|
 the universe
Harbinger ofEldritch Despair
Registered: 03/10/99
Posts: 1,456
Loc: Under your bed
Last seen: 15 years, 6 months
|
 Time 
#475603 - 12/01/01 01:25 AM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
What if time moved 'backwards'? What if the "big bang" happened at McKenna's 2012, and history is the explosion from that? we're coming to something more "complete" or "together" I know you can feel it, (expecially if you've read any McKenna;)) And have you recognized how things weren't near as together in the past? It might be because of the 'particles' of the explosion becoming less 'together'. Spreading out and becoming more chaotic. And how in the hell can we be moving foward if we can't see the future? That's a kind of silly question but it helps to illistrate my point. Things are coming together, apparently, and I think it's because everyithing we can't see, has allready happened, in a way our monkey brain time senses have a hard time conciving. I'm pretty drunk right now, so if the idea didn't get across right, I'm sorry. But if you got it, please respond with your'e own thoughts on the subject. :)
--------------------
"If you had a million years to do it in, you couldn't rub out even half the 'Fuck you' signs in the world."- J. D. Salinger
|
Anonymous
|
|
Time? Huh?
|
Anonymous
|
|
Oh yeah that clock thing... yeah I saw one of those once at the store
|
the universe
Harbinger ofEldritch Despair
Registered: 03/10/99
Posts: 1,456
Loc: Under your bed
Last seen: 15 years, 6 months
|
 Re: Time [Re: ]
#475637 - 12/01/01 01:55 AM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
It is a convienient reference point. How many times were you trying to hook-up and the guy wanted to know when? You just have to make it up as you go along. Time is flexible like that, even though it's allready happened. Maybe on a different dimension or something. Who knows? X
--------------------
"If you had a million years to do it in, you couldn't rub out even half the 'Fuck you' signs in the world."- J. D. Salinger
|
Anonymous
|
|
Ever notice how time likes to speed up and slow down? I am under the impression that time slows down at night if you are awake...if you are asleep it goes really fast. Usually when the sun is at its peak during the day time is about average, but it seems to slow around that 2-5 zone, and from the 8-12 it goes by in about 2 earth hours.
Or take for example that I have been up all night babbling on the Inner net while I am supposed to go to work in 2 hours, and work for 10? Or how about when you wake up at 9am and lay back down for that extra 5 minutes of sleep, and you sleep for 5 minutes and wake up and it's 5 hours later.
It's a good thing Time is relative
|
 Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
|
Time is just a measure of relative changes (one object's changes in physical location in relation to another).
If time "went backwards" the beginning would just be the end.
|
the universe
Harbinger ofEldritch Despair
Registered: 03/10/99
Posts: 1,456
Loc: Under your bed
Last seen: 15 years, 6 months
|
Re: Time [Re: Kid]
#475763 - 12/01/01 04:13 AM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Of course the beginning is the end. That's been covered. Time is relative, that's been covered too. The point is Time is moving backwards.........and fowards, sort of. Kind of like one of those acid paradoxes you come up with during your peak and everything makes sense. If time's in an infinite loop, there is no hope, but...I do think that there is hope, it's sort of a spiral......it reallly goes past human 3dimensional ways of interpreting and explaining reality. Sorry to waste your time. ;)
So maybe you're right kid, unless you were just wasting my time too.
--------------------
"If you had a million years to do it in, you couldn't rub out even half the 'Fuck you' signs in the world."- J. D. Salinger
Edited by the universe (12/01/01 04:15 AM)
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
|
> Of course the beginning is the end.
auw. I was just referin' to that other thread cuz I wanted to post but didn't want to...
> ......it reallly goes past human 3dimensional ways of interpreting and explaining reality
Time is an abstraction based on observed changes in our 3D world. We're invoking the ideas of the 4th dimension and the "arrow" of time to fit what we see... perhaps
|
Pynchon
Slow Learner
Registered: 04/28/01
Posts: 578
Loc: New Zealand
|
Re: Time [Re: Kid]
#475803 - 12/01/01 05:26 AM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
So you're saying time is just...I dunno, speed divided by distance travelled, f'r instance? I suppose thats a good way of splitting time into "units", but I think there's more to it than that. What about particle decay? Theres a direction to that -- an irreversible change that takes place. Doesn't that suggest that time really is a fundamental feature of the universe, even if it's just a measurement of stages of decay? Or have I completely missed your point?
