Time is Illusory

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
User avatar
Some Schmo
God
Posts: 2466
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:21 am

Re: Time is Illusory

Post by Some Schmo »

Gadianton wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 3:06 pm
I did look up the aging question though, got to at least see what Google says, and some guy at Harvard has an explanation:

https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2019 ... get-older/
Focusing on visual perception, Bejan posits that slower processing times result in us perceiving fewer ‘frames-per-second’ – more actual time passes between the perception of each new mental image. This is what leads to time passing more rapidly.
To me, this sounds like another way of saying, "The more often we think about the time (or look at a clock), the slower time will appear to go." Although, it sounds like he's saying we think about time less because we can't do it as often as we age. Our brains are slowing down.
Religion is for people whose existential fear is greater than their common sense.

The god idea is popular with desperate people.
User avatar
Some Schmo
God
Posts: 2466
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:21 am

Re: Time is Illusory

Post by Some Schmo »

Physics Guy wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 9:07 am
The perspective of Einsteinian relativity, on the other hand, says that time is just like space, only different. In particular the speed of light is really just a unit convention, like the way there are special units of length associated with horses. A furlong is nothing but a certain fraction of a mile, a hand is nothing but so many inches, but horse heights are in hands and horse races in furlongs. In the same way that a hand is four inches, a nanosecond is about a foot.

The reason for using our traditional time units, of course, is that if you're dealing with a situation in which lengths are a few feet, then a foot of time (being a nanosecond) is probably far too short a time for convenient use. You're probably dealing with durations of at least several seconds, so billions of feet. If you're going to be using feet for all your lengths and Gigafeet for all your times, well, those are different words for the units anyway, so you might as well call the Gigafeet seconds—as we do.
I always find this kind of stuff interesting.

Humankind has done this in a few different contexts. We think in certain unit sets depending on the size/location of the thing we're measuring. We measure speed in knots out on the sea. Noah purportedly measured his arc in cubits. We measure computer memory in bytes, and processing speed in hertz. We measure the space between stars and planets in light years. Ect.

And of course, we choose the unit within a set that makes sense for the size/speed of the thing we're measuring. If we're measuring a window, we're probably noting it in inches, but we measure a marathon in miles. We measure the weight of food in ounces and cars in tons. We used to think 16 megabytes of RAM was killer. Now, nothing less than four gigabytes will do.
Physics Guy wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 9:07 am
Anyway the implication of time being just like space is that past, present, and future are all always there, the same way New York and LA and Chicago are all always there. We just move from one to the other. We've left the past behind (and we won't go back there again); we haven't yet arrived at the future. But those other times beside the present are still real and still there, like Paris or Tokyo, even when we don't happen to be there as well.
This is the kind of idea that bends my brain. I find it easier to think in light-years than to imagine all of time always existing.
Religion is for people whose existential fear is greater than their common sense.

The god idea is popular with desperate people.
Chap
God
Posts: 2308
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:42 am
Location: On the imaginary axis

Re: Time is Illusory

Post by Chap »

I don't think I have anything useful to say on the topic of time.

But Augustine of Hippo (354-430, a Berber by origin, originally a Manichee, converted to Christianity, later a bishop and a major theological writer) certainly did.

Here is the beginning of his discussion of time in his Confessions - what follows is also very interesting, at least I think so ...

St. Augustine: Confessions

BOOK XI

CHAPTER XII. -- WHAT GOD DID BEFORE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD.

14. I answer him who asks, "What was God doing before He made heaven and earth?" I answer not, as a certain person is reported to have done facetiously (avoiding the pressure of the question), "He was preparing hell," said he, "for those who pry into mysteries." It is one thing to perceive, another to laugh -- these things I do not answer. For more willingly would I have answered, "I know not what I know not," than that I should make him a laughing-stock who asks deep things, and gain praise as one who answers false things. But I say that You, our God, are the Creator of every creature; and if by the term "heaven and earth" every creature is understood, I boldly say, "That before God made heaven and earth, He made not anything. For if He did, what did He make unless the creature?" . . . I know that no creature was made before any creature was made.

CHAP. XIII. -- BEFORE THE TIMES CREATED BY GOD, TIMES WERE NOT.

