Dear Tatiana
''if time runs slower somewhere, it should also run faster in some other places? ''
This question is asked from an imaginary observation post outside the universe, as if you're looking over God's shoulders at His creation, so to say, as if the pace of time is something absolute, something which doesn't depend on anything, something which can be determined objectively, which, as I argue, it is not. Since according to relativity theory a gravitational field is an area of contracted spacetime as seen from a position outside* of it, the physical distance between the observer and the clock (as measured with a ruler within the field) is much larger than their mathematical distance (as calculated from their positions with respect to the stars), so the observer should see the clock run slower as the field is stronger or, equivalently, as their (physical) distance is greater. Reversely, as seen from within the field, from a position near its 'source', the field works like telescope, so things appear to be closer, so a clock outside* of it is observed to run faster. *With ' outside', I mean a position where the field is very weak compared to the field at its 'source', quotation marks as in a Self-Creating universe (SCU) particles (and the objects they form) are as much the source as the product of their fields and forces, of their interactions.
''in relation to what you measure the distance''
As there's no yardstick outside the universe with respect to which we can compare, measure inside distances, distance similarly is not an absolute quantity but something relative, observer-dependent, on his mass, motion and the distance he observes a distance between objects from. A SCU has no reality as a whole, no beginning, so it lacks the external, absolute clock showing cosmic time a BBU is supposed to have, no clock we can use to objectively determine the duration or time sequence of events, what precedes what even if we would be able to look from the outside in.
My essay, short as it had to be, only could be a summary of the main arguments and conclusions of a far more extensive study you may find interesting, so if you are able to bear its many flaws, you might take a look at my site: www.quantumgravity.nl. If you do, I'd very much like to hear your comment on it: as a work in progress, it can only benefit from critique.
Anton
