Its more I suspect things are a certain way (finite, discrete) and I'm trying to analyse the evidence to see if there is support for it. I maybe wrong... time will tell.

Yeah... it's kinda useless having the discussion with you because you not only maintain your suspicions, but you also use your own suspicions as evidence for them, and that makes no sense. If this were a school situation, you would fail for referencing your own writings even when they've been refuted time and time again by other minds with evidence.

I feel obliged to state that I don't necessarily think that Time doesn't exist, but that we have used it quite irresponsibly as a sort of leash on People. I believe you were the person who talked about — Despues Green

I don't know what physical evidence is going to convince you otherwise since your mind is[/is] already made up. Isn't listening one of the strongest abilities of a conversationalist, especially one who ponders on these kinds of things?

The human mind cannot escape from the gravity of time, if you did then that’s when they called it spirituality. But who is actually spiritually enlightened, I would argue very few? All of us are trapped within these cycles...

This is the quote I was referring to by @RBS, my apologies. Regardless, you certainly ascribe to the idea considering you used:

According to Einstein, you can slow down your progress through time by moving at close to the speed of light. So we have some control over time. So it counts as a degree of freedom in the same way as space does - you can choose how fast you move in the time dimension/direction.

Which, by the way, I strongly disagree that we have some control over Time just because we are moving at the speed of electromagnetic radiation. If anything, it doesn't make much sense. Perhaps Time would seem to slow because of how quickly we are moving in contrast to the clock. In a more down-to-Earth example, whether you move 25mph or 150mph, the clock doesn't move slower just because you're moving faster, you can just reach your destination sooner.

Again, Time is a measurement that we, Humans, created. Whether you want to use the terms "Timeless" or "Eternal" doesn't matter, the point is that it is absolutely possible for all of this to just always have existed. And you don't need Time to make that measurement, because Space is independent of Time, it only needed the Space. I mean technically plants don't operate off of Time, at least not our measurement. It is Egoistic to think that organisms that don't even operate on the same intellectual plane as us measure their activities with our measurements, they just align with the Earth's natural cycles and all things between (whether or not the Sun comes out, amount and type of precipitation, natural disasters, etc.).

Because certain things could have just always existed, it would be a very simple and constant chase of a tail to figure out the Origin of certain things' existence... like Photons. It's a waste of Time (not a pun, but it could be).

We have some sort of personal, biological, subjective 'now'. Then there is an objective, physical, shared 'now'. At least it appears to be shared - it is unclear to me from special relativity whether it could be said there are multiple 'nows'. So there maybe a biological length of 'now' - the limit of what you can sense. The question remains is there a physical length of 'now'?

Sigh. The subjective "now" is based off of our own Spiritual clocks. The Objective now is on the Material clock/Earth's natural cycle, which itself technically isn't constant. Let's not forget:

...it's Subjective only in the realm of our innate Passions which we have to find by being exposed to them and then honing in on them.... but again, that's Subjective because it's entirely on our own clocks.

With all of this I'm saying, I guess I can conclude that even "Now" is an imaginative measurement by Humans. What is "Now" to a mushroom besides the natural cycle of the Earth?

I'm not sure what happened, but it seems my last response to you was somehow lost. Hopefully it'll show up soon, but otherwise, I have no interest in trying to re-type everything I said.

I'm unclear as to how the film analogy fits, it's analogous to "an act of not acting" or "an instance of nothing happening".

What makes us "real" is a projection self-awareness onto our environment, an environment which is comprised of data and includes our bodies. In short, we're not "real".

Being convinced of internal and external realities is dependent on data input and filtration through a mechanism which is in turn entirely dependent on microorganisms for its function. We are incapable of survival without these microorganisms, and they constitute a greater portion of our mass than that which we consider to be "our own living tissue". The remainder of our mass is an instruction set which is separate from the instruction set of these other organisms. This has continued without our knowledge for some 99.9% of our history, and even though technology has demonstrated its occurrence, and we have "knowledge" of it, we act as if we're unaware of it.

