Go to Naut's Tidbits & Snippets
- Add a comment
- Go to And Everywhere: How Time Has Changed...
Taking a chance here...
trying to describe my own notion of temporal motion...
From the perspective of physical reality, the life we lead waking, time moves (if it moves) sequentially, ticking out from NOW into the PAST and the PRESENT remains unformed until it arrives and becomes NOW.
But in whatever you want to call the sleeping reality of dreams, or even the casual daydreaming reality where thought rather than body is doing the moving (or being the moveable), this sequential experience of time becomes irrelevant. It is independent of the strictures of physicality or of distance.
In deep meditative consciousness, all time becomes NOW: we cease to perceive the passage of time. thi is one of the hallmarks of the meditative state which I have noticed also occurs when playing 'Marbles' and other computer games. (Games that place you in another world, via an avatar, also play one's time-sense, but not in quite the same way: it shifts cognition into 'game-world-time' and loosesn one's sense of 'real-world time.')
All of these are about perceptions of time, not time itself.
But if time is not a thing in itself, but only a product or an effect of perception...
Boy, the universe is confusing!
posted by
Ciel
on December 13, 2008 at 11:48 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Interesting, u scientist philosophers...
I too thought so at first, Naut...but think again, time on earth is measured wrt some fixed reference point ( sun, God, center of universe, heaven, whatever )... so if that point is in motion itself wrt some other reference point ( different galaxy / universe, whatever ), then isn't it possible that time, as measured by light traveled, might remain unchanged ( frozen ) wrt some reference point ( omnipresent God for eample )...us scientists really know very little about the connection between spirituality and scientific theory...in fact, i've started thinking that the latter comes from the former, rather than the other way around!..thank u for your intellectual dialogues, one of the very few I find here :)! - Ash
posted by
ash_pradhan
on December 12, 2008 at 9:44 AM
| link to this | reply
Naut
Too much for me...
posted by
Troosha
on December 12, 2008 at 7:12 AM
| link to this | reply
I arrived to late.......
to be able to add anything of significance........I need to get a watch!
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on December 12, 2008 at 5:27 AM
| link to this | reply
When will it stand still again?
posted by
Justi
on December 11, 2008 at 10:00 PM
| link to this | reply
Re:
gap, how much time do you have for this? More importantly, how much time can I spend on this? The problem is that we would have to begin back somewhere else before we can get to the questions you're asking, for things to make sense...
The short answer is that 'wormholes' fall within the range of 'established speculative' physics, although we don't know if they 'really' exist, much less what's 'on the other side'...Parallel universes belong to the realm of 'speculative speculative' physics... 
posted by
Nautikos
on December 11, 2008 at 5:11 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Maybe the clocks are ticking out the seconds...
Ciel, sorry I missed your comment earlier, but you make a very important point here, and you're absolutely right! In important ways,
we are producing seconds (or whatever) in the very process of counting them...
posted by
Nautikos
on December 11, 2008 at 5:00 PM
| link to this | reply
so where do "wormholes" and parallel universes fit into all of this theorizing? I nearly flunked science in High School and took gut science courses in college to satisfy my requirements, so pardon my confusion!! Mal
posted by
gapcohen
on December 11, 2008 at 1:32 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Interesting, u scientist philosophers...
Nope, ash, I don't think one can explain it scientifically, it's not a scientific statement. But it's a nice poetic image, that captures and expresses a bit of the mystery of both light and 'spirit'...
posted by
Nautikos
on December 11, 2008 at 12:19 PM
| link to this | reply
Interesting, u scientist philosophers...
can u understand / explain the statement "our spirits r frozen light" :)?
Ash
posted by
ash_pradhan
on December 11, 2008 at 9:53 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Naut...
Yes, people have been working on it for about that length of time, and the math gets really complicated - in fact it's
all math - nothing has been empirically verified, and there are some people who claim that it is not verifiable in principle...but I don't understand it well enough - I shouldn't even be talking about it, 'cause I don't really like to talk about things I don't understand properly...
posted by
Nautikos
on December 11, 2008 at 9:16 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Naut...
I heard about string theory about 10 years ago on a radio talk show and what I heard sounded really bizarre. I'd like to see where that leads.
posted by
metalrat
on December 11, 2008 at 8:55 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Naut...
Quantum physics? It depends what aspects we're talking about! The
Standard Model is a very old hat, like a well-worn fedora, and it's also been verified to the point of boredom...Even though it will always remain 'weird' from the point of view of classical physics...Now it's string theory, but that's where I have to stop talking, because I certainly don't understand it well enough...
posted by
Nautikos
on December 11, 2008 at 8:46 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Re: Re: Naut...
I forgot..E=MC
2. 
posted by
metalrat
on December 11, 2008 at 8:41 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Re: Naut...
And I forgot to add: it's wrong to say "light waves as they approach the speed of light", etc. Light always moves at the same speed, at least in a vacuum, and there's no need to complicate things here. For all practical purposes, the speed of light ( c ) is a
constant...
posted by
Nautikos
on December 11, 2008 at 8:37 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Naut...