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Time [Re: Pynchon]
#475807 - 12/01/01 05:31 AM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
How fast is time? And what happens to time when travelling above the speed of light?
|
Ulysees
Power of Lard
Registered: 10/06/01
Posts: 5,060
|
Re: Time [Re: ]
#475823 - 12/01/01 06:15 AM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
hmmm. Interesting questions, now go find the answers and tell us. 
--------------------
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Time [Re: Ulysees]
#475836 - 12/01/01 06:39 AM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Ok well apparently time will cease to exist on December 22, 2012. For us anyway.
For some people it appears to be linear, while this is simply not the case.
It seems as though the speed of light is 17 times faster in the 4th density than it is in the 3rd.
Time travel is very strictly regulated.
ack..overload.. I downloaded it but I need to sleep before it is fully processed
|
Ulysees
Power of Lard
Registered: 10/06/01
Posts: 5,060
|
 Re: Time [Re: ]
#475838 - 12/01/01 06:42 AM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I've got a lot of work to do before 2012 if I'm gonna stay in the game. McKenna, I wish you were still here to see it... (though perhaps it will be more exciting from his perspective.)
I'm going to have to sleep soon as well... I have to finish reading something else first.
--------------------
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
Re: Time [Re: Pynchon]
#475869 - 12/01/01 07:52 AM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
> What about particle decay? Theres a direction to that
And the reverse process, call it particle construction. That has a direction too.
> Doesn't that suggest that time really is a fundamental feature of the universe, even if it's just a measurement of stages of decay?
But time isn't just a measurement of decay, or any physical process governed by a single law. Time is relative change. The international definition of one second is the duration an electron going around a hydrogen atom X number of times (or something very similar).
Time is in the instants, the instants are not in time. What I mean is that I think that there's no reason we should be looking at time as some type of external framework, or arena, for the physical universe to play out in. Why should we say time even exists at all? Perhaps what we interpret as time is relative configuration spaces.
|
Timeleech
addict
Registered: 10/04/01
Posts: 590
Loc: Norway
Last seen: 20 years, 1 month
|
|
I think what the universe is trying to say is that time is not static. Time is not the same all the time, uh, well. Something like that.
>And how in the hell can we be moving foward if we can't see the future?
He's obviously referring to "If you move through time, and can see the past, but not the future, your'e facing the wrong way". That migh help to illustrate your point a little better:)
It has become a cliche that time is relative, so we need to come up with something more clever than that! I dig those McKenna raps, and if you view history as a series of strings, loose filaments falpping around in space(?), then it makes more sense if they are all connected at one point in the future. At least to me. History doesn't seem to be wildly fluctuating (well...), It is a much more fitting image that the threads all flow together at the end (is the beginning is the end).
Damn, I need some acid to think straight on this subject. Or mebbe just some sleep would help. Being awake for 36 hours straight does something to the time-continuum.
I certainly look forward to 2012! I am basing my whole life on the fact that it all ends in 11 years. I'm going to retire in 4 1/2 years, then I will succesively take psychedelics regularly, more and more frequently. So when 2012 comes I will not know it if McKenna's prohpecy never came true. It will be true for me . Anybody with me on this one? I need some company apart from the Man McKenna himself on the other side.
Those who live will see.
--------------------
--
Eternally boggled, flummoxed, bewildered and surprised.
theophagy.org
|
the universe
Harbinger ofEldritch Despair
Registered: 03/10/99
Posts: 1,456
Loc: Under your bed
Last seen: 15 years, 6 months
|
|
Now that I'm sober, let me try this again-have you noticed that throughout time shit has been coming together? First there was space with its random gasses and what-not, then there were planets and stars and such formed, then life began on at least one of the planets, then this life became self-aware, and here we are with technology and culture and what-not. We know there was a "big bang" at the beginning of the universe, but why should stuff go from less complete to more? I think we're movng towards the "big bang" and that we will someday explode into relative nothingness again. So tiem moves backwards back towards this big bang. Maybe we as living concious creatures have to percieve time as moving this way so we can successfully complete our function. As this big bang obviously had some sort of conciousness as a singularity. I don't know if this is coming out right, but I gotta go right now. I don't want to lose any time getting blowed out.
