Welcome


Thank you for visiting our new forum! To start posting again please follow the link below to create a new password. First time forum users please follow the link to register. CFI thanks you for continuing the discussion on evidence-based thinking and humanist values.

Definitions of ''TIME''


Forums Forums Philosophy Definitions of ''TIME''

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 94 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #322134
    @sree
    Participant

    Bob: By “does not exist in absolute terms” I am going to assume you mean “isn’t real” or “isn’t an actual thing” or “isn’t a phenomenon”.

    Damn right.

    My answer to your question is no, we can not make any such conclusion.

    Why not?

    There would not be anywhere near enough information in a series of black footprints to conclude anything other than it would appear that a two-legged creature wearing shoes walked down the path after stepping in black paint.

    Exactly! There is all there is to conclude: black footprints made on a path with each thump of the goddam speaker. Time doesn’t exist! In # 318190 you said:

    Time does not present any evidence of interacting with anything; if it did we could say it exists, but it doesn’t so we have to say it doesn’t exist.

    Don’t mess around with truth, Bob. You are the one who announced that time is an artifact of the memory (i.e. imaginary). Now, that I prove your claim, you are hemming and hawing. You are like someone who claims that you can fly; and when I throw you off the balcony, you are clutching to the railing terrified.

    I give you a dozen photos (3 x 5 glossy color prints) of the same clock all showing different “times”.  If I assure you I took the photos and the clock was working perfectly, what can you conclude about time from them?

    If you gave me a dozen photos of the same clock showing different “times” as in 1 pm, 2 pm, 3 pm, 4 pm, 5 pm, 6 pm, 7 pm, 8pm, 9 pm, 10 pm, 11 pm, and 12 pm, I would conclude that you gave me a dozen photos showing the same clock with the long (minute) hand at 12 o’clock position and the short (hour) hand at the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 o’clock positions.  They are all photos of the same clock with its long hand in one position and its short hand in various positions. What has time got to do with those photos?

    #322164
    @ibelieveinlogic
    Participant

    Sree:  “What has time got to do with those photos?”

    Einstein is quoted as saying that time is what we see when we look at a clock.  I think he was right.  Notice that we would see only one arrangement of the clock’s hands relative to its face.  We would call that a particular time.  In order to establish the concept of the passage of time, which is what we commonly call time, we would need memories, or records, of other individual times.

    Each of the photos I gave you would be a record of a single time.  Without additional memories, or records, associated to the photos you cannot have any idea of the sequence the photos and thus you cannot conclude anything about the passage of time they might represent.  It would be the same for any physical evidence such as the footprints in your example.

     

    Sree:  ” Since there is no need to remember (i.e. conceptualize), nor do we need a ticking clock that is replaced by you marking steps on the path, can we conclude that time does not exist in absolute terms?”

    Bob:  “My answer to your question is no, we can not make any such conclusion.”

    Sree:  “Why not?”

    I think that us observing the footprints on the path is not enough to conclude anything about time.  I don’t see how a line of footprints by themselves could tell us much about how, when or why they were made.  I think we would need more info about them.  I don’t make the connection that they replace memories or a clock.

     

    Sree:  “Don’t mess around with truth, Bob. You are the one who announced that time is an artifact of the memory (i.e. imaginary). Now, that I prove your claim, you are hemming and hawing. You are like someone who claims that you can fly; and when I throw you off the balcony, you are clutching to the railing terrified.”

    I don’t see where your example proves my claim.  I don’t get it.

    The only “proof” of my claim that I can see is that there is no evidence to the contrary and that is not really a proof.  My claim would be shown to be false if there was evidence that time interacts with anything, that it is an actual phenomenon.  I think there is no such evidence.  I think it better to say that my claim is assured by logical deduction rather than proved.

    #322212
    @sree
    Participant

    Bob: Einstein is quoted as saying that time is what we see when we look at a clock. I think he was right.

