Thought is independent of time

What thoughts do we have of space?

Perhaps that it is coming from somewhere going to somewhere, a curious construct in that we are all here, now. Where else would we be?

I think we grow space/time as we are conceived and develop. The past as well as the future, artifacts of current emergence.

As far as consciousness transcending time as we think about it, specific applications do.

Patience for example, can reliably substitute for lifetimes of anxious anticipation.

Happiness transcends tedium.

Peace brings immediately all the satisfaction of life.

 

Some of the stuff in that article like NDE and OBE stuff I find pretty interesting, however as far as some of the neuroscience stuff goes there are some glaring erroneous notions presented or not presented by the author.

The article lists these areas but fails to mention anything regarding the frontal lobe and cortex (though Broca's area is located there) which is the region of the brain neuroscience has determined as being largely responsible for critical and abstract thinking. The article primarily focuses on consciousness which we may divorce from thought but this is important to one of the claims the author makes in the following part I quote, as well as it being the term used in the thread title.

While direct causality for many aspects of consciousness and thought have not been established by neuroscience, the last sentence I underlined is simply false. There is evidence of neural correlates involved with thoughts and ideas. Here is an article on a study exemplifying neural activity correlated with thought.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100916145047.htm

 

Wolf:

Perhaps I am only not understanding what isn't there to be understood in the first place? :-D

As a particle, sure, but light is never only a particle. Or, to put it in my unscientific way, being a wave, it is never at rest.

When I mentioned the 'accomodation' of light as time before, I did not mean to imply its equation! ;-D Relaxxx said it before, that motion is key here. I remember once talking with a scientist who thought he was onto a theory of everything, and I didn't doubt that he was. I'm sure he's still onto it, if he likes! :-D While anything goes in theory, I'm sure our being conscious means we could have it do so through wanting it to. Allow me to be even more obscure; as an artist who finds he can also think a little, I feel as though we could stick around in a feeling! lol

tikoo:

First sentence I keep space with. Second also. Struggling to reconcile third. Fourth presents a divide. Fifth, I am with you that life speaks together. :-D


thedope:

How far did you have to fly into the future to find that it was an artifact?!

 

thedope:

Eternity is not a journey of distance. As we know the future, it is a conception of probability based on a model of the past. There is no future happening, everything occurring currently. The past as well a malleable perspective of currently living tissue.

 

lol Missing the account then for how it's an artifact, of anything.

 

It is an idea projected from current emergence. It is an object made by humans of some archaeological or cultural interest, i.e. concern about the future.
It is also a method dependent result that appears to exist because of the way we think about it.

 

The future exists as possibility. When we act on our hopes for it beyond our concerns, we find we give to possibility what it is we want of it. The future may remain to us, but never as remains.

 

thought is independent of time because time
deserves no thought -

space , though , is our fundamental shared experience . the only
sort of moment we (life) might ever have together is total , universal anhillation .

were that ever to be we would feel it now . we would
die broken-hearted right now (or yesterday)

yep , i've heard the notion we are the walking dead and carrying
on as illusion . oh , that's so-so a human-centric idea . my dog disapproves .

space is the medium of thought , and all of life speaks together ,
and there is community with wisdom that will never be purely human .
hmm? , as in , do not be anxious about time , an operatic chorus ?
.
.
cripey , that phrase in going forward sure is annoying .

 

Light is apparently a particle/wave until we measure it--then it becomes one or the other and is no longer both. The determining factor is the measurement. If we measure it as a wave then it becomes a wave only. If we measure it as a particle then it becomes a particle only. This creates the sticky problem for quantum physicists that there must be an observer, and such stranges questions, as if there is a cat in a box that is either alive or dead, then is it that it is both states until we observe it, in which case it becomes either dead or alive? And does a mouse determine the state of reality by his observations?

One solution to this problem, in an attempt to remove the observer is that there are multiple universes created with each state, therefore we are in the case of measuring light, we are in one universe measuring light as a particle, we are also in another universe measuring it as a particle, probably in another universe where we do not measure it and remains a wave/particle (...and most of all, another 3-stooges universe where someone forgot to turn on the light switch and they are puzzled because there is no measurment...)

With the double slit experiment, if light passes through as a wave, it will pass through the slits in equal quantities and strike the screen or whatever is on the other side of the double slits in a wave pattern just like waves of water would enter into a harbor or marina with two openings--where the waves cross there would be interference which would be reflected in the pattern. But if it enters as a particle, then it can enter only one or the other slit, and will pass straight through to the other side accordingly---because it is now a physicality--a sigle point, and cannot be in more that one place at a time.