--------------------
"If you had a million years to do it in, you couldn't rub out even half the 'Fuck you' signs in the world."- J. D. Salinger
|
Pynchon
Slow Learner
Registered: 04/28/01
Posts: 578
Loc: New Zealand
|
Re: Time [Re: Kid]
#476831 - 12/02/01 03:19 AM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
>Perhaps what we interpret as time is relative configuration spaces.
I like this thought a lot, but there doesn't seem to be a place for any "quantum weirdness" in such a universe...unless you want to take a literal interpretation of the Schrodingers Cat paradox, which would leave the feline in question both alive and dead at the same time...heh, there's that word again ;) What I mean is that, using your "configuration spaces" idea, both configurations (alive/dead) would be equally real...
|
Timeleech
addict
Registered: 10/04/01
Posts: 590
Loc: Norway
Last seen: 20 years, 1 month
|
 Re: Time [Re: ]
#476914 - 12/02/01 07:37 AM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Shroomism:
>How fast is time? And what happens to time when travelling above the speed of light?
I hate to be the one quoting science on this one, but here goes:
E=mc^2: As you go faster your mass increases, and as you aproach the speed of light, your mass grows exponentially. Were you to travel at the speed of light your mass would be infinite! You would have more mass than the entire universe, and somehow that doesn't seem right to me... 
Time would stand still, as you would fill up so much space you would spill over into time and effectively block it from moving
Kid:
>The international definition of one second is the duration an electron going around a hydrogen atom X number of times (or something very similar).
Before that definition of time came up people used to measure time by the moon. What we really measure (count) are cycles. Natural cycles.
And have you noticed that at the smaller scales, cycles tend to be a lot faster? The beating of a hummingbirds heard compared to Pkuto's trip around the sun? The lifetime of a [insert name of favourite sub-atomic particle] compared to [insert favourite galaxy]?
Time seems to be moving a lot faster at the smaller scale, and if the beginning is the end, that is, we are moving towards the big bang backwards, moving towards a singularity, then everything is getting smaller.
And if everything is getting smaller, it will go faster, and faster, and faster, untill not only space itself contracts into this singularity, but time itself. Then there will truly be only *now*. That is what the merging with god might be, that's what "we are all" really means, this is what is meant by saying "everything is nothing, nothing is everything". At that singular point in time and space, everything *will be* nothing.
--------------------
--
Eternally boggled, flummoxed, bewildered and surprised.
theophagy.org
Edited by Timeleech (12/02/01 07:50 AM)
|
The AntiChrist
enthusiast
Registered: 10/29/00
Posts: 64
Loc: Holland
Last seen: 21 years, 2 months
|
|
This is amazing, I had this excact theory in a very confusing trip about a month ago. Maybe ill write a trip report sometime, but heres a small summary (and i dont know what happend when, so its probably in the wrong order):
I realized time was going backward, I was traveling/experiencing the whole time loop, from the start to the beginning and backwards and ended up fucked up back in the normal time direction. At one "end" everything was one/monotonous and at the other "end" everything was totally split up/multicomplex.
I believe I was indeed somewhere near a turning point.
I had a memory of the future, and the more the future came close everything had to get more and more clear (pieces falling together in your mind). I "knew" the effects were to the future of things I did in the present.
I realized that the past memory system was indeed backwards.
When the trip was ending I was in a zone laying between these two experiences and this was the most disturbing, couse I vaguely knew what was going to happen in a near future, but didnt know what to do about it. My future was/will be a horrible death due to some painful accident...
I actually had totall memory loss at the end of the trip.
Now I dont know what to think of it, except it was very weird. I also forgot a lot of stuff, think my brain doenst has the capacity to understand it.
Also a big prove of time going backwards: birth, death and the live between it.
I also thought of the theory that time is going backwards and foreward at the same time, we just have to realize it. Proof of this are psychics that can predict the future.
Like a road, on each side you can go to another direction.
--------------------
the lightswitch on the wrong side
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
Re: Time [Re: Pynchon]
#477844 - 12/02/01 11:35 PM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
> What I mean is that, using your "configuration spaces" idea, both configurations (alive/dead) would be equally real...
Yes. Actually, I think you could envision a universe of configuration spaces where every configuration were equally real. However, there would be many (infinite?) configuration spaces where conscious beings like ourselves have memories (or seem to have memories/evidence of a "past"), and experience Time.
> which would leave the feline in question both alive and dead at the same time...heh, there's that word again ;)
Different "place" or co-ordinate (these are relative configuration spaces). Of course coming up with a timeless model of consciousness that fits our experiences would be difficult, I think.
