 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I dunno what time is, it seems just another word for existence. We live in this 'now' all of the time. The past is memory, & of course evidence all around us that it happened, & what is the future, just something we invent in our brains. You could go looney thinking about it all too much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker's_Guide_to_the_Galaxy#Chapter_1
Ha, that's the first thing that went through my mind when I read the thread, it's the only line I remember from the first episode.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The sad thing is that religions (NO, DON'T START A VERBOTEN ARGUMENT...) have been saying this stuff for ages.
Buddhists and Hindus have always worked on the space/time transcendentalist model. The Christians and patriarchal religions call it 'omnipresence', the idea of dimensions where all space and time is one, where the future is already over (therefore prophecy) and simultaneously the past has in some ways not yet begun (therefore miracles? ... a sort of backward loop of redemption ... the spiral). The idea is that 'spiritually', 'God' or maybe also the inner self (the Hindu 'Atman') can travel through time at all rates of change simultaneously, and even though human beings are corporeally stuck in this frame of 60 seconds a minute, on a deeper level, some part of them, the 'soul' can travel at all rates of change simultaneously.
By that way of thinking, the 'divine' isn't 'outside of time' but more in it than we are.
Now it'd be premature to say that this is 'explained' by quantum theory or by relativity, or lightspeed theories, but it's not inconsistent with them. It's a shame these belief systems inevitably get sidetracked by a lot of loonies. 'You can point at the moon, but there's always someone who'll just stare at your finger'.
The infinitesimally small and the vastly big in space relate to this in the same way as in time. If you deal in infinite distances, then you come back mathematically to a unified point. After all, the universe after the big bang expanded from a point, so in a way, every pont in the universe is the centre. And every person. Which is what Hindus have been saying for yonks.
'I would not have you ignorant of this, .... that to the Lord, a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years is as one day'.
Now don't give David a headache and start a religious argument, that'll lock us all down. Some say meditation states put us in that sort of consciousness. 'Only way is to try it I suppose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Er...yeah, maybe. I the meantime we're born, live in the now, remember the past, look forward to the future, & die. And all the other stuff will remain just ideas & concepts.
Maybe they're more. They're certainly more to the quantum bods, and some of the meditation people claim they're more to them too. I mean, if it can be UTILISED usefully then it's all worth the examination.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jul 8, 2015 - 11:05 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Grecchus
(Member)
|
Kurt Godel, you may remember, was the austrian logician who proved there are statements within a formal language system that can lead to the notion of undecideability.
The question, "is time an illusion," can be phrased in lots of different contexts. In order to understand the context, we would have to be clear on subtexts and precisely related issues.
Although I feel I can see where you're coming from, Sol, the truth is the question requires a level of insight and familiarity within the framework of physics which is far removed from my ability to actually provide an answer, if truth be told.
The answer could be given as a simple "yes" or "no." If that is the case, I can't say there is an answer I can give because I don't know if either of those responses is actually true or false. That's very probably the type of answer you'd get from someone like Noam Chomsky.
It's not being pedantic. The grammar is perfectly legal. It's just there is a tremendous amount of conceptual baggage that goes with the question which can be heavily interpreted in the literal sense or more philosophical leanings can be tempered within the framework of a lengthy answer. There'd still exist the very real possibility that any answer provided would be just as incomprehensible as the question itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Dalai Lama said in the Glastonbury interview with Alan Yentob that the great challenge for western education systems is to start teaching 'some kind of mind education', i.e. philosophy, psychology, transcendentalism, and even semantics etc., earlier.
It's been said by many educationalists that we need to teach things like economics to children, and philosophy fits that too.
We patronise kids far too much, assuming they can't hold these things. The result is that as adults, they have no entry point into self-awareness, because they never got the openings. Why shouldn't kiddies speculate on cosmology?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
