|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,818
|
Subject and object in time
#27235123 - 03/03/21 11:43 AM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
The nature of time is obviously very mysterious. It is rather easy to describe our perception of time and duration as a subjective phenomenon, which is fine, but what is the objective nature of the medium in which temporal (and spatial) change is occurring? If objective time is an illusion too, what about clocks that spin at different rates in different reference frames in experiments? This clearly has nothing to do with concepts of duration. There is something deeper. The mystics talk about transcending time, but it seems to me that the lot of them sure spend most of their time in it.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
Green_Hands
The Great Devourer



Registered: 05/21/05
Posts: 625
Loc: Old World
|
|
If gravity bends time than universe is not homogenously old.
--------------------
Looping our reflections, our obsessions draw us in Fix and fixation, no sentience beyond
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,528
|
Re: Subject and object in time [Re: Green_Hands]
#27235365 - 03/03/21 03:05 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
time inside gravity wells changes a bit more slowly than the rest of the universe does - relativistic-ally, so we are younger than some of the more free floating bits, but we show our age and die and they don't do anything.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: The nature of time is obviously very mysterious. It is rather easy to describe our perception of time and duration as a subjective phenomenon, which is fine, but what is the objective nature of the medium in which temporal (and spatial) change is occurring? If objective time is an illusion too, what about clocks that spin at different rates in different reference frames in experiments? This clearly has nothing to do with concepts of duration. There is something deeper. The mystics talk about transcending time, but it seems to me that the lot of them sure spend most of their time in it.
The underlined phrase, as I understand it, expresses a desire for a stable / permanent background of some sort, in the phenomenal world. As I understand it, both physics and Buddhism deny that there is any such thing, or even a possibility of any such thing.
Quote:
"Excerpt from: The Time Of Your Life, 1939, by William Saroyan.
"...ARAB (quietly, gently, with great understanding) No foundation. All the way down the line. .... ...NICK That’s all he’s been saying this week. ..."
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,818
|
Re: Subject and object in time [Re: laughingdog]
#27235549 - 03/03/21 05:14 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
That is an excellent point. What I am trying to get at is how the subjective and the objective here are equivalent. As many psychonauts, and indeed many on this website, can tell you, time appears to be an illusion on, say, a strong psychedelic, because we can see that our experience of time is really a consequence of how the human brain stacks memory. So our entire perception of duration is essentially not real, and from this many people go on to say that time itself isn't real.
But my question is how this jibes with what physics tells us. A clock in a spaceship zooming along will appear, to an observer on Earth, to be ticking more slowly than one on Earth. So how is this related to the stacking of memory? If it seems reasonable to declare time an illusion in this perspective, how can we call it an illusion when clocks can change rates depending on velocity and acceleration?
This does not, of course, presuppose an absolute background. In relativistic physics, there are no absolutes, just bodies in motion relative to each other. But I think, in this context, my question still has meaning.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
I have a better understanding of the Buddhist view than of physics.
I would say desire occurs in time and is based on a self not being satisfied with the present and desiring a different future and not being satisfied rouses one, to take action, to do
Whereas contentment / gratitude is relaxed (stress free) in the present so one can just be, or let go of time
So subjectively perhaps the experiencing of time is another aspect of separation Every pleasure, is already fading, even as one begins to enjoy it. Like Paul Simon's song - Slip Sliding Away.
However if there is not enough food, but we want to make sure our kids get enough, and choose to eat something less appealing, & less of it, then we no longer expect to derive happiness from personal sensations, and are free of the time bound effects of every bite's pleasure already fading.
So the less self & desire, the less we suffer, on account of time's passing, and our body's journey to old age and death. Or one might say that like many other 'things' resistance is key. When we are one with time it disappears, when we resist it, it appears. Thus in the 'flow state' (downhill skiing might be an example) in a sense time disappears. Whereas when we feel rushed, during a test for which did not prepare for properly, time appears in a very stressful form. (Although funnily in this example in the flow state involves movement, and the stressful time bound state is characterized by stillness).
Actually one of Einstein' explanations of relativity is rather like the subjective view, and of course the psychedelic experience is also subjective.