By measuring it, we have determined which state it will break down to and therefore how it will pass through the slits. That makes sense from a time and causal standpoint----until we measure it after the slits and it does the same thing. Having passed through the slits as either a wave or a praticle (but not both), it should have been determined prior to passing through the slits which state it is.

Your comments had reminded me of something I had read---I think it might have been Fred Alan Wolf-----if we found ourselves falling into a black hole, and turned around to look behind us, we would watch all the rest of time pass--to death of the universe.

The Lakota, in their animistic view of reality, see movement as fundamental. There is a life force or entity they see as fundamental to the universe. It is one of the Wakaŋ Taŋka--Great Spirit. I say one of, because while Christians, for example, try to define God as a single entity, they understand reality from a much older framework of a multiplicity---that the universe is filled with multiple forces, and while there may be a single unity, we experience the Great Mystery in a manifold of forms. This being or force of momvement is calle, Taku škaŋ škaŋ (Taku shkang shkang, with an a as in father). Taku means something, škaŋ means movement, it therefore literally means, Something-moves-moves. So when you look at the sky, and you see clouds floating across--you are watching Taku škaŋ škaŋ. When a baby is born and it first moves, or when a herd of buffalo are running accross the prairie---Taku škaŋ škaŋ.

When you pray with the čanuŋpa--the sacred pipe, you pray to the four directions, you pray to the sky (typically symbolically referring to it as, wakiŋyaŋ--the thunderbirds), you pray to mother earth, referring to it as uŋči maka (grandmother, maka also refers to the creative principle), and then you pray to the 7th direction, the center or 'within' and you refer to it as Taku škaŋ škaŋ.

I agree with you and Relaxxx that movement is key to our reality. (And Relaxxx is going to love how I twisted science into a New Age pseudo-science and just now solved the unified theory---you see between the two spirit gods Newton and Einstein, there is this giant eagle… and if you don’t understand me I have these cactus buttons I picked up in Northern Mexico… -------Ok I’m just joking---but just so everyone knows, Taku škaŋ škaŋ is a concept that goes back thousands of years at least, and is a key part of Lakota cosmology). We can only understand consciousness as a consciousness of something.

We understand movement as a dynamic of time. But if a photon ‘moves’ through time the way we move through space, Is movement necessarily restricted to time? If something moved in time, the way we move through space, we would see it, or it would have existence in our universe for only an instant—and in fact, each photon we perceive as light is only an instant of stimulus picked up by our brains. Yet somehow at the speed of light, science tells us that this single particle/wave (or wave, or particle) lives for light years as it moves across the universe, and it lives for only a single instant.

Our physical universe, the material world exists only in the here and now (and the moment after is when we perceive it). All mass, all objects, based on our current understanding, are structured within the space-time framework of the universe. If consciousness emerges from matter at the moment of its physical manifestation, which is the here and now, in a dance of movement---the unfolding of time---space-time---and that consciousness is a consciousness-of, which is a consciousness of the manifestation of reality, then there is no past beyond memories and causal influences (and the future is only a door of potentiality). Does this fit your perceptions of reality?

But in that case, where does light go before and after its momentary existence in our universe. And what of those theoretical particles that move faster than the speed of light, and therefore move back in time, and have an inverse relationship with inertia (our resistance or inertia, speeds them up)?

I think the question to this thread involves the point that, just as our physical reality exists in a sea of light energy at a level we functionally measure as zero, could we not also exist in a sea of consciousness that exists or has being at a base level we functionally measure as ‘zero-being.’ Theoretically, when light only exists for an instant in the here and now of perception, it exists at the same moment in a different here and now. At some instant moment of now, for example—the Hubble telescope has recorded the photon of a galaxy that is probably millions of light years away. At that same instant of ‘now,’ that photon was also on the other side of the universe, millions of years ago. But it is not just that one photon—the universe itself, in so much as it is a sea of ground-energy-level light energy, is not bound by the physical here and now. As it exists now, it exists millions of years ago on the other side of time, now----and therefore beyond time

We do not know what consciousness is. We only know that consciousness is experienced as a consciousness-of. But conceivably, that consciousness-of, could be a point at which it rises above that ground-energy level, and manifests-----just as light, when it rises above that ground-energy-level, and is suddenly manifested in the physical universe—in the sudden moment of here and now (or just as particles which seemingly appear and disappear in what we refer to as absolute vacuum---ignoring the sea of ground-energy-level light). In this way, consciousness could not only exist beyond time, it could very well be that it is the rise above ground-energy-level, the consciousness-of, that gives rise to physical reality.

