12
   

Is there a now?

 
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2015 02:40 pm
@carloslebaron,
There is no way around this comment...
Holly fracking Christ !!!
0 Replies
 
Banana Breath
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2015 05:19 pm
@carloslebaron,
Quote:
THE PERCEPTIONAL LAW is UNBEATABLE. Vive la France!!!

What on earth are you drinking? Mineral spirits?
Razzleg
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2015 09:54 pm
@Rickoshay75,
Rickoshay75 wrote:

Is there only a past and future? Does NOW come and go so fast it can't be isolated or pinned down?


Rickoshay75 wrote:

Razzleg wrote:

Rickoshay75 wrote:

Is there only a past and future? Does NOW come and go so fast it can't be isolated or pinned down?


Time is an abstract of experienced motion. Depending on the theoretical model of time one uses, a "now" may or may not exist. But the same goes for the "past", the "future", "destiny", "fate", "history", "predestination", "eternity", etc.

Your question implies a linear model of time...what if it's more complicated than that?


Practical NOW lasts an instant, philosophic or perceptive may see it differently.


So am i to understand that the question in your OP was merely rhetorical; because you already seem to have both a developed opinion and a philosophic agenda?

Rickoshay75 wrote:
Practical NOW lasts an instant, philosophic or perceptive may see it differently..


How would you distinguish the "practical" from the "perceptive" and "philosophic" nows? Can you do so without involving the other two versions of the now that you choose to treat as distinct counter-versions?

JLNobody wrote:

There is ONLY now and it is empty.


This is a pretty good koan. You said it, but it does not mean what you think it means.
JLNobody
 
  2  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2015 01:47 pm
@Razzleg,
I'm glad that my statement can feul more than one meaning. Of course, past and future are useful abstractions--they do not any longer or yet exist. But IN A SENSE only they exist and "now", the present, is the location and process where the latter becomes the former.
Razzleg
 
  2  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2015 11:55 pm
@JLNobody,
JLNobody wrote:

I'm glad that my statement can fuel more than one meaning. Of course, past and future are useful abstractions--they do not any longer or yet exist. But IN A SENSE only they exist and "now", the present, is the location and process where the latter becomes the former.


and yet, the koan nature of your original phrase persists -- we're all wrong...
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2015 07:34 am
More and more, it sounds to me as though we have stopped talking about the possible existence of the past, present, and future...

...and are now confronting the limitations of human language to deal with descriptions of REALITY.

It appears that even the parts of it that we can experience...cannot adequately be described.
carloslebaron
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2015 08:05 am
@Banana Breath,
Fil Albuquerque said

Quote:
There is no way around this comment...
Holly fracking Christ !!!


You said

Quote:
What on earth are you drinking? Mineral spirits?


First, let me tell you a past experience with a similar situation but with different topic.

I remember several years ago, when I was talking with a Christian friend, that two thousand years ago in Galilee no one called "Jesus" to the biblical messiah, but he was known as "Yeshu" because this was his Hebrew name.

When he heard what I said, this friend of mine got angry, he called me names, he didn't talk to me for a while, because according to him, I was lying and that the name "Jesus" is sacred, unique, even angels in heaven put on their knees when they hear this name, etc. etc.

After a while we met again in a party, and he separated a few minutes from his wife, and asked me for "evidence", because he mentioned about the Hebrew name of the messiah to others and he heard that such was correct.

After showing him some sources, he became disappointed and still was in denial. He stop talking to me again for a while again.

After months, we met again, and he told me that yes, the name of the messiah is not "Jesus" but that he still is using this name anyway because such is how the messiah is named by his Church. At this time, he recognized that the name was not Jesus with understanding.

__________________________________________

The same might be expected from both of you.

You have the idea that when we see the images of stars, that these are "past images", because according to you, light traveling at 186,000 miles per second will take years to reach out location.

Suddenly, I show up with THE PERCEPTIONAL LAW and you are trapped with the risk to know that your idea have been debunked. That whatever you have learned about the perception of images in school and universities is false, completely false.

