A wal
  • A wal
  • Cambridge
  • United Kingdom

This conversation is closed.

The arrow of time is arbitrary.

The arrow of time is created from the fact that we remember the past but not the future. We have a three and a half dimensional view of the universe, which is all that's needed to create the illusion of a moving time line. The truth is that everything is always happening now. If you think there's something special about this particular moment then why do you have that impression in every single moment of your life? It's always now.

See here for the full idea (a new and much simpler version of relativity): http://www.ted.com/conversations/13951/the_proper_theory_of_relativit.html

Closing Statement from A wal

I didn't realise this conversation was closing so soon. I think I've said everything that I wanted to so I'll use this to reply to Natasha.

There's nothing wrong with being all over the place. That's how original thinking and ideas comes about. That's better than being the opposite. This world needs more people like that. I don't think that quantum mechanics itself is pompous, just that it tends to sound it when it's written down because it's impossible to talk about in plain English. We don't have the words to describe it properly because it's so unlike anything languages have evolved to express. As a right brainer you're probably more suited to understanding it than most other people, including me. QM is definitely all over the place. (: I'm getting used to it now but I really struggled with it to start with. I like using my right brain but I was used to looking at the universe as definite. I still think it is in a way. It's just that it's constantly branching into alternate possibilities that we're not aware of. I do believe in the determinism. I did before I understood the idea of multiple realities because I think that the future is no different from the past except in our perceptions of it, but now I'm even more convinced because I think that all options are played out for every choice we make. We still get to choose in a sense. You could even argue that it's the fact that everything that can happen does is what gives us the freedom to choose.

I think kids have been gradually maturing mentally at a progressively younger age for a long time because of social attitudes changing with regards to how much kids should be told, and the internet has accelerated it. They're nowhere near as naive as they used to be. I think that's a good thing. By shielding them all we're doing is developing young adults who aren't equipped to deal with the real world.

  • thumb
    Aug 30 2012: Like you say we build time from memory.

    Without it we see only what is actual here and from here what ever has been if we look far from here.

    Space as well as time are illusions we see - as the observer changes its perspective within an everchanging world.
  • thumb
    Sep 23 2012: I did too but it did make me think. I constantly go back to discussions, deleting my posts that I believe are irrelevant to the topic as a source of respect to the authors. Sometimes I take the lazy route instead of using the PM or my Email.
  • thumb
    Sep 23 2012: It Is gone :)
    I'm very sorry about that.
    • thumb

      A wal

      • 0
      Sep 23 2012: Don't be. I wasn't moaning. I thought it was funny. (:
  • thumb
    Sep 23 2012: That's really cool A wal. I like Bugs bunny myself. Did you know that cartoons are really just a parallel universe :)
    See you later.... enjoyed.
    • thumb

      A wal

      • 0
      Sep 23 2012: People are going to read that post first and take it completely out of context. (:
  • thumb
    Sep 22 2012: When you think about time, the math says we can go forwards in time by merely bending space. We could go backwards also by folding space in another direction, say behind us but it's all moving forward any way you go.
    So we are locked in the direction that we can move in time. Time has a direction.

    If I'm located on another galaxy, it takes time for your light signals to reach me. By the time they get to me, you have advanced in time, just as it happens with communication with the mars rover.

    If we fold space time, between us, we are closer together in our relative time, at least I think so. :)

    But, if we took a 3 deminsional blanket, you took one end and I took the other, then folded it so you and I are closer together, if we are forced to follow the blanket surface, we are still just as far apart from one another.

    Light is bent or space is distorted around a massive body of matter (or cluster). so we can see behind large galaxy clusters. In some instances this light is focused, like a lens, allowing us to see further out into the Universe. We don't see light that is in the future, we see light that has traveled the distance between our locations. If light has energy then we are looking at the energy state that existed in the past, which tells us nothing about the energy state of the location where the light came from in the time relative to our location.

    Time is real and has a direction relative to where in space you are located.
    • thumb

      A wal

      • 0
      Sep 22 2012: It has no direction. Standard physics says the all the laws are completely time reversible. You need to take a step back and look at it outside the context of your one directional brain. You can't remember the future. That's the only difference between the past and the future. If it wasn't for this one directional view we'd perceive time in the same way that we perceive space. Everything is happening right now.

      Don't think of it as folding space. Think of it as the distance shortening (length contraction and time dilation) which warps it.
      • thumb
        Sep 22 2012: I think we got our wires crossed A wal. I meant no implication towards you.