And just like the photon, consciousness-of could be here in the absolute moment of here and now, and at the same time, across the universe a million years ago. Or, in a more practical manner, it could be in the instant now, conscious-of measuring a wave/particle parcel of light, deciding to measure it as a particle, and at that same time, 2 feet away, a few milliseconds in the past, conscious-of a determination of that same parcel of light as a particle.

 

Tikoo:

No, only interdependent. That time is undeserving only means there's always time for thought. The feeling that one must act changes our perception of time. We only really describe space with our own.

First sentence makes sense. The second makes none! :-D

No, no, oh and no lol

Do you?

Death and taxes seem to make sense to some, and in seeming to go forward, to many.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_0CODiY4ew"]Acting Tips : How to Slow Your Speaking Voice for Acting - YouTube

 

By [conscious] power of association, free will exists. So fuck u niggaaa. Obv. some choices are tougher than others, if your fear, feelings, ego, elephant man, whatever is telling you to do another (thus sending those emotion neurons your way). but I can always make meticulous decisions should I have to prove a point.

For the sake of making things easier, we run on 60% automatic, but even those automatic decisions come from style & personal choices you have compromised w your ego long ago (instinct).


**perhaps fundamental & basic but this my current & only understanding. Anything being that I cannot believe in with confidence.

 

Possibly. It is not guaranteed that it exists for you.

What future?
The future is ever and always a concern of this moment. It does not exist apart from it. Anticipation is an echo from the past.

 

thedope:

No, it definitely exists as possibility. It's why guarantees have nothing to do with it.

Any. Is hope a concern for you?

 

Thought is no more independent of time than the car is independent of the road upon which it moves.

 

Wolf:

But it is a waveparticle before and after measuring it as either wave or particle.

I still don't follow at "but not both" nor at "should have". Whether the light is measured after the slits or not, the measurement is still being effected for wave or particle, thus affecting it as such. Here's an article concering pilot-wave theory and how the uncertainty principle, while not being possible to rule out, needn't necessarily 'apply':

http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-slit-experiment-skirts-uncertainty-principle

This too:

http://arstechnica.com/science/2012...rticle-duality-in-the-double-slit-experiment/

The retrocausality is still only a seeming one. I think the idea that it is anything more is in thinking the observer can be purely such, that detection can be apart from its physical influence.

We all together walk our own paths

From our perspective ( from which light has none of its own (see double-slit experiment ;-D)) light 'lives' at light speed.

More or less. :-D

Energy transfer.
And I can't account for theoretical particles, except in theory. :-D

How beyond? What other side?

It couldn't exist beyond time, but would become its own. Consciousness arises in the physical, its arising in itself does not change that even though it changes how it does so.

 

Tell me if I am wrong, but I read both of those articles to be skirting the issue of the wave/particle collapse (is that the term I'm looking for?), for the purposes of creating a method to measure both mass and momentum at the same time. The first article pointed out that it did not deny the results of the Double Slit Experiment, but that by finding a way to measure both mass and momentum may open up new doors. In other words, I read this to mean that the results still remain the same that when measuring particles the result is particles, and when measuring a wave, the result is a wave.

The reason I use the terms 'but not both,' or 'should have' is not because the particles/waves of light change in structure, but because of the way they come out of the slits. The fact that photon particles only go through one slit or the other, while a light wave travels equally through both, (which is the empirical result of the experiment) tells us from a causal standpoint that it should be too late to affect the change the way light moves through the slits when measured after the slits, but somehow that is not the case.

This is the problem—the observer—that confronts quantum physics, and pretty much the whole reason they went down that multiple universe path.

In the previous post where I went through a little gedankenexperiment (mind experiment) about time not existing, I proposed that maybe light, because its existence from its perspective is only a single instant, and exists simultaneously at both its beginning point and its end point is defined as either particle or wave (by the observer’s measurement), in a single moment. Therefore we could argue that it is light that changed in our past (but not in light’s past because it was only a single instant—no past, no future, only a moment of light-speed-now. But this does not escape the problem that there was a change in the past from our perspective.

