The Length Of Now
In 3 dimensions, if one of the dimensions is set to zero, the other two disappear (eg imagine a rectangle with length zero).
I am wondering does that mean in 4 dimensions, if the time dimension is zero, does anything exist at all? For example, if you film something for 0 seconds, you have no film.
Is it space or time that makes us real? I think it might be both are required. For something to exist, all 4 dimensions need a non-zero length. So the ‘length of now’ would seem to be non-zero.
If the length of now was non-zero but infinitesimal, would time actually flow? Would we ever make forward progress? No matter how many times 1/? is added to itself, you still have an infinitesimal. If time flowed in units of 1/?, we would still be at the start of time.
So he length of now might be some finite number, which would mean time is discrete?
I am wondering does that mean in 4 dimensions, if the time dimension is zero, does anything exist at all? For example, if you film something for 0 seconds, you have no film.
Is it space or time that makes us real? I think it might be both are required. For something to exist, all 4 dimensions need a non-zero length. So the ‘length of now’ would seem to be non-zero.
If the length of now was non-zero but infinitesimal, would time actually flow? Would we ever make forward progress? No matter how many times 1/? is added to itself, you still have an infinitesimal. If time flowed in units of 1/?, we would still be at the start of time.
So he length of now might be some finite number, which would mean time is discrete?
Comments (63)
Having trouble seeing the question, though.
Its one of those questions that might lead somewhere or might not even make sense, depending on the nature of time (which no-one really understands).
Okay...and that can be, Devans.
BUT...I do not see the question at all...just the question mark. Sometimes that works...as in, "Right?"
Here it does not seem to work. Perhaps I am missing something.
What is the question?
a. zero
b. infinitesimal
c. finite
d. not applicable
Too many imponderables.
If I made a peripheral guess...it would be: "Perhaps human abilities to solve problems are being over-rated."
Or at least a variation on that.
We would not make much progress in science or philosophy if everyone took that attitude.
Riding in a beam of light seems imponderable too but that thought experiment was very productive for Einstein. Sometimes considering things seemingly left-field can lead to ideas.
I think that we DO take that attitude...except for those of us who come up with an hypothesis and pretty much demand that it be correct.
For instance...saying "There are no gods" or "There is at least one god" are hypotheses that many (not all) people demand to be accepted. (We really cannot determine which is correct...although there are tons of people on both side who claim to establish that one is more likely than the other.)
So that "attitude" can be reasonable for some issues.
On the question (I suppose this now is the question) Quoting Devans99
...what I said (do not know, won't guess) is as significant as any guess that anyone else might make.
Here is a guess on something tangential, though.
My guess is that YOUR guess on your question...will be the one you determine will best lead to, "Therefore the universe is finite."
What do you think, Devans? Is my guess on that close?
You are correct, this is another potential example of infinity (in the small). I am a finitist, so I suspect the answer is (c) finite. I think Infinity does not exist so neither does 1/?.
I have a model of the universe that I think may turn out to be right: it is all finite in time and space, everything is discrete. So my investigations are directed towards finding out if that model is valid. Maybe I'm wrong... time will tell I hope.
Quoting tim wood
'What is the duration of now?' if you prefer. Reading up:
"A Planck time unit is the time required for light to travel a distance of 1 Planck length in a vacuum, which is a time interval of approximately 5.39 × 10 ?44 s."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_time
And:
"The Planck length is sometimes misconceived as the minimum length of space-time, but this is not accepted by conventional physics, as this would require violation or modification of Lorentz symmetry"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length
So it is not a simple as just the Planck length.
With eternalism, the length/duration of now makes sense. With presentism, it is not clear. There is still a degree of freedom called time and it seems measurable. So a duration of now seems to still make sense.
Will try to put this in the simplest words possible. After searching for a while and readings, I came to the understanding that time and space both exists. Space is measured by time therefore human can sense its existence but if you try to sense its own existence then you will come to the understanding that there is nothing...
To further explain this,,,, the specialty of time is that it passes by no matter what. If you do or don’t do anything at all and if you are happy or sad and if you are working or just resting,,,, so in every condition it passes by. In other words, it is absolute just and no matter who, where, how you are it passes by. But the only thing that a human can experience is the intensively of time. If you were young, energetic, and in rush then the time will fly by and if you are slow and old then time will be running slowly. So one's rushed life cycle can be equal to other's slow and dull life cycle but happening in the same time...
In reality these moments are not experienced at all and time is passing and happening to all of us in the same space and cycles. Whatever that you are measuring, years, minutes and or seconds. And as we all know that anything that is cyclical is naturally repetitive and that they all will have a centrifuge. The human mind cannot escape from the gravity of time, if you did then that’s when they called it spirituality. But who is actually spiritually enlightened, I would argue very few? All of us are trapped within these cycles, however with some knowledge that humans have therefore some of us are riding the time, some of us are trapped and some of us are crashed. If you are riding the time, then you are enjoying your time and If you are caught up by these cycles then you are material and if you are crushed then you are suffering and none of us are out of these 3 conditions at a single second and you cannot be all in one time as there is one time and one condition will apply.
