Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

MagicBag Grow Bags
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2  [ show all ]
Re: Time [Re: Kid]
    #477863 -

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 :smile:

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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Time [Re: Timeleech]
    #478135 -

>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 10:07 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Time [Re: Timeleech]
    #478442 -

> 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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Time [Re: Pynchon]
    #478448 -

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'.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Time [Re: Kid]
    #478885 -

>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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Time [Re: Timeleech]
    #478911 -

> 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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Time [Re: the universe]
    #481489 -

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 :smile:)
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? :laugh:


--------------------
--
Eternally boggled, flummoxed, bewildered and surprised.
theophagy.org

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Time [Re: Timeleech]
    #481951 -

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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Time [Re: Timeleech]
    #486123 -

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]

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Time [Re: ArCh_TemPlaR]
    #487172 -

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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Shop: North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* particle and field felix4life 611 2 06/07/06 08:03 PM
by fireworks_god
* The GOD particle Scarfmeister 1,833 12 08/21/04 10:54 PM
by trendal
* The approaching revolution in particle physics distortopia 1,379 16 09/14/05 04:55 PM
by IgnatiusJReilly
* bummer....a McKenna prediction's already wrong
( 1 2 3 all )		 question_for_joo 7,301 51 03/20/05 05:19 PM
by Gomp
* Time as an emergent Particle. *DELETED* EddYerb 432 0 03/19/14 11:08 PM
by EddYerb
* particles don't exist until they are observed *DELETED* Deadfrancis 414 8 02/12/18 05:26 PM
by Ferdinando
* The philosophical standpoint on metatheoretical particles. spacer 298 1 10/15/14 07:19 PM
by OrgoneConclusion
* The word "to" and wave particle duality. xFrockx 213 0 12/07/09 07:37 PM
by xFrockx

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
2,364 topic views. 3 members, 54 guests and 19 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.028 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 17 queries.