And yeah, describing a timeless universe without that word is tough.
|
Timeleech
addict
Registered: 10/04/01
Posts: 590
Loc: Norway
Last seen: 20 years, 1 month
|
Re: Time [Re: Kid]
#477863 - 12/02/01 11:59 PM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Your configuration spaces sound like parallel universes to me. For every bifurcation in time (whenever a "choice" is made, or something can have more than one outcome) there is a new universe created. So Shr?dingers cat would spawn two new universes, one with a living cat, one wit a dead.
another option is that all these universes exist separate from each other, and that there are an infinite amount of universes evolving side-by-side.
Yet another option is that there exist an infinite freeze-frame universes, and that the passing of time is actually us moving from universe to universe. Or perhaps there are only partial clusters of universe-bytes, and as things happen, they replace the ones in the "complete" universe. A little bit like mpeg compression, only storing the change from frame to frame
I originally wrote a much, longer and thoughtful post but my browser crashed, and I don't care to repeat it all, but what I wrote is the essence of it.
--------------------
--
Eternally boggled, flummoxed, bewildered and surprised.
theophagy.org
|
Pynchon
Slow Learner
Registered: 04/28/01
Posts: 578
Loc: New Zealand
|
|
>for every bifurcation in time (whenever a "choice" is made, or something that can have more than one outcome)...
The whole point (at least, in my interpretation) of Kids idea is that the configuration spaces are pre-existing and static. There are no "when" bifurcation points, only "where", and no "real" choices, either -- these are just illusions that are built into us to make sentient life possible...tho' naturally this would require an infinite number of configuration spaces, and begs the question why we see some and not others...and why we all seem to agree on which ones we do see, and on the "direction" we see them...
If I've got the wrong end of the stick, I'm sure I'll hear all about it ;)...
Your "infinite freeze-frame universes" is a better idea, tho' I think the distinction between one infinite universe and an infinity of universes is pretty arbitrary...
Edited by Pynchon (12/03/01 08:07 AM)
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
|
> Your configuration spaces sound like parallel universes to me.
Sort of, except without time, and they would all be contained within one universe. Look at the "history" of our universe as a "path" through the configuration-space universe. A "parallel universe" would just be a path that broke off from this one.
> So Shr?dingers cat would spawn two new universes, one with a living cat, one wit a dead.
Schrodinger's wave equation would allow for a configuration space for any probable configuration of particles.
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
Re: Time [Re: Pynchon]
#478448 - 12/03/01 03:44 PM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Yes, you understand the idea quite well, Pynchon.
I too find that the most difficult question to reconcile: why is this conscious experience, this conscious experience? (seems simplistic)
One idea could be that in this kind of universe the identities that we perceive would be illusionary. The only you is at the configuration space Now (and Now and Now...). All other consciousnesses embedded in these spaces would be just as separate from each other. The consciousness you experienced 'one second ago' is just as seperate as someone else's consciousness in a 'paralell universe'.
|
Timeleech
addict
Registered: 10/04/01
Posts: 590
Loc: Norway
Last seen: 20 years, 1 month
|
Re: Time [Re: Kid]
#478885 - 12/03/01 10:49 PM (21 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
>The consciousness you experienced 'one second ago' is just as seperate as someone else's consciousness in a 'paralell universe'.
The self is constantly dieing and being reborn some buddhism teaches if I am not mistaken...
>Sort of, except without time, and they would all be contained within one universe. Look at the "history" of our universe as a "path" through the configuration-space universe.
This is more or less what I had in mind. This path that branches off wherever there is a "choice" made. Or in case you don't think there are choices, wherever there are more than one possibilities for action/reaction. The difference is then that there is one universe, or an infinite amount of them?
>A "parallel universe" would just be a path that broke off from this one.
But do they all exist from the beginning, or are they created as they are "needed"?
I haven't read up on as much quantum physics as I'd like to, but how do you recon quantum entanglement fits into this (pretty well I should imagine, but how exactly)?
--------------------
--
Eternally boggled, flummoxed, bewildered and surprised.
theophagy.org
|
Kid
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 2,365
|
|
> This path that branches off wherever there is a "choice" made.
Well, the thing is that the path is not actually being travelled. Our notion of "history" (as contained in memories and records) would simply be that at whatever co-ordinate of configuration space we are in, there are "snapshots" that resemble other co-ordinates. Memories and record may just contain structures resembling structures elsewhere in the configuration-space universe.
