Page 5 of 15

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 6th, 2019, 12:20 pm
by Atla
The catch with "loop time" or "circular time" is that it predicts that the expansion of our observable universe will necessarily reverse eventually. (Which isn't that implausible I think, seeing how the expansion rate already changed at least 3-4 times in the past, so such an event will probably happen again.)

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 6th, 2019, 1:36 pm
by Tamminen
@ubojico
I would say time is infinite in both directions.
My past is a series of events that really happened. I cannot change them. If someone asks "From where did you come here?" I can say "I walked the road from place A." Then that someone may ask "From where did you come to place A?", and I can say "I walked the road from place B". But we cannot continue this endlessly into the past. The journey must have started somewhere. My past and my future differ in this respect. I can look into my future ad infinitum, but not into my past, because my past is real but my future is not.

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 6th, 2019, 1:52 pm
by ubojico
Tamminen wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 1:36 pm
@ubojico
I would say time is infinite in both directions.
My past is a series of events that really happened. I cannot change them. If someone asks "From where did you come here?" I can say "I walked the road from place A." Then that someone may ask "From where did you come to place A?", and I can say "I walked the road from place B". But we cannot continue this endlessly into the past. The journey must have started somewhere. My past and my future differ in this respect. I can look into my future ad infinitum, but not into my past, because my past is real but my future is not.
You can see an end in the future with that line of reasoning. Where will you go after A? I will go to B and C. After D, E and F, I will die at point G. The end.

But if you view future as endless, then you must view past as well. I dont see why it cant go endlessly. Before my birth I literally was the attraction of my parents, literally were my parents, and everyone else and everything else. Forever.

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 6th, 2019, 2:01 pm
by Tamminen
Atla wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 12:09 pm
What you say would require that a "you" exists distinct from the rest of the world and from "me", which is of course nonsense.
In this kind of conversation language often goes on a holiday and we mean different things by the same words.

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 6th, 2019, 2:44 pm
by Tamminen
Atla wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 12:05 pm
You talk about the logic of linear time with a direction from past towards future, but I'm talking about another logic that's actually directionless.
The catch with "loop time" or "circular time" is that it predicts that the expansion of our observable universe will necessarily reverse eventually. (Which isn't that implausible I think, seeing how the expansion rate already changed at least 3-4 times in the past, so such an event will probably happen again.)
These paragraphs show that you talk about physical time. I speak about subjective time, which is the original meaning of time. Subjective time is a process where the present experience changes to a past experience and a new present experience appears from the future. It cannot change direction in its concrete process of advancing, only in thinking, abstracted from the real happening. Physical time is an example of abstracted time.

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 6th, 2019, 3:56 pm
by Tamminen
Let us suppose there is an absolute point of view to the world, and from this point of view time is a closed loop, whatever that means. Now I am part of this loop, and in the middle of subjective time. What I wrote in my replies to @ubojico and @Atla above applies here, which of course destroys the loop as a structure of subjective time. To sum up, subjective time is a linear, never-ending one-way street with a starting point somewhere in the past.

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 6th, 2019, 5:41 pm
by ubojico
Tamminen wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 3:56 pm
Let us suppose there is an absolute point of view to the world, and from this point of view time is a closed loop, whatever that means. Now I am part of this loop, and in the middle of subjective time. What I wrote in my replies to @ubojico and @Atla above applies here, which of course destroys the loop as a structure of subjective time. To sum up, subjective time is a linear, never-ending one-way street with a starting point somewhere in the past.

But as soon as I die, I will wake up as someone else, effectively continuing my subjective time. In the same sense, my subjective time started at a point in time infinite in the past for all intents and purposes, as the first consciousness.

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 6th, 2019, 5:47 pm
by Felix
Atla: "an awkward way to put it would be that there is only one finite "round", only one finite "cycle" with no beginning or end."

Anything finite by definition has a beginning, including your "closed loop," so your statement is illogical.

Atla: "What you say would require that a "you" exists distinct from the rest of the world and from "me", which is of course nonsense."

Well, the illusion of separate I's is certainly persuasive enough to convince anyone who has not experienced cosmic consciousness, which is not many, that we are are distinct subjects - those troublesome physical bodies tend to reinforce that idea by continually bringing us back to temporal reality. And as they say in Zen, after enlightenment one is still compelled to "chop wood and carry water," if one wishes to retain one's current subjective bias, i.e., avoid physical death.

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 7th, 2019, 2:28 am
by Tamminen
Felix wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 5:47 pm
...after enlightenment one is still compelled to "chop wood and carry water"
What if we just say that our separateness and unity are equally real?