    Einstein was wrong. Like you, Einstein took it for granted that “time” was an existential fact. Time is an illusion but we can’t just stop there. There is more to this. We will have to reset our entire understanding of objective reality. Your power of deduction cannot process this unless you have an insight into how cognition works. I am not suggesting that you read up on the topic. There is no science on this. You have to discover and figure it out yourself firsthand. Ours is a timeless reality. And yet, things move, the clock ticks. What are we?

    I like this exchange because you are smart and fully engaged in this discussion.

    #322235
    @ibelieveinlogic
    Participant

    Sree, I do not accept time as “an existential fact”.  I don’t accept that time is an “illusion.”  In order for it to be an illusion there would have to be an underlying reality that is somehow distorted to produce the illusion.  I do accept that time is a concept.

    Of course our reality is “timeless”, meaning without time, meaning no time.

    Yes, we observe that things move, and clocks tick, and we have acceptable explanations for why these events happen as they do.

    My conclusions are that each of us is a binary entity; we have a body and a soul, both instanced at the moment of conception.

    #322304
    @sree
    Participant

    Sree, I do not accept time as “an existential fact”.  I don’t accept that time is an “illusion.”  In order for it to be an illusion there would have to be an underlying reality that is somehow distorted to produce the illusion.  I do accept that time is a concept.

    Ok, let’s say time is a concept. Would you also say that America is also a concept, an idea of a nation state? Following this line of thinking, one could say that everything, in reality, that cannot be detected by the senses is conceptual, an artifact of the mind.

    • This reply was modified 8 months, 1 week ago by Sree.
    • This reply was modified 8 months, 1 week ago by Sree.
    #322309
    @sree
    Participant

    Of course our reality is “timeless”, meaning without time, meaning no time.

    Yes, we observe that things move, and clocks tick, and we have acceptable explanations for why these events happen as they do.

    A clocks ticks, it doesn’t measure the passage of time. It just keeps ticking as a movement in pace with the movement of the sun. The ticking clock is real, and so is the moving sun across the sky. Those are the only two things I see. No time passing. If the passage of time is perceivable, then it is an illusion that cannot be detected by the senses.

     

    #322310
    @sree
    Participant

    Hey Bob, do you realize what we are doing here? I call it critical inquiry. To the Buddha, it would be considered insight meditation. No kidding. If we can crack this mystery of time, we can move on to tackle your conclusion on the binary entity.

    #322338
    @ibelieveinlogic
    Participant

    Sree:  “Would you also say that America is also a concept, an idea of a nation state?”

    I think use of the term “America” to describe the United States of America is the most pompous thing I have ever encountered.  We have two continents currently named North America and South America.  Everyone who is in either continent is an “American”.  I try to avoid using the term American and use US citizen or something similar when referring to a citizen of the USA.  It would be much better if our founder had chosen a different name for our confederation.  What brass it was to contemplate that those States would forever be “THE” only states of both continents.

    Sree:  ” Following this line of thinking, one could say that everything, in reality, that cannot be detected by the senses is conceptual, an artifact of the mind.”

    Yes, I agree.

    #322339
    @ibelieveinlogic
    Participant

    Sree:  “If we can crack this mystery of time …”

    I don’t see it as a mystery.  My only concern is that so many accept that it is something physical, something real.  Not that their wrong thinking causes me any problem – it doesn’t – but I don’t think it is helpful or beneficial at all.  I’d like to believe that the effort spent in pursuing this wrong idea could be better spent in another direction.

    #322374
    @sree
    Participant

    Sree: ” Following this line of thinking, one could say that everything, in reality, that cannot be detected by the senses is conceptual, an artifact of the mind.”

    Bob: Yes, I agree.

    An artifact of the mind is a concept, an idea, a metaphor. A chair, which can be perceived by the senses, exists when it is seen and/or touched. Would you agree that it no longer exists but an artifact of the mind when you have closed your eyes and no longer touching it?