Or for purposes of argument, when speaking of light’s perspective, we could say from the perspective of an object travelling at the speed of light. If we could travel at the speed of light, that would be our perspective—a distant point of origin and point of trips end, no matter how far, would become only a single instant.

.

Interesting---so using a light source---say a galaxy millions of light years away, then travelling at light speed, the distance of millions of years is traversed in an instant—creation and finality at the same time, and in that same millions of years the passage of light from the perspective of human time, was energy transfer from the same millions of years of ‘nows,’ till that light struck your eye. Or do you conceive in a different way. I have to think that through to see if it changes anything.

Like light—from the human perspective. It only exists in the now for us, but what if it can also simultaneously exist millions of years ago, in a distant galaxy millions of light years across the universe. And as a ground to the universe can simultaneously exist all over the universe. If light has such properties, whose to say that consciousness can’t have those too.

That is, according to the side of the argument against essentialism.

 

It doesn't work quite that way - it's not when you are looking for one or the other... but when certain interactions alter the outcome.

So... monitoring where the wave-particles pass through the slits, collapses them to a particle...

The difference being...

measure/observe before the slits = particle behaviour and two lines are formed
nothing measuring them going through the slits = wave behaviour and a pattern is formed

That's the general gist at least, further things have been extrapolated from that of course.

 

Wolf:

The match-up by weak measurement to pilot wave theory, which posits a particle passing through one slit as its associated wave goes through both, appears to show that nothing is really being determined backwards in time.

Light doesn't have a perspective of its own. It is constant by travel only. The instantaneous is only motion. Light doesn't exist simultaneously at its source and observation point, even though it does exist at both. The light we may see will always be new to our sight, however old.

It would become a trip at light speed.

I conceive it as you do, save for its traversal in an instant. My point being that light is not conscious, we are.

Simultaneity is always of the moment. Everything occurs at once, being infinite. What is 'placed' as past however, is not still happening. The universe is its own ground. I put no bounds on consciousness... physicality is no prison.

I have no idea how that is an argument against essentialism, if essentialism is what it claims to be. lol

Your claim, that consciousness could rise to be a consciousness not of anything, that seems to me to be the argument against a things essentials, which can only incorporate the whole of its particulars, no? ;-D

 

doctor , your understanding of physics will ignore light
organizing as a circle and thus having conciousness .
reason will fail lonesomely without the faerie .

philosophy can accept it .

 

Interesting thread.

Interesting because at it's most basic it falls into two camps.
Those who feel that "we" or what we refer to as "I" is the product of our physiological makeup with no existence, prior or post our physical manifestation. For them thought is most definitely constrained by time because the thing having, creating, experiencing the thought is also simply a by-product of the same physical system that is processing the thought.

Then there is the camp that feels that our physical system is a tool or means of experiencing a physical universe, but the actual "observer" is not tied to or a product of said physical system. For them thought can easily be outside of time because the thing having, creating, experiencing the thought is not constrained by the limitations of the physical system. It is merely the visualization or vocalization and processing of the same that takes time, as the information Meagain presented verifies.

Interesting how at one level it comes down to a spiritual belief question, at least I can see that aspect.

Tastyweat you need to keep in mind some of the mechanisms and process that psychedelics, most notably LSD, utilize and how those physiological mechanisms can greatly impact our perception of seemingly unrelated phenomena. The perception of time specifically for this thread.
LSD causes some areas of the brain to fire more frequently and also has the literal effect of allowing more sensory input to be processed as well as all higher brain functions are essentially processing more data, both incoming and outgoing.
This is a physiological effect that has been well documented.

In short when you hear someone say they "hear more music" or "see more color" when under the influence of LSD is because they are literally processing a lot more information that would normally be filtered out. The filtering mechanism has developed as a defense/survival feature to eliminate extraneous "noise" from the brains sensory input.

One of the most pronounced and dramatic subjective effects of all this extra information processing is the perception of time slowing or stopping. Time hasn't changed, just the rate/volume of information processing being done.
Think of high speed time-lapse film. The more frames per second processed, the slower the appearance of times passage.

Now that phenomena is rather awesome and astounding to say the least, but I feel you may have invested a little more into the experience without considering any basic physiological explanations.

Oh, and Days of The Future Passed is one of the best pieces of music, especially for journeys though one's own mind