        Hey! I don't have a problem letting you take a crack at it; saves me the work. I have a forum if you want to join. www.moonstroller.com If you find someone that like talking to you can invite them there and you can talk or you can just use your email, I guess. But I'm trying to recruit members from TED to create a more private area to discuss things. We can embed videos, images (graphs for instance), etc,. In the TED discussion, there is no way to embed videos or control the BBC code to spice up the post.

        I find it interesting your question about the blanket. Can you see you and I holding a blanket, like we are assiting one another to fold it and put it away? That's what I refer to as 3 deminsional image manipuation or the minds ability to deal with objects is a Spacial capacity.

        Join my forum and we can discuss it at length. I think you would be an interesting addition and people would like you. :)

        Have a good Sept. 22.


        :)
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 22 2012: See what? No one taught me. I learned it on my own. You may be just approaching it from a slightly different perspective or taking something out of context. There's more than one way of looking at it. If you click on that link below to physics forums there's a description of standard special relativity. Be specific about what you're having trouble with or what you think people are getting wrong and I'll see if I can clarify it for you. What did you mean then by folding space your blanket analogy?

          I misread your earlier post. Yes time is necessary to establish Einsteins idea about curved space time in his description of gravity but that's not the only way of looking at it.
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 23 2012: You completely changed your last post so my reply makes no sense now. (:

          I'm already spending too much time on line lately. Youtube is addictive. Did you know that the Earth is actually flat, and hollow, and that the rest of the universe revolves around it and that our world is run by reptiles and judgment day is just around the corner? Amazing stuff. Actually I can't stop watching Eddie Izzard videos. He takes funny to a whole new level.
  • thumb
    Sep 21 2012: From my understanding, energy can neither be created or destroyed. And since everything is just a infinite form of energy then there is no such thing as time. Time is a human idea. Not a environmental idea. Every mammal lives for the same amount of "time" if you count by heart beats instead of seconds. 1.6 billion heart beats and everything dies. The only reason there is a difference in time is the rate of which the heart beats.

    http://beholders.org/mind/scienceandfacts/124-1billionheartbeats.html
    • thumb

      A wal

      • 0
      Sep 21 2012: It's as real as space, it's just just we can only see in one direction of time. That's the only difference.

      We all have the same amount of heart beats? What about insects that live for 24 hours? It may work as a very general rule but I wouldn't read too much into it. I'll follow the link and have a look.
      • thumb
        Sep 21 2012: Time is man made sir and its as real as money is but that also an illusion. If earth and mars switched place from the beginning of time, everything thing that we know about time although the labeling might stay the same the "distance" would not. Our year, day cycle would all be different. Because we base time off of our current rotation around our sun. If we rotated around a different sun it would be a different time structure.
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 21 2012: It wouldn't change a thing. It would just mean we'd have different labels for it. The length of a days, years, etc would obviously be different but it wouldn't affect the passage of time. Time is every bit as real as space. They're even interchangeable. The only difference is in our heads. We create the arrow of time and give it a progression simply because our memories are one directional. That's the only difference.
      • thumb
        Sep 21 2012: You might be right, but I dont think it would be how we currently perceive it if we did. We still think as time as 2 or 2 dimensional
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 22 2012: I don't know what you mean? Time is only one dimension and we can only see in one direction of it (the past). That's what makes it seem different to the spacial dimensions.
      • thumb
        Sep 22 2012: I know man if I would think about time really existing on a grand scale of "measurement" I think that it would have to be multi directional just as space is and that although we can only see it as as one direction because that is all we can recall. If time were to exist as it would have to be future, past, "left", right" it would have to function and flow just as space does. Think multi-verse. However the only time I can truly see is the present which goes back to my earlier idea of it not existing.
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 22 2012: It does work in the same way as space. Each spacial dimension is a straight line, only two directions. (;
      • thumb
        Sep 22 2012: What info you have to back this up. I am willing to consider no time and it a man made concept or muti-time awareness that is all in compassing. But right now the only thing I see you have is proof is that we can recall the past. I am still thinking that is a man made concept
  • Sep 1 2012: Arrow of time is recorded observable changes. Since we observe too little , for us it is a line directed from past to future. I agree with you, it's all about perception.
    What is actually changing ? " The shape changes, not the form "
    Maybe, to be ' at present' means to be in the presence of 'form' where causality shatters and cause and effect becomes one moment , now.
    • thumb