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 7th, 2019, 3:45 am
by Felix
"What if we just say that our separateness and unity are equally real?"

I wish that was so. Unfortunately separateness is much more real than unity to most people - thus war, inequality, environmental degradation, ad nauseum.

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 7th, 2019, 1:41 pm
by Atla
Felix wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 5:47 pm
Anything finite by definition has a beginning, including your "closed loop," so your statement is illogical.
?
Take a circle for example, and you're a 1-dimensional being on the circle.
The circle has a finite size, but where is the beginning on it?
What I'm talking is more or less the same thing, just in 4 dimensions.

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 7th, 2019, 1:54 pm
by Atla
Tamminen wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 2:44 pm
These paragraphs show that you talk about physical time. I speak about subjective time, which is the original meaning of time. Subjective time is a process where the present experience changes to a past experience and a new present experience appears from the future. It cannot change direction in its concrete process of advancing, only in thinking, abstracted from the real happening. Physical time is an example of abstracted time.
I think subjective time is just the sensation that time flows in one direction, from past towards the future. (A nice illusion.)

You added the assumption that it therefore had a start in the past. But you can tell this how? (Plus the idea of a beginning brings up logical problems.)

An alternative assumption is that there never was a start because time goes in circle, it "flows in one direction" and eventually returns into itself.

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 7th, 2019, 2:32 pm
by Atla
Atla wrote:
May 7th, 2019, 1:41 pm
Felix wrote:
May 6th, 2019, 5:47 pm
Anything finite by definition has a beginning, including your "closed loop," so your statement is illogical.
?
Take a circle for example, and you're a 1-dimensional being on the circle.
The circle has a finite size, but where is the beginning on it?
What I'm talking is more or less the same thing, just in 4 dimensions.
Oh yeah important little detail, here I was talking about an 1-dimensional circle. It can't really be visualized I think.

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 7th, 2019, 2:57 pm
by Tamminen
Atla wrote:
May 7th, 2019, 1:54 pm
I think subjective time is just the sensation that time flows in one direction, from past towards the future.
A sensation is the content of the present in subjective time. Tomorrow always comes after today, even if the content of tomorrow were the same as the content of today. This is the internal structure of subjective time, its logic. Going backwards in subjective time is a contradiction in terms. The situation becomes a bit more complicated when we speak of physical time, time measured with clocks, and the problems with spacetime, when time and space get intertwined, especially in General Relativity.
You added the assumption that it therefore had a start in the past. But you can tell this how? (Plus the idea of a beginning brings up logical problems.)
I tried to explain this in my reply to @ubojico above. The logic of subjective past is such that there cannot be a real event in the infinite past, and even if there were, there would be no road from that event to where I am now. I think you can see this if you think about it carefully. I admit that also the idea of finite past is somewhat strange and counterintuitive, but there is no logical contradiction in it. Think about the moment when you wake up in the morning and have your first conscious experience after deep sleep, and replace the deep sleep with nothingness. Would you tell me where the logical problems are, I am very interested.

Re: The Implications Of Generic Subjective Continuity

Posted: May 7th, 2019, 3:28 pm
by Atla
Tamminen wrote:
May 7th, 2019, 2:57 pm
Atla wrote:
May 7th, 2019, 1:54 pm
I think subjective time is just the sensation that time flows in one direction, from past towards the future.
A sensation is the content of the present in subjective time. Tomorrow always comes after today, even if the content of tomorrow were the same as the content of today. This is the internal structure of subjective time, its logic. Going backwards in subjective time is a contradiction in terms. The situation becomes a bit more complicated when we speak of physical time, time measured with clocks, and the problems with spacetime, when time and space get intertwined, especially in General Relativity.
You added the assumption that it therefore had a start in the past. But you can tell this how? (Plus the idea of a beginning brings up logical problems.)
I tried to explain this in my reply to @ubojico above. The logic of subjective past is such that there cannot be a real event in the infinite past, and even if there were, there would be no road from that event to where I am now. I think you can see this if you think about it carefully. I admit that also the idea of finite past is somewhat strange and counterintuitive, but there is no logical contradiction in it. Think about the moment when you wake up in the morning and have your first conscious experience after deep sleep, and replace the deep sleep with nothingness. Would you tell me where the logical problems are, I am very interested.
Ok I don't understand what you mean. If by subjective time we really only mean the illusion of the passage of time, then nothing follows from it since it's just an illusion. It has no "actual" internal structure or logic.