Linear Time

The idea of Linear Time dominates most minds in the West.

I propose that this notion is entirely spawned by the predominance of Christian-Abrahamism and the Ethics & Morals deeply ingrained in these systems. The most immediate and pressing reason and cause is the Absolution of Sin. "Sin" is washed-away, whether forgiven or forgotten, both are essentially the same. Christianity offers a moral system and ethics that, once forgiven, the mistakes of the past no longer matter. Combined with Western Corporatism, you can also buy your way out, if rich enough. But the function is simple. The Past, is severed from the present. The Present, is severed from the future. And The Future, is all that matters.

It is not as you were.
It is not as you are.
It is only as what you want to be.

This notion has developed in sophistication from the Tabula Rasa, Blank Slate Theory, Mind-Body Duality (Dualism), Disassociative Disorder, and any other generalized philosophical function that offers an 'erasure' (Annihilation, Nihilism) of "the past" in exchange for a (Positive) "future'.

Linear time = causality.
The cosmic movement/momentum towards increasing chaos and/or decreasing order.
The movement is never finality, i.e., completed, so the process continues.

Increasing chaos = increasing possibility; decreasing roder = decreasing probability
Absolute chaos (theoretical) = infinite possibilities of uniform probability - life is impossible in such a state.
what we experience as matter/energy is also impossible , absolutely improbable, because these are patterns we experience, i.e., interpret, translate, into kinds of en energy/matter.
Time is this movement, experienced as change, i.e., interactivity - relative to the organism's median metabolism, his biorhythms or cellular systolic/diastolic cycles - especially his brain cells where the processing occurs, i.e., consciousness.

Æon wrote:

The idea of Linear Time dominates most minds in the West.

I propose that this notion is entirely spawned by the predominance of Christian-Abrahamism and the Ethics & Morals deeply ingrained in these systems.  The most immediate and pressing reason and cause is the Absolution of Sin.  "Sin" is washed-away, whether forgiven or forgotten, both are essentially the same.  Christianity offers a moral system and ethics that, once forgiven, the mistakes of the past no longer matter.  Combined with Western Corporatism, you can also buy your way out, if rich enough.  But the function is simple.  The Past, is severed from the present.  The Present, is severed from the future.  And The Future, is all that matters.

It is not as you were.
It is not as you are.
It is only as what you want to be.

This notion has developed in sophistication from the Tabula Rasa, Blank Slate Theory, Mind-Body Duality (Dualism), Disassociative Disorder, and any other generalized philosophical function that offers an 'erasure' (Annihilation, Nihilism) of "the past" in exchange for a (Positive) "future'.

Is linear time the only possibility?  Let's discuss others, whether or not it is immutable.

Circular.

Since time measures a relationship between rates of change - interactivity - we can imagine that in a multi-diemsional cosmos lines are a human experience determined by the limitations of four dimensional space/time.

Satyr wrote:

Circular.

Since time measures a relationship between rates of change - interactivity - we can imagine that in a multi-diemsional cosmos lines are a human experience determined by the limitations of four dimensional space/time.

One direction circular?  In only this 4 dimensional understanding, but that leaves 7 other dimensions where time may act differently and can anyone speculate how a different nature of time might appear? Or the rate of such an appearance.

We experience time as cycles. The day and year being the ones that have always been, and still are, the most important. There are many others, some short, others very long indeed. Plants grow, die, and are reborn. The universe itself, for all we know, may be part of an ever expanding and contacting cycle. So yes, linear time is an artifical construct that doesn't really fit our experiences, and I would agree is very much a product of Judeo-Christian thinking, where the universe has a definite beginning and a definite end, and that's all there is.

Maia wrote:

We experience time as cycles. The day and year being the ones that have always been, and still are, the most important. There are many others, some short, others very long indeed. Plants grow, die, and are reborn. The universe itself, for all we know, may be part of an ever expanding and contacting cycle. So yes, linear time is an artifical construct that doesn't really fit our experiences, and I would agree is very much a product of Judeo-Christian thinking, where the universe has a definite beginning and a definite end, and that's all there is.

So you believe that our 4 dimensions are all there is, strictly tied to our understanding of physics? All possibilities are tied to only what we can evidence as actual, out of hand negating the potential for anything other?

Time refers to change, which is a term describing interactivity It is how interactivity is experienced- after the fact.

Dimensional space = possibilities.

The possibility of interactivity is what is interpreted as matter/energy. So dimensions that cannot be perceived cannot be interpreted, other than after-the-fact as the unforeseen, the uncanny, the strange, the mysterious.

