Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral
  1. One other thing. Within the confines of our reality, time appears to be real. We can manipulate time from within this reality. But to travel through time, we must be able to transverse separate realities that are bent around light in a similar configuration. But that is unnesscessary when we can "travel" outside of our reality through time or we can expand our being to include the past and the future by seeing that the past is our memory of the past in the present and the future is our expectations hopes and dreams of a linear reality. Consciousness is an easy way to travel as long as you don't want the "proof" of science. ------------------
  2. What's interesting in most of these discussions is what has been left out. Science limits itself by its refusal to see (generally speaking) that its objective point of view is not so removed from objectivity at all. Science says that there must be an objective observer in replicating experiments to get the correlative evidence for replication. By dismissing all that is not objective Science limits itself to one mode of inquiry. The kinestic, the powers of emotion, intuition and some extra sensory percepts are limited from the scientific inquiry. Science has value, but does not consider other aspects of experience as valid means of discovery. Archologists have remarked that they are in awe of the Mayan's lack of technology to view the Sagitarrian Nebulae, for instance, and yet they have this knowledge that the Sag Nebulae contains black holes. How were they able to acertain this knowledge? There is considerable evidence that they used a certain kind of hallucinagentic mushroom to explore the interior world and within this space were able to "see" the black holes of the Sag Nebulae. My point in bringing up this example is this: we are conditioned by our own thinking and trapped within it when we assume that time can be explained from a mechanistic perspective totally. We live inside concepts. One concept is the ego. Krishamurti has proposed that the ego arrived when language arrived. Whethyer or not this is so it is true that language itself divides time into past tense, present tense and future tense. I think we need to relieve all this tension. But this is difficult to look beyond the language of words which make the structure of our reality invisible. When it is invisible our assumptions about the nature of time are also invisible because we ahve been in the sea of this conceptual reality. My work as a shaman or journeyer has enabled me to go beyond what is normally defined as reality and see things that few people see. To do this one must be grounded, and centered in physical, emotional, intellectual, sexual reality in order to move beyond it and experience other realities and the underpinnings of separate realities that are beyond time. Stars931
  3. I was reading Shadow's postingh #28, And I haven't been here in a while. It seems that time may be specfic to a place when we consider phenomonlogical time, or the subjective element. We are definitely to preoccupioed with intellectual ideas and thoughts etc. to acknowlegdge and experience the other aspects of your knowing. I have experienced a different flaor or time based on feelings and intruition. These would hardly stand up under scientific investigation because science deals in hard observable data with strict guidelines. Before the advent of time zones, trains in Europe would never arrive on time because everyone's time was different. The people on the train would have their time pieces set one way and the people of the town in a different way, often times it would be hours off.
  4. I suppose time travel is possible within the physical laws of the reality that we have constructed / observed ( as a result of our construction). But what if we step outside the confines on that reality to the underpinnings of our reality? If one was to do this one could do this with consciousness only as far as I know, because our bodies exist in the framework of the the reality we have constructed and the laws of that structure. But if we were to step outside the confines of reality we could see that time is a constant only to the point of view inside the reality and not necessarily true outside. So my point here is that by letting go of ordinary reality we can "travel" through time because it ceases to exist.
  5. I am not a mathematcian ( nor a speller ), but Dr. Bean I guess I have not explained this exercise in "no-time" well enough. Since we define the present based on the past and the future it exists in a certain perceptual field. Our language is designed to speak in a linear time based reality, with past, present and future tenses, so it becomes difficult to talk about time outside this perceptual field. It is only natural that math and sciences premises spring from a linear time based system. When you speak of everything happening at once you are speaking of an object oriented linear reality and cause and effect relationship bercause you use the term "everything". In an eternity-in-the moment based system there are no "things". There are only relationships between... Here my ordinary thinking becomes boggled because I have no way to adequeately describe what I am talking about. Even the word present is a concept that belongs to a linear based time system and it becomes meaningless in this system based on relationships without objects. Maybe a good way to come up with a working definition of relationship is to say that there are no absolutes, no objects. Who we are is based on relationship. Without relationship we could not exist. Our existence is defined by relationship. To be so reduntant is perhaps my own fobble. Language is an artifical way of taking reality and making it symbolic so that we can manipulate the world around us as objects which is good for us and necessary, but artifical and for our convience.
  6. We build machines to measure time, and we perceive the passage of time. We see that events have a beginning middle and end, repleat with new beginning and so on. How much of this is cultural, based on a certain mind set? The very language that we use helps define the world so that we can manipulate aspects of our world. Can we prove that there is a future? We can extroplate a future but there is no way a future can be "proved". Similarly how can we prove there is a past. Certain there are agreed upon events that appearsed to occur in the past, such as the bombing at Pearl Harbor. We have memories of the past, but those memories exist in the present. The future appears to exist based on expectations, anticpations, fears, hopes, dreams and even extraoplations, and all these occur in the present. So from a certain poiunt of view we could say that there is no future or no past. If we hold the premise "there is no past and no future" then how does time travel fit into that? Because we live in a linear based time reality, and we make agreements on the rules of that reality, our perceptions are shaped around those concepts which include language and cultural morays. Linear time based realities are based on a beginning, middle and end. Even philosophies of an afterlife or of an eternity exist on a linear system: we die (end) and then an eternity begins (under some religious /philosophical structures). Eternity having a beginning is an oxymoron. Eternity is forever. If we were to look at time as a cycle or a circle, that eternity exists as a cycle or spiral that intersects linear time and lifts us to a different perspective. Instead of time travel, which implies a futuire and a past, what about allowing the present to expand to a large now. Then travel would be obsolete, because we would need to go from place to place because we would know a large present that might include a lifetime.
  • Create New...