|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: blaze2]
#5294352 - 02/13/06 11:09 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Now equals awareness. 
Blessed Awareness! 
This thread is sweet. 
 Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
trendal
J♠


Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: blaze2]
#5294362 - 02/13/06 11:13 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
the perception of something does not make it real.
But you said "how can you perceive something if it isn't real". Well, I can perceive both time and distance - so by converse they must be "real".
is distance real? It is measurable, but that does not mean reality.
How can something be measurable and yet not be real?
In reality there is only one Now, the mind remembers past moments and that is the only place they exist.
So was Einstein wrong, then? Your statement directly contradicts Relativity. I said nothing about the past/future "existing", only that there is no such thing as a "universal now" because time is relative to the observer as per Relativity.
If something doesn't exist outside the mind how can it be real?
The Mind is an extension of physical reality, so anything that happens "in the mind" is in some sense "real" - even though it isn't a physical object.
Would you say language is "real"? It doesn't exist as a physical "thing" but certainly exists in the minds of humans.
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: trendal]
#5294424 - 02/13/06 11:30 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
trendal said: So was Einstein wrong, then? Your statement directly contradicts Relativity. I said nothing about the past/future "existing", only that there is no such thing as a "universal now" because time is relative to the observer as per Relativity.
I don't believe he was referring to a "universal now", but that there is one continual moment in terms of one's conscious awareness. Perhaps "when" this now is being experienced is not relevant. 
Quote:
How can something be measurable and yet not be real?
Distance might be real, but the concept of time is abstract. When he states that time is not real, I would surmise that he is referring to the fact that there simply is no universal clock that denotes time, that it is an abstract measurement relating to distance and motion. Whether or not the abstraction is "real" is a question of categorization; I would state that it is not a concept inherent in reality, but that its existance as an abstract concept relating to aspects of reality that are inherent in reality is real. 
With clarification, I'm sure it would remain evident that you both are holding the same perspective on the matter. 
 Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
trendal
J♠


Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
|
Distance might be real, but the concept of time is abstract.
Distance and time are one and the same. Distance explains the spatial separation between two objects, while time explains the temporal separation between two events or states.
When he states that time is not real, I would surmise that he is referring to the fact that there simply is no universal clock that denotes time, that it is an abstract measurement relating to distance and motion.
Again, this is exactly the same as distance - there is no universal yard stick to measure distance. It is an abstract notion relating to separation and motion.
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
blaze2
The Witness


Registered: 12/20/02
Posts: 1,883
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: trendal]
#5295205 - 02/13/06 02:57 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
"how can you percieve something if it isnt real"
What I meant is that for something to be real it has to be percieved, BUT things that are percieved can exist in their entirety INSIDE the mind, and as such are not real.
Time has no "real" counterpart. It is an idea of the mind. "Time" in reality is ONLY the now. It's just what is, and that is the only way time exists. Einstien understood this, everything he wrote in Relativity is in support of the theory that there is no past/future, only a now. "Time" IS reality, but its not future or past realitys. Time(the moment) and space(distance), make up reality, but neither is "real" They are ideas.
space can be bent(Einstien said so, and its been proven around black holes and the like), thus negating all our perceptions of distance, and Time's true nature isnt as we humans percieve it. Time is real so far as you understand it to BE reality, and not a measurement OF reality. peace
blaze2
-------------------- "Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein "peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein "Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." Thomas Jefferson "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson
|
Annom
※※※※※※



Registered: 12/22/02
Posts: 6,367
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 8 months, 9 days
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: trendal]
#5295353 - 02/13/06 03:24 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
trendal said: Factor relativity into the question and there truly is no such thing as a universal "now".
..........
The ball is dropped.
You "see" it hit the floor and make a note of it. However you didn't see it as it was happening due to the already mentioned latency in perception. Further, it takes time for the light to travel from the ball to your eyes which adds another (incredibly) small latency.
I "see" it hit the floor, though again I only "see" it after the fact due to latency of perception. I also see it a little later than you do because I am much farther away from the ball than you are - so the light takes even longer to reach my eyes.
So then my concept of the "now" when the ball hit the floor is almost entirely independant of your own concept of that "now". We both had latencies of various times added to our perception of the event.
In a physical sense, there is no such thing as universal time. One person's "now" is only their own - it can never be exactly the same as anyone else's "now".
While this is correct, it isn't the real explanation why there is not a "universal now" in Special Relativity.
Two observers who have a relative velocity to each other will see the ball hit the ground at a different time, even if you correct the times with the time it took the light to travel to your eyes and correct it with the "latency of perception time".
Imagine that psilocyberin is on a planet in a galaxy far, far away - 10 billion light-years from earth - idly sitting in his living room. You are on earth and you and psilocyberin are not moving relative to each other. Since you are at rest relative to each other, you and psilocyberin agree fully on issues of space and time: your and psilocyberin's now are the same. After a little while, psilocyberin stands up and goes for a walk in a direction that is directly away from you with 10 miles per hour. The events on earth that belong on his now-list(his present) are events that happened about 150 years ago, according to you! - The Fabric of the Cosmos: Space, Time, and the Texture of Reality by Brian Greene
This now-list is corrected with the time it takes the light to travel to psilocyberin. The described effect has nothing to do with the speed of light.
Edit: Interesting result of this is that, in an infinite universe, everything in the far future and the past happens "now" for some observer(some need the speed of light though).
Edited by Annom (02/14/06 12:05 AM)
|
blaze2
The Witness


