From: Case (Case@ispots.com)
Date: Wed Dec 07 2005 - 17:43:05 GMT
Scott said in the Looking for the Primary Difference thread:
This bit of pruning needs to be reinstated, since it is the crux of the
whole matter.
Is time durational or successive? What continues when you sense a change?
[Case]
I agree this is a really important point. I am throwing together a few
initial thoughts but would love to hear your take. Since I am admittedly
prone to misunderstanding; I think what you are asking is whether time is
continuous or discrete. Your problems with bits and elementary levels of
processing suggest that you regard it as discrete but I am very interested
in your actual thoughts. In fact this is just a bit of rambling in the hope
you can help either throw it out or give it some shape.
The specific nature of time is intertwined with the nature of space; since
they are supposed to be the same thing. We think of space as continuous so
perhaps time is as well. However in order to talk about space we have to
divide it up into units of measurement. The same occurs with time. Even if
it is continuous we don't seem to be able to do much with it until it is
carved into units.
Euclid begins with: A point is that which has no parts. Does this referred
strictly to space but does it apply to time as well?
We often speak of a point in time but I wonder what significance this has.
Whenever we talk about the past or future, we seem to be talking about
periods of time, time as a certain number of units past or future. Is there
a fundamental unit of time? If you say that a "point" is "that which has no
parts," can you say that an "instant" is "that which has no duration"? Is
there a geometry for this?
It would seem that the most significant point in time is "Now". I would
conjecture that "Now" is the "instant" in which all probability achieves
100% in other words it is the instant of absolute certainty. Every other
instant is probabilistic in relation to the "Now instant". I suspect this is
tautological but it is interesting. For example can probability hold at 100%
for some duration? That would make the fundamental unit of time the duration
for which all of the quantum uncertainties can be said that have been
resolved. I am going to hazard a guess that this would be a very very short
duration. Smaller even than itsy bitsy.
This "Now instant" would make space and distance, even the shape of space,
irrelevant; as it would apply to all things everywhere. It should apply to
everything that does or even does not exist. This seems to have self
evidence going for it.
Your actual question was framed as: Is time durational or successive? So
perhaps you mean does "Now" have duration or is it a succession of
"instants" in time. If it is a succession of instants there is the huge
problem of what happens between then. It is like a clock cycling between
time and no-time. What happens during the no-time cycle? Could no-time
cycles be said to have duration in any sense? Would the entire universe be
configuring and reconfiguring itself from instant to instant. Or would it be
something like prime numbers where the number of primes is infinite but the
space between them is hard to put a finger on.
Or if we are saying that an instant has no duration, can a stream of
no-durations have duration, as a line is a succession of points?
Rather than asking how can consciousness exists if awareness is limited to
some fixed instant or set of instances I suspect you are really asking how
can anything at all exist.
moq_discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 07 2005 - 18:33:46 GMT