The true nature of Now

Doer said:

Yep, music will do it. Playing or listening. What we call time is a precision of duration.
The first clock has just 2 ticks. Sunrise, sunset. Add noon. 3 ticks. Add arm length
finger spans above the horizon, more ticks, more precision.

Add Solstice and Equinox, more precision. Do you see how this has happened?
Now we demand split second timing or we don't know who won the Luge.

The mind without precision clocks, on circadian only, perceives a stretchy "moment."
A moment waiting in the Dr. office is longer than the moment of Ginger Baker's drum solo.

But, think of Now as the constant, not needing precision, the stretchy "moment" makes sense.

Click to expand...

...nifty, Doer

Is time in this preparation a fractal 'matter'? I know that we as humans have 'borrowed tech' from nature since the beginning of... I see, in this instance, time spanning out and in like a beautifully 'arranged' flower or plant. (not only that plant)

Now is endless,if you were to contemplate the ending of a "now" you only reach the next now.It is one point that is constantly renewing itself so to speak.No time- like now.The application of now is broken down with the use of time itself.

Doer said:

Remember that game, Simon Says?

Simon Says come to arms length.
Simon Says move half way closer.
Simon Says move half way closer. (she does)
Simon Says move half way closer. ( you kiss her)

That's how I used to play.

Homer Simpson goes the the movies,
to the Googleplex. Funny... the largest named number.

Can you divide 1 second, by 1 googleplex?
By 2 googleplex, by googleplex googleplex?
Sure. You'll soon realized there is no end
to the subdivisions of 1 second.

Well, what is Now? Just a bit of the mind flip. Now is vast and everylasting. All else runs through it. It's science, but only the human mind can observe the quantum still point?

Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that time is infinitely divisible? At no point do you reach a terminator?

Well, I don't see Now as a fractal or Fibonacci sequence, but perhaps you mean
our obsession with precision. I don't see that either. We are only just beginning to
realize those as nature's building sequences. In early art forms you only see
2D representations. Perhaps the repeating of basket pattens come from
nature?

guy incognito said:

Are you suggesting that time is infinitely divisible? At no point do you reach a terminator?

Click to expand...

Yes, precision (so called, time) is infinitely divisible. No Now there. Just theoretical
infinity.

Doer said:

Well, I don't see Now as a fractal or Fibonacci sequence, but perhaps you mean
our obsession with precision. I don't see that either. We are only just beginning to
realize those as nature's building sequences. In early art forms you only see
2D representations. Perhaps the repeating of basket pattens come from
nature?

Click to expand...

"self-similar irrespective of scale" <---seems divided with a 'beautiful wrapper'. You bring my thought back to 'no dimension'... 137 or 128.

*please don't mind my wandering into your thread here

There is a person who's work it is to prove mathematically, that what we perceive is at best, 2D, if not 1D, her holy grail. It seems to have to do with Heisenberg and the idea that our perception of 3D ends at the outer valence cloud of any and all atoms. Atoms are not objects we can go inside of, even mentally. We can't visualize probability waves, for example. (Heisenberg, 1921) Atoms simply define the magnetic edges of 3D perception.

To her, this limited perception doesn't rate a full 3 dimensions. Just like I think gravity doesn't rate a full Fundamental Force tag.

And I don't mind you're wandering, eye.

Doer said:

There is a person who's work it is to prove mathematically, that what we perceive is at best, 2D, if not 1D, her holy grail. It seems to have to do with Heisenberg and the idea that our perception of 3D ends at the outer valence cloud of any and all atoms. Atoms are not objects we can go inside of, even mentally. We can't visualize probability waves, for example. (Heisenberg, 1921) Atoms simply define the magnetic edges of 3D perception.

To her, this limited perception doesn't rate a full 3 dimensions. Just like I think gravity doesn't rate a full Fundamental Force tag.

And I don't mind you're wandering, eye.

Click to expand...

...thanks Doer. I understand that 'wandering' can be a tedious thing, so...

1 light at the 'back of it all' - split into 3 (heavens) and 7 (people). "if thine eye be single you shall see the kingdom".

When I look at what I can see - I mean what appears to be an oval field of view, I see that edge you (and your friend) speak of.

If you think about the graph of a moment infinitely divided from any direction you see it ends with a point. What was once a line from past to present now become a singular infinitely small point of space. Calculus tells us at this point you would have no motion in the time axis. Theoretically from that point with just a little push we would be able to travel in any direction of time & space.

This means it may actually be possible to travel back in time.
Or
I'm high so work with me this could be a simple proof of a wormhole. To open a worm hole you must reach that point. from there you could move back in time while moving froward in space. This would increase your relative speed like two cars traveling in opposite directions on a highway.
Or
you could neglect the travel time to a distant planet. If you traveled back in time at the same opposite rate of your home planet's relative time you would get there seemingly instantly relative to the planet you left.