Additionally, risking becoming verbose and annoying Darling...
Speed of Light.
As we accelerate within dimensions the direction indicates possibility of interacting.
So as we accelerate the possibility of interacting within fewer and fewer dimensions increases and decreases - shrinks - in all other dimensions.
Infinite acceleration - theoretical - would be the possibility of interacting in one dimension and no other.
Imagine a spaghetti.
Since this is impossible - in my metaphysics (no absolutes) all matter/energy must be interactive within at least two dimensions. This means it would be unable to interact within all other dimensions - so it would be imperceptible - perception being a consequence of interactivity.

WendyDarling wrote:

Maia wrote:

We experience time as cycles. The day and year being the ones that have always been, and still are, the most important. There are many others, some short, others very long indeed. Plants grow, die, and are reborn. The universe itself, for all we know, may be part of an ever expanding and contacting cycle. So yes, linear time is an artifical construct that doesn't really fit our experiences, and I would agree is very much a product of Judeo-Christian thinking, where the universe has a definite beginning and a definite end, and that's all there is.

So you believe that our 4 dimensions are all there is, strictly tied to our understanding of physics?  All possibilities are tied to only what we can evidence as actual, out of hand negating the potential for anything other?

I'm sure there are other realities too. The interesting question is, what is their nature?

Satyr wrote:

Time refers to change, which is a term describing interactivity It is how interactivity is experienced- after the fact.

Dimensional space = possibilities.

The possibility of interactivity is what is interpreted  as matter/energy. So dimensions that cannot be perceived cannot be interpreted, other than after-the-fact as the unforeseen, the uncanny, the strange, the mysterious.  

Additionally, risking becoming verbose and annoying Darling...
Speed of Light.
As we accelerate within dimensions the direction indicates possibility of interacting.
So as we accelerate the possibility of interacting within fewer and fewer dimensions increases and decreases - shrinks - in all other dimensions.
Infinite acceleration - theoretical - would be the possibility of interacting in one dimension and no other.
Imagine a spaghetti.
Since this is impossible - in my metaphysics (no absolutes) all matter/energy must be interactive within at least two dimensions. This means it would be unable to interact within all other dimensions - so it would be imperceptible - perception being a consequence of interactivity.  

 

Imagine a dimension of only infinite thought, no outward changes to interpret the passage of time. Are "we" tied to one directional thought and memory recall there? Time in reverse is no longer the strict definition of linear. If that is imaginable, why not possible?

Maia wrote:

WendyDarling wrote:

Maia wrote:

We experience time as cycles. The day and year being the ones that have always been, and still are, the most important. There are many others, some short, others very long indeed. Plants grow, die, and are reborn. The universe itself, for all we know, may be part of an ever expanding and contacting cycle. So yes, linear time is an artifical construct that doesn't really fit our experiences, and I would agree is very much a product of Judeo-Christian thinking, where the universe has a definite beginning and a definite end, and that's all there is.

So you believe that our 4 dimensions are all there is, strictly tied to our understanding of physics?  All possibilities are tied to only what we can evidence as actual, out of hand negating the potential for anything other?

I'm sure there are other realities too. The interesting question is, what is their nature?

I dunno and enjoy speculating about any alternatives imaginable.

Instead of speculating by pulling things from our arse here's a method which limits our imagination so that ti does not fall prey to fantasies...and go insane.

We use reality as we experience it as our foundation, and speculate from this grounding.
Since existence is all, this experience of existence cannot be contradicted by another.
That is nihilism, viz., the contradiction of experienced reality by theory, by abstractions, by noumena...

Physics is our basis....then we move downward into the subterranean domains of metaphysics, and then upwards into the imaginative projections of ideology. The three must be aligned, in harmony, otherwise we go insane and we join ILP to share our insanity with other crazies.
The physical, the experienced, is our down to earth, our starting point. Our speculations must be grounded there.

Going insane is easy
It offers us alternate realities, expressing a dissatisfaction with actual reality.
I can imagine all sort of pleasant alternatives...and if this is going to become a hedonistic exchange then I am sure we can share many pleasures with each other.

Satyr wrote:

Instead of speculating by pulling things from our arse here's a method which limits our imagination so that ti does not fall prey to fantasies...and go insane.

We use reality as we experience it as our foundation, and speculate from this grounding.
Since existence is all, this experience of existence cannot be contradicted by another.
That is nihilism, viz., the contradiction of experienced reality by theory, by abstractions, by noumena...

