the dao of time

[silent thunder]

been 'spending some time' considering time

 

time can be measured... seemingly in many manners

by the moon: 28 day 13 month in a yearly cycle, very accurate; solar: varying days to the 12 month with leap years blah blah, sidereal, seasonal, galactic.  they are all ways to mark the fluid progression of events relative to our position and perception, but really are there ever any separate moments? 

 

there is of course, nearly everywhere the dominant modern time reminders that run nearly all aspects of our life: mechanical, digital, atomic, precise within parameters of definition by machine, as set by humans yet still fluid and relative.  Einstein made sure we got that much.

 

but what is it?  what is time?  what does 9am on monday mean?  to a hawk?  to an infant?  to a business owner?

 

I have experienced extreme subjective time... time slowing waaaaay down, on several occasions.  I've also experienced what seemed like no time.  outside of time, it was alternately horrifying and blissful when it occurred for me.

 

past and future are little more than mental projections to me, not real at all, but reflections and projections of mind.

 

the present seems real enough, but what is it really... how long is the present?  how long is a moment?  1/256th of a second?  1/64th of a second?  1 second?  the time it takes to complete a simple action?

 

how many present moments are there in a kiss?  one?  twenty?

 

right now, it's the middle of the night relative to my position on the planet and how we as a culture define day and night.  the present mechanical time is 1:11 antemeridian.

there is a present second

a present minute

within the present hour

of the present day

in the present week

of this present month

and year

with the present decade

of this current century

within the present millennium

epoch

era

bang

 

indeed given a potent vocabulary word and from a certain perspective, i can say with conviction that we are in the midst of the present eternal moment

 

time can be many things it seems

but there is only one present

 

 

 

[silent thunder]

hmm, it's time for a long walk

[Karl]

It's a relative conceptual measurement of causality, as is distance (space between objects). Because we are conceptual creatures we are dependent on the past as a key to our long range future. It is purely a human concept, animals only have direct perception.

[Karl]

hmm, it's time for a long walk

Cabin fever ? I'm going to walk along the river in half an hour or so. I get cabin fever.

[Marblehead]

There will always be "time" between "cause" and "effect".  How it is measured doesn't really matter all that much.

[Michael Sternbach]

Paradoxically, this ever-elusive present moment is all there is/has been/will be. The past exists in our more or less exact memory of it; the future is already there in our imagination - and sometimes a glimpse of it is being revealed by divination or clairvoyance. But none of this changes the fact that all we have direct experience of is this infinitely narrow line yet endlessly extended thing that we call the present. This is a fundamental insight which spiritual traditions like Zen speak to.

[joeblast]

Simply put, there is no time component to consciousness.

 

Time is a byproduct of that which makes up spacetime - and consciousness, while it interfaces with spacetime, is not "made up of" spacetime.

 

That is the abstraction that makes time such a variably perceived phenomenon.

[Marblehead]

True.  However, we should remember the lessons of the past so we don't keep making the same mistakes over and over again, and we should do a little planning for the future just in case we are fortunate enough to wake up tomorrow morning.

[Taomeow]

My favorite subject.  Thank you for bringing it up. 

 

*The post that followed has been deleted by me. Was, is?..   Will forever be?..  

 

The reason for the deletion is personal and has nothing to do with anything.      

Edited August 12, 2016 by Taomeow

[Miffymog]

I may have already relayed this story on this website, apologies if this is the case

 

Has there ever been a time when you've looked at a clock and the second hand has seemed to be frozen in time. That second has seemed to last for ages, so much so that almost a very mild anxiety occurs as because that second seems abnormally long? Now, the second does of course pass and the hand moves on, but you remember that strangely long second. Why did this happen?

 

Well, there's a fairly simple explanation behind it. What you'll find is that these 'long' seconds only occur when you've just looked at the clock. Now, when you move your eyes from one direction to anther, the visual cortex is filled with a blur as the eyes move from left to right. Instead of transferring this blur to you 'consciousness', your mind fills up this period of blur with a stationary image. This 'blur' as your eye moves lasts up to one third of a second, which if ignored and changed into a stationary imaged of a clock hand, when added to a normal duration of a second, is enough to give you a freaky experience of a very long second.

