It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

what is time?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 09:31 PM
link   
there is not much, about time, that can be "introduced" to me...
perhaps there is nothing... aside from the manipulation of time, as a physical existence.
understanding what time is, as a mental construction, is one thing; that is all very elementary.
i think that most have missed the point of this thread.

for westerners:
time and space were considered 2 and constant, eternally.
then, they were considered a unity, while being relative to the observer.
ie: time is not constant but is "elastic" in a sense, in relation to the velocity of an observer, relative to "light speed"; space shrinks and time slows, i believe.

what is the affect of the mental faculty on space-time, as a physical existence, which affects physicality? this question is difficult to pose as I am sure it is equally difficult to answer. i am not concerned with ideas of time, but, rather, i am concerned with the previous experiences one may have had with this topic... be it, vedics or other eastern philosophies, or something E.T. or something else all together.

can it be that one is simply touching time, at specific moments, while remaining, for the majority, "around" time, in a way that physical manifestations of time, on the body, are altered coincidingly?

(oh well, this is, perhaps, a lost notion... circumnavigated by buddha and left to obscurity in the day dreams of idle minds...)




posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by onlyOne
time is not constant but is "elastic" in a sense, in relation to the velocity of an observer, relative to "light speed" (time speed); space shrinks(?) (might be) and time slows, i believe.




Yes! That is a very clever statement! Thank you for sharing. Time slowing and fastening, as when time is seen as all, as space, as energy. It is. great



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 09:54 PM
link   
I am here and I am not.....Do I measure my exsistence by memory depending on what I know ive done?. Or by the insight I have seen and have experienced come true again and again. I am not really ready to go that far down the rabbit hole as to explain some of the more deeper experiences that i am tied to.Sorry.......



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Time is the force that separates events in a chronological order.

Without time, past, present and future would be one.



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 10:52 PM
link   
thanks but no thanks, akashicwarrior.
i know it's fun to post the answer to a seemingly simple question, but i am certain that you didn't even read the OP, or atleast figured that your understanding was surpassed of everyone elses, and, as a result, neglected to read the subsequent posts.

it's ok. i mean no disrespect, but it was previously stated that your kind of response was not desired.

thanks for the concern, though.

[edit on 1/9/2006 by onlyOne]

[edit on 1/9/2006 by onlyOne]



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 05:21 AM
link   
I seriously revised my personal conception of time in 2004, after decades of avoiding the implications of things I had experienced in my life.
Finally, in my then urgent need, I made a desperate attempt at conceiving a model of time which would allow the possibility of the occurence of many things that I had seen linear time seemed to deny the possibility of. I had ignored the contradiction for as long as I could. My final view, which I accepted as preferable, as it allowed what I otherwise couldn't explain was that past, present, and future are simultaneous, and the present moment is all there is.
The troublesome phenomena I felt compelled to explain was precognition, seeing scenes yet to be, then being awed to see them for real.
If the present is all there is, that is possible.
Marianne Williamson said it like this, "If God exists in Eternity, and the only place eternity and time intersect is the present, then the present is the only time there is."
I was comfortable with my old concept of linear time, except that I couldn't accept that it was possible to see something that has yet to happen.
So, as unpopular a time concept as mine is, it is one I felt forced to find, due to my incomprehension of how linear time could coexist with precognition.
Someday I hope to understand time more clearly.

[edit on 03 22 2005 by BlackGuardXIII]



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by AkashicWanderer
Time is the force that separates events in a chronological order.

Without time, past, present and future would be one.



I do not want to see time that way, as I recall it, time just is, I guess I see time as others see the now, it continually changes. With time not being series of judged moments of now.

Your time is not open akashic. It has a lenght, it's a period, mine is infinite. Or that's how I would like it to be..


This 'one' you refer to, is the thing I call time. In this one, past nor future nor now does exist. It just is. as to say it. It is just happening. Past present and future ARE one. When you split it up in past present future you speak about time as in periods of the existing.

[edit on 10-1-2006 by alienaddicted]



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienaddicted
time is movement,

even if all things stood still, atoms move along rapidly, when everything stands still, like at -273°C they claimed, time does not exist anymore on our planet, but still exists in the universe, our planet being at -273°C doesn't interfere with others or does it? anyhow, how WOULD our planet become like that... ?

time is movement, or time just is. Everything is time. Can't go back, can't go forward, with forward going further than time is. It's like we are locked in time.

The mind is timeless. As to when one becomes the mind, he is timeless and sees all??? now that's "putting the weight of the world upon your shoulders". I'd try not to look. But I guess that won't happen. Seeing devastated people, or very sad people or very angry people isn't a funny look then when completely being timeless, on the other hand, when not duplicating those feelings, it should be no problem.

how to travel in time, it might only be possible in the mind, for mind is timeless so all times.



[edit on 9-1-2006 by alienaddicted]



I'd like to add that time is in fact everything, and all times are seen in one moment. so it is in fact timeless. With an open mind to it, all times can be seen, but still , I guess to see it allll, would need a supermind.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienaddicted
I do not want to see time that way, as I recall it, time just is, I guess I see time as others see the now, it continually changes. With time not being series of judged moments of now.


I also see the Now as everchanging, and past and future as illusions. The continual change of the now however, is the work of time. Without time the Now would not change in a linear fashion, and would just be in all states at once.

This is what we find in dimensions above this one, where time does not exist.

Inverencial Peace,
Akashic



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 01:00 PM
link   
you are correct.

regards, AA

mod edit to removve quote of previous post

[edit on 10-1-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 10:17 AM
link   
I changed my concept of time two years ago, basically out of necessity. It was either that or I was on the brink of mental meltdown. So, I somehow picked up on the concept of the moment being the only reality, and as one of you said, the past and future being illusions. But I never would have chosen to change my definition of time on my own, it was something that I needed to do to so that it would make sense in relation to events in my life.
I am curious how and/or why your perception of time is also different than the majority opinion.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
So, I somehow picked up on the concept of the moment being the only reality, and as one of you said, the past and future being illusions. But I never would have chosen to change my definition of time on my own, it was something that I needed to do to so that it would make sense in relation to events in my life.


I also changed it out of necessity.

I realized that all suffering comes from the denial of the Now, all that exists. We deny the Now when we identify with the incessant stream of conditioned and repetitive thought patterns about the past and the future. We continually think about the past because it gives us a false identity. We continually think about the future because it gives us the hope that a future moment will be better than this one.

If we just accept and become aware of the Now, we no longer identify with the past or future. We no longer make reality our enemy, and instead feel a deep peace within it.

To be or not to be: that is the question.

Inverencial Peace,
Akashic



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 12:24 PM
link   
It is good to hear that I am not the only one who wrestled with the problem of redefining time. For me, it has brought peace, and was well worth it.
I still feel uncertain about all the ramifications of my new definition, but they are not pressing uncertainties, I just don't know, but feel no urgency to find out.
Blessings



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 12:35 PM
link   
nice points U 2.


indeed lot's of people might see time as a thing going forth. As something to look back at, and as something to look forward too. It might just be this is because one isn't centered, or hasn't have the understanding of seeing time as it is. I don't really like myself telling this, but still I posted. Time is a precious thing to ponder on, one of the best I guess.

with kind regards,

Alienaddicted




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join