Your first reaction to THE PERCEPTIONAL LAW will be a complete denial. And it will take a while for you to recognize that all your former knowledge on perception of the images of objects is obsolete, good for nothing, a common mistake, a scientific error, cheap philosophy....

You'll have two choices, or keeping your denial or accepting the FACT.

THE PERCEPTIONAL LAW is not a theory but a fact, and you must know that facts are not in need of explanation. A fact just "is" and can be verified all the time.

A fact is that we exist physically, a fact is that there is a "now" in a continued change. The entire universe changes continually without stop. What is "now" trillions and trillions of miles away, it is also "now" here in our location. And our perception of the entire universe is in its current "now" without exceptions.

THE PERCEPTIONAL LAW debunks the whole amount of ideas scientific and philosophical concerning to the possibility of traveling in time, the existence of wormholes, dilatation of time, and similar mythology that up to this moment still is erroneously considered as "science" or "serious philosophy".

My advice is for you to reconsider your position, because regardless of your denial, the universe works this way.

Go ahead, rather that attack my person, you should investigate, do the test I suggest you to do, and I can assure you that THE PERCEPTIONAL LAW as the fact as it is, will always rule.

Again, there is a "now" which for us it last a fraction of a second, and this fraction of a second is enough for us to perceive the entire universe in its present, right now.



0 Replies
 
carloslebaron
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2015 08:13 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
More and more, it sounds to me as though we have stopped talking about the possible existence of the past, present, and future...

...and are now confronting the limitations of human language to deal with descriptions of REALITY.

It appears that even the parts of it that we can experience...cannot adequately be described.


What you have said above comes from a person who doesn't know if he is physically real or not.

I have no idea where you have pulled the absurd thought that physical reality might not exist at all.

My guess is that your own personal difficulty to interpret the incoming stimuli is what makes you think that way, that there is nothing real.

Otherwise, please explain with details, what makes you think that way.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2015 08:21 am
@carloslebaron,
carloslebaron wrote:

Quote:
More and more, it sounds to me as though we have stopped talking about the possible existence of the past, present, and future...

...and are now confronting the limitations of human language to deal with descriptions of REALITY.

It appears that even the parts of it that we can experience...cannot adequately be described.


What you have said above comes from a person who doesn't know if he is physically real or not.

I have no idea where you have pulled the absurd thought that physical reality might not exist at all.

My guess is that your own personal difficulty to interpret the incoming stimuli is what makes you think that way, that there is nothing real.

Otherwise, please explain with details, what makes you think that way.


I do not know the true nature of the REALITY of existence, Carlos.

Do you?
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Jan, 2015 05:56 am
@JLNobody,
JLNobody wrote:

I'm glad that my statement can feul more than one meaning. Of course, past and future are useful abstractions--they do not any longer or yet exist. But IN A SENSE only they exist and "now", the present, is the location and process where the latter becomes the former.


Excellent !
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Jan, 2015 05:59 am
@Razzleg,
"Empty" just means the balance of opposing forces, the "zero" result of equal confronting vectors. At least that's my take on it. I don't believe in absolute emptiness. "Size" just the same rather refers to density of information more then it refers to any other Jurassic twenty century old meaning.

Balance is good !
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Jan, 2015 06:01 am
@Frank Apisa,
Agreed !
...if anything the limits of language and languaging are well visible online...
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Jan, 2015 06:14 am
...for other readers let me just make the disclaim the past few posts have nothing to do with CarlosleBaron crazy talk...we are addressing the meaning of "now", the problem of time and time perception, and not the particularities of scientific investigation on spacetime and time dilation or questioning that light takes time to travel like anything else that moves.

...I know I know...its obvious but sometimes the obvious needs to be said just so people don't get confused with cross talking....
carloslebaron
 
  0  
Reply Thu 15 Jan, 2015 08:34 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
I do not know the true nature of the REALITY of existence, Carlos.

Do you?


OK.

Lets go to basics.

We are organic compounds formed by particles; particles are former by atoms; atoms are former by protons neutrons, electrons; electrons are assumed to be composed by smaller objective components or parts.