      A wal

      • 0
      Sep 10 2012: What? The universe is static. The perception of time is the result of us being only aware of three and a half dimensions. Nothing needs to happen and nothing needs to shatter, or even be slightly damaged. Wtf?
      • Sep 10 2012: Don't you think that 'static' is not less perceptional than 'changing' ?
        A 'thing' is both what it is and what it is not, that's how the open system is maintained and how the miracle of life is possible in general.
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 10 2012: Static is more perceptional because if we are able to see the whole of time and space all at once it would be motionless. It's our limited perception that creates the illusion of movement. How can a thing be what it's not? It's what it is that makes it what it is. The universe is a closed system. It's completely self contained, and extremely simple. All it has are space and time, which are part of the same structure called spacetime and the only difference is in our heads, and matter and energy, which are equivalent (E=mc^2). That's it. They interact through the four forces. The miracle of life is possible because the interactions of nature allow it to be, and because great complexity can emerge from a very simple set of rules. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2vgICfQawE&feature=related
      • Sep 10 2012: I would suggest, that it's our limited perception that creates spacetime as well. Can you imagine a point, which is not even a dot for it occupies no space in no time and positioned nowhere, but it's extremely dense and contains everything, i do mean everything ...where E=mc2 condensed into E of unimaginable power; that is static closed 'completely self contained, and extremely simple' universe. If there is a spacetime there is a motion hence change, it's the universe how we perceive it. Maybe without the eye of the observer there is nothing actual but everything potential.
        But even that ' dot' is not static ; if it was how could it possibly come out from the state of perfect simplicity or equilibrium? There is nothing external for it , to push it out and no 'out' to be pushed into.
        I agree the rules that govern the universe and make it a kind of an engine for producing complexity and life must be very simple and really universal . Mandelbrot set suggests it, the holographic principle gives an image and Hermes Trismegistus says "As within so without" " As below so above "
        In a way it's our illusion of perception creates the illusion of ourselves , but we are real and communicating now. So, every thing is what it is and what it is not simultaneously.
        Don't take me wrong i don't claim for truth, just thinking on line :)
        Thanks for the link !
  • thumb
    Aug 30 2012: the very fact that we remember the past but not remember the future proves the existence of the arrow of time. 7bn people all remembering the past and none of them the future. maybe there is some reason for that.
    • Sep 1 2012: If 7bn people are involved in the illusion, it means that it is a very... very persistent illusion :)
      As for the 'reason' , i think you are pretty close to the purpose of human life here. A 7bn people question !
    • thumb

      A wal

      • +1
      Sep 10 2012: It's because we're all human and we all work in basically the same way. We all see the same three spatial dimensions despite the fact that there's probably more. The universe doesn't make any distinction between the past and the future. It doesn't even know the difference between space and time. We create that. The only thing that separates them is being able to see in one direction of one of the four dimensions that we're aware of.
      • thumb
        Sep 10 2012: "all see the same three spatial dimensions despite the fact that there's probably more."

        because they are very different.
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 10 2012: No they're not. If we can see in both directions it's a spacial dimension. If we can see in one direction then objects positions in the other three dimensions appear to be changing through cause and effect when we look back or extrapolate forwards at any point along it and it becomes temporal. If we can't see it it's hidden. They're all the same.
        • thumb
          Sep 22 2012: I think in a way your are right Pinter.

          We have space, we have matter, we have time incorporated with space to create two dimensional space time. Matter makes up the other dimension that give us the three dimensions. Most of the dimensions that quantum physics is talking about lie inside the matter, not the space time. Space time is the fabric that matter is situated within. Matter, having the force of gravity, bends space time around itself, or so says Einstien.

          With our eyes, we see a ball sitting on a blanket but that's really just a two deminsional view. The three dimensions can be better pictured as layers of blankets lying on top of one another making a stack of blankets. If we cut out a square in the middle of this blanket mass, we have a three dimensional block of flat blanket space. Instead of setting the ball on the blanket pile, insert it in the middle of the pile and you get an idea of how gravity warps three dimensional space.

