Jump to content

Why now means nothing.


Designer2
 Share

Recommended Posts

Why now means nothing

 

Time is everything. You can explore the past present and future and also predict the future. The state of now can't do none of these things. Preaching the now is a religious idea by new age people. Since new age died a long time ago(time wise) don't you believe there idea of now should die with it.

 

Not believing in time that changes in states is ridiculous isn't it. Yes everything is blink in and out of time and constantly creating new just like a tick of a clock isn't it. But it all depends on the previous states which indicates time is important. Without time now would not exits and this should end the story. Any comments are appreciated. Its TIME to end the concept of NOW. Double meaning LOL. Another problem with English language.

 

Thx.

 

Designer.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Now mean nothing since what was once there is already gone and probably never existed. Now is not real since it constantly changes from once it was since there is no time component therefor it never existed since it blinked out. Tuda.

 

I heard that everything in existence blinks in and out at a very fast rates, billions of a second in a video I saw. Thus like frames in a picture each picture is a discrete snapshot with time flicking through the frames of a picture. I read this idea some place but don't or can't find a name for the theory or it might be common knowledge for the idea of blinking in and out of the universe.

 

Sharpz this theory of 'now' is a new age idea and should be abandoned at all cost for something newer and better. I don't want to be involved with a religion since it is wrong.

 

Thanks

 

Designer.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you referring to NOW as an adverb that alludes to the present moment or are you referring to the word NOW being utilized as a connective particle that is introducing an inference? Or are you adducing the use of the word NOW as a noun describing the measurement of each successive moment that passes by?

 

Like the river that is never the same twice, each moment that passes by NOW is never the same twice. Observe the flow of the river and you will observe the flow of each moment that passes by NOW.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mylo. X.

 

I believe that changes is quantifiable such that after a billionth of a second or as such a quantifiable state change occurs or a jump occurs.

 

There is no NOW that is an ooZ (liquid jello) that is a asynchronous I believe all changes are synchronous at every tick of an atomic clock I believe in the matrix module of reality just like in the movie there is nothing new age about that.

 

We live in a simulation and that is the nature of this reality.

 

The English language as we all know it is pretty screwed 'UP'. You should look in the dictionary for the word 'UP' it goes on and on. Anyhow.

 

If NOW does exist you then need time to exist to maintain the change in snap shots of the picture.

 

But NEW AGERS don't believe time exists but these people always state NOW only exist and that this is the real problem.

 

But you need time to change between synchronous states without time there will be no NOW since nothing exists statically since it wouldn't last and won't exist since all matter blinks in and out all the time(created then destroyed).

 

Thx

 

Designer.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Designer,

 

You do bring up an interesting point. In physics (or science in general) the concept of "now" is a difficulty. If we mean "this instant in time" we already have a few of obvious problems.

 

First is the simple fact that information transmission is limited to the speed of light as its maxima. Two or more people's objective view of an event witnessed by all of them as occuring"right now" does not occur for each of them at the same time once the information from the event arrives at their location. This, plus any included relativistic effects, is a central tennant of Special Relativity - the fall of absolute simultaniety of events.

 

A second problem is the neurochemical limitation on the speed of transmission of information. Neurons transmit information through our bodies not at the speed of light, ~300,000, 000 meters/sec, but at about 85 meters/sec. "Now" is long gone by the time our brain processes the input.

 

So, just thinking about "now" ultimately entails an event in the past.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darby,

 

"So, just thinking about "now" ultimately entails an event in the past."

 

That's interesting. Your comments imply that there IS such a "thing" as the NOW (an instant in time), which humans can only experience AFTER the event.

 

Designer,

 

I would argue that the NOW is an inxtricable component of the seamless flow of the past, present and future (an impermanent manifestation). It would perhaps be akin to the buddhist law of dependent Origination. The NOW arises due to the principle conditions of the past, present and future. The NOW has occured, has yet to occur and is occuring, simultaneously, imo.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maylo.X

 

What you are saying to me is we are just film in a movie projector and that's the universe.

 

Film before the light is the future. Light going through the frame is the NOW.

 

Film exiting the frame into the exit reel the past.

 

Is that what you mean?

 

The universe is a can of file thus a simulation.