15. But if the roving thought of any one should wander through the images of bygone time, and wonder that You, God Almighty, and All-creating, and All-sustaining, the Architect of heaven and earth, did for innumerable ages refrain from so great a work before You made it, let him awake and consider that he wonders at false things. For could innumerable ages pass by which You did not make, since You are the Author and Creator of all ages? Or what times should those be which were not made by You? Or how should they pass by if they had not been? Since, therefore, You art the Creator of all times, if any time was before You made heaven and earth, why is it said that You refrained from working? For that very time You made, nor could times pass by before You made times.

But if before heaven and earth there was no time, why is it asked, What did You then? For there was no "then" when time was not.

16. Nor did You precede time by any time; because then You would not precede all times. But in the excellency of an ever-present eternity, You precede all times past, and survive all future times, because they are future, and when they have come they will be past; but "You are the same, and Your years shall have no end." Your years neither go nor come; but ours both go and come, that all may come. . . . You have made all time; and before all times You are, nor in any time was there not time.

CHAP. XIV. -- NEITHER TIME PAST NOR FUTURE, BUT THE PRESENT ONLY, REALLY IS.

17. At no time, therefore, had You not made anything, because You made time itself. And no times are co-eternal with You, because You remain for ever; but should these continue, they would not be times. For what is time? Who can easily and briefly explain it? Who even in thought can comprehend it, even to the pronouncing of a word concerning it? But what in speaking do we refer to more familiarly and knowingly than time? And certainly we understand when we speak of it; we understand also when we hear it spoken of by another. What, then, is time? If no one asks me, I know; if I wish to explain to him who asks, I know not. Yet I say with confidence, that I know that if nothing passed away, there would not be past time; and if nothing were coming, there would not be future time; and if nothing were, there would not be present time. Those two times, therefore, past and future, how are they, when even the past now is not; and the future is not as yet? But should the present be always present, and should it not pass into time past, time truly it could not be, but eternity. If, then, time present -- if it be time -- only comes into existence because it passes into time past, how do we say that even this is, whose cause of being is that it shall not be -- namely, so that we cannot truly say that time is, unless because it tends not to be?

CHAP. XV. -- THERE IS ONLY A MOMENT OF PRESENT TIME.

18. And yet we say that "time is long and time is short" . . . A long time past, for example, we call a hundred years ago; in like manner a long time to come, a hundred years hence. But a short time past we call, say, ten days ago: and a short time to come, ten days hence. But in what sense is that long or short which is not? For the past is not now, and the future is not yet. Therefore let us not say, "It is long;" but let us say of the past, "It has been long," and of the future, "It will be long." . . .

19. Let us therefore see, O human soul, whether present time can be long; for to you is it given to perceive and to measure periods of time. What will you reply to me? When present, is a hundred years a long time? See, first, whether a hundred years can be present. For if the first year of these is current, that is present, but the other ninety and nine are future, and therefore they are not as yet. But if the second year is current, one is already past, the other present, and the rest future. And thus, if we fix on any middle year of this hundred as present, those before it are past, those after it are future; wherefore a hundred years cannot be present. See at least whether that year itself which is current can be present. For if its first month be current, the rest are future; if the second, the first has already passed, and the remainder are not yet. Therefore neither is the current year present as a whole; and if it is not present as a whole, then the year is not present. For twelve months make the year, of which each individual month that is current is itself present, but the rest are either past or future. Although neither is the current month present, but one day only: if the first, the rest being to come, if the last, the rest being past; if any of the middle, then between past and future.

20. Behold, the present time, which alone we found could be called long, is abridged to the space scarcely of one day. But let us discuss even that, for there is not one day present as a whole. For it is made up of four-and-twenty hours of night and day, of which the first hour has the rest future, the last has them past, but any one of the intervening hours has those before it past, those after it future. And each hour passes away in fleeting particles. Whatever of it has flown away is past, whatever remains is future. If any portion of time is conceived which cannot now be divided into even the smallest particles of moments, this only is that which may be called present; which, however, flies so rapidly from future to past, that it cannot be extended by any delay. For if it is extended, it is divided into the past and future; but the present has no space. Where, therefore, is the time that we measure? . . .

CHAP. XVI. -- TIME CAN ONLY BE PERCEIVED OR MEASURED WHILE IT IS PASSING.