Registered: 12/20/02
Posts: 1,883
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: Annom]
#5295741 - 02/13/06 04:44 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
all true Annom, but you see it as disproving the universal now, to me it only proves it. we can only percieve the results of this now.
say you leave adn take that lightspeed space ship up for some laps around the solar system, then came back to earth you are right it would be a later "time" but the gap wasnt experianced by everyone only the spaceship, people died, were born, and all that while you ran some laps. your now has changed, perception, but in reality the now never did, you just changed inside of that moment just faster than usual. its like fast forwarding a VCR tape. the end is different from the beginning but they are all the same tape. is the part you skip not real? is it not still there? Time is constant, is universal, and is but one moment.
-------------------- "Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein "peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein "Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." Thomas Jefferson "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson
|
trendal
J♠


Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: blaze2]
#5296120 - 02/13/06 06:05 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
blaze2 said: Time(the moment) and space(distance), make up reality, but neither is "real" They are ideas.
Quote:
space can be bent(Einstien said so, and its been proven around black holes and the like), thus negating all our perceptions of distance, and Time's true nature isnt as we humans percieve it.
How can something that isn't real be bent?
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
trendal
J♠


Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: Annom]
#5296145 - 02/13/06 06:10 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Annom said: Imagine that psilocyberin is on a planet in a galaxy far, far away - 10 billion light-years from earth - idly sitting in his living room. You are on earth and you and psilocyberin are not moving relative to each other. Since you are at rest relative to each other, you and psilocyberin agree fully on issues of space and time: your and psilocyberin's now are the same. After a little while, psilocyberin stands up and goes for a walk in a direction that is directly away from you with 10 miles per hour. The events on earth that belong on his now-list(his present) are events that happened about 150 years ago, according to you!
The Fabric of the Cosmos?
Good book!
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
MystikMushroom
I RULE YOU!
Registered: 10/11/04
Posts: 400
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: trendal]
#5296489 - 02/13/06 07:14 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Good thought provoking read...
I can't remember who said it--either Plato or Socrates but here:
"Time is eternity in motion" <--- Chew that over in your head...
Blaze 2's analysis lines up more with what I have personally experienced.
I belive that the higher a being's complexity, the more complex it's awareness is. I've spent time in places where my awareness was stretched so much, time seemed like a joke. The Eschaton; or the "Trancendential Object" at the end of time is a level of awareness that we might someday permanently reside in.
But for right now, current human perception of time is such that a series of linear actions are linked together in sequence.
Think if we humans could comprehend non-local information
|
Annom
※※※※※※



Registered: 12/22/02
Posts: 6,367
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 8 months, 9 days
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: trendal]
#5297637 - 02/14/06 12:03 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
trendal said:
Quote:
Annom said: Imagine that psilocyberin is on a planet in a galaxy far, far away - 10 billion light-years from earth - idly sitting in his living room. You are on earth and you and psilocyberin are not moving relative to each other. Since you are at rest relative to each other, you and psilocyberin agree fully on issues of space and time: your and psilocyberin's now are the same. After a little while, psilocyberin stands up and goes for a walk in a direction that is directly away from you with 10 miles per hour. The events on earth that belong on his now-list(his present) are events that happened about 150 years ago, according to you!
The Fabric of the Cosmos?
Good book!
Yeah, I think so. I have that quote in textfile but forgot to add the source. I'm almost sure it's from the fabric of the cosmos. Thanks for the source, I'll add that.
|
Annom
※※※※※※