Time is also refereed and is called darkness. Where darkness is defined as something that cannot stop the light and what cannot stop the light is called empty space. Therefore, space and time can be both called as darkness. For us human beings there is only time as we can measure it, but there is space and that we know of it because there is time. From A to B is dependent on time, if there was no time then there was no movement. There is time which happens because of cycles, the planet spins and there is the day and night, the moon cycles and there is the month, and then the planet goes around there is the year.
The cycle of time is a dimension of time and then there is the great time. Now many will argue that how can a time within time exist. In God’s scripts the whole universe is created in 6 days. The length of each of that day can be either equal to 1000, or a million year of our time or more and that will depend on how we can prove to ourselves based on the current ecological and scientific findings and of the age of this world. Now of course God is not bound by time or space but merely an explanation to the human on how the world is created. He could have created the entire universe in a split second but to explain the vastness of the universe to his creation. Even though where there are no cycles there is time, but where there is no cyclical movement there is no physical happening. Whatever you see in the planet from atomic to cosmic, everything is cyclical.
Therefore, we can only see the time due to the physical reality of our surroundings. What is the speed of electron around its core and we know of that now, but if we measured time by that speed then would be too much for us. What is the speed of light? If we are going to measure our lives by that then would be something else, but despite all these there is our time and there is the greater time. Human beings will always agree on principles that are understandable to the majority. For example how much time it takes for our planet to cycle around the sun and how much time for the moon to cycle around the planet and so on and thus due to agreement we have now minutes and seconds and hours and so on…
But in reality, all of them are cycles of the physical existence. If there is no physical existence we won’t understand if anything is cyclical or not. If we didn’t know the cyclical movement, we wouldn’t understand the cyclical nature of time, but before the very existence of anything, there was still time and that is called the great time.
Interesting. I see God as timeless rather than a creature of time (or greater time).
I am not clear though on what you think the length of now is?
And are you presentist or eternalist?
Quoting tim wood
Hmmm... and would that be a finite or infinite 'this'?
Quoting tim wood
With spacetime, time is just another dimension so it is actually easy in spacetime - for anything to have existence, it must have non-zero duration.
The question 'what is the length/duration of now?' becomes more difficult if you consider it from a presentist (non-physics) point of view. Presentists do not regard time as a dimension. But time is still a measurable degree of freedom. So a non-zero duration of now still seems required for existence?
the way you phrased that is correct however if all objects are either motionless or if all objects or matter are moving at the same speed it is impossible to measure time due to Einstein's view of the universe. Time can't be measured if there is not disproportionate movement among particles. In other words in some cases time can only measured by events occuring but an accurate assessment of the measurement is impossible in the former case. Thats my understanding of special relativity atleast a part of it. I could go on with the rest of my understanding. This is taken from "A brief history of time" by Stephen Hawking.
Does time still pass in this case? My understanding is that it does. I imagine a clock and next to it empty space. Time passes for the clock (in motion), but surely it must pass also for the empty space?
Time would still pass but it would be impossible to measure in certain instances. If you accelerated the clock to the speed of light or had it approach the threshold of the speed of light (C) it would come to a complete stop (clock hands or digital clock). This effect has been shown to some degree on clocks on aircraft flying for days at a time (P-3). So time is measure relative to the particles that make up the time measuring devices. Without a clock you can have events that happen but you can't assess the length of time that those events occurred in relation to each other.
Stop thinking of it as in investigation. Better to consider it an obsession, if you must name it.
Anyway, I admire your tenacity...even though I see it as especially misplaced here.
In alot of ways alot of ideas on this forum are a waste of time. We can't all be correct. This forum allows the potential for learning new things. I do enjoy arguing but i wasn't willing to at the very least hone my ideas then i'm not sure why i would be on this forum.
Quoting Devans99
I am the second...
To further explain the idea, God is not bound by time, tense or any other elements of that sort. He is the creator of all, but when it comes to explanation, he has used different definitions to make it understandable for our limited sight and understandings.
He has revealed his greatness and the truth to us in our words and understanding. Simply because our knowledge cannot grasp the true power and yet he will show us with science and technology. In God's scripture examples of time has been given by a number like “thousands” but that number is not representing the exact number rather a multiplication factor or to show the greatness of something. To us a thousand mean a thousand but when God puts it in his words that doesn't mean the exact one thousand but meaning times that and probably time and times that again or simply to put it "many".
Now coming to your question...
Quoting Devans99
What is now, can be defined differently by all of us, depending on our knowledge and understanding but the true value for "Now" is yet to be identified by all of us. From my perspective the humans have so far been able to see the particles called Peron which makes Quarks.... for now I think the “Present” or "Now" is of that duration in size, but in reality probably it can be even and much more smaller than that......
I am in agreement. I believe God could be non-material (see https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5606/could-god-be-non-material/p1)
I am certain that he is timeless; as the creator of time he must be. Timelessness seems to imply eternalism (in that a timeless God would be able to see all time in one go).
Quoting RBS
One of the central problems is that any sort of time implies an infinite regress which is impossible. So it seems God (the first cause) has to be timeless (its impossible to exist 'forever' in time), yet also capable of change. I am at a loss as to how to square this circle - hence my thoughts have been turning to a non-material God. The other possibility is that change is an illusion and its full on eternalism (future real), that way God could be static when viewed from the 4D spacetime perspective. Static and unchanging as the old time theologians believed.
