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.

 

TIME.....what the!....

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 05:34 AM
link   
ok before reading any of this thread i issue a word of warning to stricktly religeous people as it may have some controversial agendas. however before you come to any hasty decsions just consider that every new idea at face value seems outrageous. with time and better understanding however the concepts merge in and are generally accepted and not resented ( consider the proposal of a spherical earth and the orbit of the earth round the sun )

anyway with that out of the way to the subject at hand. TIME

the concept of time has been troubling me for a while now as i beleive it holds the key to at least a peice of the puzzle to the mystery of existance.

working with our current models of science, time itself started at the big bang, time is infact an aspect unique to the universe. besides anything that happend before the big bang is irelevent because everything that is, is contained withing the universe and events before then have no bearing on us.

now consider this, you are born some 20 odd years ( most of us ) after the the brith of your mother. now there are two paths we can choose here both have undesirable consequences.

1) your soul is conceived and created upon your birth, raising the question "why would any soul deserve to exist longer than another" one possible solution to this problem is that your soul is eventually destroyed in co ordinandce with its creation, putting it simply your mothers soul is destroyed 20 odd years before your own in some distant future, this seems equally inprobable and highly undesirable.

2) your soul has always existed and will exist forever. this at face value seems a nicer way of thinking about things but dig in deeper and we find some very uneasy revelations. first of which is if your soul has always existed what was it doing before your birth. this implies that upon death you would have no memory of your current life as your souls previous endevours are never remembered in your current life. this seems equally undesirable.

the problem however with both these logical deductions is they are both put in the context of TIME. timlessness for many is hard to imagine. if i said imagine there was no time im guessing most would imagine a still picture, no movement, however this implies the presence of the present, a still picture or " frame" of time, which is still an ASPECT of time. timelessness infact implies absolutly nothing. not even a single atom as this would also be a " frame " of time.

to solve this ever growing puzzle we must consider how the universe and time within it came to be. here lies the paradox. for a big bang to be initiated it requires an action, actions must occur over time, yet time has not yet been created as it is an aspect of the universe.( for all you religeous people reading, there you go unequivical proof of some sort of divine power ) for the sake of argument lets just refere to the initiation of the big bang as an act of GOD, ( unless anybody has any better ideas ) what ever state god exists in therefore must be outside of time as the big bang was trigered before time was invented. this also implies there is a relm exterior to the universe itself as what ever started the big bang (god) is there

back to the problem of souls, the problems previously stated are removed when using the proper context of time, upon your death or prior to your birth you exist out of time, without the presence of any time what so ever you negate the need for an actual creation, creation implies an initiation at some prior point, it requires a point in time which you can indentify and say, THEN thats when i was born.

some of the implications of this are that we wer with god before we wer hear, or EXTREMELY controversialy but we ourselfs are infact GOD. beleive what ever you think is the most conceivable or likly,

In summary i feel iv barly scratched the surface but these are just a few of my thoughts. any cultured inputs to piece this jigsaw are most welcom

[edit on 8-1-2010 by C1OUD]




posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 05:50 AM
link   
i ran out of words writing this thread as the sheer volume of text to contextualise the concepts was imense but there are a few things that could be explained more clearly i feel.

in a proper context of time. there is no need to worry about souls having existed before any others as this is still a measurement of TIME, and souls as pointed out must exist outside of time.

an extremely dark reveleation is that existing without time implies nothingness, memories therefore, or information cannont exist outside of time, this would explain why upon birth we have to learn everything we know, because our soul has only just come into a relm of time where information to exist. ( for us to think we use a process. for a process to occur time has to elapse. if we wer in a still frame of time with no movement no thought could occur, hence in a place where not even a still " frame" of time can exist there is even less chance of thought)

still there is a small glimer of hope, as what ever started the big bang must have done so through an action, impying some sort of movement or thinking must be possible outside of time, otherwise how did the big bang occur.

heres a more obvious solution . everything we no about science and relativity are wrong. and thats why using our current model of thinking we cant make sence of things.

these are just a few thoughts and obsevations i have, and yes i know they may offend some religeons etc but once again, consider a complex jig saw puzzle, you cant tell what it is till its finished and i have by no means solved anything in this thread. i am mearly asking for collaberation of thoughts as the more people dedicate thought and perspective on this idea the clearer the picture is likly to become.

all EDUCATED comments appreciated. that is to say any thoughts dicrediting my ideas are welcome provided they have some justfication and merit. needless to say people who cannot bring educated input into this discusion please dont waste both our times

[edit on 8-1-2010 by C1OUD]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by C1OUD
 

You presupposition is that souls are timeless or eternal.

Without that assumption there is not problem.