21. And yet, O Lord, we perceive intervals of times, and we compare them with themselves, and we say some are longer, others shorter. We even measure by how much shorter or longer this time may be than that; and we answer, "That this is double or treble, while that is but once, or only as much as that." But we measure times passing when we measure them by perceiving them; but past times, which now are not, or future times, which as yet are not, who can measure them? No one will dare to say that they can measure that which is not. When, therefore, time is passing, it can be perceived and measured; but when it has passed, it cannot, since it is not.

CHAP. XVIII. -- PAST AND FUTURE TIMES CANNOT BE THOUGHT OF BUT AS PRESENT.

23. . . . If there are times past and future, I desire to know where they are. But if as yet I do not succeed, I still know, wherever they are, that they are not there as future or past, but as present. For if there also they be future, they are not as yet there; if even there they be past, they are no longer there. Wherever, therefore, they are, whatsoever they are, they are only so as present. Although past things are related as true, they are drawn out from the memory, -- not the things themselves, which have passed, but the words conceived from the images of the things which they have formed in the mind as footprints in their passage through the senses. My childhood, indeed, which no longer is, is in time past, which now is not; but when I call to mind its image, and speak of it, I behold it in the present, because it is as yet in my memory. Whether there is a like cause of foretelling future things, that of things which as yet are not the images may be perceived as already existing, I confess, my God, I know not. This certainly I know, that we generally think before on our future actions, and that this premeditation is present; but that the action we premeditate is not yet, because it is future; and when we have begun to do that which we were premeditating, then shall that action be, because then it is not future, but present.

24. In whatever manner, therefore, this secret preconception of future things may be, nothing can be seen, save what is. But what is now, is present, not future. . . .
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
User avatar
Physics Guy
God
Posts: 1557
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 7:40 am
Location: on the battlefield of life

Re: Time is Illusory

Post by Physics Guy »

I've only ever tried to read a few bits of Augustine, and that was long ago now, but my impression was that he had a few very insightful things to say—and that he really needed an editor to make him just say those few things and shut up instead of rambling on and on for so long.

I've heard other people tell me how terse and dense Augustine is, though, so maybe I just missed a lot of good stuff.
I was a teenager before it was cool.
Chap
God
Posts: 2308
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:42 am
Location: On the imaginary axis

Re: Time is Illusory

Post by Chap »

Physics Guy wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 4:50 pm
I've only ever tried to read a few bits of Augustine, and that was long ago now, but my impression was that he had a few very insightful things to say—and that he really needed an editor to make him just say those few things and shut up instead of rambling on and on for so long.

I've heard other people tell me how terse and dense Augustine is, though, so maybe I just missed a lot of good stuff.
The piece I quoted struck me as very readable - as is the whole of the Confessions, for that matter. I have read it all, so I have some right to an opinion.

I don't want to be rude to Physics Guy, who is a pleasant and interesting person, but there seems to be a certain culture in which one demonstrates one's own credentials by commenting off-hand on the merits or otherwise of major figures in the history of thought by 'trying to read a few bits' of their work, and then on that basis (!) setting on record the advice one would have given to the person in question, had they had the immense good fortune to have been able to ask for the benefit of one's advice. That does not strike me as a good idea.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
User avatar
Physics Guy
God
Posts: 1557
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 7:40 am
Location: on the battlefield of life

Re: Time is Illusory

Post by Physics Guy »

Well, I read Confessions, and then think I tried for at least a few hours to plow through City of God, after reading a broader collection of excerpts from Augustine's work in a class. My impression of City of God—which in my post I did allow could have been wrong—was not that there were a lot of things in it that I couldn't understand, but rather that Augustine really seemed to be labouring every point at unnecessary length. His text seemed highly compressible. I fully acknowledge that a few hours of reading is not going to be enough to give anyone a clear grasp of the whole body of thought of anybody like Augustine, but I think it is sufficient for making my kind of take. The guy really seemed long-winded. I think I put in enough time to be able to conclude something like that.

And I think it's an important thing to say about City of God, that it's going to strike a lot of readers as rambling. I mean, if I mumble badly in a lecture, it's fair for a student to call me on that, even if the student has no understanding of whatever profound point I was mumbling about. If they care about whatever I was trying to say, in fact, then they should complain about my mumbling. They're not being arrogant if they do complain that I mumble: they're caring about the topic and they're calling a flaw out for what it is. So I figure that if an old book still deserves to be taken seriously today, then it's also open to elementary criticisms, even from non-experts.
I was a teenager before it was cool.
User avatar
Some Schmo
God
Posts: 2466
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:21 am

Re: Time is Illusory

Post by Some Schmo »

Physics Guy wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 9:10 pm
The guy really seemed long-winded.
Got to admit, I read the following and thought the same thing.
CHAP. XIII. -- BEFORE THE TIMES CREATED BY GOD, TIMES WERE NOT.