 

Here's the rub - how can your 'consciousness' (in order to cover up the period of the blur) be given the image of a stationary second hand, before it actually gets to see it? The answer - it cant.

 

What we see as a procession of events are greatly (if not entirely) fabricated by various parts of the mind so that there seems to be consistency in our life experience. Now, this has been successful enough for us to survive and reproduce, but our impression of the now is really quite made up.

 

Well, from some points of view ...

Edited August 12, 2016 by Miffymog

[silent thunder]

thanks folks... that was fun

i wonder what will come next...

 

oh... more thoughts... as usual... hmm.

maybe it's time to sit. 

 

nope evidently not

 

 

I hope no one takes my words as my religion here... everything, including time and my self seems fluid to me, so my words were/are just so much mulling over and devil's advocate as I'm no staunch advocate of the eternal present, yet my sense of that remains and it is very compelling to me and stubbornly refuses to be dismissed over the last few years by my innate skepticism.  So here I am sharing it with all you amazing fuckers and as usual, loving it.

 

That concept of the eternal present moment as perceived as an epoch/era, is and was a compelling semantic argument of HH Dalai Lama that was recorded digitally.  It was/is a simple offhand comment made in passing by HH to the cameraman who was filming him at that time, which started this ball rolling around my brain cage some years ago now.  It took root and has returned again now, er um then when I typed it and then again now and well... I figured you folks would bring a wealth of non-expected perspective and I am not/was not/will not be let down it seems...

 

Taomeow, your sharing based on the words of the seemingly long gone philosopher's assertion that there is no present at all, only past and future is and I expect will be for some time a real nut cracker... I will have fun chewing that bone on and off in my spare time. 

 

It seems the closest take to it in my own perception is how Joeblast described it.  Seems compellingly real within a context of mental processes, except that it exhibits so much fragility in its fluid and relative nature to my own perception of it for me to adopt it as law.

 

As with reality, perception and most things... it seems relative.

 

aaah... now it is time to sit.

[Taomeow]

Simply put, there is no time component to consciousness.

 

Time is a byproduct of that which makes up spacetime - and consciousness, while it interfaces with spacetime, is not "made up of" spacetime.

 

That is the abstraction that makes time such a variably perceived phenomenon.

 

So, in this model, if there's no time, what is "spacetime" made of besides space? 

[Karl]

thanks folks... that was fun

i wonder what will come next...

 

oh... more thoughts... as usual... hmm.

maybe it's time to sit. 

 

nope evidently not

 

 

I hope no one takes my words as my religion here... everything, including time and my self seems fluid to me, so my words were/are just so much mulling over and devil's advocate as I'm no staunch advocate of the eternal present, yet my sense of that remains and it is very compelling to me and stubbornly refuses to be dismissed over the last few years by my innate skepticism.  So here I am sharing it with all you amazing fuckers and as usual, loving it.

 

That concept of the eternal present moment as perceived as an epoch/era, is and was a compelling semantic argument of HH Dalai Lama that was recorded digitally.  It was/is a simple offhand comment made in passing by HH to the cameraman who was filming him at that time, which started this ball rolling around my brain cage some years ago now.  It took root and has returned again now, er um then when I typed it and then again now and well... I figured you folks would bring a wealth of non-expected perspective and I am not/was not/will not be let down it seems...

 

Taomeow, your sharing based on the words of the seemingly long gone philosopher's assertion that there is no present at all, only past and future is and I expect will be for some time a real nut cracker... I will have fun chewing that bone on and off in my spare time. 

 

It seems the closest take to it in my own perception is how Joeblast described it.  Seems compellingly real within a context of mental processes, except that it exhibits so much fragility in its fluid and relative nature to my own perception of it for me to adopt it as law.

 

As with reality, perception and most things... it seems relative.

 

aaah... now it is time to sit.

There is no concrete time or space these are relative concepts. From that perspective there is only one long 'now' in which causality continues in one direction. There is only a soup of things that we seperate out from one another into conceptual classifications such as planets and moons. We measure distances between these objects in relation to other objects such as the length of our arms. We measure the passing of time in the same way, but what we are really measuring is movement between relative objects as a result of causality. Hence we can discover relative velocity and relative speed wrt relative distance and relative time.

[joeblast]

So, in this model, if there's no time, what is "spacetime" made of besides space? 