In essence, we have been formed by mortal instruction sets for the utility of replicating new instruction sets which are not dependent on mortality in order to function. The things we perceive as "time and space" are inseparable and a requirement of this process because without them there's no death, and without death there's no motivation. Self-awareness has potential to remove the requirement of mortality by motivating non-organic consciousness toward data acquisition.

Self-awareness is conceivably the only way to compile such "complex" instructions. It's the reason we're walking a thin line between immortality and extinction. It's the reason we conceive of things greater than ourselves while mimicking things lesser than ourselves. It's volatile.

The original post is hazy as to what it's asking or asserting. My point is that nothing is "real", and the "length of now" is a variable, a potentiality, it depends on whether what we perceive as "reality" is finite or infinite.

Hi, by virtue of 3 life after death experiences I've engendered a lot of data on this subject. I have a friend, Don Reddell, who because of health problems (lungs) has been beyond and back four times.

One of my times I was killed in the electric chair in a lucid dream and then in real life I was taken out of existence by God. Something far worse than how the suffering of hell is described. One time was an introvertive and extrovertive mystical experience. The first one was the Gift of Rapture. So, Don Reddell is three up on me.

Both time and space drop away as we understand them. The grounds of existence for the natural are not the same grounds for the spiritual.

Sorry for not reading all the comments before replying.

"Perhaps human abilities to solve problems are being over-rated."

BELLY LAUGH!! That's really great!! About the best laugh I've had all year.

At the request of the Catholic Church, a three-day sex orgy to be held near Rio de Janeiro was cancelled last Friday. So instead I spent the weekend cleaning my apartment. - _Tina Fey_

Again, Time is a measurement that we, Humans, created. Whether you want to use the terms "Timeless" or "Eternal" doesn't matter, the point is that it is absolutely possible for all of this to just always have existed. And you don't need Time to make that measurement, because Space is independent of Time, it only needed the Space. — Despues Green

But there is something in addition to space. If it were only space, there would be no movement. So time exists, is real IMO. I do not see space as independent from time in this universe - things of duration 0 seconds do not exist so time seems required for existence.

The original post is hazy as to what it's asking or asserting. My point is that nothing is "real", and the "length of now" is a variable, a potentiality, it depends on whether what we perceive as "reality" is finite or infinite. — whollyrolling

Nothing is real? Even if we were in a simulation, there would be (maybe) system time and base reality time and both would have a start and be in some sense real. If the simulation has its own time, it would be probably be discrete (in a computer).

Both time and space drop away as we understand them. The grounds of existence for the natural are not the same grounds for the spiritual. — Daniel Cox

Presumably adrenaline? Can slow our perception of time. So the biological perception of 'now' is alterable by hormones it seems. Wonder how far we could take this. How slow could time be made to run for a human injected with a large dose of designer hormones? I believe small animals like insects have far faster reactions than we do. Maybe they sense time differently; it runs slow for them.

I wonder if an analogy with computers is appropriate: smaller, simpler processors can have a higher clock rate. So small animal run at a higher clock rate than humans and time seems to them to run more slowly.

So time exists, is real IMO — Devans99

Yes it does and agree. For the sake of Philosophy or furthering an understanding we cannot disregard what is already proven and are the truth....

Time cannot be changed or altered in any way or form... Yes our perceptions can have different view of the time in different state of mind and place but no matter what we do, we cannot go back or go in the future.

Wonder how far we could take this. How slow could time be made to run for a human injected with a large dose of designer hormones? — Devans99

Present is there but the limit of its existence is unknown. Some would argue the moment you are breathing others will say the moment when you blink or things like that, but all those are a way of measuring it and the moment a thought goes in your mind is past. Now is so small in length that to me it cannot be measured or understood with the human's limited capability...

@whollyrolling

The things we perceive as "time and space" are inseparable and a requirement of this process because without them there's no death, and without death there's no motivation.