The path is not actually being travelled. It simply has configuration-spaces which are similarly structured.
> The difference is then that there is one universe, or an infinite amount of them?
A configuration-space universe could have all configuration possibilities within it. It could be self-contained. So, not only could there be an infinite number of configurations, but there could be a limitless number of "paths" (which you termed, "parallel universes").
> But do they all exist from the beginning, or are they created as they are "needed"?
You're using a temporal notion for an a-temporal space. The configuration space universe would exist. Each "point" (co-ordinate) within it would be what you consider one instant of any universe which could possibly exist at any given point in "time." The "complete history of our universe" could be represented as a path through the configuration space universe.
> I haven't read up on as much quantum physics as I'd like to, but how do you recon quantum entanglement fits into this (pretty well I should imagine, but how exactly)?
Is this where two particles behave the same way, no matter what? Well, it would simply be a possibility for a configuration space... I'm not sure what you're asking.
|
Timeleech
addict
Registered: 10/04/01
Posts: 590
Loc: Norway
Last seen: 20 years, 1 month
|
|
I found something interesting regarding time moving backwards:
It's from "The Age of Spiritual Machines" by Ray Kurzweil
here's the place I found it.
And here is the interesting quote:
"In postulating the duality of light, quantum mechanics has discovered an essential nexus between matter and consciousnesss. Particles apparently do not make up their minds as to which way they are going or even where they have been until they are forced to do so by the observations of a conscious observer. We might say that they appear not really to exist at all retroactively until and unles we notice them."
The issue of time has more or less resolved for me, but in case ther is such a thing (I like to entertain several world-views, so the schock isn't so big when I inevetably find out that one is wrong, I have another to hold onto as a life-raft )
If the particles don't exist in the past untill we notice them, time indeed apears to move backwards, any thought about this, or has everybody lost interest in time now that it doesn't exist any more?
--------------------
--
Eternally boggled, flummoxed, bewildered and surprised.
theophagy.org
|
the universe
Harbinger ofEldritch Despair
Registered: 03/10/99
Posts: 1,456
Loc: Under your bed
Last seen: 15 years, 6 months
|
|
this is only a half-ass idea but, there's a near infinite amount of particles shot off from this big bang at the beginning/end of time and we are working our way back through them, organizing them back into something coherent with where we direct out attention and what choices we make and somehow through some chaos type fractal deal that leads certain particles to behave the way we percieve them.
--------------------
"If you had a million years to do it in, you couldn't rub out even half the 'Fuck you' signs in the world."- J. D. Salinger
|
ArCh_TemPlaR
enthusiast
Registered: 07/15/01
Posts: 200
Last seen: 21 years, 5 months
|
|
Shroomism:
In reply to:
How fast is time? And what happens to time when travelling above the speed of light?
According to Stephen Hawkings, the theoretical physics of *you* exceeding FTL velocities will reverse Time. You end up going back in Time. Time becomes negative in the mathematical equation.
Stephen's new book, "Universe in a Nusthell", shows a 3d visual of how time actually looks like, two conjoined chains, like one unending loop.
Timeleech:
In reply to:
"In postulating the duality of light, quantum mechanics has discovered an essential nexus between matter and consciousnesss. Particles apparently do not make up their minds as to which way they are going or even where they have been until they are forced to do so by the observations of a conscious observer. We might say that they appear not really to exist at all retroactively until and unles we notice them."
Sounds similiar to holographic theory. I forget the term used for this. The idea was the same particle experiments carried out from different places, yielded different results -- susceptible by progenitors.
And here's my crazy impressionable notion on the Big Bang.. What if it was a black hole? particles implosion [shrinks to one atom], causing rifts in time, opens a porthole into another dimension. Particles [one atom] reformation crystallizes into super ones and multiply.
KtP
u:[s]
|
the universe
Harbinger ofEldritch Despair
Registered: 03/10/99
Posts: 1,456
Loc: Under your bed
Last seen: 15 years, 6 months
|
|
I don't know about a porthole to another dimension, but yeah, the big bang did start from a blackhole.
--------------------
"If you had a million years to do it in, you couldn't rub out even half the 'Fuck you' signs in the world."- J. D. Salinger
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
felix4life
1 2 3 all )
spacer
xFrockx