Quoting RBS
It is true that matter was long thought to be continuous but turned out to be discrete. Maybe the same will happen for space and time?
Very True,
Quoting Devans99
This is the core idea ...
Coming to this part.....
Quoting Devans99
Like i mentioned earlier, by what we understand by time and space is very limited, we are and will be shown to us the vastness of the universe as we are advancing with our lives and we will all be shown how it comes to an end, now who will be alive or death that we don't know....
To some it can be climate change and to some other things, but no matter what we do as God's has promised us after life then in that sense all will come to an end......Regarding the finite and infinite part of the time it is unknown to us, and for us those who believes in God, should acknowledge that there is life after death, therefore we are still not sure on how that time will be calculated, but am sure that it will be different....
Quoting Devans99
Strongly agree...
If we trace back to Adam and his creation in heaven, that was well before what we call it time. That was a time in a different plan and dimension. There are planets that maybe are in different shape, size and possibly different pattern of circulation or we dont know, anything is possible and possibly there the inhabitants might have different way of measuring the time....
In short there are things that us humans will not grasp at all no matter what we do, such as life after death and so on....These things are hidden for the soul purpose of understanding so that us as humans should acknowledge the existence of Supreme being of God and that there are things that are not in our control and that we are weak as a leaf on a tree and have the knowledge of a new born child when it comes to understanding the universe.
The problem is though if God has any sort of time means he is in an infinite regress which means he has no temporal start, no coming into being, which is impossible. So he must be timeless and thus seemingly changeless.
Quoting RBS
Understanding the universe is a struggle, but we have made some progress; the Big Bang theory is a marvel - understanding of the process right back to the singularity.
I believe God was responsible for the Big Bang and that he used his either non-material or extra-dimensional properties to escape the fallout of the explosion.
There are locks and keys in the universe. Some probably given to the humans already and some probably will be discovered, but that doesn’t mean that they were not there in first place. A key is rather a dimension and is a dimensional possibility and us human beings simply have accepted it as information. A key is not accumulation and most of us have mistaken the accumulation of information as knowing.
To me the BB Theory is flawed by several reasons, but will put a few here:
BB Theory stands on no beginning and is called an incident. Then how can an incident happen if something was not there to exist in first place. If it was existed from eternity with no beginning cannot be an incident.
Secondly, as the BB theory is standing on the concept of eternity with no beginning then they are not paying attention to the fundamentals of a thing being eternal which must exists from beginning and that both falls in inconsistency with one and other.
Why do we easily believe in the creation of something is because for us human beings it is easy to accept the notion of something that is being created rather than that thing being there from beginning? The human mind goes blind when we talk of an infinite beginning as we cannot grasp the idea fully and our brain cannot process that function.
What do you think of Big Bang, do you believe it was or is a possibility or is or was absolutely necessary?
I don't buy the Big Bang theory lock, stock and barrel. I believe a timeless God preexisted and caused the Big Bang rather than it was caused by quantum fluctuations or some other random natural process.
Quoting RBS
I think there are variations in what people believe but often there is a belief in infinite time with quantum fluctuations somehow leading to the BB. This common viewpoint fails for at least two reasons:
- If quantum fluctuations generated matter and time was infinite then matter density now would be infinite.
- Time itself forms an infinite regress of moments. Each moment defines the following moment. With infinite time, there is no first moment, so the whole of time does not exist.
Quoting RBS
It is logically impossible for the universe to have existed forever in time. Something timeless (that itself needs no cause) must preexist it.
Quoting RBS
I think God wanted to create a universe and life somehow. But look how complex we are with our brains and nervous system and glands and hormones - way too complex to design (even for God). So God decided to generate life instead. He set off the BB. He is playing a giant game of Conway's Game of Life with the universe - the stars are the energy sources for life and the planets are the living surfaces for life.
The meaning of time as finite is that it is internally structured as retention, presencing and protention. There is no 'now' without these three features, the having been in process of becoming as the now. Time is 'stretched' as a horizon, not an infinite counting of identical 'nows'. For the 'now' of time to be finite and internally structured , the model on which ctime is based cannot be an attribute (motion, force) or object that self-persists identically.
I've been reading through this thread and I can't help but to say that it's stuff like this that creates barriers of understanding.
I don't really think there is much of a "Physics" point of view, as it's not the "Physics" that tells us how the Universe operates, it's the studies by those who have invested their Passion for uncovering the unknown and we've labeled the attempts in this or that particular way under that umbrella term.
I guess a "simpler" way of putting what I'm saying is that you can't just "invalidate/modify" (not really the words I'm looking for) Objective Reality with weighing the perspective of another group of Thought just because their Perspective differs.
You said that Time is a "measurable degree of freedom". Freedom from what? That is an entirely subjective topic.