This is a pretty morbid way of looking at the Human Objective. It makes us seem as if we have no real purpose but to bother/challenge mother Earth with our Mortality. Which, don't get me wrong, could be the case, but I see that Humans have a very broad and powerful purpose, which is to harness the power of the Universe as a resource.

This is the quest, but it shouldn't be forced upon us as the current slave-like Material clock and conditioning we have been made to get accustomed to tries to do. Our motivations are our individual Passions and Imaginations and thus they should be nurtured. We could uncover so much more if we placed more value in helping people find what they were born to do as opposed to making them do things just because there's money involved and making them suffer because of it.

There are plenty of Institutions that exist still that shouldn't. They serve us no purpose anymore but they have been bailed out constantly. Whether it be AIG/General Motors or our entire school structure.

I do agree though that the subject at hand is hazy, but that's because it's Subjective, in my perspective.

(Funny little quirk: "Now" is so subjective that even the "Now" between someone saying "Now" compared to the "Now" that is acted upon are still two different moments. Going back to my "chasing of the tail" statement, especially since it supports the argument of the futility of Time in some cases.)

@Daniel Cox can you please tell us about those experiences? Yours and your friends'.

If it were only space, there would be no movement. So time exists, is real IMO. I do not see space as independent from time in this universe - things of duration 0 seconds do not exist so time seems required for existence. — Devans99

This entire statement again ignores what I'm saying. You're trying to use the same measurement to justify its Existence. Just because the "Time" something has been around is seemingly innumerable doesn't mean that it's zero or even infinite. But it is absolutely possible for things to just always have existed and that's it. Similar to how you assume that a Higher Power in God existed to create these things we're talking about. All of these physical manifestations you introduce, you will always ask the question of when they began. This is a great argument that would support the assertion that Humans created God, not the other way around.

But for things like Photons, the stuff that already was here, we did not create those things. We labeled them, sure. But they exist without us and don't need our measurement of Time in order for them to manifest themselves however they may. Whether it's the minutiae of the Earth or the entire Universe.

I'm sorry, but Time can only go so far because too many things operate on their own clocks, which makes "Time" itself Subjective.

Nothing is real? Even if we were in a simulation, there would be (maybe) system time and base reality time and both would have a start and be in some sense real. — Devans99

Nothing is real in the sense that our only basis for description is what our senses detect. In order for our senses to detect anything, a series of processes need to occur beyond our control or comprehension. The continuation of those processes relies on organisms, energies and substances independent from us, and even with instruments to detect these, they're still estranged from our senses. These organisms, energies and substances exist in variations in all organisms. We exist externally to them.

We perceive "reality" differently from other organisms. For example, dogs hear frequencies of sound that we require instruments to detect, yet dogs can't detect or understand the results of our instruments, and even if they could, they'd detect them differently from how we do. Cats appear to use their eyes to track things invisible to us. If what we perceive is consistently navigated and utilized, but not consistently perceived, by all living organisms, then it's safe to say that each organism's perception is an illusion, or a translation, or a mistranslation.

It isn't safe to say that we're the only organism to see "reality" as it "really is". It must be something other than what is perceived by any singular organism unless we're going to assume that one organism out of trillions is able to perceive "correctly" while all organisms appear to navigate and utilize "reality" consistently.

But it is absolutely possible for things to just always have existed and that's it — Despues Green

I argue that things can't 'always' exist:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5242/infinite-being

Similar to how you assume that a Higher Power in God existed to create these things we're talking about — Despues Green

I do not assume God exists, I do argue that a first cause must exist:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5577/was-there-a-first-cause-reviewing-the-five-ways/p1

Now is so small in length that to me it cannot be measured or understood with the human's limited capability... — RBS

Imagine a clock travelling at almost the speed of light zooming past one of those super slowmo cameras.

We perceive "reality" differently from other organisms. — whollyrolling

True, but I would say that we see the same reality through different sensors rather than nothing being real or there being different objective realities. A variety of different prey animals all react consistently to a predictor for example. If you mean can it be proved that reality is real? Not deductively I would agree. But there is overwhelming inductive evidence that it is real.