 

But note we are holographic film aren't we.

 

But if we are film we are just snap shot and there is no real NOW that is a evolving (liquid jello) where everything is a

 

discrete event but we are just a snapshot that give us the ability to travel to the past and future.

 

If we were a jello NOW we could not travel to the past or going into the future since this act would destroy the past integrity.

 

Interesting quote I found.

 

The Universe - Solved by Jim Elvidge

 

Evidence - our discrete world

 

"It takes an infinite amount of resources to create a continuous reality, but a finite amount to create a quantized reality."

 

Darby

 

I never saw this question that way you stated it.

 

So you believe everything is happening asynchronously over time dealing with events over the continuum(temporal free for all) with all event happening when they choose independent of synchronously ordered time?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Designer,

 

I'm not doing a very good job in conveying what I mean....lol.

 

"What you are saying to me is we are just film in a movie projector and that's the universe.

 

Film before the light is the future. Light going through the frame is the NOW.

 

Film exiting the frame into the exit reel the past."

 

Your analogy implies that time is "linear", and I do not believe that is the case. I come from an asian & Carribean background, and do not think that time follows a linear model. I liken time to the flow of the river or oceans; it has no container and holds no shape, it is defined by its continuous fluidity (like you pointed out in the quote you came across). I am by no means an expert on the matter (by any stretch of the imagination). I understand time as being the past, present, future and the NOW is a component of all 3 (I am still unsure of how to better express this to you). When I take a photograph, it is evidence of the past. The photograph also proves the existence of the future. The photograph also represents the NOW imo. The photo cannot be retaken in precisely the same conditions it was originally taken. similarly, the NOW can only occur once. Lol, I'm still not sure I am expressing my point clearly...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mylo. X.

 

The problem with you fluid idea is the past will constantly be destroyed by a newer past.

 

That's the nature of water in a river.

 

There always different water and different currents. If the past is not fixed it really then is not the past since it not fix thus there will never be a true history in anything. I.E. maybe now Hitler was never born.

 

This always indicates that true and original history we experience together will always be destroyed and have no lasting truth.:(

 

If history is not static by default it then destroys all historic true content.

 

This idea of yours has serious implications since once you enter into the past you will eventually be destroyed of all you past truths and self thus no true lasting history; you might eventually never have exited washed away by the rivers of time.

 

It bothers me!

 

Note the film idea and the river of time are some what opposite ideas of reality; one destroys and the other maintains.

 

Film Idea -> holographic -> maintainer.

 

River -> Jello liquid -> destroyer.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darby

 

My Fragment Ideas

 

There are two world quantum and space time we don't know who rules.

 

If space time rules reality is a film and everything is synchronous events are state machine based

 

(this must happen first before these next events can happen)

 

If the quantum world rules then asynchronous and everything can happen at anytime(free for all).

 

Darby we can resolve the John Titor thing once and for all here.

 

Quantum world rules: John Titor TRUE.

 

Space time rules: John Titor Fraud.

 

Film Idea: John Titor Fraud.

 

River of time Idea: John Titor TRUE.

 

With respect to events not happening in the John Titors time line spelled out in his post.

 

This gives some truth of the nature of reality. All this indicates above is that there

 

may be a reason John Titors predictions didn't come to pass due to the different models of reality.

 

I think I opened a can of worms.

 

These are just personal ideas in the back of my head.

 

Thanks

 

Designer.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Designer,

 

If I continue with my analogy of time being like the flow of the river, then there is another similarity I failed to mention before. Just as the flow of the river is not consistent (in regard to speed, strength of current etc) the same can be said of time not being consistent, due to speed (time passes by more slowly, the closer the speed of light is attained).

 

As it stands, I am just interested in the subject of time-travel. My 2 favourite films are Looper and 12 monkeys. I'm not even sure if time-travel into the past is even possible.

 

"The problem with you fluid idea is the past will constantly be destroyed by a newer past.

 

That's the nature of water in a river."

 

I honestly think that the "past" in this life (we are currently experiencing) is gone, and like I said before its prior existence is made evident by such things as historical records, photographs, video's etc.

 

"If history is not static by default it then destroys all historic true content."