[edit on 8/1/10 by troubleshooter]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 05:58 AM
link   
timelessness of souls poses its own problems, as in my comment after my intial thread text.

without time implies nothingness, memories therefore, or information cannont exist outside of time, this would explain why upon birth we have to learn everything we know, because our soul has only just come into a relm of time where information to exist. ( for us to think we use a process. for a process to occur time has to elapse. if we wer in a still frame of time with no movement no thought could occur, hence in a place where not even a still " frame" of time can exist there is even less chance of thought)


if souls are not timeless then this implies an END i personally dont welcome this idea much

[edit on 8-1-2010 by C1OUD]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 06:17 AM
link   
reply to post by C1OUD
 

The idea that some stuff in man is continuous came from Homer...
...and the idea of pre-existent stuff (or pre-embodiment stuff) can be attributed to Plato who put a positive spin on the idea of continuous stuff.

Before Homer death meant ceasing to exist.
...and before Plato, personhood began at birth (not even conception).

I think that's how it actually is...
...we begin to exist at conception and we cease to exist at death...
...and only the spirit of a person who is united to the Eternal Spirit survives...
...everyone else is just road kill.

So if there is no pre-existing or continuous stuff to consider, time is not an issue.




posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 06:19 AM
link   
I think our descriptions of Time are wildly inaccurate.

It may be that Time is a real thing in which reality unfolds. We cannot perceive the time/event structure because we are embedded in it and one-dimesion short of being able to jump out of it. Time is our Flatland limit.

Time will act like a membrane on reality. No amount of energy within reality will be sufficient to break free of Time. We can stretch it as much as we want but we simply haven't the power to break it.

What is on the other side? I don't know. But I can try to imagine a 3d shadow of Time.

If we could somehow jump out of Time, we would see all that is or ever was laid out like a three-dimensional gel. Each and every single event that ever happened to anything will be forever recorded in the medium of Time.

Time could be a real thing and we simply perceive its shadow.

This may also go a long way toward reducing the number of spinning, splitting, phasing, moving and other verbs we often use to describe time but what actually describe what time is not. We could then get back to focusing on our Time and our Reality. The one we all really share.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   
think of time and the universe as a bubble. outside this bubble there is no time and no matter. if you were to stand outside the bubble and look in, you will see everything inside the bubble happening all at once. everything from the beginning of time to the end of time. it is all one single happening.
when you pass thru the bubble you are bombarded by time and have to experience your journey by were you started in the bubble and were you will end in the bubble, as well as every moment in between. you can not look forewords or backwords since you are subdued to a moment by moment structure.
at the same time that u are in the bubble, there is some one el's outside the bubble watching this happen. since they are timeless they can see everything that is happening inside the bubble happen at any point of time from beginning to end or all at once
its like drawing a time line on a piece of paper. you can see the time line from beginning to end as a whole but if u were to experience the time line you would see it as moments instead of a whole.

ex
(----1----2----3----4----5----)
we can look at this time line and see 1 2 3 4 5, but if we were to experience or pay attention to 1, we could only see 1. to get to 2 we would have to experience every dot in the time line before we got to 2. if we look at the time line as a whole we can see 1 2 3 4 5 or 5 4 3 2 1 or 3 5 2 1 4.
its all in perception.
i hope that youy can understand what im talking about and my post isn't to willy nilly to be understood.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 07:16 AM
link   


some of the implications of this are that we wer with god before we wer hear, or EXTREMELY controversialy but we ourselfs are infact GOD. beleive what ever you think is the most conceivable or likly,


It is said we are made in the likeness and image of God, we are the physical aspect of God. Hence, we are all a bunch of little Gods(or devils lol) so in a sense you are right and we are God, at least we have that potential. That's part of waking up, realizing this; saying to yourself before all of this, I AM. Personally I believe just like you said, we were with God before we were here. That is why our name is in the book of life, because we always existed, and through soul evolution we will journey back to the Source(God).



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 07:36 AM
link   
well its nice for one to get a religeous perspective on this topic
and two not to have condemnation screemed down my throat for suggesting new ideas. i think if more of religeon had as flexible and adapatble perspective as your own we'd find alot of religeon and science merges to reinforce each other.

i do feel as though many religeous people are protective over their beleifs which is why i provided the forewarning to this thread. it would be nice if religeon could veiw science as an enourmous jigsaw puzzle. which once completed would form a sort of hazy window to the truth. of course like any jigsaw when certain parts are added together it will paint some but not all of a picture and will result in misinterpritations. the more pieces you add different parts of the picture become visible and more of it makes sence.

likewise scientist can be highy critical of religeous veiws. extreme ends of either spectrum isnt productive at all.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 07:43 AM
link   
reply to post by C1OUD
 




timelessness of souls poses its own problems


I see no problems.



we find some very uneasy revelations. first of which is if
your soul has always existed what was it doing before your birth.


There is no "before" if there is no "time."



this implies that upon death you would have no memory of your current
life as your souls previous endevours are never remembered in your current life.


It does not imply that at all. Oh...surely it's possible to "not remember" other lives, but try to stop thinking of them as "previous" lives. There is no time, remember?

Look at the table your computer is on. The left and the right sides of the table both exist, right? Now look at the left side exclusively. Focus on it. Does the right side cease to exist? No, you're just not thinking about it.

