Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Cojana · 07-12-2003, 07:07 PM

Science, technicly there are no past or future, just the present 'now',.. but only for a split second, a split second and 'now' becomes the past,which doesn't exist,. and the future are always a split ahead,also none-existent, thus leaving 'now' the present for only a split second, ie,existence in split second intervals, if you all are going to chastice me,please do so, with intellect, valid argument, disclose where my ignorames lies, and you'll be doing it in split second intervals,

Arken · 07-12-2003, 07:37 PM

My only chastisement of you is your use of 'split second' since 'now' is not measurable by time at all due to the fact that once you measure it, that time has passed and it is no longer 'now.' It's definitely a difficult thing to wrap your mind around.

Kat_Somm_Faen · 07-12-2003, 07:49 PM

Well there should be no "split second' now.

It is more like an "arrow of time" traveling. And our existence in time is always now. It is never in the past actually. And time is continuous after all, there is an infinite regression between Now and some time in the past.

You seem ti be thinking of Now as a distinct as the split second Now time and there is another flash of a new split second now. Kinda like a movie frame. Where is fact it is continuous flow. Nothig is split second and the difference between now and pat is infinitely small. You can always half it and half it and on an on.

Like that arrow never hitting the tree or the rabbit never crossing the finish line and getting beat by the turtle

Jesse · 07-12-2003, 08:05 PM

Relativity says there is no universal way to define the notion of "now". For one observer event A and event B may happen "at the same time", while for another observer event A happened "before" event B, and there is no physical reason to prefer one observer's definition of simultaneity over another's.

Cojana · 07-13-2003, 07:27 AM

From what I percieve as to the responces recieved, we are inbetween what 'now' was, there are no 'now',past,or future, just the split second lingering in contiinuim ,,if time were to stop, would we become rigid statues,or just disappear, maybe death transends the split second existence into spiritual flow, or are that apples and oranges,...

fando · 07-13-2003, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cojana
From what I percieve as to the responces recieved, we are inbetween what 'now' was, there are no 'now',past,or future, just the split second lingering in contiinuim ,,if time were to stop, would we become rigid statues,or just disappear, maybe death transends the split second existence into spiritual flow, or are that apples and oranges,...

Physics takes no responsibility for the crazy conclusions we humans draw from it.

Wounded King · 07-14-2003, 01:53 AM

If we consider the 'true' now to be an instant of time, for the sake of argument a unit of plack time, then as humans we never experience the now consciously as all of our thought processes relating to a specific unit of time take considerably longer than the now to occur so we can never resolve things to the level of the true 'now', except perhaps by using technology retrospectively to analyse the instant.

Cojana · 07-14-2003, 08:28 AM

since there are no time to analyze the instant 'now' are here, could then the instant be term as relative,??

Tom Sawyer · 07-15-2003, 11:10 AM

Think of time as a dimension, just the same as length. You travel through it just like you walk down a road.

Just as when you walk a few steps, it's not that the "you" five feet behind your present position has stopped existing, you simply aren't there anymore. It's the same with time, when you move forward a few seconds, it's not that the "you" a few seconds ago has stopped existing, you simply aren't there anymore.

Past, present and future are simply terms we have invented to describe somethings postion along a temporal continuum, the same as the terms near and far along a length continuum. They are not things in and of themselves.

Postcard73 · 07-17-2003, 12:41 PM

Quote:

as humans we never experience the now consciously as all of our thought processes relating to a specific unit of time take considerably longer than the now to occur so we can never resolve things to the level of the true 'now', except perhaps by using technology retrospectively to analyse the instant. [/B]

It's been a while since I read it, but I'm pretty sure that in the book The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test , Tom Wolfe illustrates that one of the main driving forces behind the rise of the LSD culture in the '60s was a desire to speed up perception and thus experience the actual "now."

Also, would it be incorrect to suggest that "now" isn't defined as the instant something happens, but rather the instant it is perceived? I guess this would be flawed. If a tree falls in the woods and no one is there to perceive it, then did it really fall? And if so, then did it fall during a moment that could be called "now" while it was happening, even though a perceiver would recognize the moment of the tree's falling as the past? It doesn't hurt to ask- I'm bored at work...

07-12-2003, 07:07 PM	#1
Cojana Senior Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Reseda, California Posts: 651	split second existence Science, technicly there are no past or future, just the present 'now',.. but only for a split second, a split second and 'now' becomes the past,which doesn't exist,. and the future are always a split ahead,also none-existent, thus leaving 'now' the present for only a split second, ie,existence in split second intervals, if you all are going to chastice me,please do so, with intellect, valid argument, disclose where my ignorames lies, and you'll be doing it in split second intervals,

07-13-2003, 07:27 AM	#5
Cojana Senior Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Reseda, California Posts: 651	split second, continuim, From what I percieve as to the responces recieved, we are inbetween what 'now' was, there are no 'now',past,or future, just the split second lingering in contiinuim ,,if time were to stop, would we become rigid statues,or just disappear, maybe death transends the split second existence into spiritual flow, or are that apples and oranges,...

07-14-2003, 08:28 AM	#8
Cojana Senior Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Reseda, California Posts: 651	does the term 'relative' apply.?? since there are no time to analyze the instant 'now' are here, could then the instant be term as relative,??

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-12-2003, 07:37 PM	#2
Arken Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: North Hollywood, CA Posts: 6,303	My only chastisement of you is your use of 'split second' since 'now' is not measurable by time at all due to the fact that once you measure it, that time has passed and it is no longer 'now.' It's definitely a difficult thing to wrap your mind around.

07-12-2003, 07:49 PM	#3
Kat_Somm_Faen Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Boulder, Colorado Posts: 3,316	Well there should be no "split second' now. It is more like an "arrow of time" traveling. And our existence in time is always now. It is never in the past actually. And time is continuous after all, there is an infinite regression between Now and some time in the past. You seem ti be thinking of Now as a distinct as the split second Now time and there is another flash of a new split second now. Kinda like a movie frame. Where is fact it is continuous flow. Nothig is split second and the difference between now and pat is infinitely small. You can always half it and half it and on an on. Like that arrow never hitting the tree or the rabbit never crossing the finish line and getting beat by the turtle

07-12-2003, 08:05 PM	#4
Jesse Moderator - Science Discussions Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Providence, RI, USA Posts: 9,908	Relativity says there is no universal way to define the notion of "now". For one observer event A and event B may happen "at the same time", while for another observer event A happened "before" event B, and there is no physical reason to prefer one observer's definition of simultaneity over another's.

07-14-2003, 01:53 AM	#7
Wounded King Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Edinburgh Posts: 1,211	If we consider the 'true' now to be an instant of time, for the sake of argument a unit of plack time, then as humans we never experience the now consciously as all of our thought processes relating to a specific unit of time take considerably longer than the now to occur so we can never resolve things to the level of the true 'now', except perhaps by using technology retrospectively to analyse the instant.

07-15-2003, 11:10 AM	#9
Tom Sawyer Talk Freethought Staff Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Toronto, eh Posts: 42,293	Think of time as a dimension, just the same as length. You travel through it just like you walk down a road. Just as when you walk a few steps, it's not that the "you" five feet behind your present position has stopped existing, you simply aren't there anymore. It's the same with time, when you move forward a few seconds, it's not that the "you" a few seconds ago has stopped existing, you simply aren't there anymore. Past, present and future are simply terms we have invented to describe somethings postion along a temporal continuum, the same as the terms near and far along a length continuum. They are not things in and of themselves.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.