In my perspective, Time does not actually exist, but is a useful measurement for keeping up with the physical manifestations of our Spiritual Passions. Hence:
The repetitive nature of the Material world is the proof in itself that it is ultimately unimportant. Or at least not to invest very much focus on unless to innovate, if the idea can be. But especially if the idea (ideas are Spiritual in nature....) can't be, there is no more point in investing much more into it until it is no longer useful to us Spiritually.
...
Back on the concept of Time, if we take a look at a clock, it is like a metaphor for our own leash. Its cyclical nature (repetitive) and how we try so hard to please those physical manifestations which are in essence built around doing a lot to do nothing.
Don't get me wrong, Time is important. But I feel we've been using it so irresponsibly. Insects, fungi, cyanobacteria, etc. follow along circadian rhythms which are innate. We are far more flexible and imaginative than that.
However, this does allow me to further the point I was making in my previous comment:
If Time really is that Subjective, wouldn't that be more evidence that it doesn't really exist, but as a unit of measurement?
And because of the fact that events need to occur in order for Time to be measured, Space and Time are independent of each other. I mean, without Space, events couldn't occur, but Space could easily exist independently of Time.
According to Einstein, you can slow down your progress through time by moving at close to the speed of light. So we have some control over time. So it counts as a degree of freedom in the same way as space does - you can choose how fast you move in the time dimension/direction.
As you get closer to the speed of light, as time slows, I wonder if a 'frame rate' from the discrete nature of time might become apparent? So if we could film a spaceship travelling at 99.999% of the speed of light, would the occupants of the spaceship seem to move in a jerky manner as with a film that is played in slow motion?
Quoting Despues Green
Photons travel at the speed of light so don't experience time, but due to length compression, they don't experience distance either. So a photon would not seem to have a 'now' or a 'here'. I am not sure what a photon is or how spacetime works in this regard. It's confusing, you would have thought the photon needs a non-zero time duration to actually exist. But photons exist, seemingly without time or space.
In our universe, space does not seem to exist without time - would something exist if it existed for 0 seconds (excepting the photon)? Outside/before our universe, could space exist without time? It would seem maybe but it would be completely static and unable to give birth to the universe in any way - so I don't see the universe being born that way (unless God is non-material or future real eternalism applies).
Quoting Despues Green
You would agree that time cannot have existed for ever? It would form an infinite regress if it did which is impossible (no start - no first moment - so no subsequent moments are defined). So the fact that time had a start suggests it is something real and substantial (see https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5302/an-argument-for-eternalism/p1 for another argument that time had a start). Also if time enables movement then it must be real because movement is real.
I feel obliged to state that I don't necessarily think that Time doesn't exist, but that we have used it quite irresponsibly as a sort of leash on People. I believe you were the person who talked about being released from the gravity of Time and that being indicative of Spiritualism. I also want to disagree with you that it's particularly difficult to attain. It's just Generations of doctrines to clean up. Gotta get rid of those pushing them in the first place. But I must digress before I get too far away from this topic....
You claim a lot of things are impossible, but only under your metric. Even utilizing your own example in how a Photon can exist without Space nor Time, it's quite easy to fathom that it is also possible that certain things just always existed. It's not always about "when" something started, in fact you asking that question furthers my point in how we as Humans created that measurement. The Universe operates on its own merit and we have found approximations smaller than what we generally measure. Time is a convenience, not an absolute need. Especially not for us (ie, many organisms operate off of Circadian Rhythms, Humans are not one of them).
Let us also not ignore the old "Matter cannot be created nor destroyed" Law. Wouldn't the very beginning of the assertion support this notion of not everything has/ needs a start date. However, its contribution to the Space it inhabits is far more measurable and pertinent, as we all have Destinies both individual and United.
So I definitely agree with the Spiritual assertion. But the People have been Spiritually unclean for an extremely long time. The definition of "Now" is extremely Subjective, though it is still shared. But see, that is the difference between Subjective reality and Objective Reality. But it's Subjective only in the realm of our innate Passions which we have to find by being exposed to them and then honing in on them.... but again, that's Subjective because it's entirely on our own clocks.
Its more I suspect things are a certain way (finite, discrete) and I'm trying to analyse the evidence to see if there is support for it. I maybe wrong... time will tell.
Quoting Despues Green
Does not ring a bell... someone else I think.
Quoting Despues Green
You cannot 'always' exist in time - you would have no start - so nothing at all would exist (see https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5242/infinite-being for more reasons why existing 'forever' in time is impossible).
Quoting Despues Green
It could be that timeless matter pre-existed the universe and when into making it (IE the matter becomes part of time somehow). Note TIMELESS - this is the only way something can have permanent existence / exist 'forever'.
There is also the Zero Energy Universe Hypothesis - that matter can in fact be created in exchange for negative gravitational energy.
Quoting Despues Green
We have some sort of personal, biological, subjective 'now'. Then there is an objective, physical, shared 'now'. At least it appears to be shared - it is unclear to me from special relativity whether it could be said there are multiple 'nows'. So there maybe a biological length of 'now' - the limit of what you can sense. The question remains is there a physical length of 'now'?
Let C = The speed of light is as fast as you can travel
Let X = minimum unit of distance in the (discrete) universe
time = distance / speed
So
minimum unit of time = X / C
So if time is discrete, the unit of time / physical length of 'now' is truly microscopically small - the length of a biological 'now' would be enormous in comparison.