Whatever is the primeval component of matter and energy, if it is perceived by our senses and instruments, then it is physically real.

What is "now", "past" and "future"?

I will explain it with the most accurate definition in base of facts, solely facts. In base of the rule of THE PERCEPTIONAL LAW we can obtain the following:

We have particles in the universe causing the existence of matter and the existence or recycling of energy.

The universe is in continued motion

Here is the key: motion

Motion rules the universe. Nothing is found without motion.

We perceive motion, we see objects and celestial bodies in motion continually. In base of our perception of motion, we have invented a measure called time

From here, in base of this perception of motion we have established that

1)- when the motion of an object or body has passed to another step/status or place (decaying, moving, etc.) we call to the former step/status or place, the past, and

2)-when we think or calculate that the motion of the object or body will pass into another step/status or place (growing, moving, etc.) we call to this next step/status or place, the future.

There is no more to add to this simple perception of the universe. If some weird behavior of motion is perceived, it will be always related to matter and energy and motion. Nothing more.

You might argue that other possible existence is anti-matter and similar, but if anti-matter affects the behavior of matter, then anti-matter is physically real. Keep in mind that "we call it" anti-matter, but actually we have no idea what it is. Still, the observed phenomenon in tests show clearly that is physically real when affects matter.

We might don't understand the universe in its whole, but as far as we can perceive it (with or without explanation to what we perceive, how we perceive it, etc.), then we can recognize physical reality.

You don't need to fully understand how lightning happens, but you can perceive it and you know that it exists not only by the fraction of a second spark, but also by the damage that it might cause to houses, trees, etc.

The same as well, we recognize as "now" to the continued observation of the continued universal motion both in parallel.

We can't see the past at all: even when you watch the video of a terror attack, you are watching the current images coming from inside a device, but the physical terror attack happened two days ago and neither you nor anyone trillions of miles far away from earth will see it after two days, because the past doesn't exist anymore: the atoms of the particles of the molecules of the organic compounds forming the human bodies who performed the terror attack have moved already, and are now somewhere else: on the run, killed by police officers, etc.

THE PERCEPTIONAL LAW is the best tool to understand physical reality and comprehend the meaning of past, present/now and future.

carloslebaron
 
  0  
Reply Thu 15 Jan, 2015 08:47 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Quote:
...for other readers let me just make the disclaim the past few posts have nothing to do with CarlosleBaron crazy talk...we are addressing the meaning of "now", the problem of time and time perception, and not the particularities of scientific investigation on spacetime and time dilation or questioning that light takes time to travel like anything else that moves.

...I know I know...its obvious but sometimes the obvious needs to be said just so people don't get confused with cross talking....


Unfortunately, the meaning of "now' must be defined to its best in the branch of science. It is notorious that the Relativity theories have never presented a scientific definition of time, which is essential for their own credibility, because "time" is their base foundation.

If time doesn't exist physically, then the Relativity theories are based on nothing. By consequence, "spacetime" and "dilatation of time" are just mythological expressions.

And yes, you might argue that "light travels" and that light might have a motion like 186,000 miles per second, 'however we perceive the images of the further celestial bodies in the universe in their current status and present location, simultaneously with our current status and present location.

How this happens? Well, who knows!

But, the observation of the entire universe in its present is a fact

0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Jan, 2015 12:11 pm
@carloslebaron,
carloslebaron wrote:

Quote:
I do not know the true nature of the REALITY of existence, Carlos.

Do you?


OK.

Lets go to basics.

We are organic compounds formed by particles; particles are former by atoms; atoms are former by protons neutrons, electrons; electrons are assumed to be composed by smaller objective components or parts.

Whatever is the primeval component of matter and energy, if it is perceived by our senses and instruments, then it is physically real.

What is "now", "past" and "future"?

I will explain it with the most accurate definition in base of facts, solely facts. In base of the rule of THE PERCEPTIONAL LAW we can obtain the following:

We have particles in the universe causing the existence of matter and the existence or recycling of energy.

The universe is in continued motion

Here is the key: motion

Motion rules the universe. Nothing is found without motion.

