) usually increases, aggressiveness (A) often decreases, information processing capacity (H) decreases, and frustration (F) may decrease (acceptance of aging) or increase (if not accepted). K, as a function of t, changes accordingly.

For example, an 80-year-old engineer’s old test results: R = 12, A = 10, F = 11, H = 9. New results: R = 14, A = 7, F = 8, H = 7. Calculations show that at 70, t = 1.8 s; at 80, t = 3.5 s—almost double. At 70, group 2 events were most important; at 80, group 3. At 70, one repetition was enough for significance; at 80, two or three are needed. Calculated Z: 6.24 at 70, 6.65 at 80—almost the same. This is mainly because r decreased, reflecting a shift in what is considered important. If serious health issues arose (r = 18), Z would be 9.1, a one-third increase.

Z also reflects the time spent processing information. As this time increases, the number of events a person can process in a given period (e.g., an hour) decreases. Since each message usually prompts a response, less time remains for other actions, creating the impression of APT.

Thus, the idea of APT as a result of aging is mainly a psychological illusion. It may or may not occur, depending on personal psychological traits and attitudes toward the importance of events and messages. It is also related to the state of the nervous system (nerve impulse speed drops from 85% at age 60 to 75% at 80, compared to age 20, but this is not the main factor). Physical condition plays a role, but not a decisive one.

Moreover, the illusion of APT can arise at any age under certain conditions, but this requires further study.

Conclusion

So, what is the answer to the question in the title? Apparently, it is clear: the acceleration of personal time is both a myth and a reality. For some, it exists; for others, it does not. It all depends on the individual. However, this does not mean the topic is closed or fully understood. Research into changes in personal time should be expanded, both for APT and its alternative—deceleration of time (DPT). For DPT, additional event groups may be needed, such as:

• Group 7: events causing minor mental and physical fatigue (1 point)
• Group 8: events causing significant mainly mental fatigue (0.5 points)
• Group 9: events causing significant mainly physical fatigue (0.25 points)
• Group 10: events causing significant fatigue of both types (0.5 points)
• Group 11: events causing severe fatigue of both types (0.1 points)

It may also be appropriate to adjust the calculation of Z. But these are tasks for the future.