          I figured that out all by myself. :) Want to see a black hole?:) Just kidding.
      • thumb
        Sep 10 2012: you seem not to remember what we are talking about. humans see 3 dimensions and not the others because those 3 dimensions are very different than the other 6 or 22 or whatever (according to string theories).
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 10 2012: Ah, if you're talking about in string theory then yes, they're different. You didn't say you were talking about the eleven dimensions of M theory. I don't believe in that, I believe in this: http://www.ted.com/talks/garrett_lisi_on_his_theory_of_everything.html. Maybe matter and energy start to look like strings in eleven dimensions but I don't think that's fundamental.
        • thumb
          Sep 22 2012: Believe it or not, most scientist and Mathematicians only see with two dimensions inside their brain. This has been proved by a woman who knits Hyperbole's, when Most mathematicians can't model them with Math. :)
      • thumb
        Sep 10 2012: then what the hack are you talking about. it is the only theory i'm aware of that has more than 3 spacial dimensions.
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 21 2012: Follow the link dude. It's right there.
      • Sep 10 2012: Maybe it will be better described as 2D information field than 'one direction' ? What if the complexity leads to simplicity and the difference between those two is perceptional ?
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 21 2012: No I think it's definitely much clearer and more accurate to describe it as one directional view of a dimension that's just like any other.
      • Sep 21 2012: Maybe you are right, but how do you know ? You sound as if you do know.
        I am interested :)
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 21 2012: I don't know anything. I just think that a one directional view of a dimension is all you need to create the perception of what we think of as time.
      • thumb
        Sep 21 2012: lisi's model has a 4 dimensional spacetime. every sound theory has.
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 21 2012: That's weird. It was a while ago now that I saw it but I thought it was based on the 128 dimensional shape that I'd heard of before that's got all these symmetries and stuff but the description says eight dimensional and you're saying four? Right, I'm going to watch it again.
      • Sep 22 2012: " it's simply a curved surface "
        ( A wal )
        Why it should be different with time ? It's one dimension.
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 22 2012: It's not any different with time. When did I suggest it was?
        • thumb
          Sep 22 2012: I thought time was part of the 4 dimensional space time continuum? Isn't time necessary to establish Einsteins idea about curved space time in his description of Gravity?
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 22 2012: Absolutely not! That's just one way of looking at it. http://www.ted.com/conversations/13478/a_new_law_of_physics.html It's four dimensional, at least.

          Sorry Natasha, this three reply only set up is a total pain!
      • thumb
        Sep 22 2012: "That's weird. It was a while ago now that I saw it but I thought it was based on the 128 dimensional"

        that's weird for you, since you don't have a clue about modern physics. in many theories, there are 3+1 apparent dimensions, and many other dimensions that for some reason are not visible or measurable. in string theory, there are 10 or 26 dimensions, and the method they get rid of the "extra" is compactification.
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 22 2012: It's 248! You were only out by 244. Compactification is quite a big word. You must be very smart. I wish I was that smart.

          The dimensions are all the same. They're not curled up or anything like that. I know all about string theory thank you. It has eleven dimensions since it was found that all versions of string theory were actually the same thing expressed in different ways, like flat and curved space-time. It's called M theory. We've been through this!
      • Sep 22 2012: Is "one directional view " the same as "curved surface " ?

        My reply button is yours , welcome :)
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 22 2012: No. Our one directional view of time is responsible for the fact that we perceive time differently to space. Time is not a separate dimension though, in the same way that three three spacial dimensions are interwoven. We don't turn in 90 degree jerks, we do it smoothly because the dimensions are interchangeable, and the same applies to time. If an object accelerates then in order to keep the speed of light constant then the distance in time and the spacial direction that they're accelerating in have to shorten, giving light less distance to travel and more time to do it so that its velocity is the same as it was before once they stop accelerating.

          This time dilation and length contraction also apply when objects are accelerated by gravity. You can view it as curvature (outwards with energy and inwards with mass) or as forces in flat space-time because it's same thing. Curvature is very simple. Forget about gravity. When you follow a curved path through two spacial dimensions you get pushed to the outside. You can follow a curved path through any two dimensions. If you want one of them to be time then pick a spacial direct and accelerate. You still feel yourself being pushed to the outside of both dimensions. You're pushed back in the spacial dimension and in time, so you're travelling through time slower than someone who isn't accelerating. It's not noticeable at low speeds because it's relative to the speed of light.
      • Sep 23 2012: Thanks for your patience :) What i am trying to say is that our perception of time is not that simple and strait forward as it seems.
        Science is on the way to recognize human consciousness as a major player but still do not address to it as such. In terms of Jung ' collective consciousness/unconsciousness ' it's an invisible field. It was Gurdjieff ( if I'm not mistaken ) who said that the majority of people are asleep but some are awake. Being asleep means to feel 100% material ,mortal and experience time as a strict line directed from past to future and accept it as the only reality But collectively we are not totally asleep and far from being awake. And maybe this awaken part produce the curve and organise the surface in our collective human perception of time, so it resonates with the space surface curve and makes it one dimension. Perhaps "inward" and "upward" are higher space dimensions; and each of us has an independent, personal time scale for these dimensions.
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 23 2012: You know there is such a thing as being too open minded. No offence but you're all over the place. You need to grasp the structure of the universe first and then let your mind wonder from there. Try turning off your right brain for this. I like using mine as well but you've got to give it the rules for it to work within or it doesn't stand a chance. We may or may not all experience the universe completely differently but what I'm about to say is true for everyone.