We perceive motion, we see objects and celestial bodies in motion continually. In base of our perception of motion, we have invented a measure called time

From here, in base of this perception of motion we have established that

1)- when the motion of an object or body has passed to another step/status or place (decaying, moving, etc.) we call to the former step/status or place, the past, and

2)-when we think or calculate that the motion of the object or body will pass into another step/status or place (growing, moving, etc.) we call to this next step/status or place, the future.

There is no more to add to this simple perception of the universe. If some weird behavior of motion is perceived, it will be always related to matter and energy and motion. Nothing more.

You might argue that other possible existence is anti-matter and similar, but if anti-matter affects the behavior of matter, then anti-matter is physically real. Keep in mind that "we call it" anti-matter, but actually we have no idea what it is. Still, the observed phenomenon in tests show clearly that is physically real when affects matter.

We might don't understand the universe in its whole, but as far as we can perceive it (with or without explanation to what we perceive, how we perceive it, etc.), then we can recognize physical reality.

You don't need to fully understand how lightning happens, but you can perceive it and you know that it exists not only by the fraction of a second spark, but also by the damage that it might cause to houses, trees, etc.

The same as well, we recognize as "now" to the continued observation of the continued universal motion both in parallel.

We can't see the past at all: even when you watch the video of a terror attack, you are watching the current images coming from inside a device, but the physical terror attack happened two days ago and neither you nor anyone trillions of miles far away from earth will see it after two days, because the past doesn't exist anymore: the atoms of the particles of the molecules of the organic compounds forming the human bodies who performed the terror attack have moved already, and are now somewhere else: on the run, killed by police officers, etc.

THE PERCEPTIONAL LAW is the best tool to understand physical reality and comprehend the meaning of past, present/now and future.




Did that mean "yes" or "no?"
carloslebaron
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Jan, 2015 09:15 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Did that mean "yes" or "no?"


REALITY is defined with several thoughts according to its application. You must go to specifics in order for you question to be answered. This is not a court case where the "trick" of answering "yes" or "no" to general questions is required.

In specific, when is physical reality the answer is YES, physical reality can be known because we (including instruments made for this purpose) can perceive it.

Its origin or similar questions? Who knows. And we can live with it, because facts are not in need of explanation

Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Jan, 2015 09:20 am
@carloslebaron,
carloslebaron wrote:

Quote:
Did that mean "yes" or "no?"


REALITY is defined with several thoughts according to its application. You must go to specifics in order for you question to be answered. This is not a court case where the "trick" of answering "yes" or "no" to general questions is required.

In specific, when is physical reality the answer is YES, physical reality can be known because we (including instruments made for this purpose) can perceive it.

Its origin or similar questions? Who knows. And we can live with it, because facts are not in need of explanation




Nice try.

No cigar.

My question was not about the definition of reality.

My question was:

Quote:
I do not know the true nature of the REALITY of existence, Carlos. Do you?


So...with the expected attempted evasion nonsense out of the way...

...DO YOU?
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Jan, 2015 03:29 pm
@carloslebaron,
Facts DO need explanation in the sense that an item of experience sometimes needs to be evaluated regarding its alleged facticity. Someone has said that facts are little theories.
carloslebaron
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 09:56 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
So...with the expected attempted evasion nonsense out of the way...

...DO YOU?


Frank,

You need to recognize that you voluntarily have decided to live in your own world where you have no idea if you yourself are real.

The definition of reality applies to several meanings, and as a general concept you can obtained it from wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality

Reality is the conjectured state of things as they actually exist, rather than as they may appear or might be imagined.[1] In a wider definition, reality includes everything that is and has been, whether or not it is observable or comprehensible. A still more broad definition includes everything that has existed, exists, or will exist.

As you noticed it, it is a common understanding that reality in general terms can include even what "it has been", for example, it is a reality that the US Independence day was in July 4, 1776."

I have explained you the specific definition of physical reality.

"Now" is a specific physical reality, because is the current status and location of everything in the universe.

"Now" becomes a fact.

 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is there a now?
  3. » Page 4
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/24/2022 at 08:01:48