Registered: 12/22/02
Posts: 6,367
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 8 months, 9 days
|
|
I remember reading about a surgeon in Consciousness Explained by Daniel C. Dennett who did a little research on when a signal is send from our hands or feed (when we feel something) and when this signal is received by our brain and when we actually feel it.
I remember that the body sends a timecode with the feel-signal so a signal that has to travel longer, because the nerve path is longer, is perceived at the same moment as a signal that was send from a body part near the brain. Our nerve system thus compensates for different nerve lengths so we perceive a touch at our feed and at our head at the same time when it was at the same time.
I'll try to check this when I'm home and have the book.
|
fresh313
journeyman


Registered: 09/01/03
Posts: 2,537
Last seen: 12 years, 9 months
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: Annom]
#5297732 - 02/14/06 12:27 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
ya it integrates it all so it meshes nicely
|
blaze2
The Witness


Registered: 12/20/02
Posts: 1,883
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: trendal]
#5299709 - 02/14/06 03:52 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
trendal said:
Quote:
blaze2 said: Time(the moment) and space(distance), make up reality, but neither is "real" They are ideas.
Quote:
space can be bent(Einstien said so, and its been proven around black holes and the like), thus negating all our perceptions of distance, and Time's true nature isnt as we humans percieve it.
How can something that isn't real be bent?
perception is bent, but is the reality bending?
-------------------- "Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein "peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein "Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." Thomas Jefferson "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: Annom]
#5300196 - 02/14/06 05:57 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Ive thought about this thread all day long, and your post is basically what I was thinking about.
it is possible that our brains (perception central) could create a counter balance to perceptual latency by controlling our entire perception of time/timing. what if our brains actually created an even greater latency of our perception so as to better control the sequence in which we perceive reality?
I dont know if it is true, but I once heard that if we were to sever a persons neocortex for a year, and then somehow re-attach it, that the person would instantly perceive everything which they were unable to for that year. If that is possible, or even slightly true, it makes me wonder if they would actually feel in an instant every sensoral (word?) perception, or would that person experience that year in real time?
|
dorkus
don't look back
Registered: 04/12/04
Posts: 1,511
|
|
Great thread. Blaze2 explains my perspective perfectly.
or would that person experience that year in real time?
My vote goes to realtime. Instant flash with the experience of realtime. As a dream, or a deep trip.
I remember once tripping for maybe ten hours, but the whole trip was gathered in the fifteen minutes before midnight. Strange stuff.
Edited by dr_mandelbrot (02/15/06 12:28 PM)
|
justamonkey
Stranger


Registered: 10/26/05
Posts: 292
Loc: Upstairs
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: dorkus]
#5315877 - 02/19/06 08:55 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Whether it is now or not, latency or not, it has no bearing whatsoever on my life. Therefore, why would I choose to waist my time on the thought of it? What is the practical reason in a common life for knowing that the sun revolves around the earth? Is there really one? Why waist your mental capacities on trivial persuits, they need not apply to you.
Overanalysis is the first step toward confusion.
-------------------- [quote]We don't need anyone to teach us sorcery, because there is really nothing to learn. What we need is a teacher to convince us that there is incalculable power at our fingertips. What a strange paradox! Every warrior on the path of knowledge thinks, at one time or another, that he's learning sorcery, but all he's doing is allowing himself to be convinced of the power hidden in his being, and that he can reach it. [/quote]-Carlos Casteneda
Edited by justamonkey (02/19/06 08:57 AM)
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: justamonkey]
#5316112 - 02/19/06 11:05 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
justamonkey said: Overanalysis is the first step toward confusion.
Ignorance is the first step towards confusion. Any increase in understanding of the nature of reality benefits ourselves and our race further.
Quote:
Whether it is now or not, latency or not, it has no bearing whatsoever on my life. Therefore, why would I choose to waist my time on the thought of it? What is the practical reason in a common life for knowing that the sun revolves around the earth? Is there really one? Why waist your mental capacities on trivial persuits, they need not apply to you.
There is no practical reason in knowing that the Sun revolves around the Earth, as such knowledge is false, first and foremost. 
It is your choice what understanding and knowledge you wish to concern yourself with, but there is nothing to designate choosing to understand reality more fully, even if there is not a direct benefit in regards to a limited, ego-based demand or expectation, as a waste of one's time and energy.
Necessary? No. Beneficial? Yes. Enlightening? Ja! 
 Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: The latency of perception [Re: justamonkey]
#5316390 - 02/19/06 12:45 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I personally had some cognitions when analyzing this thought and its implications. i think it says a lot about our perceptions.
there really is no worth or point to anything unless you yourself place it there.
|
|