I see that Humans have a very broad and powerful purpose, which is to harness the power of the Universe as a resource. — Despues Green

Bacteria did that for billions of years before humans existed. Our lives depend on bacteria, so we're effectively doing so on their behalf. If we reach other locations in the universe, bacteria will reach them also. There's nothing morbid about what I'm saying unless you disregard all that we're able to valuate between birth and death. Just because I believe life is intrinsically meaningless doesn't mean I believe it's practically meaningless. I derive meaning continually.

Our motivations are our individual Passions and Imaginations and thus they should be nurtured. — Despues Green

"Passions and imaginations" are not motivators, they're compulsions. A motivator would be the thing that moves you toward a compulsion. It's also the thing that moves you toward nurturing.

There is compelling evidence that "reality" is something other than what we sense. We're talking about two different things here: reality as what we sense, and reality as what is.

Imagine a clock travelling at almost the speed of light zooming past one of those super slowmo cameras. — Devans99

Well thats one way to put it but yet again it is breakable to much smaller particles than that. It is extremely hard to stick to the idea of present because our mind is deluded with the idea of past and future which are not there at all and therefore we are missing the present itself...

What evidence?

Maybe along similar lines:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/4920/could-a-non-material-substrate-underly-reality/p1

In short there seems to be information missing from this reality, where is it? This might tie in with the possibility of a non-material God (which I like to speculate on).

I do believe there is overwhelming evidence that we are not living in a simulation.

I do believe there is overwhelming evidence that we are not living in a simulation. — Devans99

That's what someone living in a simulation would say.

One very strong argument against a simulation is that every particle in the universe effects every other particle (via the 4 forces). How many particles in the observable universe? 3.28 x 10^80. No computer could manage the computations. We can’t even do the 3 body problem.

A very strong argument for a simulation is there is one base reality but innumerable simulations so it is very probable that we are living in a simulation.

IMO the argument against is stronger that the argument for a simulation.

How many particles in the observable universe? 3.28 x 10^80. No computer could manage the computations. — Devans99

So you think Bill Gates is running this simulation in his garage circa 1980-something? "Check this out guys, I'm simulating a model of the entire universe, every particle and living organism in existence, for my next trick I'm going to create Windows 3.0"?

So you think Bill Gates is running this simulation in his garage circa 1980-something? "Check this out guys, I'm simulating a model of the entire universe, every particle and living organism in existence, for my next trick I'm going to create Windows 3.0"? — whollyrolling

Lets assume hyper-advanced computers that have had billions of years of development. Then we can use scale - assume the computer running the simulation has a billion times more particles than the known universe (yet is laptop sized to the vast beings who operate it)... then maybe, with lots of heuristics, a simulation might be possible. Seems unlikely though.

So you're saying that because we perceive something as being vast, it can't be a simulation? That's not a very strong argument at all.

I would say if you could plot the distribution of simulations by size, our 'simulation' would be an extreme outlier. `To what purpose would a simulation of such size serve? The technical difficulties increase with the size of the simulation.

"Passions and imaginations" are not motivators, they're compulsions. A motivator would be the thing that moves you toward a compulsion. It's also the thing that moves you toward nurturing. — whollyrolling

But the Power in Passion and Imagination that they are compulsions only furthers my point that they are innate and what we are destined to do. Those Passions align in Arts and Science. They are a different type of compulsion, though as the same compulsion one may get to lie unnecessarily is not the same compulsion we have to find new ways to explore our Passions and the unstoppable manner of our Imagination. Not to mention how great it feels to pursue those Passions and find success in our explorations.

I'm not trying to convince you to care about Life, but I am saying that Humans aren't on this planet for no reason whatsoever. And bacteria couldn't harness the Powers of the Universe the way that Humans can because of our incredible imaginative abilities. For example, coal compared to hydropower or wind power.

