Control emissions at the cylinder level, with Zero CO, Zero HC and near zero NO
The Physics of Time framework
Dr. Ibrahim Mounir Hanna
Inventor of the Relative Motion Engine and Founder of the Physics of Time (PoT) Framework
I am an inventor and independent researcher working on motion, geometry, open systems, and time-based diagnostics. My work began with a practical engineering question: how can useful work be increased when system geometry changes during motion? That question led me to invent the Relative Motion Engine (RME), a patented moving-boundary combustion architecture, and later to develop the broader Physics of Time (PoT) framework.
This website presents that journey: the invention, the patents, the engineering results, and the expanding framework that emerged from them.
Why I began this work
I did not begin with a philosophical theory. I began with an engineering problem. In open systems with moving boundaries, classical mechanics remains correct, but practical design insight often comes only after full integration, simulation, and post-analysis. I wanted to understand whether geometry itself could be used more directly to improve realization of pressure, momentum, and useful work before the full computational cycle is complete.
That search led to the invention of the Relative Motion Engine. It also opened a wider question: whether time can be treated not only as a parameter of motion, but as a primary diagnostic ledger for how systems realize work and structure.
The invention
The Relative Motion Engine (RME) is a moving-boundary combustion system in which internal geometry changes how pressure acts during the power stroke. In the current project presentation, the system is described as one in which two pistons move in the same direction during combustion, reshaping the pressure field and increasing conversion of combustion pressure into useful work.
The published project description reports substantially higher pressure and work results in simulation relative to comparable conventional cylinders, while preserving conservation laws. The project is also supported by a family of patents and international filings listed on this website.
What the invention revealed
The most important thing I learned from the engine was that geometry is not merely a passive container for motion. In open systems, geometry can redistribute:
· acceleration exposure,
· pressure realization,
· force transmission pathways,
· participating mass,
· and the timing through which useful work becomes available.
This was the practical beginning of PoT. The framework did not start as a claim about all of physics. It started as an attempt to understand, in engineering terms, how moving geometry changes realization during motion.
From invention to framework
As the engineering work developed, I found that the same geometric and timing questions appeared beyond combustion. They appeared in moving-boundary systems, in orbital relations, in wave structure, and later in the problem of how readings should be normalized before interpretation.
From that work emerged the Physics of Time (PoT): a time-primary engineering and diagnostic framework for open systems. PoT does not replace classical mechanics, thermodynamics, or conservation laws. It adds a diagnostic layer intended to make realization, participation, and geometry-dependent timing more visible before full integration is complete.
In its broader development, PoT also became a framework for observer normalization, hierarchical readings, and structured classification across domains.
What I mean by Physics of Time
By Physics of Time (PoT), I mean a framework that studies how open systems realize motion, pressure, and structure through exposure, participation, and geometry-dependent timing.
In this work, time is not treated only as a passive coordinate. It is treated as a diagnostic organizer of realization.
PoT is used here as:
· an engineering diagnostic for open systems,
· a tool for analyzing moving geometry,
· a way to compare structures across domains,
· and a method for organizing readings before turning them into larger interpretations.
What PoT does not claim
PoT is not presented as:
· a replacement for thermodynamics, a new force, or a free-energy claim,
It is presented as a framework that grew out of analysis and repeated engineering testing.
Main achievements presented through PoT:
Prepared in a soon coming book” The Physics of Time for engineers”, I present the following main lines of work:
1. The invention of the Relative Motion Engine
A patented moving-boundary engine architecture developed from relative-motion geometry.
2. Geometry-shaped acceleration exposure
A line of work showing that geometry can change how acceleration is realized in open systems.
3. A time-primary field-traversal tool
A diagnostic method for analyzing how systems traverse fields and realize work over time.
4. Cross-domain geometric linkage
A broader research direction relating confined systems, orbital motion, wave structure, and hierarchical organization through common geometric principles.
5. Time-primary non-inertial normalization
A new conservation ledger built around a novel time-primary non-inertial framework.
6. Classification of normalized readings
A later development in which readings become structured entries in a ledger before they are used to support explanatory claims.
7. Toward a coherent ledger of open systems
An ongoing effort to understand how engineering systems, motion, waves, structure, and observation may be related within one organized framework.
Engineering basis of the work
The practical basis of this framework is engineering, not speculation alone. The current project description states that the PoT approach was evaluated through extensive CFD simulation of moving-boundary combustion systems and that it helped predict design trends and gains before full simulation closure. The site reports more than 100 full-cycle CFD simulations between 2018 and 2025, with useful-work improvements in the reported range of roughly 18–45%, while conservation laws remained preserved
This practical engineering anchor is important. The broader framework grew out of design, testing, and geometry-driven performance analysis.
Website purpose
This website is intended as a structured presentation of my work. It brings together:
· the Relative Motion Engine,
· patents and engineering documents,
· the Physics of Time framework,
· open-system diagnostics,
· and the broader effort to build a coherent ledger across domains.
If you are visiting as an engineer, this site shows how the work began in machinery and moving-boundary performance. If you are visiting as a researcher, Observe for “ The Physics of Time for Engineers”, it will show how that engineering path led to a broader framework for normalization, structure, and interpretation.
Closing statement
My work began with an engine, but it did not end with an engine. It developed into a broader attempt to understand how geometry, timing, and participation govern realization in open systems. This website documents that path: from invention, to engineering method, to the continuing development of the Physics of Time.
The Physics of Time for Engineers
Geometry itself can do work — when the walls move
Classical methods tell us how efficiently a system performs. Physics of Time asks how its motion became admissible in the first place.
In the Physics of Time, Ibrahim M Hanna proposes a new framework for reading motion, energy, and structure across open systems.
Closed-system engineering is highly effective at efficiency audits, optimization, and conservation-based verification once a design has already been fixed. But open systems raise an earlier question: where do blind spots enter motion and design, and what governs whether stored potential becomes realizable at all? This book addresses that prior layer.
Unlike classical mechanics, which is organized around inertial-frame assumptions and around corrections for non-inertial frames, Physics of Time mechanical designs, introduced in this book, begin from a time-primary non-inertial framework. In this approach, inertial frames are not the universal foundation but a secondary derivation that emerges under restricted conditions. That reversal gives the book a method for asking how motion becomes admissible before conventional efficiency analysis begins.
Rather than replacing classical methods, Physics of Time reorders their use. It argues that open-system logic should first secure design potential and admissibility; only after that does conventional efficiency analysis fully apply. The result is a time-governed diagnostic framework built around exposure, conservation, and realizability.
At the center of the book is a unified ledger-style approach for analyzing systems across scales — from engineering devices and orbital mechanics to wave propagation, stellar processes, and cosmological observations. Standard measurements are preserved, but their interpretation is reorganized: measurement first, normalization next, interpretation after.