 

In the model/analogy I have conveyed, history has occured; what has happened, has happened. The History of our current experience of life can only occur once. Similarly the NOW only occur's once imo... I am not saying that I'm right, but that is how I view the issue of time and the NOW, at this present moment <<(Lol, english language problem)

 

In the very title of this thread, you assert: Why Now means nothing. From my perspective, everything is dependant on something, even nothing/emptiness etc. Within buddhism, a dependent relationship can be identified between sunyata and truth; emptiness is form and form is emptiness; nothing is everything and everything is nothing. This is how I view the NOW and its dependent relationship on time and times dependent relationship on the NOW. This dependent relationship is also manifest between SPACE and TIME.

 

In your 2nd post, you assert:

 

"Now mean nothing since what was once there is already gone and probably never existed."

 

If you assert that "what was once there is already gone", you are making the inference that "something" existed, so you cannot qualify your assertion by saying "and probably never existed".

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you know I am a bit against religion NOW.

 

But I will bring up a really thick book that I didn't fully read because it pissed me off OK.

 

'A Course in Miracles"

 

Its basic premise of the book states WE NEVER EXISTED.

 

It breaks the cycle of life, death, karma and destruction of the ego in my opinion.

 

In the end I came to the conclusion the book actually means nothing since the book really didn't exist. LOL.

 

They say it is a mandatory course in spirit. Well I don't think so.

 

The two things I know that are real for sure are pain and hunger the course can't deny that.

 

My favorite movies that are time travel based are:

 

1. Deja Vu. 2006

 

2. Premonition 2007

 

Thanks.

 

Designer.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you know I am a bit against religion NOW.

But I will bring up a really thick book that I didn't fully read because it pissed me off OK.

 

'A Course in Miracles"

 

Its basic premise of the book states WE NEVER EXISTED.

 

It breaks the cycle of life, death, karma and destruction of the ego in my opinion.

 

In the end I came to the conclusion the book actually means nothing since the book really didn't exist. LOL.

 

They say it is a mandatory course in spirit. Well I don't think so.

 

The two things I know are real for sure are pain and hunger the course can't deny that.

 

My favorite movies that are time travel based are:

 

1. Deja Vu. 2006

 

2. Premonition 2007

 

Thanks.

 

Designer.

"My favorite movies that are time travel based are:

 

1. Deja Vu. 2006

 

2. Premonition 2007"

 

Yes, I enjoyed watching Deja Vu, but have not heard of Premonition... I will check that movie out.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Now mean nothing since what was once there is already gone and probably never existed."

 

If you assert that "what was once there is already gone", you are making the inference that "something" existed, so you cannot qualify your assertion by saying "and probably never existed".

If we follow your theory of time being fluid/river, now could've possibly never had existed; given the possibility that the past was altered to fit the current now.

 

If that is assumed, the previous now would still have subsisted at one period in another time, when the past was in an untempered form, but does not exist anymore because the past was altered to make the previous now never exist, making the current now in place of the previous now which would have never existed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we follow your theory of time being fluid/river, now could've possibly never had existed; given the possibility that the past was altered to fit the current now.

(Emphasis added by Darby)

Dexter,

 

You do see the dichotomy above, yes? You've created a postulate that, internally, is contradictory.

 

a) Now possibly never existed because;

 

b) The past was altered to create the current now

 

In a) "Now" is denied existence but in b) "now" is given existence because it never existed, which makes no logical sense. The parsing splits the postulate into two mutually exclusive and contradictory statements.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(Emphasis added by Darby)You do see the dichotomy above, yes? You've created a postulate that, internally, is contradictory.

Yes, I do realise that what I said was contradictory; what I said was intended to find contradiction in Mylo.X.'s theory, rather than my statement conflicting with itself.

 

Thanks for restating argument, it was somewhat poorly phrased. :(

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I do realise that what I said was contradictory; what I said was intended to find contradiction in Mylo.X.'s theory, rather than my statement conflicting with itself.