Doer said:

Yes, precision (so called, time) is infinitely divisible. No Now there. Just theoretical
infinity.

Click to expand...

Anything to substantiate that or are we just assuming it is infinitely divisible?

Doer said:

There is a person who's work it is to prove mathematically, that what we perceive is at best, 2D, if not 1D, her holy grail. It seems to have to do with Heisenberg and the idea that our perception of 3D ends at the outer valence cloud of any and all atoms. Atoms are not objects we can go inside of, even mentally. We can't visualize probability waves, for example. (Heisenberg, 1921) Atoms simply define the magnetic edges of 3D perception.

To her, this limited perception doesn't rate a full 3 dimensions. Just like I think gravity doesn't rate a full Fundamental Force tag.


And I don't mind you're wandering, eye.

Click to expand...

[video=youtube;BWyTxCsIXE4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=BWyTxCsIXE4[/video]

Doer said:

OK, name a favorite, high octane activity. Something you do.
Down hill skiing
skydiving
auto racing
motorbike in the twisties
etc

I'm not thinking about my laundry list or that delightful Pinot Noir I'll pick up later.
I'm in the eternity of the moment.

Click to expand...

I recently went big game hunting in Africa with my bare hands. Heres proof
Watch to the end
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=pOFQafTr6Us

...how to substantiate the infinitely divisible?

So, answer this one. How would we know? At what point do you say,"I cannot divide the last result by another googulplex?"
If there is something to stop you, there's your answer.

Doer said:

No, Now is non-relativistic. Only information is relative. Without the need to exchange
information, Now is now, everywhere, and quantumly speaking, everywhen.

Only time is relative and I think we covered the illusionary aspects
of Time.

Click to expand...

According to Special Relativity, 'now' is relativistic over great distances. Check out this Nova episode on time: at about 20:30 in it shows how movement and distance create different 'now slices' throughout spacetime:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/fabric-of-cosmos.html#fabric-time

tyler.durden said:

According to Special Relativity, 'now' is relativistic over great distances. Check out this Nova episode on time: at about 20:30 in it shows how movement and distance create different 'now slices' throughout spacetime:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/fabric-of-cosmos.html#fabric-time

Click to expand...

Actually, it is relativistic all of the time, only more noticeable at those distances.

now i have a headache

Doer said:

...how to substantiate the infinitely divisible?

So, answer this one. How would we know? At what point do you say,"I cannot divide the last result by another googulplex?"
If there is something to stop you, there's your answer.

Click to expand...

I don't know. But you could apply the same argument to matter and energy. How do you know you can keep dividing matter into ever smaller units? What happens when you split an atom? a proton? a quark?

Without knowing the nature of time I don't know how you can claim it to be continuous or discrete. I don't know one way or the other.

Right, we don't know the nature of time. I'm interested in the nature of Now.
I'm proposing, certainly not claiming, that this infinity view is incorrect for applying the question of Now.

As a quantum type guy, I belive that splitting atoms is creating illusionary particles in 3D space.

I believe that the atom is the doorway out of 3D just as Now is.

So, the infinity view problem exists there, as well. You are right. It's the same problem. Split to infinity thinking, is the problem I propose. Since I'm not debating or trying to convince you, this will have to do.

Doer said:

Right, we don't know the nature of time. I'm interested in the nature of Now.
I'm proposing, certainly not claiming, that this infinity view is incorrect for applying the question of Now.

As a quantum type guy, I belive that splitting atoms is creating illusionary particles in 3D space.

I believe that the atom is the doorway out of 3D just as Now is.

So, the infinity view problem exists there, as well. You are right. It's the same problem. Split to infinity thinking, is the problem I propose. Since I'm not debating or trying to convince you, this will have to do.

Click to expand...

We know the Universe is expanding, and the evidence points to it expanding infinitely... If the Universe continues to expand, and light continues to travel, wont time persist forever?

Well, technically, it's acelerating expansion, as can be observed, currently, if you buy the 1a supernova, as a standard candle. So, to have that, you need Dark Energy. To make any sense of what we see over in Andromeda and all other rotating galaxies, you need Dark Matter.

As it seems today, the universe could be:
- just now starting to delta v
- or it is slowing it's delta v (not enough observation time)
- or it has always done this
- or not

And a lot of mathematical hypothesis deals with expanding and contacting space
that even defines a certain shape at full expansion.

Or, as space fill in with dark energy, it pushes apart the neutrons and protons.
Force over the cube of the distance...woops, matter starts to come apart.
It releases those atomic forces and the entire universe begins to decay into
photons.

When the last photon is popped, there is no more matter. Timespace is no longer
displaced, so locality disappears. Timespace, having no locality, is neither and/or
not big or small.

That's the next Big Event? The non-locality energy of an entire universe, spontaneously establishes locality and a new timespace is born. Or even the renewal of this timespace.