Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm trying to get a better understanding of Henri Bergson's concept of time and his theory of "Duree." His before and after is more flexible. The book I'm re-reading is titled Grove an Aesthetic of Measured Time. So far what I am trying to wrap my head around is that there are two "times." For instance there are situations when time passes slowly for the individual.
Guiles Deleuze, Felix Guattari, and Zuckerlandl all wrestle with the theory of time in discussion's about music and Spatialized time and Temporal time.
Universe time is the only time that exists, but we confuse the issues by our experience of time and our measurement of time and space because they involve our consciousness. We experience our consciousness as "instantaneous" and all our measures and experiences of duration are derivative of how we observe (or measure) it. If we observe the duration while counting the seconds on a clock or watching a pot come to a boil, it is experienced as slow. If we observe the duration after an interval of enjoyable activity, it is experienced as fast. That is what Bergson was referring to. But the universe's time (Bergson's objective time) of existence is not digitized until our consciousness observes (measures) it. I previously described the universe time as "quantum time" to differentiate it from the "measured" or "experienced" time our consciousness marks between "instantaneous intervals" at the macro level.
There is only one kind of time. All others are derivative. Our consciousness and its conceptualizations of spacetime can produce various confusing notions such as Spatialized Time or Temporal Time. Some so-called "time theorists" (Oespensky and Dunn) even speculate about the dimensions of time and about "timing" time along a "time length" and other such confusions. The unmeasurable formation time of our consciousness is the source of our experiential and conceptual confusion about time (including relativity theory's "time dilation" confusion).
There is no such thing as "universe time", since different parts of the universe are under different gravitational potentials, and gravitational time dilation affects the pace of time
There is no such thing as "universe time", since different parts of the universe are under different gravitational potentials, and gravitational time dilation affects the pace of time
That is an artifice of our use of "measured time" and the constancy of light speed inherent in the spatial intervals.
Universe time is the only time that exists, but we confuse the issues by our experience of time and our measurement of time and space because they involve our consciousness. We experience our consciousness as "instantaneous" and all our measures and experiences of duration are derivative of how we observe (or measure) it. If we observe the duration while counting the seconds on a clock or watching a pot come to a boil, it is experienced as slow. If we observe the duration after an interval of enjoyable activity, it is experienced as fast. That is what Bergson was referring to. But the universe's time (Bergson's objective time) of existence is not digitized until our consciousness observes (measures) it. I previously described the universe time as "quantum time" to differentiate it from the "measured" or "experienced" time our consciousness marks between "instantaneous intervals" at the macro level.
There is only one kind of time. All others are derivative. Our consciousness and its conceptualizations of spacetime can produce various confusing notions such as Spatialized Time or Temporal Time. Some so-called "time theorists" (Oespensky and Dunn) even speculate about the dimensions of time and about "timing" time along a "time length" and other such confusions. The unmeasurable formation time of our consciousness is the source of our experiential and conceptual confusion about time (including relativity theory's "time dilation" confusion).
An Asian method of cooking noodles was to bring a certain amount of water to a boil then add one more cup of cold water, when it came to a boil again the noodles were done. Time although is present, It is not used.
An Asian method of cooking noodles was to bring a certain amount of water to a boil then add one more cup of cold water, when it came to a boil again the noodles were done. Time although is present, It is not used.
True that. If I'm being bored by some political nut going on and on, time basically stands still. If I'm doing something I enjoy, time flies. But it's still the same ticks of a watch in both scenarios. However, there are times when time is absolute. If you show up an hour late for your flight, the airline is not going to be receptive to your viewpoints on time. Keep in mind, these are the same folks who have extremely vague ideas of their own when it comes to departure and arrival times.
Last edited by stephenMM; 04-20-2024 at 01:51 PM..
Still to this day I can't believe the time it takes to drive from Aragonite, UT to Wendover, UT is only an hour. My sense of time was skewed by my perception of space. There was very little if not any thing to act as delineations in space. It was as if I was sitting in a vehicle that was not moving. When I recalled the drive to someone I mistakenly told them it took hours to make the drive.
They're not abstract. They couldn't be more concrete. If I say "I'll get to that as soon as I finish this project", one knows exactly what I mean. The time frame has been accurately described. If I say "Before I can do that I need to finish up here first", again, that's an exactly defined time frame. All time is like that.
On another level, there is no such thing as "time" which in the past or future. No one ever lived in the past or the future, they lived in the present. So time can be seen as more of a river flowing. It's always now, now, now. But that sort of time is of little use to anyone, we need to know what came before and what came after. Knowing that time is always now is of no benefit to anyone.
Then there's relative time. If I'm doing something tedious that I don't want to do, time will appear to be dragging. If I'm doing something that I love, then time can fly by. If we want to have more time in our lives, then obviously we should suffer, as that will make time seem crawl by. But that's not how it goes, who wants to suffer? Whether time is flying by or crawling, or whether it is in the past or the future, time is always in relation to something else. Nothing in the universe stands alone, everything is in relation to something else and everything is impermanent. Things are constantly changing into something else, yet there is no loss. All the atoms which existed in the beginning of time (if time even has a beginning or end, who knows?) are still here. None have been added, and none have been lost.
There is no universal time at all. It does not exist or exist. It is nothing more than a personal illusion about the difference between now and the future.
There is no universal time at all. It does not exist or exist. It is nothing more than a personal illusion about the difference between now and the future.
Our measured and subjectively experienced time only seems illusory because of the formation in "quantum time" of our "instantaneous" awareness. Life, motion, duration, change, novelty, birth, death, molecular activity, solar fusion, natural processes, reactions, etc., etc. all require universal time (quantum time) to occur. Any suggestion that all this Reality is illusory is preposterous.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.