15. But if the roving thought of any one should wander through the images of bygone time, and wonder that You, God Almighty, and All-creating, and All-sustaining, the Architect of heaven and earth, did for innumerable ages refrain from so great a work before You made it, let him awake and consider that he wonders at false things. For could innumerable ages pass by which You did not make, since You are the Author and Creator of all ages? Or what times should those be which were not made by You? Or how should they pass by if they had not been? Since, therefore, You art the Creator of all times, if any time was before You made heaven and earth, why is it said that You refrained from working? For that very time You made, nor could times pass by before You made times.

But if before heaven and earth there was no time, why is it asked, What did You then? For there was no "then" when time was not.

16. Nor did You precede time by any time; because then You would not precede all times. But in the excellency of an ever-present eternity, You precede all times past, and survive all future times, because they are future, and when they have come they will be past; but "You are the same, and Your years shall have no end." Your years neither go nor come; but ours both go and come, that all may come. . . . You have made all time; and before all times You are, nor in any time was there not time.
It kind of reminds me of scripture and other older documents, and makes me wonder if that's a product of the times.

ETA: I swear, with the right delivery, you could make the above into a stand up routine. It's comically redundant. Not saying it's not interesting to read though, Chap.
Religion is for people whose existential fear is greater than their common sense.

The god idea is popular with desperate people.
Chap
God
Posts: 2308
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:42 am
Location: On the imaginary axis

Re: Time is Illusory

Post by Chap »

Physics Guy wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 9:10 pm
I figure that if an old book still deserves to be taken seriously today, then it's also open to elementary criticisms, even from non-experts.
I find it bizarre that you should ask your self whether 'an old book still deserves to be taken seriously today'. The City of God and the Confessions were foundational texts of Christian thought in late antiquity, and as such helped to shape western literate culture for centuries thereafter. Whether or not these texts are your favourite reading today is not the point. The people of the past did not live their lives to provide you with entertainment: it is our privilege as human beings to glimpse and try to comprehend their lives and struggles through the sometimes fragmentary remains that they have left us.

A basic rule in reading a text that comes from a different time, place, and culture is that you need to realise that the author was not writing for you, and your idea of what he ought to be trying to do, and whether he has succeeded in his aims, is likely to be irrelevant.

Augustine was addressing an audience who were trained in a very different culture from the one you know, and that audience respected him greatly. He was a professor of rhetoric before he was a bishop, and knew how to grab and hold the attention of people raised with expectations of spoken persuasion expressed in grammatically elaborate Latin, a style of prose that was in principle meant to be heard spoken aloud rather than read - rhetoric was the art of being a public speaker who persuaded an audience by art as much as by content. If when reading an English translation of Augustine's writing you can't see now what his contemporaries saw, the appropriate reaction is to realise that you have a mountain of understanding to climb. Some of us enjoy doing that; others may not.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
Gunnar
God
Posts: 2338
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 6:32 pm
Location: California

Re: Time is Illusory

Post by Gunnar »

It seems to me that the question of what God was doing before he created heaven and earth is really much the same as the question of what happened before the "Big Bang" that began our universe, and that St. Augustine's answer was essentially the same as how today's cosmologists answer that question. As I understand modern cosmology, the idea is that time itself, as we know or perceive it, was created during the "Big Bang." If that is true, then asking what what happened before that is really a meaningless question, because if time itself did not yet exist "before" that, the very concept of "before the Big Bang" is essentially nonsensical and irrelevant.
No precept or claim is more suspect or more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9568
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: Time is Illusory

Post by Res Ipsa »

ajax18 wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 1:10 pm
The longer you've been alive, the smaller a percentage of your life each day is
I think it's this above everything else.

I believe time only exists in our earthly dimension. It's something God invented for us. For God time is just one eternal now. That's very abstract and impossible to make sense of but that's what I believe.
Yeah, I’ve always thought it was choice 1.

Interesting Idea about God.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
Post Reply