Physics is our basis....then we move downward into the subterranean domains of metaphysics, and then upwards into the imaginative projections of ideology. The three must be aligned, in harmony, otherwise we go insane and we join ILP to share our insanity with other crazies.
The physical, the experienced, is our down to earth, our starting point. Our speculations must be grounded there.  

Thinking outside of your safe box equals insanity?

If it is done for entertainment or for pleasure, no....if it is then taken literally, yes.

Motive, darling.

Satyr wrote:

If it is done for entertainment or for pleasure, no....if it is then taken literally, yes.

Motive, darling.

Motive to address challenging thought.  I thought philosophers push the defined boundaries(perspectives) or in the very least re-arrange perspectives.  My faux pas using bounds.  I understand boundaries here, only what is elsewhere? Don't you wonder?  We are missing a lot.  I have no problem looking closer, in uncommon ways.

No word games, dear.
No "challenging thought" inserted to flatter yourself.
That shit don't work on me.

A motive, dear....why are you using words, what is your purpose.
If it is to entertain yourself, or relieve yourself, or comfort yourself,, or pleasure yourself, then it is different from wanting to connect to the world, to see, to know, despite being hurt, despite being displeased, despite being made uncomfortable.

Using words to mentally masturbate is a nice pastime.
Distracting, it can even exercise the mind...

Words are tools or weapons...they have no innate value.
They can be used for many purposes.
Mass manipulation being one...

By the way, Ecmandu has some fascinating alternate realities, so does Fixed and Parodites, can't say iamclown has one because he's simply negating all to bring about as much uncertainty and anxiety it requires to force people to come to compromises...and his ideal utopia will be the result of this uncertainty, ahem skepticism: no more conflicts, no disagreements, no pain, no suffering, no wars, no crying, no hunger - a beautiful alternate reality.
Ecmandu's no "consent violations" is another motive....A world where all have what they need, desire, and want and nobody is denied it as well.
A wonderful motive....is it threatening?
Only if it creates a mass movement of insanity, otherwise its harmless mental masturbation...like with the Russian Revolution.
Desperation is inspiring.
Because when the delusions are proven to be utopian dreams it ain't the dreams that will be blamed but humans who did not believe strong enough in the collective dream.

Sweetie....confusing fantasy and reality is not harmless.
So admit that you enjoy fantastic speculations...it chalenges your imagination...entertains you, makes you feel hopeful, good...
Admit it and we can proceed and I can contribute.

Here's one my contribution, for now...
What if...what if there are being living in alternate multi-diemsional reality, but we can't wee them.
What if they are helping us or inhibiting us and we call them our angels or our demons?

You know how things miraculously fall into place and we get what we wanted but we can't explain how, or when no matter what we do we can't accomplish a task.
Or when sometimes we get a feeling something will happen and it does.
Maybe its them.

Satyr wrote:

Here's one my contribution, for now...
What if...what if there are being living in alternate multi-diemsional reality, but we can't wee them.
What if they are helping us or inhibiting us and we call them our angels or our demons?

You know how things miraculously fall into place and we get what we wanted but we can't explain how, or when no matter what we do we can't accomplish a task.
Or when sometimes we get a feeling something will happen and it does.
Maybe its them.

If you can admit that you don't know it all and that what you mock as science fiction/fantasy may become science fact, as oh so much sci-fi fantasies, have. Nor do I discount, in the ugliest of ways, millions, billions of testimonials regarding experiences that defy what is currently understood.

That same bullshyte again...
Should I post a disclaimer every time I utter a word?
Is it not implied when I say "there are no absolutes"? No omnipotence and no omniscience.
No TRUTH....no all encompassing, final, complete, perfect opinion.
Have I excluded myself from this?

It's funny that you came from a forum, ILP, where there are at least half a dozen crazies that openly or indirectly claim to be omnipotent, omniscient or that they are genius...
Have I ever declared myself omnipotent, or omniscient, or a god, or the ideal male, or the one who discovered the end of all philosophy...No!!!
I only imply the superiority of my views...

Manipulative female.
Like you can ever use words to bring me down a peg.

But I'll play along.
Don't cost me a thing.
Well, it forces me to swallow my pride... and to bite on my tongue...or fingers before I type something truly nasty.
The old Satyr is not here, dear....do you miss him?
He's calmer...more indifferent.
Some think this is weakness because of how I was in the past, and I want them to think that.
It gives me an additional advantage.

