You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
The way I correlate it all so far is through time, with time zero as unconsciousness, the absolute center of "being," if you will; the subconscious functioning of the brain sets the parameters by breaking time into infinitesimal quanta, both forward and backward as time. Needless to say, this type of time is illusory or unobservable; finally, the finite reality that is observed four-dimensionally consists of consciously gluing the above increments together in discrete perceptible measures at the CPU rate of c. We can invoke the use of gluons here, if you wish.
The correlation between subconscious parameters and subatomic particles is through the interactions of the short-lived virtual particles, whereby their superluminal velocities dilate time from zero to eternity, part of which(the part observed) is in the form of stabilized atoms. So the reason we would observe anything in motion, like the moving arms you mentioned, is because the energy transfers of the atoms are being recreated incrementally over the time it takes the frames to be traversed by light - sort of like the motion-picture hypothesis, but with the added note that the static frame(newtonian spacetime) cannot exist without internal time dilation. There would be no extension possible or colors possible for us to see.
As an aside, my atomic model is based on electrons and positrons, continually annihilating over cyclical atomic orbits. Each cycle equals new particle pairs.
You're right about the brain. The absolute center - T-zero point - could be classified as brain dead, which I advocate as being a necessary transition for a new type of thinking.
Consciousness is an emergent property of large numbers of neuron firing within the brain, which seems baffling to reductionists, but it seems to be so. A single neuron cannot be conscious.
Emergence is the notion that something is more that the sum of its parts. Strong emergence has downward causation; weak emergence only appears to have.
A single molecule of water is not wet; larger numbers are (perhaps due to the slipperiness of hydrogen moving around).
Macroscopic irreversibility is an emergent property of large numbers of molecules.
The subconscious presents consciousness with a frame of observation every 10/44ths of a second, although time can seem to speed up or slow down due to other factors.
Memory reconstructs the past. Vision predicts the future through imagination’s anticipation.
If I get Nobody’s theory correctly, all possible descriptions already exist “out there”, for what else could the timeless-formless do, the sum of which carries no information at all, everything being the same as nothing, just as Borge’s library of all possible book variations would be worthless information (a catalog entry would have to be the book itself).
Anything and everything has already happened, but is presented time-dilated by the subconscious. Our downward causation may give us some “choice”.
The Following User Says Thank You to austintorn@aol.com For This Useful Post:
If we accept General relativity, and its implications of space and time dilation ... then we must also conclusively accept that the past, present and future exist in this universe at the same moment ...
All past present and future events are here now ... their only measurable difference being human perception of motion ...
Now we are told that the 'distortion' of Spacetime is only apparent at speeds approaching light speed or alternatively, at vast distances. But surely we can measure it at any speed or distance ? In other words, any and all movement, must distort Spacetime, however small that movement is ?
Now for my 'brainstorming' question.
All thats moving in relation to us, cars on the street, trees in the wind, the hair on our head blowing in the wind, the wind itself, our arm as we strike a home run .... must, in some sense be moving slightly into the future, or alternatively, the past. Our body and all around us must only be synchronised when we are 'still' in relation to our selves and our surroundings. ?
In other words if we could freeze frame our surroundings so that only the present were visible, then the only parts visible would be the parts that were in the same still state as the observer ? Would our arm swinging the baseball bat be visible, or only return to our view once the home run had been hit, would roads be empty of all traffic ?. (Of course this is impossible as Nobody pointed out, if time was frozen, light would be frozen and we would receive no light at all.)
Is it possible that our 'esse' is in some sense not just in the present but in a wider band bounded by our motion. Are we spread or smeared or 'Bell-curved' across a small amount (or even all) of the past-future with the immediate present being the mythical mid position from which we presume to take our 'base' measurements?
Or are there simply billions of Graybeards, perish the thought, all acting in near-unison in parrallel universes and our 'esse' is just a condensed persona of them all ... LOL
If I'm crazy, where did the craziness set in .... ??
cool bananas ... greg
The easiest way to prove that all is at the same speed is to attempt to break a second down to it's tiniest part. It's impossible, it would be as small as infinity is large. It's so small, it doesn't even have a name, so let's christen it finitiny, pronounced fini tiny. That brings us to now, which doesn't even exist either cause we don't have anything before or after now. So basically I find myself agreeing with Nobody once again. Life is pointless and we don't even exist or we never stop existing. It's too complex so either something is screwing with us just for the heck of it or we are already artificial intelligence and about as dumb as the computer in front of us. Time must be programed into us to give us some false sense of having to be somewhere at a particular time, the computer doesn't know what time it is either, we have to tell it, that's also why we sometimes ask people, "what time is it?" If it was real, we would always know the time like how we know the weather if we just step outside into it. We are constantly in time right? So then we should constantly know the time, but we don't.
It's not impossible to break time down to it's smallest unit. It's called Planck time, the time it takes light to travel a planck length. A very small period of time indeed.
The energies needed to smash particles to within a Planck length of each other were available to the universe at a time equal to the Planck length divided by the speed of light. This time, called the Planck time (Gh/c5)1/2, equals approximately 10-43 second.