"Prof. Einstein is said to have ... [said]... "When a pretty girl sits on your lap for an hour, it seems like a minute. When you sit on a hot stove for a minute it seems like an hour." "
"The mystics talk about transcending time, but it seems to me that the lot of them sure spend most of their time in it." No only that, they get sick, have pains, get old, and die just like the rest of us. But some do quite well at ignoring their pains.
Unfortunately I doubt my post is the sort of answer you seek. The physics is very strange indeed.
Edited by laughingdog (03/03/21 09:16 PM)
|
Green_Hands
The Great Devourer



Registered: 05/21/05
Posts: 625
Loc: Old World
|
|
Massive galaxies than age bit slower than very small ones. And inside those dense pockets age even more slowly than less dense parts. And closer to center time slows even more but only relative to other parts. For observer time/space should be constant.
--------------------
Looping our reflections, our obsessions draw us in Fix and fixation, no sentience beyond
|
Rahz
Alive Again



Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,227
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: The nature of time is obviously very mysterious. It is rather easy to describe our perception of time and duration as a subjective phenomenon, which is fine, but what is the objective nature of the medium in which temporal (and spatial) change is occurring? If objective time is an illusion too, what about clocks that spin at different rates in different reference frames in experiments? This clearly has nothing to do with concepts of duration. There is something deeper. The mystics talk about transcending time, but it seems to me that the lot of them sure spend most of their time in it.
Very mysterious. I don't grok it, but perhaps it could be made less mystical by pointing out that the measure of time was always based on various arbitrary but consistent movements whether they be seconds on a clock or the spin of the Earth. If you do some looking around you can find explanations that include minimum mention of math, but to actually understand the math is probably beyond most.
So it's interesting to wonder what it would be like to be Einstein, who probably thought time dilation made perfect sense.
-------------------- rahz comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace "You’re not looking close enough if you can only see yourself in people who look like you." —Ayishat Akanbi
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: The nature of time is obviously very mysterious. It is rather easy to describe our perception of time and duration as a subjective phenomenon, which is fine, but what is the objective nature of the medium in which temporal (and spatial) change is occurring? If objective time is an illusion too, what about clocks that spin at different rates in different reference frames in experiments? This clearly has nothing to do with concepts of duration. There is something deeper. The mystics talk about transcending time, but it seems to me that the lot of them sure spend most of their time in it.
perhaps this is the sort of thing you seek, DQ: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=einstein+twin+paradox+
Mystics are about more than transcending time,they are about going beyond all categories, as in: "its all one". And if one looks at the stories of Zen Masters' deaths, some predicted the day of their death ahead of time, or gave a shout or short poem, or couplet at the last moment. So they were not in denial of time.
And the physics combines time with space, does it not?
And in the everyday world all of science depends on the idea of cause and effect, which of course, occurs in time. And before science, also in the everyday world, the ancients, had calendars based on the astronomy of the time. And these calendars were used for making accurate predictions. Stonehenge, the Aztec, & Maya are the first to come to mind, but there were of course many as we all know.
And clocks spinning at different rates is still spinning, and not an illusion. As long as what is going on in blackholes, ( & before the big bang) is not properly understood, I doubt anyone, can have a fully satisfactory explanation as regards 'time'.
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,818
|
Re: Subject and object in time [Re: Rahz]
#27237726 - 03/04/21 08:44 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Rahz said: Very mysterious. I don't grok it, but perhaps it could be made less mystical by pointing out that the measure of time was always based on various arbitrary but consistent movements whether they be seconds on a clock or the spin of the Earth. If you do some looking around you can find explanations that include minimum mention of math, but to actually understand the math is probably beyond most.
So it's interesting to wonder what it would be like to be Einstein, who probably thought time dilation made perfect sense.
Yes, I think of time as a series of moments. A potential arises into a moment, which has a brief existence, which then subsides back into potentiality, which then arises again, and so on. So the passage of time and reality itself are not continuous, but rather like a movie with a series of frames appearing as continuous movement, or a spinning bicycle wheel with spokes. There are many metaphors. But where this objective array meets with our perception of memory is where I get awfully confused.