Satyr wrote:

That same bullshyte again...
Should I post a disclaimer every time I utter a word?
Is it not implied when I say "there are no absolutes"? No omnipotence and no omniscience.
No TRUTH....no all encompassing, final, complete, perfect opinion.
Have I excluded myself from this?

It's funny that you came from a forum, ILP, where there are at least half a dozen crazies that openly or indirectly claim to be omnipotent, omniscient or that they are genius...
Have I ever declared myself omnipotent, or omniscient, ro a god, or the ideal male, or the one who discovered the end of all philosophy...No!!!
I only imply superiority of my views...

Manipulative female.
Like you can use words to bring me down a peg.

But I'll play along.
Don't cost me a thing.

Well, it forces me to swallow my pride... and to bite on my tongue...or fingers before I type something truly nasty.
The old Satyr is not here, dear....do you miss him?
He's calmer...more indifferent.
some think this is weakness because of how I was in the past, and I want them to think that.
It gives me an additional advantage.

Logic is a word, ever heard of it?

Logic, from logos...
Logic is how the human mind disciplines itself to reality - how the mind remains within the limits of natural order.

Using logic would exclude most of your 'what ifs' dear.

But, let's be honest, you like conflict....a challenge you call it.
It get your loins moist...ahem, I mean it makes your intellectual juices run, your blood boil, your imagination go wild with pathos....makes you feel alive, excited....healthy.

Ooops there it is!
Dat ol' goat...

Remember me on ILO...sweetie?

Satyr wrote:

Logic, from logos...
Logis is how the human mind disciplines itself to reality - how the mind remains within the limits of natural order.

Using logic would exclude most of your 'what ifs' dear.

But, let's be honest, you like conflict....a challenge you call it.
It get your loins moist...ahem, I mean it makes your intellectual juices run, your boil boil, your imagination go wild with pathos....makes you feel alive, excited....healthy.

Ooops there it is!
Dat ol' goat...

Everything you assume about me and probably a large portion of the theories of science is misguided, but you are safe here, in your small bubble.

Good point.

Satyr wrote:

Good point.

I'm open to having conversations exploring the nature of reality with any people who actually want to do that which is not you and the peanut gallery who chimes in adding nothing but insults.

Cool...you win.
Singularity exists.

Carry on.

The two common modes of time are Linear and Cyclical.

These can be understood separately or conjoined. Linear time is a progression of unique moments. While Cyclical time is repetition of repeating patterns. If time were only-linear, then no two moments would be the same, patterns would never repeat, and nothing would be knowable, because the mind would always be in a state of apprehension, trying to perceive and understand endlessly unique moments in time: chaos and confusion. If time were only-cyclical, then all would be knowable, predictable, and stagnant. Nothing would change.

So:

Linear-time = Endless change
Cyclical-time = No change



Here is the mathematical equivalent. Start counting from one, to infinity. Let's say you count to 593 trillion. It doesn't take long before the processing of each second becomes too large. You cannot integrate and accept endless Uniqueness of time. It takes too much mental, or even computational processing power. So biology must admit defeat. Instead, intelligence has evolved to break the linear-time and start repeating. On a clock, the hand moves to 12 noon or midnight, then resets: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12, etc.

Smaller patterns repeat easier, meaning easier mental integration, like in musical tempo, 1 2 3 4, 1 2 3 4, 1 2 3 4, etc.

Or no repetition or progression at all (absence of time, Stagnation): 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1, etc.

What direction are people 'moving' in time?

Forward? Backward? Sideways? Up and down? Most people do not consider this, but rather conceive of time as passive travelers, being swept downstream. Most do not consider resistance, or "moving" in time. Science has attempted to integrate time into physics and mathematics through the theory of General Relativity, meaning that time is relative to different objects, speeds, acceleration, etc. But it is not yet widely held that time is a Subjective notion, relative to the mental processing speed of different minds and intellectual ability. Some people 'think' faster than others, react, memorize, recall, process, etc. Why does time "move faster when having fun", yet feel slow while bored? What is "subjective" time versus "objective"?

What is time to a rock? How many years pass, thousands of years, millions, and yet the rock feels nothing? No change, yet it remains as it was one million years ago.

Life is subjective, and every human takes his/her own experience of time as its own standard. Time is directly interpreted and understood through this personal experience. So a common understanding of time is a social and societal abstraction. People "share" time together, or apart. What can simpler animals say about time? Do they know, or care? Life passes, and it cannot think of passage in higher terms. It is only in humanity, using language and literacy, that memories, stories, information, are recalled from years, decades, centuries, millenniums prior. This expands the collective memories of humanity, which also expands the overall understanding of Time.