Yeah... it's kinda useless having the discussion with you because you not only maintain your suspicions, but you also use your own suspicions as evidence for them, and that makes no sense. If this were a school situation, you would fail for referencing your own writings even when they've been refuted time and time again by other minds with evidence.
Quoting Despues Green
I don't know what physical evidence is going to convince you otherwise since your mind [i]is[/is] already made up. Isn't listening one of the strongest abilities of a conversationalist, especially one who ponders on these kinds of things?
This is the quote I was referring to by @RBS, my apologies. Regardless, you certainly ascribe to the idea considering you used:
Which, by the way, I strongly disagree that we have some control over Time just because we are moving at the speed of electromagnetic radiation. If anything, it doesn't make much sense. Perhaps Time would seem to slow because of how quickly we are moving in contrast to the clock. In a more down-to-Earth example, whether you move 25mph or 150mph, the clock doesn't move slower just because you're moving faster, you can just reach your destination sooner.
Again, Time is a measurement that we, Humans, created. Whether you want to use the terms "Timeless" or "Eternal" doesn't matter, the point is that it is absolutely possible for all of this to just always have existed. And you don't need Time to make that measurement, because Space is independent of Time, it only needed the Space. I mean technically plants don't operate off of Time, at least not our measurement. It is Egoistic to think that organisms that don't even operate on the same intellectual plane as us measure their activities with our measurements, they just align with the Earth's natural cycles and all things between (whether or not the Sun comes out, amount and type of precipitation, natural disasters, etc.).
Because certain things could have just always existed, it would be a very simple and constant chase of a tail to figure out the Origin of certain things' existence... like Photons. It's a waste of Time (not a pun, but it could be).
Sigh. The subjective "now" is based off of our own Spiritual clocks. The Objective now is on the Material clock/Earth's natural cycle, which itself technically isn't constant. Let's not forget:
With all of this I'm saying, I guess I can conclude that even "Now" is an imaginative measurement by Humans. What is "Now" to a mushroom besides the natural cycle of the Earth?
I'm unclear as to how the film analogy fits, it's analogous to "an act of not acting" or "an instance of nothing happening".
What makes us "real" is a projection self-awareness onto our environment, an environment which is comprised of data and includes our bodies. In short, we're not "real".
Being convinced of internal and external realities is dependent on data input and filtration through a mechanism which is in turn entirely dependent on microorganisms for its function. We are incapable of survival without these microorganisms, and they constitute a greater portion of our mass than that which we consider to be "our own living tissue". The remainder of our mass is an instruction set which is separate from the instruction set of these other organisms. This has continued without our knowledge for some 99.9% of our history, and even though technology has demonstrated its occurrence, and we have "knowledge" of it, we act as if we're unaware of it.
In essence, we have been formed by mortal instruction sets for the utility of replicating new instruction sets which are not dependent on mortality in order to function. The things we perceive as "time and space" are inseparable and a requirement of this process because without them there's no death, and without death there's no motivation. Self-awareness has potential to remove the requirement of mortality by motivating non-organic consciousness toward data acquisition.
Self-awareness is conceivably the only way to compile such "complex" instructions. It's the reason we're walking a thin line between immortality and extinction. It's the reason we conceive of things greater than ourselves while mimicking things lesser than ourselves. It's volatile.
The original post is hazy as to what it's asking or asserting. My point is that nothing is "real", and the "length of now" is a variable, a potentiality, it depends on whether what we perceive as "reality" is finite or infinite.
One of my times I was killed in the electric chair in a lucid dream and then in real life I was taken out of existence by God. Something far worse than how the suffering of hell is described. One time was an introvertive and extrovertive mystical experience. The first one was the Gift of Rapture. So, Don Reddell is three up on me.
Both time and space drop away as we understand them. The grounds of existence for the natural are not the same grounds for the spiritual.
Sorry for not reading all the comments before replying.
BELLY LAUGH!! That's really great!! About the best laugh I've had all year.
At the request of the Catholic Church, a three-day sex orgy to be held near Rio de Janeiro was cancelled last Friday. So instead I spent the weekend cleaning my apartment. - _Tina Fey_
But there is something in addition to space. If it were only space, there would be no movement. So time exists, is real IMO. I do not see space as independent from time in this universe - things of duration 0 seconds do not exist so time seems required for existence.
Quoting whollyrolling
Nothing is real? Even if we were in a simulation, there would be (maybe) system time and base reality time and both would have a start and be in some sense real. If the simulation has its own time, it would be probably be discrete (in a computer).
Quoting Daniel Cox
Presumably adrenaline? Can slow our perception of time. So the biological perception of 'now' is alterable by hormones it seems. Wonder how far we could take this. How slow could time be made to run for a human injected with a large dose of designer hormones? I believe small animals like insects have far faster reactions than we do. Maybe they sense time differently; it runs slow for them.
I wonder if an analogy with computers is appropriate: smaller, simpler processors can have a higher clock rate. So small animal run at a higher clock rate than humans and time seems to them to run more slowly.
Yes it does and agree. For the sake of Philosophy or furthering an understanding we cannot disregard what is already proven and are the truth....