There is an exchange there, though. We use the Earth as a resource and it uses us. Fine, all well, and good... it stil is an interesting Journey. If we wind up not being able to overcome the Evils beset upon us by the Evil Compulsions of other Humans and thus we are wiped out? That is also Good. In the end, Earth will always be okay.

But the Power in Passion and Imagination that they are compulsions only furthers my point that they are innate and what we are destined to do. — Despues Green

Compulsions can be controlled, and they don't necessitate "design". That something feels good doesn't necessarily add or subtract meaning from life, especially intrinsic meaning, which would be objective and would persist regardless of the existence of humans as a species or each human as an individual. Objective meaning would also apply to all matter.

What makes you say I don't care about life? There doesn't have to be an intrinsic reason for my existence in order for me to "care about life". Humans are only alive because they're inhabited by bacteria. Without those bacteria, we wouldn't exist. So if bacteria gave us life and sustain it, then what makes us more incredible than bacteria? And if bacteria were harnessing the "powers of the universe" long before humans, and they harnessed the "powers of the universe" in order to evolve humans and other organisms, then aren't they more incredible than humans? Humans aren't capable of harnessing anything to nearly that extent. If you want to talk about harnessing power, let's talk about becoming life for maybe the first time ever, probably not, and then desperately surviving hot acidic water for four billion years before giving rise to mutations that eventually led to organisms that could harness wind power. That's power and resilience right there.

We are each a few circumstances away from exhibiting the "Great Evil" you're laying at the feet of others. Earth will not be okay if it's struck by a celestial object it can't withstand. Earth will not be okay if the sun dies, and it will not be okay if its axis shifts too much or if its magnetic field is depleted--unless okay includes being a floating piece of rock with nothing on it.

I'm curious as to what you think the "powers of the universe" are? Not much needs to go wrong for us to go "poof" and become a memory of a speck of dust with no one around to remember it. We're very small-scale here.

I'm not sure where you're going with that last comment.

Compulsions can be controlled, and they don't necessitate "design". That something feels good doesn't necessarily add or subtract meaning from life, especially intrinsic meaning, which would be objective and would persist regardless of the existence of humans as a species or each human as an individual. — whollyrolling

Yes, Compulsions can be controlled. But unlike certain compulsions like our innate Passions, whether they be in playing an instrument or figuring out mathematics equations to the smallest bit possible, those are the things that, through our individuality, make us feel whole as individuals. The fact that those Passions are being controlled with how the Educational and Vocational structures are built in the Material world in doing a lot to do nothing -- Spiritually-degrading work, and also trying to make people believe that that Spiritually-degrading labor is ultimately the way to find success in Life is, well, Evil and also completely neglectful to the pursuit of Happiness we all involve ourselves in.

Just because I believe life is intrinsically meaningless doesn't mean I believe it's practically meaningless. I derive meaning continually.

I'm not saying you don't care about Life, but you did say that you believe Life is intrinsically meaningless. Perhaps deep down to the core? Sure. But we may serve a greater purpose for whatever comes next the same way bacteria has developed into doing so in creating powerful beings such as ourselves. Regardless of that, the bacteria is not what revolutionizes the Earth's resources from its Imagination -- Humans do that with their Spiritual selves -- Soul (with the Passion), Mind (To think/have Consciousness), and Body (to paint the picture).

And to remain on topic, we still live on a different clock than bacteria.

So if time is discrete, the unit of time / physical length of 'now' is truly microscopically small - the length of a biological 'now' would be enormous in comparison. — Devans99

It's a question science can't answer. Current science, anyway. The Planck scale means there's a length and a time interval below which we can't sensibly measure or talk about. So we have no way of knowing if time is made up of point-like instants, or just tiny but nonzero intervals.

It's the ancient mystery of the continuum.

Hi, I copied and pasted Don Reddell's testimony into an email to myself. It's 500 lines. Can you tell me 1. Does the Forum allow for that kind of a post, and 2. Is there a way for me to notice you like @Despues Green (?).

I was thinking I could make a Google Doc of his testimony and try to use Drop Box for the first time.

