B . L O G

An interesting synchronicity has recently been spotted between start dates of two world wars and Russian invasion of Ukraine, as shown in Table \tbl1.

World War I	1914.07.28	19+14+07+28=68
World War II	1939.09.01	19+39+09+01=68
Ukraine invasion	2022.02.24	20+22+02+24=68

Table \tbl1: Correlation between war dates Let's calculate the odds for this. In every year, there are 12 dates with numbers adding up to 68, so a chance that any war will start on such a day is 12/365.25 = 1:30.44. Not such a small chance, but what is a chance that two world wars will both start on such a day? The answer is: $\displaystyle {12^2 \over {365.25}^2} = 1:926.44$ Now the chance is a bit smaller, but what are the odds that 3 world wars would all start on such a day? The answer is: $\displaystyle {12^3 \over {365.25}^3} = 1:28198.56$ So the odds are almost 1:30000, not impossible, but small enough to consider this as a meaningful synchronicity. However, the start of invasion of Ukraine cannot be a formal date of the start of a world war. If one would consider Russian invasion of Ukraine as the start of the World War III, one should also consider German invasion of Czechoslovakia as start of the World War II (a date which doesn't add up to 68), rather than German invasion of Poland (when the world actually engaged into war with Germany). The war in Ukraine is just the intro (world is not formally involved in that war, although arming of Ukraine by the West certainly is a direct involvement), World War III will formally start when either Russia invades another country or someone pretending to be Russia fires a missile toward a NATO country - triggering a direct and formal response of the world. Assuming the correlations above are meaningful, one could then predict possible formal dates for the start of the World War III. I don't think Russia will invade any other country soon. On the other hand, those pretending to be Russia are more likely to be impatient so there's good probability for the formal start date of the World War III to be a date in the current year. I don't gamble, but if I would, I would say 2022.05.21, ±1 month... and would probably be wrong. Physical interpretation A proper synchronicity should not be based on random or convenient (biased) logic. In the example above, it was convenient to split the year into two numbers but can the two numbers be correlated with physical reality? In nature, there are yearly and monthly cycles and the numbers representing day, month and year can be correlated with these cycles - representing a particular state of a local universe. There are also bigger cycles which in nature correlate with the order of magnitude. Therefore, one cannot just split the number [in a date] arbitrarily and claim there is meaningful synchronicity there. However, splitting the year into a number representing century and a number representing a year in that century should be allowed (elaborated in next chapter). Due to cyclic nature, it is also allowed to discard higher components (bigger cycles) in comparison (although this decreases probability of meaningful correlation, and magnitude of effect). So if dates of world wars are correlated, one could also consider a different, simpler logic, such as one shown in Table \tbl2.

World War I	1914.07.28	14+07+28=49
World War II	1939.09.01	39+09+01=49
World War III	2022.04.23 ? 2022.05.22 ? ...	22+04+23=49 22+05+22=49 ...

Table \tbl2: Correlation between world war dates In any case, one could argue that the sum itself is meaningless - the addition of years, months and days seems like adding apples to oranges. However, this is not the case - this is the equivalent of adding small apples to big apples, which makes more sense. Universes are self-similar and bigger cycles resemble smaller cycles in nature. Thus, if nature does not discriminate between the scales [of energy], the sum of normalized scales makes natural sense. Mathematically, the universe is normalizing the scaling vector in operation. In example, for World War I: $\begin{aligned} \begin{bmatrix} 14 & 07 & 28 \end{bmatrix} \times \begin{bmatrix} 365.25 \\ 30.4375 \\ 1 \end{bmatrix} &=\gt \begin{bmatrix} 14 & 07 & 28 \end{bmatrix} \times \begin{bmatrix} 365.25 / 365.25 \\ 30.4375 / 30.4375 \\ 1 / 1\end{bmatrix} \\ &= 14*1 + 7*1 + 28*1 = 49 \end{aligned}$ A proper reference frame One could argue that a century cannot be correlated with a known periodicity in local reality and that might be true - if one does not consider harmonics. A lunar-solar cycle is equal to 33-34 years, very close to 100/3, making it a 3rd harmonic of a 100-year period. But is century the right choice for the interpretation? The period of a lunar-solar cycle might be a better (more localized) reference frame, but where/when does the cycle start? Assuming the lunar-solar cycles are aligned with centuries, years 1900, 1933.33, 1966.66, 2000 would be the years of cycle beginnings/ends during the last century. This would produce the same sum for the 1st and the 3rd world war as in Table \tbl2, but not for the World War II (the sum would be 06+09+01=16, as the war started in year 6 of the cycle). However, assuming the cycle starts with the year 1907, the sums for the world wars become equal again. This is shown in Table \tbl3.

Event	Gregorian date	Lunar-solar date	Sum
World War I	1914.07.28	**07.07.28	07+07+28=42
World War II	1939.09.01	**32.09.01	32+09+1=42
World War III	2022.04.23?	**15.04.23	15+04+23=42

Table \tbl3: Lunar-solar correlation between world war dates In fact, choosing any year from 1907-1914 for the start of a 1st cycle in last century would produce equal sums. So what is, in the end, the proper reference frame, producing proper dates for us, to properly correlate events in local time? There is a high equality (low relativity in equality) between the phenomena of world wars and there's logic for these to occur at the same point in scale-invariant cyclic time. More invariance there is between reference frames, the better, so perhaps we should synchronize our centuries with lunar-solar cycles synchronized with world wars [synchronicity] (or volcanism) and declare this the year 2011, not 2022. That's how much the world lags behind some of us anyway... Date of the World War III updated. Uncertainty Nature might use leap years in our brains, but that's not the case everywhere. Similar is the case with other cycles - somewhere integer numbers will be used, somewhere precision will not be sacrificed as much and leap quanta will be smaller. Dates can also differ between one part of the world and the other. To take all this into account, for any date here, uncertainty of ±1 day should be implied.