Don't tell me...that's old hat too? lol
posted by
metalrat
on December 11, 2008 at 8:36 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Re: Re: Naut...
It's been a while since I've boned-up on science, as you can tell.
If I ever get time, I need to bring myself up-to-date. Quantum physics seems to have made a splash.
posted by
metalrat
on December 11, 2008 at 8:35 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Re: Naut...
Chuck, there are complicated theoretcical reasons why we can't achieve the speed of light, though we are not sure how close we can come.
The bending of light is caused by the bending of space, which in turn is caused by gravity... though we might also say simply that space is bent in the presence of mass. And the time business I'm talking about is just 'normal' Special Theory of Relativity stuff, which has been verified to a point where it's really 'old hat', and has been for quite a while! Physicists worry about other things these days...
posted by
Nautikos
on December 11, 2008 at 8:29 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Naut...
True, Naut...I doubt we'll ever so much as approach the speed of light in space travel, all grand sci-fi speculation aside.
But, if memory serves correct, I read a while back on the bending of light waves as they approach the speed of light, and I wondered if that were the same thing that happens to time at the same speed.
The effect of the speed of light on the relative passing of time as you just explained it still begs understanding, and I'm sure that theoretical physicists and mathematicians are burning the candle at both ends trying to figure it out.
posted by
metalrat
on December 11, 2008 at 8:17 AM
| link to this | reply
Maybe the clocks are ticking out the seconds...
producing them, not just counting them... A Steven Kingish thought. like the flip side of The Langoliers...
posted by
Ciel
on December 11, 2008 at 7:39 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Naut...
Chuck, I gotta respond to that! First of all, we'll never be able to travel at the speed of light - only light (and maybe a few other particles, but we need not get into that) travel at the speed of light.
And as you're zipping along, you will notice nothing at all strange about your clock and (hence your time)...it will just keep ticking the way it has been programmed to tick, just as accurately as always! If you're accelerating in a straight line, you won't even know you're moving! That something 'strange' is happening to time can only be observed by an outside observer who stayed behind! If I measure the ticks of your clock from the ground, I can tell they are much farther apart, i. e. they have slowed. But you can't notice that!
And when you turn around and come back, you will never have noticed that anything strange happened to 'your' time when you get home! But, depending on how fast and far you went, you may find that all the people you knew are gone, and home ain't home any more...
posted by
Nautikos
on December 11, 2008 at 7:08 AM
| link to this | reply
That must explain why we feel more and more stressed by the time, the time just flies by nowadays.
posted by
auslander
on December 11, 2008 at 6:42 AM
| link to this | reply
Naut...
Although the Optical Atomic Clocks are accurate enough to improve space navigation, once traveling in space at the speed of light, weird things begin to happen to "time" which could possibly undo any notion of accuracy while in space.
posted by
metalrat
on December 11, 2008 at 6:05 AM
| link to this | reply
I think of time as a rubber band. Boring minutes feel like hours,
the fun days go by in a second, and when you're in a critical care waiting room, the clock seems to stop.
posted by
Pat_B
on December 11, 2008 at 4:52 AM
| link to this | reply
very very interesting. in fact i have been quite fascinated by time lately and have been reading up on another manifestation of it. you have inspired me to share it now - i guess i won't wait to craft it , I'll just post what i have
.
posted by
bythewindowsill
on December 11, 2008 at 12:39 AM
| link to this | reply
interesting post - and i am a "clock watcher" even though i have nowhere to go and all day to do it
posted by
ladychardonnay
on December 10, 2008 at 11:23 PM
| link to this | reply
I'm sorry. I don't know how I did that. Can you delete my comment? I think I must have been busy burning the candle and leaned on a key or something.
posted by
TAPS.
on December 10, 2008 at 10:40 PM
| link to this | reply
Great post, especially the comment at the end. I've been burning the candle at both ends for a long time now and the twain are nearly meeting.
posted by
TAPS.
on December 10, 2008 at 10:37 PM
| link to this | reply
Nautikos
I found that fascinating, especially the knowledge they had to make mechanical movement in 1200 and on.
posted by
WileyJohn
on December 10, 2008 at 10:04 PM
| link to this | reply
tick tock went the grandfather clock!
posted by
Kabu
on December 10, 2008 at 9:41 PM
| link to this | reply
WOW!
That was an AMAZING trick shot! Speaking of time, how long do you suppose it took to set THAT up? Time for lunch here, my stomach is growling, that's accurate enough for me!
posted by
KaBooM62
on December 10, 2008 at 8:05 PM
| link to this | reply
Well, I am one who is burning my candle at both ends.
posted by
hazel_st_cricket
on December 10, 2008 at 8:05 PM
| link to this | reply
The times, they are a changing! I heard a second is going to be added to this year too! Naut, when you get a chance, check this out!
Amazing trick I know you will love it! Shelly
posted by
sam444
on December 10, 2008 at 7:17 PM
| link to this | reply