Thanks for restating argument, it was somewhat poorly phrased. :(

Darby beat me to it. The averment you cited Dexter, was self-contradictory. As far as I am aware, my "analogy" of time being like the "flow of the river" contains no logical contradictions... but I could be wrong...lol.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we look at use from an eternity point of view we never existed; but yet here I am since there will be no record so NOW mean nothing just a hypothetical blip. This makes NOW also hypothetical doesn't it since it never created anything. Because it creates nothing in it self it never existed. Mylo.x if you are right then time travel is impossible since the past must be destroyed to make the new present. But as Darby claimed earlier there is no PRESENT due to the delay of light and relativity between objects so there is really no present NOW. We need a new theory we just can't reference the past that does not exist example old texts and new age beliefs since your theory says they don't exist.

 

P.S. We exist in the past due to the chemicals in our brain so NOW means nothing since it is slightly in the past.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember:

 

1. Einstein's idea that mass and energy are equivalent (E=mc2)

 

2. Ernst Planck's idea that every energy is associated with a frequency.

 

3. De Broglie's idea that matter can act as a wave

 

4. Einstein's gravitational redshift idea.

 

Playing around with matter waves = playing with time.

 

Introducing the Compton clock.

 

A rock is a clock: Physicist uses matter to tell time

 

Next stage:

 

Müller hopes to push his technique to even smaller particles, such as electrons or even positrons, in the latter case creating an antimatter clock. He is hopeful that someday he'll be able to tell time using quantum fluctuations in a vacuum.

The antimatter clock - aka the DeLorean time machine time indicator. :D

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember:

1. Einstein's idea that mass and energy are equivalent (E=mc2)

 

2. Ernst Planck's idea that every energy is associated with a frequency.

 

3. De Broglie's idea that matter can act as a wave

 

4. Einstein's gravitational redshift idea.

 

Playing around with matter waves = playing with time.

 

Introducing the Compton clock.

 

A rock is a clock: Physicist uses matter to tell time

 

Next stage:

 

The antimatter clock - aka the DeLorean time machine time indicator. :D

Servantx,

 

Please forgive me if I state this in a manner that is offensive. It is NOT my intention.

 

In your above statements you refer to each theory an an "idea". In each case it is much more than that. In each case we have experimental and observational verificatrion that the underlying theory is correct. Mass and energy are equivalent. Mass does behave as a wave (or a particle) depending on how one looks at the scenario. Gravitation is a component of acceleration, depending on the situation.

 

My point is: it doesn't matter what one's stand is on these physical facts. They are what they are and there is no denying or debating their existence. The only question that remains is wheter or not there are "work arounds" that allow, for example, a situation where one can accelarate to a certain velocity that is less than the universal limit of ~300,000 km/sec in vacuuo, such that the implied light speed limit effects occur but the special relativity speed limit is not violated.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only question that remains is wheter or not there are "work arounds" that allow, for example, a situation where one can accelarate to a certain velocity that is less than the universal limit of ~300,000 km/sec in vacuuo, such that the implied light speed limit effects occur but the special relativity speed limit is not violated.

Hi Darby,

 

I don't think there is a need to accelerate velocity. Time slows down in a gravitational field. My last post is linked to the twin paradox effect to jump to the future. I was mentioning the view of matter as wave form rather than a particle, which scientists can play with to accelerate or decrease time rate by changing the matter wave frequency with gravitational red-shift.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order for John Titor's story to make sense, his original time-line can not be altered or disturbed in any way least he lose his motivation for travelling. This means that for time-travel to exist logically in our fictional story, there must be at least 2 time-lines. You can not take a gold coin from one world and put it in your original world. Your original world must contain only 1 gold coin. You can then take gold coins from a 100 alternate worlds and put it in 1 of those alternate worlds. Then you have to live in that alternate world in order to spend the coins. Your original world must still have that original 1 gold coin.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order for John Titor's story to make sense, his original time-line can not be altered or disturbed in any way least he lose his motivation for travelling. This means that for time-travel to exist logically in our fictional story, there must be at least 2 time-lines. You can not take a gold coin from one world and put it in your original world. Your original world must contain only 1 gold coin. You can then take gold coins from a 100 alternate worlds and put it in 1 of those alternate worlds. Then you have to live in that alternate world in order to spend the coins. Your original world must still have that original 1 gold coin.

I see you are investigating my get rich plan. But if this works, then there are an infinite number of alternate timelines. Just take one ounce of gold from 1000 different timelines, and then retire in the past.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...