In certain nonordinary experiences I've had, I had the insight -- as many do -- that the perception of duration is arbitrary and basically meaningless, due to how the brain processes memory. Where I get generally confused is how this realization pertains to a gravitational field, which is clearly a bit more objective. If there is a quantifiable relationship between two clocks placed in two different locations in the vicinity of a black hole, it's hard to call time any sort of illusion. And that's what I don't get.
How can time appear to be arbitrary and concrete simultaneously?
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,818
|
Re: Subject and object in time [Re: laughingdog]
#27237735 - 03/04/21 08:48 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said: perhaps this is the sort of thing you seek, DQ: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=einstein+twin+paradox+
Mystics are about more than transcending time,they are about going beyond all categories, as in: "its all one". And if one looks at the stories of Zen Masters' deaths, some predicted the day of their death ahead of time, or gave a shout or short poem, or couplet at the last moment. So they were not in denial of time.
And the physics combines time with space, does it not?
And in the everyday world all of science depends on the idea of cause and effect, which of course, occurs in time. And before science, also in the everyday world, the ancients, had calendars based on the astronomy of the time. And these calendars were used for making accurate predictions. Stonehenge, the Aztec, & Maya are the first to come to mind, but there were of course many as we all know.
And clocks spinning at different rates is still spinning, and not an illusion. As long as what is going on in blackholes, ( & before the big bang) is not properly understood, I doubt anyone, can have a fully satisfactory explanation as regards 'time'.
Yes I am well familiar with the twin paradox, which is one of the most fun thought experiments there is. You are making just my point. I contend that time is NOT an illusion, so how, during the psychedelic experience, can we be so sure that it is? I don't know where the twain meet.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
Perhaps something to do with the filters to experiencing being disabled, tons more data flowing in, so that the present feels infinitely richer? So much richer that one can no longer keep track of before and after? Awareness (being context not content) is perhaps also outside of time, and being impersonal also outside of desire (which is also time bound). As awareness is "expanded" ( or context emphasized compared to content) during psychedelic experience, this might also contribute to the effect? I suspect detachment also plays a part. When we don't care what happens, when the push and pull of aversion and attraction, no longer constantly tug at us, perhaps an eternal peace becomes apparent?
|
Rahz
Alive Again



Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,227
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: How can time appear to be arbitrary and concrete simultaneously?
Well, the reason I brought up math is that it does seem to provide a framework to answer that question. Unfortunately I am not in a position to answer that question for you. And even if I could, you would have to be able to understand it.
Perhaps there is a way to describe it in laymans terms, but people who understand the math don't seem to be able to quite stoop to my level and one would have to understand the math to provide the layman expression.
Or, perhaps there is a mystical approach. Ancient dudes described the breathing universe and the atom.
So while I cannot give you an answer, there are two approaches at your disposal if your curiosity is strong enough to learn such a revealing art.
-------------------- rahz comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace "You’re not looking close enough if you can only see yourself in people who look like you." —Ayishat Akanbi
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: ....[1] So the passage of time and reality itself are not continuous, but rather like a movie with a series of frames appearing as continuous movement, or a spinning bicycle wheel with spokes. There are many metaphors. But where this objective array meets with our perception of memory is where I get awfully confused.
[2] In certain nonordinary experiences I've had, I had the insight -- as many do -- that the perception of duration is arbitrary and basically meaningless, due to how the brain processes memory.
[1] That we may experience time as separate frames does not prove that time is quantized (although it may be) but simply may mean that our perception only woks at a certain frame rate.
[2] I would guess there is a choice as to how one relates to nonordinary experiences. For instance the gods people met in a NearDeathExp. may depend on their beliefs or culture I've heard. Which perhaps raises some questions...
Seems to me as humans we "have our feet in different worlds". Markos or Joseph Campbell would find all kinds of mythological references, I suspect, as to how this is a paradox we all live with. Without reason we cannot understand cause and effect or have a language with a logical grammar allowing understanding, but without love / empathy / compassion its all pointless. Perhaps time has a similar paradoxical character?
|
Loaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist



Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,006
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 27 days, 15 hours
|
Re: Subject and object in time [Re: laughingdog]
#27237881 - 03/04/21 11:00 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
I still say time is 100% abstraction, same with space.
