7
   

Duality Becoming-Time

 
 
sibilia
 
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 10:03 am
DUALITY BECOMING-TIME (B-T)

The becoming is the continuous series of changes. It's a property of the matter. The becoming is absolute.

The time is the successive extension of phenomena. Time is relative.

The duration is the quantitative measurement of time.

In the Duality B-T, as the becoming as the time are objective, but their measurement (duration) is an (subjective) entity. We perceive the becoming in changes and the time like an illusion, but is objective, it depends of the extension of phenomenona. We use clocks and calendars to adjust ourselves to the constant flow of the becoming.
 
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 10:18 am
... and your point is?
sibilia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 11:05 am
@contrex,
Your question was very precise.

My point is to offer an explanation for the occurrence of events.
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 11:17 am
@sibilia,
sibilia wrote:
My point is to offer an explanation for the occurrence of events.


And you think you have done that?
Strauss
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 11:19 am
@contrex,
Must be in a very sibylline way..
sibilia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 11:31 am
@Strauss,
Quote:
Contrex says:
And you think you have done that?

Of course. Why not.

Quote:
Strauss says:
Must be in a very sibylline way..

That's very funny, but my own intuiton.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 12:19 pm
@sibilia,
Quote:
My point is to offer an explanation for the occurrence of events.


Define "event" !
sibilia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 01:14 pm
@fresco,
Quote:
Fresco says:
Define "event" !

Event is a single occurrence of a process.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 02:03 pm
@sibilia,
To whom does it "occur"..i.e.who is doing the "counting" or specifying the "event window"?
sibilia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 02:17 pm
@fresco,
Quote:
Posted by fresco:
To whom does it occur... i.e. who is doing the counting ?

The observer that experiments and verifies facts.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 03:39 pm
@sibilia,
So all "events" are observer dependent ?
i.e. No observer=no events =no "time" ? (...and presumably no "materiality")
sibilia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 05:40 pm
@fresco,
Quote:
So all "events" are observer dependent ?
i.e. No observer = no events = no "time" ? (...and presumably no "materiality").

The observer that experiments and verifies real and independent facts.
sibilia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 05:45 pm
@sibilia,
SCHEME OF BECOMING-TIME DUALITY
 http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/378330_348406411900751_370938691_n.jpg
0 Replies
 
mark noble
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2012 11:47 pm
At first glance - wtf?
At 2nd glance - This is a statement applying homemade symbols in place of more commom ones. You appear to be referring to 'cause & effect'?, yet I have no means of establishing why.

Was there a question?
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Aug, 2012 02:39 am
@sibilia,
I suggest you investigate the paradox of having the observer defining "events" and the requirement for events to be "independent". I wish you luck since that one has eluded most recent writers on ontology (theories of existence) !
sibilia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Aug, 2012 06:05 am
@fresco,
Quote:
At first glance - wtf?

Mark, what that means?

Quote:
You appear to be referring to 'cause & effect'?, yet I have no means of establishing why.

Becoming is first, if there is no becoming no time.

Quote:
Was there a question?

Not yet.
sibilia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Aug, 2012 06:08 am
@sibilia,
Quote:
I suggest you investigate the paradox of having the observer defining "events" and the requirement for events to be "independent". I wish you luck since that one has eluded most recent writers on ontology (theories of existence) !

I'll do that.
mark noble
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Aug, 2012 12:20 pm
@sibilia,
It means....What the ****? but is a current abbreviation expressing total upheaval of expected reasoning on behalf of, in this instance, myself....the reader.
Yes, time, duration is prevalent 'conceptually' between caus and effect.
sibilia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Aug, 2012 01:05 pm
@mark noble,
Thanks Mark for your explanation about "WTF?".
It's interesting to learn more English.
sibilia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Aug, 2012 02:47 pm
@sibilia,
BERGSON AND THE B-T DUALITY

Let’s see the following points:

1) The Bergson’s duration is the Sibilia’s becoming.

2) Sibilia and Bergson agree with the concept of time: abstract and mathematical.

3) For Bergson the duration is the real time of the conscience. Here, we disagree because the becoming is objective and generates the illusion of time.

4) Although, we intuit the becoming, this is not exclusive of the conscience.

5) The Bergson’s negation of the time it was not just right. The time must be consider as a convenience.

ORIGIN OF THE B-T DUALITY

Arrived the moment to consider the time as an illusion, the definition of this concept lead us to the becoming. An illusion is the distorted interpretation for a perceived stimulus really. This stimulus is the becoming. So, the becoming plus its perception (illusion) conform the B-T Duality.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Duality Becoming-Time
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/22/2020 at 07:39:56