That's kinda like taking the banana out of a banana creme pie     Time dilation at relativistic speeds or gravitational wells as well as the decently coherent mathematical models that predicted them simply show that the two are inextricable.

 

Time is that which makes space flow, the playing out of entropy, an arena for potential to move from here to there.  Its what gives the 3d world utility, and potential for change to take place.   I'd say we might get bored if there were not that possibility, but then again, we wouldnt have the neural flow for that to take place, either

 

Then again, its sorta like defining consciousness, are you going to get significantly better than "that which sees" or some such

[Taomeow]

That's kinda like taking the banana out of a banana creme pie     Time dilation at relativistic speeds or gravitational wells as well as the decently coherent mathematical models that predicted them simply show that the two are inextricable.

 

Time is that which makes space flow, the playing out of entropy, an arena for potential to move from here to there.  Its what gives the 3d world utility, and potential for change to take place.   I'd say we might get bored if there were not that possibility, but then again, we wouldnt have the neural flow for that to take place, either

 

Then again, its sorta like defining consciousness, are you going to get significantly better than "that which sees" or some such

 

 

OK.  Banana creme pie is close, but I know something even closer -- ice cream, which has no ice and may or may not contain cream. 

Edited August 12, 2016 by Taomeow

[silent thunder]

oh it is DEFINITELY time for ice cream!

[silent thunder]

Cabin fever ? I'm going to walk along the river in half an hour or so. I get cabin fever.

Sometimes definitely, but in that case, back then... last night.  When I was presently in the past.

 

That walk last night was gloriously soft and blissful and seemed much akin to softly, almost floatingly walking along the bottom of the ocean while all the glorious currents of light, wind and sound slid across my awareness like water made out of golden, yet non-visible light.

 

There was a weightless quality to it, while still being firmly physical and rooted as my bare feet constantly shared their awareness of the texture and presence of the ground.

[Karl]

Sometimes definitely, but in that case, back then... last night.  When I was presently in the past.

 

That walk last night was gloriously soft and blissful and seemed much akin to softly, almost floatingly walking along the bottom of the ocean while all the glorious currents of light, wind and sound slid across my awareness like water made out of golden, yet non-visible light.

 

There was a weightless quality to it, while still being firmly physical and rooted as my bare feet constantly shared their awareness of the texture and presence of the ground.

Mine was vigorous. :-) For much of the walk I had the river to myself, I like to sing as I walk and really stride out, the river gives it all a sense of purpose when it's running fast and high.

[Taomeow]

A physicist who promises a new revolution in physics, Julian Barbour, got me onto a completely new track not with ideas and formulas I braved reading his "The End of Time" but with a single image that had an unmistakable grey, dusty, settled smell of an old forgotten truth:

 

"The cat that jumped is not the cat that landed."

 

This was over a year ago, and a whole new system has crystallized for me since then, which made me do things differently, think differently too, but that's not important, the important part is... 

 

...ideas are a dime a dozen, but if you can live the way you lived before (or, rather, without) a particular idea, it was a cheapo  idea, in all likelihood wrong.  Or maybe not wrong but half-baked, not clear to your whole system even if your mind believes it is.  An idea that makes you do things differently is not idiot-proof either, it may merely be an indicator that you do things the wrong way, by itself it's not enough to make you do things the right way.  What criteria do we use?  Time will tell we say.  But if there's no time, and in Barbour's model there ain't any, what will tell?  

 

Someone starts a new diet based on a new idea.  It works for a while, a short while or a long while, and then he or she gets sick.  What has changed from the "time" when it worked till the "time" he got sick?  If there's no time, there's no "accumulation" of "effects."  No "because" and no "as a result."  So, how does one discover that the diet "made him sick?" 

 

Change might do it.  If you change the diet and are no longer sick, well...  time had nothing to do with it.

 

But what if you're so sick that it's too late to change?  Ahem...  "too late" is a time reference.  What if there's no time?  Why doesn't a change change your state then? 

 

That's the cat's meow of the whole deal.  The cat that jumped onto the wrong diet is not the cat that landed sick.  What we need to do is find out where the right cat went, the healthy one in whose bodymindspirit the jumping one intended to land...  