    • This reply was modified 8 months, 1 week ago by Sree.
    • This reply was modified 8 months, 1 week ago by Sree.
    #322376
    @sree
    Participant

    Bob: I don’t see it as a mystery.

    By “mystery”, I mean that even though our reality is “timeless”, we  – including me – are all living in a time bound way. On the average, I check the “clock”half a dozen times a day, and the calendar more than once a week. To me, this is astonishing considering I quit my job more than 6 years ago just to get off the time-locked economic treadmill the rest of the world is on. I even bought a sailboat to get away from time-stuck humanity. No way. The sun, moon and stars entrapped me out there in the Pacific. And my provisions, that kept dwindling, reminded me to head for shore.

        My only concern is that so many accept that it is something physical, something real. Not that their wrong thinking causes me any problem – it doesn’t – but I don’t think it is helpful or beneficial at all.

    What good would it do even if the whole world saw that time doesn’t exist, or an artifact of the memory?  As I told you above, it’s still the same old way of life. We would still live by the ticking clock.

        I’d like to believe that the effort spent in pursuing this wrong idea could be better spent in another direction.

    What other direction? Don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that there is no benefit to realizing that time doesn’t exist. The implication is tremendous. It’s life-transforming.

    #322424
    @write4u
    Participant

    Sree said; What other direction? Don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that there is no benefit to realizing that time doesn’t exist. The implication is tremendous. It’s life-transforming.

    Why do you say that? For our purposes nothing changes in any way at all. Time still accompanies change. And if there is no change, you won’t know that time is also missing. Wherever there is empty space, there will also be time. Spacetime will not go away.  It’s just that time is not an extra dimension except as part of spacetime. Time will just not exist independent of space. It never has. And it is not testable.

    Time is not measurable in and of itself. It is always connected to the measurable existence of something else.

    #322429
    @ibelieveinlogic
    Participant

    Sree;  “What other direction?”

    Something, anything, concerning reality.  I’d rather see people spend their lives studying something frivolous, like the ecological implications of 17th century French literature, than the fantasies of spacetime and time travel.

    Notice how many, like Write4U, defend the notion that there are these things called time and spacetime.  They treat them as if they are real and as if there is something we can do with them – a waste of their efforts.

    #322431
    @ibelieveinlogic
    Participant

    Write4U:  “Time still accompanies change. And if there is no change, you won’t know that time is also missing. Wherever there is empty space, there will also be time. Spacetime will not go away.  It’s just that time is not an extra dimension except as part of spacetime. Time will just not exist independent of space.

    I suggest you re-think spacetime.  Spacetime is the idea that when we look at the night sky what we see is a collection of objects as they existed at various times.  We accept that because we accept that light is not transmitted instantly.  All we can know about those objects is how they appear at the moment we view them.  We can not determine where they are, what their state is or even if they still exist at all.

    We do not observe “empty space”; we observe only objects in space.  We have nothing upon which we can base a description of what empty space is.  We have no way to associate change in empty space with anything else because we don’t observe empty space and we cannot know if it changes.  Therefore we cannot associate time with space as we can for objects.  We have no basis for a history of space like we have for histories of objects.

    I think of a photo of the night sky as a collage of photos of objects as they existed at various times.

    #322471
    @sree
    Participant

    Bob: We do not observe “empty space”; we observe only objects in space. We have nothing upon which we can base a description of what empty space is.

    Brilliant! Great observation. Like time, space – in the absolute sense – also doesn’t exist. (The illusion of) space materializes when objects appear in the field of sensory perception. Mind you, for space (illusion) to be perceivable there has to be more than one object if both are stationary.

    Also, there is no such thing as movement of one object.  The illusion of movement appears when two or more objects change positions relative to one another; otherwise, movement doesn’t exist.

    Bob, the bottom line here is that the inherent nature of our object reality is essentially perceptual. If you get this, then you are free of the paradigm, of settled science, in which Einstein and Newton were caught. If you don’t get this, then our discussion is science fiction.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 94 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.