Best.
Pat
The Following User Says Thank You to Profpat For This Useful Post:
The way I correlate it all so far is through time, with time zero as unconsciousness, the absolute center of "being," if you will; the subconscious functioning of the brain sets the parameters by breaking time into infinitesimal quanta, both forward and backward as time. Needless to say, this type of time is illusory or unobservable; finally, the finite reality that is observed four-dimensionally consists of consciously gluing the above increments together in discrete perceptible measures at the CPU rate of c. We can invoke the use of gluons here, if you wish.
The correlation between subconscious parameters and subatomic particles is through the interactions of the short-lived virtual particles, whereby their superluminal velocities dilate time from zero to eternity, part of which(the part observed) is in the form of stabilized atoms. So the reason we would observe anything in motion, like the moving arms you mentioned, is because the energy transfers of the atoms are being recreated incrementally over the time it takes the frames to be traversed by light - sort of like the motion-picture hypothesis, but with the added note that the static frame(newtonian spacetime) cannot exist without internal time dilation. There would be no extension possible or colors possible for us to see.
As an aside, my atomic model is based on electrons and positrons, continually annihilating over cyclical atomic orbits. Each cycle equals new particle pairs.
You're right about the brain. The absolute center - T-zero point - could be classified as brain dead, which I advocate as being a necessary transition for a new type of thinking.
Nob ... I am sure what your saying has merit. But you write as though I am familar with the terms. I do get the gist of what your saying (I think)
What is superluminal ... ?
How do you practically view a relationship between subconscious parameters and subatomic particles ?
I know that you see this, but you left me back on the starting line ... LOL
I don't know if our brains can operate at the rate of 'c' .. presuming they could ... why 'c' ?
cool bananas ... greg
'Blondie says I must hate all Brunettes. I'll try, but if I can't ... I'll love them both' ... graffiti on Tavern wall, Pompeii, circa AD 70.
That brings us to now, which doesn't even exist either cause we don't have anything before or after now. So basically I find myself agreeing with Nobody once again. Life is pointless and we don't even exist or we never stop existing.
Hi Sally .... I think your view is very close to mine.
If you break it down to basics then the question becomes:
'Why is it I can 'see' the past but cannot 'see' the future.?'
My answer is that we don't see the past any more than we can see the future. All we see when we look 'backwards' are the records we retrieve from our memory banks.
'Then why do our memory records only contain the past ?'
They don't, not really, they only contain information that is necessary for survival.
Its important that we remember where Tigers live. Its important that we remember girlfriends birthdays and anniversaries. These are examples of things that are extremely dangerous and life threatening if we forget them. I see memory as a beneficial natural selection.
But I don't think memory is the past. Today thousands and thousands of passenger jets landed all over the globe. We don't know their destinations or their passenger lists (the past), just the same as we don't know tommorrows schedules (the future). But we do know that our girlfriend is arriving on flight QA509 out of Stonewall in Black Ankle Country at 1 pm , because it would be dangerous to forget it.
When we review our memory we think we 'see' the past. But all we 'see' are memories. The true past is as elusive as the future. It has no ordered shape. Everyones view of it is different.
cool bananas ... greg
'Blondie says I must hate all Brunettes. I'll try, but if I can't ... I'll love them both' ... graffiti on Tavern wall, Pompeii, circa AD 70.
Hi Sally .... I think your view is very close to mine.
If you break it down to basics then the question becomes:
'Why is it I can 'see' the past but cannot 'see' the future.?'
My answer is that we don't see the past any more than we can see the future. All we see when we look 'backwards' are the records we retrieve from our memory banks.
'Then why do our memory records only contain the past ?'
They don't, not really, they only contain information that is necessary for survival.
Oh wow, that's what my baby would say. Do you think written history is inaccurate? OH WOW! That could change everything! There was this guy on about the same thing on another message board and he said we can change the past with this now knowledge.
Quote:
Its important that we remember where Tigers live. Its important that we remember girlfriends birthdays and anniversaries. These are examples of things that are extremely dangerous and life threatening if we forget them. I see memory as a beneficial natural selection.
History is self serving. I understand the importance of our personal rememberences, but why should I care about history in general? I never did like history class, in fact I didn't graduate high school cause I always cut that first period history class I had.
Quote:
When we review our memory we think we 'see' the past. But all we 'see' are memories. The true past is as elusive as the future. It has no ordered shape. Everyones view of it is different.
I agree with you 100%. But we both agree on the past in essence, so I can only agree that you are right, we are very close, maybe a just planck off.
Life is pointless and we don't even exist or we never stop existing. It's too complex so either something is screwing with us just for the heck of it or we are already artificial intelligence and about as dumb as the computer in front of us. Time must be programed into us to give us some false sense of having to be somewhere at a particular time, the computer doesn't know what time it is either, we have to tell it, that's also why we sometimes ask people, "what time is it?" If it was real, we would always know the time like how we know the weather if we just step outside into it. We are constantly in time right? So then we should constantly know the time, but we don't.
Linear Mode
