7

# Duality Becoming-Time

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.
• Topic Stats
• Top Replies
Type: Discussion • Score: 7 • Views: 11,479 • Replies: 134

contrex

1
Fri 10 Aug, 2012 10:18 am
sibilia

1
Fri 10 Aug, 2012 11:05 am
@contrex,

My point is to offer an explanation for the occurrence of events.
contrex

1
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
Fri 10 Aug, 2012 11:19 am
@contrex,
Must be in a very sibylline way..
sibilia

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

Event is a single occurrence of a process.
fresco

1
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
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
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
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
Fri 10 Aug, 2012 05:45 pm
@sibilia,
SCHEME OF BECOMING-TIME DUALITY

0 Replies

mark noble

1
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
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
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
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
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
Sat 11 Aug, 2012 01:05 pm
@mark noble,
sibilia

1
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
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
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz

1. Forums
2. » Duality Becoming-Time