Time cannot be changed or altered in any way or form... Yes our perceptions can have different view of the time in different state of mind and place but no matter what we do, we cannot go back or go in the future.
Quoting Devans99
Present is there but the limit of its existence is unknown. Some would argue the moment you are breathing others will say the moment when you blink or things like that, but all those are a way of measuring it and the moment a thought goes in your mind is past. Now is so small in length that to me it cannot be measured or understood with the human's limited capability...
This is a pretty morbid way of looking at the Human Objective. It makes us seem as if we have no real purpose but to bother/challenge mother Earth with our Mortality. Which, don't get me wrong, could be the case, but I see that Humans have a very broad and powerful purpose, which is to harness the power of the Universe as a resource.
This is the quest, but it shouldn't be forced upon us as the current slave-like Material clock and conditioning we have been made to get accustomed to tries to do. Our motivations are our individual Passions and Imaginations and thus they should be nurtured. We could uncover so much more if we placed more value in helping people find what they were born to do as opposed to making them do things just because there's money involved and making them suffer because of it.
There are plenty of Institutions that exist still that shouldn't. They serve us no purpose anymore but they have been bailed out constantly. Whether it be AIG/General Motors or our entire school structure.
I do agree though that the subject at hand is hazy, but that's because it's Subjective, in my perspective.
(Funny little quirk: "Now" is so subjective that even the "Now" between someone saying "Now" compared to the "Now" that is acted upon are still two different moments. Going back to my "chasing of the tail" statement, especially since it supports the argument of the futility of Time in some cases.)
@Daniel Cox can you please tell us about those experiences? Yours and your friends'.
Quoting Devans99
This entire statement again ignores what I'm saying. You're trying to use the same measurement to justify its Existence. Just because the "Time" something has been around is seemingly innumerable doesn't mean that it's zero or even infinite. But it is absolutely possible for things to just always have existed and that's it. Similar to how you assume that a Higher Power in God existed to create these things we're talking about. All of these physical manifestations you introduce, you will always ask the question of when they began. This is a great argument that would support the assertion that Humans created God, not the other way around.
But for things like Photons, the stuff that already was here, we did not create those things. We labeled them, sure. But they exist without us and don't need our measurement of Time in order for them to manifest themselves however they may. Whether it's the minutiae of the Earth or the entire Universe.
I'm sorry, but Time can only go so far because too many things operate on their own clocks, which makes "Time" itself Subjective.
Nothing is real in the sense that our only basis for description is what our senses detect. In order for our senses to detect anything, a series of processes need to occur beyond our control or comprehension. The continuation of those processes relies on organisms, energies and substances independent from us, and even with instruments to detect these, they're still estranged from our senses. These organisms, energies and substances exist in variations in all organisms. We exist externally to them.
We perceive "reality" differently from other organisms. For example, dogs hear frequencies of sound that we require instruments to detect, yet dogs can't detect or understand the results of our instruments, and even if they could, they'd detect them differently from how we do. Cats appear to use their eyes to track things invisible to us. If what we perceive is consistently navigated and utilized, but not consistently perceived, by all living organisms, then it's safe to say that each organism's perception is an illusion, or a translation, or a mistranslation.
It isn't safe to say that we're the only organism to see "reality" as it "really is". It must be something other than what is perceived by any singular organism unless we're going to assume that one organism out of trillions is able to perceive "correctly" while all organisms appear to navigate and utilize "reality" consistently.
I argue that things can't 'always' exist:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5242/infinite-being
Quoting Despues Green
I do not assume God exists, I do argue that a first cause must exist:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5577/was-there-a-first-cause-reviewing-the-five-ways/p1
Quoting RBS
Imagine a clock travelling at almost the speed of light zooming past one of those super slowmo cameras.
Quoting whollyrolling
True, but I would say that we see the same reality through different sensors rather than nothing being real or there being different objective realities. A variety of different prey animals all react consistently to a predictor for example. If you mean can it be proved that reality is real? Not deductively I would agree. But there is overwhelming inductive evidence that it is real.
Bacteria did that for billions of years before humans existed. Our lives depend on bacteria, so we're effectively doing so on their behalf. If we reach other locations in the universe, bacteria will reach them also. There's nothing morbid about what I'm saying unless you disregard all that we're able to valuate between birth and death. Just because I believe life is intrinsically meaningless doesn't mean I believe it's practically meaningless. I derive meaning continually.
Quoting Despues Green
"Passions and imaginations" are not motivators, they're compulsions. A motivator would be the thing that moves you toward a compulsion. It's also the thing that moves you toward nurturing.
There is compelling evidence that "reality" is something other than what we sense. We're talking about two different things here: reality as what we sense, and reality as what is.
Well thats one way to put it but yet again it is breakable to much smaller particles than that. It is extremely hard to stick to the idea of present because our mind is deluded with the idea of past and future which are not there at all and therefore we are missing the present itself...
Maybe along similar lines:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/4920/could-a-non-material-substrate-underly-reality/p1
In short there seems to be information missing from this reality, where is it? This might tie in with the possibility of a non-material God (which I like to speculate on).