If we assume that a soul exists through multiple incarnations, and if we suggest that there is no time, then each individual lifetime is no different than merely looking at one piece of the table. The rest of the table is still there...you're just not focusing on it. Similarly, when you're only looking at this lifetime, all the others are still there...you're just not thinking about them.



time itself started at the big bang


The implication of this, of course, is that the big bang was a limiting event.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 07:47 AM
link   
fallow the light

your ideas are well informed, about the viewing of all of time thing as a bubble. you have to consider two factors.

1)whilst out of time you cannot have the time to veiw time passing, in otherwords in order for you to veiw the passing of all of time. you have to observe it which is not possible without some time elapsing

2) to veiw all of time instantly would imply that it occurs at a infinatly quick rate, in which you would observe nothing. im not sure if ive just interpreted the way you wrote this wrong, but from your whole concept i cant see how you would mean it any other way.

i think your very right in the sence we are helpess to escape the fact our reality is bound by time. and perhaps we can never hope to understand it whilst emerced in it.

as golden oldie steven hawkings once said, if time can be divided into a infinatly small number of peices it becomes impossible to determine one moment from another



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 07:56 AM
link   
"but try to stop thinking of them as "previous" lives. There is no time, remember?"

are u sugguesting we are living every single life at once? your table ananlogy doesnt work because although outside of time time becomes irrelevent, your lives as such cannot all occur at the same time within time. when you die your soul may exist outside of time, but i doubt it can then come back into time at the same time your soul was previously living a life. if so, then its fair to say im everyone on earth at the same time.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 08:01 AM
link   
LordBucket

it seems you have misinterpreted the intent of my thread. i am by no means claiming to know more or understand this big question better than anyone else. i simply catalogued my ideas for others to see and wondered what everybody elses veiws were.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by C1OUD
 




are u sugguesting we are living every single life at once?


I'm suggesting that the question of "living every life at once" only even makes sense to ask if you look at things from the assumption that time has validity.



your table ananlogy doesnt work because although outside of time time becomes irrelevent, your lives as such cannot all occur at the same time within time.


...once again, you're looking at it assuming that time is relevant. What is this "outside of time" thing you're talking about? What do you mean these lives occur "at the same time within time?"

There is no time.



if so, then its fair to say im everyone on earth at the same time.


That is one possible interpretation.

It is not the only interpretation.



i simply catalogued my ideas for others to see and wondered what everybody elses veiws were.


And I am sharing mine.




[edit on 8-1-2010 by LordBucket]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 08:05 AM
link   
why have many "souls". Cant there be just one soul? If you remove spacetime then by all intent and purposes everything will be one as they will be nothing to seperate matter from one another. So with Spacetime you can have one soul occupy the universe in many forms that occupys the same location but not the same time or you can have the same time but not the same location. ......



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 08:08 AM
link   
timelessness of souls poses its own problems

I see no problems.

only the problem that without time, once again your table ananlogy breaks down, as memory of said edges cannot occur without elapsing of time



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 08:10 AM
link   
reply to post by loner007
 




why have many "souls". Cant there be just one soul?


...well, if there is no time...and if all the various "lifetimes" that a soul experiences are simply manifestations of focus on individual portions of self, as suggested with the table analogy above...

...then it seems reasonable to suggest that all of your and my souls, and the souls of everything else that exist are all similarly manifestations of one single soul. Or, "God" if you will.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 08:10 AM
link   
reply to post by C1OUD
 



i think if more of religeon had as flexible and adapatble perspective as your own we'd find alot of religeon and science merges to reinforce each other.


Yeah, my sentiments exactly. I'm always open to opinions of what God actually is, and the nature of the Eternal. After all, the concept of God is inconceivable to all, and we can only understand it in small pieces at a time. Hmmmm, TIME... Speaking of time, I also agree that there is a realm outside of the physical cosmos that not only existed before the big bang, but is infinite.

A good analogy that I heard based on how God views time in our reality, goes like this. Think of time as a parade, as a person you view time from the sidewalk watching the parade unfold, from beginning to end. From God's perspective, it is like watching from the Goodyear blimp, seeing time all at once. That is why there is so much prophecy in the bible, especially Revelation, where it states that the things in this book must soon take place and have already happened essentially.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 08:13 AM
link   
i know your stating your opinions its just the manor in which you presented them seemed to take me for a prize idiot for coming to the conclutions i came too. im not saying im right and your wrong i welcome any light you could shine on the subject that would make more sence to me, alot of your concepts open up new doors for thought and was the whole point of me making this, to get alot of different veiws so that individually we could each make our own sence of it all better.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by C1OUD
 




only the problem that without time, once again your table ananlogy breaks down, as memory of said edges cannot occur without elapsing of time


Who said anything about memory?

Those edges exist. And, the perspective of them as apart from one another also exists. And those different perspetives exist together. As does the perspective of the entire table.

What does memory have to do with anything?



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join