          The dimensions are basically nothing more than a grid reference system. Locally and in the flat space-time way of looking at it they're all straight lines at right angles to each other. Up/down, left/right, forwards/backwards and backwards and forwards in time. The only thing that separates time is the fact that we can only see in one direction of it. Objects follow curved paths through flat space-time in the presence of a force. You need two dimensions to follow a curved path. Acceleration is when one of the dimensions is time. You can also look at it the other way round and say that objects can only follow straight paths and a force curves the space-time that they're moving through. It's the same thing.
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 24 2012: I'm sorry if I was a little harsh Natasha, and I'd like to thank you. You brought out my tightest and simplest description yet, so I owe you one. (:
      • Sep 25 2012: Welcome !
        Thanks for 'sorry' comment, but there is no need to apologize, really :)
        You are right, the right hemisphere serves me better, I am not a physicist and can't create a picture out of the text made of acceleration, velocity, angular momentum...
        I got interested in your Proper theory of relativity, because you said it was beautiful. I believe, that the aesthetic criteria is the most important anywhere, science included.
        If you think you owe me something ( i don't think you do ) may i ask you a question ?

        Is there in your special Relativity theory the possibility of giving the meaning to the moment ' now ' ?

        In layman language , please :)
        Thanks !
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 25 2012: Special relativity is beautiful as it is and it's basically just an extension of that. It's importance in describing the universe has been greatly underestimated, which lead to a different theory of relativity which includes lots of holes, black ones to be precise. In every other theory singularities have been enough to kill it and the same should have applied to general relativity. It's a physical impossibility for anything to be truly infinite.

          There's really no difference between acceleration and curvature. Acceleration is simply a curved path through two of the dimensions, one of which is time. That's the most important concept to grasp. When following a curved path in two spacial dimensions you're actually following a curved path in three dimensions overall because it takes constant acceleration to follow a curved path in two dimensions. The fact that one of the dimension always has to be time when following a curved path doesn't mean there's anything special about time because they're interchangeable. Time is relative to the observer. If you're not accelerating/following a curved path then you are always moving at the speed of light through time from your own perspective, but to an observer with a different relative velocity you're moving through space at a certain speed and slowed down through time so that the overall velocity of every object through space-time is always the speed of light. It's relative though so they look the same to you as you do to them.

          The impression of a now is purely a consequence our our inability to see the future. It has the same meaning as a point in space. In every moment of our lives we can only remember the past and so have that same impression of it being now in every moment of our lives.
      • Sep 26 2012: In general, what we are conscious of as now is already past, even if only by a fraction of a second. The present ' now' cannot be specified in words or thoughts, without its slipping into the past.The future is not yet. When a future moment comes a similar situation will take place. The actual immediate ' now' is always the unknown.
        That 'now' was in my question. As far as i understand, Relativity theory describes time-space as completely analyzable down to dimensionless points, but it is not the end/beginning.
        Let me explain what i mean :
        Time is the 'stuff' that keeps everything from happening at once . It is not observable. Space is an observable. To observe space, we need the observer and the observed. Their separation is 'space'. Being in the moment ' now' time does not exist , the distinction between 'observer' and 'observed ' shrinks to zero and they become one .
        And my question is /was :
        Is there in your special Relativity theory the possibility of giving the meaning to the moment ' now ' ?
        Thanks for responding !
        • thumb

          A wal

          • +1
          Sep 26 2012: No problem. I could talk about this all day. Questions are good. They're helping me make a better case, although as far as I can see it's open and shut as it is.