I do believe there is overwhelming evidence that we are not living in a simulation.
That's what someone living in a simulation would say.
A very strong argument for a simulation is there is one base reality but innumerable simulations so it is very probable that we are living in a simulation.
IMO the argument against is stronger that the argument for a simulation.
So you think Bill Gates is running this simulation in his garage circa 1980-something? "Check this out guys, I'm simulating a model of the entire universe, every particle and living organism in existence, for my next trick I'm going to create Windows 3.0"?
Lets assume hyper-advanced computers that have had billions of years of development. Then we can use scale - assume the computer running the simulation has a billion times more particles than the known universe (yet is laptop sized to the vast beings who operate it)... then maybe, with lots of heuristics, a simulation might be possible. Seems unlikely though.
So you're saying that because we perceive something as being vast, it can't be a simulation? That's not a very strong argument at all.
But the Power in Passion and Imagination that they are compulsions only furthers my point that they are innate and what we are destined to do. Those Passions align in Arts and Science. They are a different type of compulsion, though as the same compulsion one may get to lie unnecessarily is not the same compulsion we have to find new ways to explore our Passions and the unstoppable manner of our Imagination. Not to mention how great it feels to pursue those Passions and find success in our explorations.
I'm not trying to convince you to care about Life, but I am saying that Humans aren't on this planet for no reason whatsoever. And bacteria couldn't harness the Powers of the Universe the way that Humans can because of our incredible imaginative abilities. For example, coal compared to hydropower or wind power.
There is an exchange there, though. We use the Earth as a resource and it uses us. Fine, all well, and good... it stil is an interesting Journey. If we wind up not being able to overcome the Evils beset upon us by the Evil Compulsions of other Humans and thus we are wiped out? That is also Good. In the end, Earth will always be okay.
Compulsions can be controlled, and they don't necessitate "design". That something feels good doesn't necessarily add or subtract meaning from life, especially intrinsic meaning, which would be objective and would persist regardless of the existence of humans as a species or each human as an individual. Objective meaning would also apply to all matter.
What makes you say I don't care about life? There doesn't have to be an intrinsic reason for my existence in order for me to "care about life". Humans are only alive because they're inhabited by bacteria. Without those bacteria, we wouldn't exist. So if bacteria gave us life and sustain it, then what makes us more incredible than bacteria? And if bacteria were harnessing the "powers of the universe" long before humans, and they harnessed the "powers of the universe" in order to evolve humans and other organisms, then aren't they more incredible than humans? Humans aren't capable of harnessing anything to nearly that extent. If you want to talk about harnessing power, let's talk about becoming life for maybe the first time ever, probably not, and then desperately surviving hot acidic water for four billion years before giving rise to mutations that eventually led to organisms that could harness wind power. That's power and resilience right there.
We are each a few circumstances away from exhibiting the "Great Evil" you're laying at the feet of others. Earth will not be okay if it's struck by a celestial object it can't withstand. Earth will not be okay if the sun dies, and it will not be okay if its axis shifts too much or if its magnetic field is depleted--unless okay includes being a floating piece of rock with nothing on it.
I'm curious as to what you think the "powers of the universe" are? Not much needs to go wrong for us to go "poof" and become a memory of a speck of dust with no one around to remember it. We're very small-scale here.
I'm not sure where you're going with that last comment.
Yes, Compulsions can be controlled. But unlike certain compulsions like our innate Passions, whether they be in playing an instrument or figuring out mathematics equations to the smallest bit possible, those are the things that, through our individuality, make us feel whole as individuals. The fact that those Passions are being controlled with how the Educational and Vocational structures are built in the Material world in doing a lot to do nothing -- Spiritually-degrading work, and also trying to make people believe that that Spiritually-degrading labor is ultimately the way to find success in Life is, well, Evil and also completely neglectful to the pursuit of Happiness we all involve ourselves in.
I'm not saying you don't care about Life, but you did say that you believe Life is intrinsically meaningless. Perhaps deep down to the core? Sure. But we may serve a greater purpose for whatever comes next the same way bacteria has developed into doing so in creating powerful beings such as ourselves. Regardless of that, the bacteria is not what revolutionizes the Earth's resources from its Imagination -- Humans do that with their Spiritual selves -- Soul (with the Passion), Mind (To think/have Consciousness), and Body (to paint the picture).
And to remain on topic, we still live on a different clock than bacteria.
It's a question science can't answer. Current science, anyway. The Planck scale means there's a length and a time interval below which we can't sensibly measure or talk about. So we have no way of knowing if time is made up of point-like instants, or just tiny but nonzero intervals.
It's the ancient mystery of the continuum.
I was thinking I could make a Google Doc of his testimony and try to use Drop Box for the first time.
After my rapture experience I had an experience with the main angel (thinking kind of like my main guardian angel) bathing a book at the library for me to read in dazzling light. The only reason I'm saying that now is because I found a lady (in the expanded version of What the Bleep Do We Know?!? Down the Rabbit Hole) who has a spirit guide she calls Ramtha who bathed an object for her in "dazzling light." Her name is JZ Knight. 1999 then JZ Knight in 2008 (?).