The more you try to imply boundaries to each, the more they collapse as concepts. Time and space have no implication minus the objects we measure in and through them, and I'd argue to assume they "exist" minus any observer is an irrational assumption.
I still argue said objects "in space and time" aren't causal, either.
Time isn't pushing anything forward because it's not an ontological process in which objects and agents are embedded; it's a psychological abstraction. A useful one, but an abstraction none the less. This doesn't invalidate its usefulness, which is where I think most start to resist this idea; it merely appropriates it.
Example question: How old it time?
--------------------
  "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance." — Confucius
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
if time is an abstraction does that mean death is an abstraction?
If the fact that time has no duration proves time is an abstraction, does the fact that the hand cannot grasp itself, or the eye see itself prove that they are abstractions?
To even make your sentences you use a time based logical structure: language with grammar and tenses, so you are using, logic which is based in time to prove time is unreal and causality an illusion. Seems sort of suspect.
Time may be abstract but I don't think your argument proves that is the case. In a dream there maybe a sequence of actions that seem to be based on cause and effect and to occur in proper sequence, but the next minute the dream may become illogical and events not to occur in proper sequence, so if one takes that as a model perhaps one might say appearances don't prove that causality ie time is 'real'.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,796
|
|
Maybe it's not the ego that dissolves, but in some form our perception of time.
So I wouldn't think its time that changes, but how we pay attention to its passing.
How much we give ourselves. How much we think is reasonable. How much it will take.
We question time, at least I do.
But organising it is stressful.
In my experience, its when I don't feel a need to pay attention to time I'm at my most peaceful.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,528
|
Re: Subject and object in time [Re: sudly]
#27238168 - 03/05/21 05:51 AM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
ego is the black hole of time waiting for nobody
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Subject and object in time [Re: laughingdog]
#27238792 - 03/05/21 01:37 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Saying time is abstract also implies there is only one level of abstraction. I think 'group theory' and perhaps even algebra in math, show that there are differing levels of abstraction. Even though, we call space & time abstract, I would say awareness might be more abstract. Space (dimensionality) limits the number of possible symmetry groups, so although invisible and intangible, it yet imposes order on the world. So its not totally abstract. Like wise the sequence of before and after, & thus causality, or time, imposes a strict order. Where-as awareness is completely aloof. (or seems even more intangible ... meaning except perhaps at the level of individual elementary particles (ie the double slit experiment, etc.))
I wonder when they talk of "space-time" whether time is also implicated in creating symmetry groups. And if anybody has ever thought about whether symmetry groups persist in the crushing pressures, in black holes?
Just as we no longer understand how self teaching AIs work, I suspect that human level intelligence cannot understand the universe at certain levels. [One of the versions of the AI: "Alpha Go" came up with a move in the game of Go, never seen before (in decades of human play), which no one understood, but much later, towards the end of the game, proved critical in its winning.] And that is only a game, and what will prove to be beginning level AI.
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,818
|
Re: Subject and object in time [Re: Rahz]
#27239118 - 03/05/21 05:36 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Rahz said:
Well, the reason I brought up math is that it does seem to provide a framework to answer that question. Unfortunately I am not in a position to answer that question for you. And even if I could, you would have to be able to understand it.
Perhaps there is a way to describe it in laymans terms, but people who understand the math don't seem to be able to quite stoop to my level and one would have to understand the math to provide the layman expression.
Or, perhaps there is a mystical approach. Ancient dudes described the breathing universe and the atom.
So while I cannot give you an answer, there are two approaches at your disposal if your curiosity is strong enough to learn such a revealing art.
I have some training in physics and math from university, and this forms the basis of the dichotomy I have highlighted, in that those disciplines treat time in a purely objective sense. That is, as a dimension orthogonal to space which, if technology becomes advanced enough, it would in principle be possible to travel through. Most of the math physics uses is based upon calculus, and that is certainly no way to answer this question. More advanced maths, with which I have no facility, would be required, and I'm not at all sure how they treat math in a less than purely objective way.
I think probably some of the mystics know a lot about it, but I am not aware of how they join subject and object when it comes to the phenomenon of time. I guess you just have to be really high.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
|