          I see what you mean now. Yes, we're technically not aware of anything until we remember it, even our own thoughts. The result is that 'now' becomes omnipresent in the sense that it's always now. It always was and it always will be now. It has no literal meaning in relativity. It's just a continuous chain of events because at any point in time we remember only what has past, which creates the impression of a moving time line. It's only moving from our perspective, at the speed of light. Acceleration/curvature shortens the distance of the static dimension that we perceive as time, but in reality it's no different from a curve in space. Any non accelerating observer is always static in space from their own perspective and moving through time at the speed of light but that's just due to how we perceive the four dimensions that we're aware of and the fact that we always reorient space-time so that our perceived movement through it is always through time, until we accelerate. It's hard to describe the true nature of time when you're trapped within a mind that distinguishes space from time but I hope that helps. There's really no difference between time and space. It annoys me when physicists claim that there is. They should know better. Special relativity is screaming it at them.
      • Sep 27 2012: For the quantum level the shortest meaningful space measurement is Planck Length = 1.61 x 1033 cm
        John Wheeler writes:
        "At Planck length, the effects of quantum gravity make our notions of `before' and `after' meaningless.At Planck length, all geometric concepts break down, including connectedness, containment, locality, and especially order, and one is therefore forced into a set of assumptions prior to any kind of geometry "
        Planck time is roughly 10−43 seconds, the time it would take a photon traveling at the speed of light to cross a distance equal to one Planck length It is the most real reality the human mind can penetrate into, 4% of the Universe our mind can make a sense of. As one scientist commenting on the results of LHC said : it is not science any more. What is it ? Watch this video, if you are not familiar with it already

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfeoE1arF0I&feature=related

        What do you think ?
        We may not think about it , but it's like : my mind is full, don't confuse me with facts :)
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 27 2012: I think it supports the idea that we create the universe around us as a perception in our minds and that the idea of different branches of reality splitting off all the time is correct. It happens whenever it's possible to know the result of something. It isolates our perception into individual branches from what was a unified probability wave of potentials. Wow. There's no way to write about quantum mechanics without sounding like a pompous arse!

          I'm not entirely sure I've got this right but I think it's true. The weirdest and coolest thing I've ever heard about quantum mechanics is that you can affect the past, in the sense that you can't know exactly what path a particle took but you can decide what path it took by what you do after it took it. So you can choose what branch to be on. How's your mind now? (:
      • Sep 27 2012: P.S. I like to think about this stuff too, but my time for TED is very limited, as well as yours, i guess, so i do appreciate your time, sorry for the delay with my responses. I don't know what is going on with time , but time is really speeding up.
        There is an old adage : Life is short , day is long. But it is not true any more, day is extremely short as well. In a sense, this observation belongs here , our perception of time duration is changing. Our perception of space has changed dramatically , the distance between A and B no matter how distinct those points geographically may be, in terms of time units can be measured by a second in case of Internet connection. When space shrinks , time shrinks too; and it's only about perception.
        Maybe here at deep root level of our perception time and space is spacetime, it's one dimension too ?
        • thumb

          A wal

          • 0
          Sep 27 2012: No problem. I've got a lot of time on my hands for the next couple of weeks. Our perception of time changes as we get older. A year seems like an eternity when we're kids and seems to shrink as we get older. Although it does seem like younger and younger people are saying the same things, but maybe that's just because kids are growing up sooner.
      • Sep 28 2012: And why do you think kids are growing faster ?
      • Sep 28 2012: " How's your mind now? "

        My right tuned mind is OK with it :) I don't understand it, but somewhere inside there is a " Bingo ! " click .
        We have a strong intuition for a free will, but we don't know how we exercise it. If you analyze carefully your choice , there are turtles all the way down, everything is predetermined. But still we choose ! Free will seems to be the function of who we are, not the function of a conscious choice. And 'who we are' is the result of our choices.
        How's your mind now ? :)
        You may say that I am again all over the place and it's true. Generally, QM is all about a holistic approach ; its object is the Whole, while parts are defined as a result of the analysis. D. Bohm once said that the Whole is all processes where each process is the Whole. Holographic principle in action and i love it :)
        D. Bohm in the attempt to make QM intelligible introduced the notion of a ' quantum potential '. It's a kind of a force, energy ( but much more subtle than that ) with a function to form a field , which ' governs ' the particle's choice to manifest as a wave or a particle.
        OK, here i feel like a blind describing the picture to a deaf :) You'd better google it , if you are interested.
        We all feel a kind of archaic revival here and there is nothing wrong with it, nothing 'pompous'. Maybe soon we'll be ready " to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time " It is T.S. Eliot's famous lines from ' Little Gidding "
        We shall not cease from exploration
        and the end of all our exploring
        will be to arrive where we started
        and know the place for the first time .
  • thumb
    Aug 29 2012: As far as i know Amber is the only organically produced product? that has withstood the test of time,amazing stuff,i wonder if anyone has started up a "Don't buy a coffin,get sealed in Amber for eternity"

    Time, that's the one thing we are always running out of.