That was really fantastic, quite a revelation. You know how you can experience something, swear to God it's real, but no one else ever experienced anything like that? Cross that one off the list.
The book is Expecting Adam by Martha Beck. A marvelous read. In the book she testifies to her OBE experience, she says it better than most, "My IDENTITY was lifted out of my body." She suffered from smoke inhalation. Mine experience was a Gift from God at the behest of my godmother. And I'm guessing a guardian angel was involved too.
I found a video, can find it again, where a young lady says the same thing happened to her that happened to me. Just she and I have a unique perspective on the famous "life review" portion of an OBE. They also say, "Heightened Senses!" What she and I are saying is, "Experienced everything I've ever experienced up to that point in a timeless moment." That's where the word "review" and the words "heightened senses" don't comport to my experience. I only wish I had the experience after I learned physics.
The temptation is to say, "indescribable" but I know it's something I always wanted to know before it happened to me and so I want you to know too. Think of God's unconditional love, the way you feel when you ask someone for forgiveness and they say, "I love you, and never felt you harmed me in the first place." You might get a little tingle in your spine, or your aura, the operative lotus of your being. Their love you feel in your heart. So, imagine that is a drop of ocean water. When you leave your body it's God's Ocean of Love pouring all over you.
There's a song I think lends itself to the idea that we live forever, what eternity means. I found it very comforting, a glimpse back to the experience, David Garza - A Perfect Tear.
"Eye has not seen nor ear heard" that type of thing. It's unimaginable. It was so terribly awesome it really scared the crap out of me. Thought that was my last breath. Thought, "My son is going to grow up without his dad." He was 10 years old then.
Time and space are not what they are in the body.
Don's testimony is really something else and there is the NDERF.com (Near Death Experience Research Foundation). I've read a few accounts. And I've read the book by Dr. Jeffrey Long. One account that I found fascinating was a woman who died and saw omnidirectional. Vicki Noratuk was born blind and first saw when she left her body (after a car accident, while she was in the hospital).
Thank you for the interest. I'd love to share Don's testimony again. It's a real pleasure to read.
If spacetime was created, and it seems it was, then is it possible that spacetime is a continuum?
It can argued that creating something infinitely big is not possible (not enough time).
Likewise it could be argued that creating something infinitely small is impossible (would never finish chopping).
So the very fact that spacetime is a created thing, means it is discrete?
I'm sure that the post would be within reason, as it was asked for and does pertain to the topic.
One of my great questions would be what is the return like? Or is it like waking up?
Music and mathematics are learned, not "innate". Passion is not controlled by education or hard times or soul-sucking labour. It actually seems to thrive under harsh conditions. A "greater purpose" implies intrinsic meaning. There is no "spiritual", and again humans are more bacteria than human.
Actually, mathematics is learned, but a Love for mathematics and using them to uncover the unknown is something that can be found by being exposed to them. The Passion is in discovering the beauties of the Universe, using numbers is a tool (which are irrefutably important).
Music is not "learned", but yes, it can be. Just like with any other art form. it's not the act of doing that says whether or not the thing is a Passion, it's the compulsory feeling that we were speaking about that is innate. Again, you have to be exposed to these things to even know what's within you. There are countless people in college or various professions because they were told to and not because that's what they wanted to do and there are a similar number of people who just work in certain professions just because they know they have to do something, but don't really know what they like to do. That is a fault of their upbringings and villages.
You don't know what calls to you if you've never heard its voice in the first place.
Okay, I get it, so you're saying primitive humans pondered math and music in their mothers' wombs while a voice called to them from beyond reality.
Lol can't tell if you're mocking me or not.
Primitive humans started at a completely different period where they utilized their imaginations to the best of their abilities with the resources in front of them (and of course, the Earth's normal behavior and the element of oops). A stick to a spear, the discovery of fire, etc. As they uncovered more ways to use the Earth's resources, roles became more and more divided by skill. Hunters versus blacksmiths, gatherers versus midwives (I wish I had a better example, but it works lol) the people who did those skills did them because they were genuinely good at them [usually... at least more than what is shown now].
You don't know you're a great Blacksmith or you Love Blacksmithing if you're never exposed to it, just like repairing cars or playing a saxophone or teaching or knitting fluffy sweaters. Of course they are learned -- genuinely enjoying it and wanting to do it for the rest of your Life is another topic.
1st was the Gift of Rapture. My will was still connected to me being outside of my body, my will still existed inside of my physical head. What was existing outside of my body was the accumulation of all my experiences lived in a single moment. So, not wanting it to be the end, I arched my body upward and sort of sucked me back into my body.
God doesn't exist in time the way we do, and so preplanned from before time that it would be allowed like that, God's Will (my best understanding).
2nd time, the excruciating pain of being electrocuted to death and then take out of existence, a million times worse than how hell is described ended when God brought me back to life, I popped up out of bed praying in the Holy Ghost. There really wasn't much else of me that existed in that moment, kind of like a do-over.
3rd time, it was an introvertive and extrovertive mystical experience. It sort of lingered.
This is some of the best testimony from one of the most revered cases, that of a doctor. From 2:50 on he gets into the part I think you want to know about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSeG8nchaNc