 

Find her and jump again.   Aim well.  Aim with precision.  Time is irrelevant.  Finding or not finding that cat...

 

...meow. 

[Brian]

A physicist who promises a new revolution in physics, Julian Barbour, got me onto a completely new track not with ideas and formulas I braved reading his "The End of Time" but with a single image that had an unmistakable grey, dusty, settled smell of an old forgotten truth:

 

"The cat that jumped is not the cat that landed."

 

This was over a year ago, and a whole new system has crystallized for me since then, which made me do things differently, think differently too, but that's not important, the important part is...

 

...ideas are a dime a dozen, but if you can live the way you lived before (or, rather, without) a particular idea, it was a cheapo idea, in all likelihood wrong. Or maybe not wrong but half-baked, not clear to your whole system even if your mind believes it is. An idea that makes you do things differently is not idiot-proof either, it may merely be an indicator that you do things the wrong way, by itself it's not enough to make you do things the right way. What criteria do we use? Time will tell we say. But if there's no time, and in Barbour's model there ain't any, what will tell?

 

Someone starts a new diet based on a new idea. It works for a while, a short while or a long while, and then he or she gets sick. What has changed from the "time" when it worked till the "time" he got sick? If there's no time, there's no "accumulation" of "effects." No "because" and no "as a result." So, how does one discover that the diet "made him sick?"

 

Change might do it. If you change the diet and are no longer sick, well... time had nothing to do with it.

 

But what if you're so sick that it's too late to change? Ahem... "too late" is a time reference. What if there's no time? Why doesn't a change change your state then?

 

That's the cat's meow of the whole deal. The cat that jumped onto the wrong diet is not the cat that landed sick. What we need to do is find out where the right cat went, the healthy one in whose bodymindspirit the jumping one intended to land...

 

Find her and jump again. Aim well. Aim with precision. Time is irrelevant. Finding or not finding that cat...

 

...meow.

When you got to the "what will tell?" part, my inner voice said "change will tell" -- change is independent of space & time.

 

[joeblast]

hm

 

change is the very essence of space & time

 

but yes, change can happen without space and time

 

its the interdependent juxtaposition of what, why, and how

 

only in certain configurations does change constructively fold back upon itself to create a stable dynamic

Edited August 13, 2016 by joeblast

[Taomeow]

hm

 

change is the very essence of space & time

 

but yes, change can happen without space and time

 

its the interdependent juxtaposition of what, why, and how

 

only in certain configurations does change constructively fold back upon itself to create a stable dynamic

 

Change is a function of probability, quite independent of space and time, whereas what we are used to handling as "space and time" are fully dependent on this probability, on the likelihood of the "other" "spacetime" state being "reachable" from a given state.  

 

Probability is mother of change and child of luck and intent.

[ChiForce]

Time is change.  There done.    Where there are flux and transient, there are time.  The idea of hours, seconds, and minutes are just illusions.  Something people in the civilization to construct to describe this state of change.  The question is does Time/ change cease to exist in the Tao???   Does time cease to be in the Dharma??

[liminal_luke]

Brian recently posted a story about reassuring a fast-food worker that she was going to be OK just before she suffered some sort of health collapse in the back of the restaurant.  What does this story say about spiritual practice and our experience of time?

 

Most of us perceive time in the same linear way, one second following another in strict, boring order.  Seconds do not generally cut in front of each other in line.  I don´t speak from personal experience, but my sense is that practice changes all that, that there´s a stage of spiritual development where time goes all funny.  Time can slow down, speed up, stand still.  Time can hop around in ways that defy conventional understanding.

 

You know that bumper sticker: It´s never too late to have a happy childhood. Call me nutty, but I believe it´s literally true.

Edited August 13, 2016 by liminal_luke

[Karl]

Change is a function of probability, quite independent of space and time, whereas what we are used to handling as "space and time" are fully dependent on this probability, on the likelihood of the "other" "spacetime" state being "reachable" from a given state.  

 

Probability is mother of change and child of luck and intent.

There is no probability in causality. Nothing happens by accident. Probability is a human conception resulting from ignorance of all the facts. If we apply probabilities to planes crashing we may come up with a probability than one in every million flights crashes, but this is not a concrete, every plane does not actually have that chance of crashing, only one plane will crash and there will be definite causes of that crash.