They lie in different points of your perception. Please remember, there is no such things as points in the nature.
There are only space, the tree and apple, the ground and you. No points!
The points are in your perception, which are imaginary.
Does the apple exist when you are asleep? I still can see it, so it is not a mere your perception but something that objectively exists.
We are not talking about apple here. We are talking about time. Apple was given out for the demonstration to dissect what the nature of time is.
I think we first have to solve the problem of the apple, whether it is objectively real or not. Is an apple real or it is your mere perception?
Apple is real. Of course it is. You can pick it up and eat it.
But time is your perception. You cannot eat time.
Ok, if the apple is real, then two states of a falling apple exist at one point or two points? Take your choice, please, one or two?
As I have already said, there are no points in the space or nature. There is only the apple falling. The points are in your perception. You can have as many points as you like, because they are in your mind.
The center of mass of the apple lies at one point in space at any given point in time.
Weâre not making any progress. I think this is a good place to end our discussion.
Not sure how the statement above relates to our discussions so far. Could you please elaborate more?
yes but at the âoff shelfâ virtual level and gaussian centered on the ânowâ part of the time dimension. They named âoff shelfâ for the virtual particles that transmit forces and you canât observe and âon shelfâ for the real materialized particles.
The intimate mechanical part of quantum mechanics is even stranger than the one usually explained in magazines! Ask Gemini
Edit: you have to remember that everything is there as superposition in the quantum state, past and future are not instantiated, they are âsuperposedâ (in entirety but gaussian centered on the now). The quantum state is the OR state of possibilities, of interference and the âon shelfâ real state is the XOR state where choice i.e. decoherence has been made. Really strange but in my metaphysics it allow to totalize Reality and answer the question âwhy something instead of nothingâ. So the quantum state is logically necessary. Deepest metaphysics indeed!
Edit2: another thing about QM: the way the AI transformer algorithm works is extremely close to the Hilbert multi-axes space with a mixing wave function of QM. The equivalent to the past-future symmetric time exploration is the self-attention mechanism that continually run forward-backward correlation on text tokens.
Yes, but I have been trying to analyse time in purely from phenomenological point of view. What can we perceive and experience in the real world and in our daily life?
Time seems to be invisible and imperceivable as physical entity. Ticking clocks and watches are not time itself. They are just instruments calibrated to run in the set intervals displaying their runnings.
Particles, atoms and electrons are not time. If they are, then they could be used to travel to the past and future, but it is only possible to imagine these scenarios. We donât ever see them happening in the real world.
We read a lot about what QM folks claim, but they sound more esoteric than the hermetic magicians in many cases.
I was just be being a realist based on what I could perceive and understand on time, and arguing from the perspective hoping that something could be revealed that I have missed somewhere in my track of thoughts. But so far, I am not seeing any.
OK, here is your exact answer:
-
Time is a strict property of the Matter category. It simply does not exist at the quantum level.
-
The categories built above Matterâi.e., Life, Thought, and Dataâexist above the strictly timed structure of Matter, but they possess a specific time of their own, a specific Time Span. This is exactly both the âphenomenologicalâ and causal concept of time you are looking for.
For example: the causal time span of the ideas I am mobilizing right now is around 3 seconds (of pure thought) + 3 minutes of writing. The time span of a new living object (e.g., the emergence of a new species) is around 1 million years. The basic quantum particle time span is around the Planck time (10â35s), galaxy formation is around 100 million years, an LLMâs answer is around 0.1s, molecular time around the nano s, cell time micro etc., etc., etc.
Do you think time exists?
if you are asking me: yes, time is real: it is the self-reflection of the quantum causality, randomness. Randomness is pure non-causality, absence of cause. So the self-reflection is: no-cause(no-cause) = absolute cause = absolute determinism of the Newton/Einstein time-space causality. It is the strict causality of Matter but it is not the causality of the subsequent categories: Life, Thought, Data have their own proper causality (see the MCogito system for details). 2+2=4 do not belong to the causality of time, it belong to the causality of Thought which is a meta-causality of Life which is a meta-causality of Matter, thatâs why you have the illusion that Time appears in Thought objects: Thought double-meta control Time, the causality of Matter, itâs not the other way, Time explaining Thought. Time has nothing to do the way Thought objects self-construct: they self-contstruct in Time but not by Time.
No, not just you: this is a question for the audience. Can time be called something existing? Does time exist or not? Whether it is not real or not is another question. For example, something exists. Can we say that time exists?
yes, I defined it at the metaphysical i.e. multi-categorical level, this is the correct level of the âexistenceâ of Time.
At our mono-categorical Thought or Life level it is the milieu of existence, the container, so it does not exist at this level. At this level we exist in Time, itâs not the correct level to understand what Time is.
Iâm in the audience, and I say no, time does not exist.
Time is thought (which makes it a valid conception);
Time is deduced (which makes it a logical inference);
Time is associated with things (which makes it relational);
Time is a condition for knowledge (which makes it necessary);
âŚ.but there is no such thing as time to be found in the realm of real existents.
Your presuppositions may vary.
2 Likes
You need to think about the simultaneous and temporal processes for a little while to understand what I am trying to say. To start, do you know what a simultaneous process is?
Yes, time exists. We live in each moment of it; without it, change is not possible. Here is the argument, so-called the argument from the change, for the existence of time: Consider a change, X to Y, where X and Y represent two states of affairs*. X and Y must lie at two different points of something; otherwise, they are simultaneous, and there cannot be any change. Letâs call these points tx and ty, respectively. Moreover, Y comes after X, so ty comes after tx as well. tx, and ty are two points of something that we call time.
*X and Y could be two states of a physical system, such as a falling apple, where X and Y represent the states of the apple in two different positions.