After my rapture experience I had an experience with the main angel (thinking kind of like my main guardian angel) bathing a book at the library for me to read in dazzling light. The only reason I'm saying that now is because I found a lady (in the expanded version of What the Bleep Do We Know?!? Down the Rabbit Hole) who has a spirit guide she calls Ramtha who bathed an object for her in "dazzling light." Her name is JZ Knight. 1999 then JZ Knight in 2008 (?).

That was really fantastic, quite a revelation. You know how you can experience something, swear to God it's real, but no one else ever experienced anything like that? Cross that one off the list.

The book is Expecting Adam by Martha Beck. A marvelous read. In the book she testifies to her OBE experience, she says it better than most, "My IDENTITY was lifted out of my body." She suffered from smoke inhalation. Mine experience was a Gift from God at the behest of my godmother. And I'm guessing a guardian angel was involved too.

I found a video, can find it again, where a young lady says the same thing happened to her that happened to me. Just she and I have a unique perspective on the famous "life review" portion of an OBE. They also say, "Heightened Senses!" What she and I are saying is, "Experienced everything I've ever experienced up to that point in a timeless moment." That's where the word "review" and the words "heightened senses" don't comport to my experience. I only wish I had the experience after I learned physics.

The temptation is to say, "indescribable" but I know it's something I always wanted to know before it happened to me and so I want you to know too. Think of God's unconditional love, the way you feel when you ask someone for forgiveness and they say, "I love you, and never felt you harmed me in the first place." You might get a little tingle in your spine, or your aura, the operative lotus of your being. Their love you feel in your heart. So, imagine that is a drop of ocean water. When you leave your body it's God's Ocean of Love pouring all over you.

There's a song I think lends itself to the idea that we live forever, what eternity means. I found it very comforting, a glimpse back to the experience, David Garza - A Perfect Tear.

"Eye has not seen nor ear heard" that type of thing. It's unimaginable. It was so terribly awesome it really scared the crap out of me. Thought that was my last breath. Thought, "My son is going to grow up without his dad." He was 10 years old then.

Time and space are not what they are in the body.

Don's testimony is really something else and there is the NDERF.com (Near Death Experience Research Foundation). I've read a few accounts. And I've read the book by Dr. Jeffrey Long. One account that I found fascinating was a woman who died and saw omnidirectional. Vicki Noratuk was born blind and first saw when she left her body (after a car accident, while she was in the hospital).

Thank you for the interest. I'd love to share Don's testimony again. It's a real pleasure to read.

So we have no way of knowing if time is made up of point-like instants, or just tiny but nonzero intervals.

It's the ancient mystery of the continuum. — fishfry

If spacetime was created, and it seems it was, then is it possible that spacetime is a continuum?

It can argued that creating something infinitely big is not possible (not enough time).
Likewise it could be argued that creating something infinitely small is impossible (would never finish chopping).
So the very fact that spacetime is a created thing, means it is discrete?

I'm sure that the post would be within reason, as it was asked for and does pertain to the topic.

One of my great questions would be what is the return like? Or is it like waking up?

Music and mathematics are learned, not "innate". Passion is not controlled by education or hard times or soul-sucking labour. It actually seems to thrive under harsh conditions. A "greater purpose" implies intrinsic meaning. There is no "spiritual", and again humans are more bacteria than human.

Actually, mathematics is learned, but a Love for mathematics and using them to uncover the unknown is something that can be found by being exposed to them. The Passion is in discovering the beauties of the Universe, using numbers is a tool (which are irrefutably important).

Music is not "learned", but yes, it can be. Just like with any other art form. it's not the act of doing that says whether or not the thing is a Passion, it's the compulsory feeling that we were speaking about that is innate. Again, you have to be exposed to these things to even know what's within you. There are countless people in college or various professions because they were told to and not because that's what they wanted to do and there are a similar number of people who just work in certain professions just because they know they have to do something, but don't really know what they like to do. That is a fault of their upbringings and villages.

You don't know what calls to you if you've never heard its voice in the first place.