What Is TIME?

reply to post by Fromabove


We are now at the end of September and I remember leaving the office for last Christmas's break as if it was two weeks ago. We all know how time flies. Why does it fly ?

The answer is simple. We move faster. Our vehicles go faster; our computers give us faster access to information. Inevitably , with faster changes comes faster time.

Similarly , with faster vehicles Space becomes smaller. The world is getting smaller and smaller as a result.

It is all about velocity (movement, or speed of it). If we want time to slow down we need to move slower.

Soulpowertothendegree:

As a soul, I resist the concept of time because inherently I have a greater sense of being, independent of time.

I will come back to this quote in time, but the question that brought me to participate in the thread was: 'What is time?' I would provide a further question of subtext...does time actually exist?

Before we can answer these questions with any degree of accuracy, we must firstly describe what we mean by 'time', and from that we can then arrive at a reasonable conclusion on the question of its actual existence?

When we ask what is 'time' we may receive a number of differing answers. For the sake of argument, let us assume a position of consensus and agree that we all have an inner perception of time. However, is it true that our inner perception of time is indeed a perception of time itself? If we answer 'yes', then we must be saying that time, per se, has an existential reality wholly distinct and separate from our perception; that time would still exist if mankind did not. If we answer 'no', then we are denying time exists at all, and that what we are perceiving as 'time' is really the conglomerate perceptions of other things that provide us with an illusion of time. I myself, am of the latter persuasion. I do not believe that time exists at all, certainly not as a reality in and of itself, that consistently perpetuates indefinitely.

First and foremost we measure time. The truth is, however, we are not measuring time at all, we are measuring things such as motion and action. We never, and cannot measure time itself. We observe and measure things from when they 'begin' to when they 'stop'. What we do to define time is to observe and measure the duration of 'events'. An 'event' can be anything, as long as it has a 'start' and a 'stop'. It can be something as small as a single quantum event such as an electron moving to a higher orbit, or as large as the nth arc degree of motion exhibited by a galaxy as it turns. We can even observe and measure the duration of 'no event' taking place.

We could film the birth of a child and photograph it every day of its life right through to adulthood and death, but this would not be a documentary on time itself, it would simply be a film record of a human being from birth to death: from human life's start, to human life's stop.

Of course, the fact that we can only measure durations of events to define time does not in itself deny time's existence, but it would require a redefining of our understanding of what time truly is if we want to acknowledge its existence at all. The fact is, we cannot observe and measure the duration of an event and equally state that we are also measuring time. If we acknowledge time exists, then we must acknowledge that events occur in time, not alongside it, not outside of it, but within time; and by that definition, time has to be separate from the events.

This acknowledgement of time's existence would suggest that time is 'absolute', having neither a beginning nor an end, nor a 'now'. If time is an absolute, the terms 'beginning', 'end', and 'now' are meaningless. Time is not (unlike space) subject to or influenced by the events occurring within it, nor defined by them...it remains constantly and only absolute?

Equally therefore, time and space are distinctly separate from each other, because the former is not defined by its content, but the latter is. Always bear in mind that events inform our perception of time. Even if we sit in the centre of a darkened room acting as a sensory deprivation chamber, our thoughts (as events) would inform our perception of time. We might well perceive time as having slowed down, due to the fact that we only have our internal psychology as a frame of reference.

It is considered that the 'Big Bang' was the point at which time and space began, but from analysis, we can see that this is not logically true. The 'Big Bang' may well have been the time when physical reality came into being, but it cannot be the point at which time began, not in the truest understanding. If we acknowledge time to exist then it does so independent even of the 'Big Bang', which was simply an event occurring within the absolute of time.

Truth is, time only has meaning to minds...to everything else it is irrelevant. Stars and planets are not counting down time to their demise, and galaxies are not watching clocks as they turn. Only minds are...mindful of time, because observations of events invoke perceptions of time in the mind. Time isn't 'something' out there, it is simply the quale of duration...that and that alone is what time is. Time is to duration as red is to colour.

Time did not begin at the Big Bang, it began when minds appeared. We can trace a time lineage back to the so-called Big Bang, because we can trace a lineage of physical events almost to the point of ignition.

We know now that we do not need to acknowledge time as existing separately and distinctly on its own. It does not exist except as a quale of duration invoked by observation. In science, it is useful to treat it as an attendant reality to space, but the only truth of reality is that space and events exist...time does not.

How this would refine one's thinking as a 'soul' is up to the thinker.

There is only ever what is happening presently.
Time is thought now.

The one who lives in time is conflicted.

No one is able to stop evolution nor prevent the clock from ticking away. tik tok tik tok.

Put two candle's in a room and 9 feet apart, then try to light them at the same time, bet you you won't succeed.

How old are you?

How many hours do you rest at night?

How many hours do you work during the week, and at what time do you start or how late does your workday ends?

If seed is sowed, does it suddenly transform into a harvest ready corn, or does it need time to grow?

I want to say that Time is essentially a geometric concept. Maybe I'm just skewed because I have an interest in geometry and on some level believe that geometry is the answer to every physical and meta-physical concept we can conceive of. But hear me out.

We know that we live three-dimensionally at the very least. Some would say that "Time" is a dimension in itself, but maybe it isn't. It isn't really a requirement for time to be a dimension for it to have an effect on geometry. Over time, the geometry of the Earth changes, slightly, slightly, until it changes from one geometry to another. In this sense, we wouldn't scale time as a dimension that is seperated from the three dimensions we know and can measure, but we use time as a seperate dimension, say, on a graph (usually on the x-axis, but, can also be expressed on the y-axis) to notify that yes, the geometry of this geometry changes given this much time, and from this time to the end-time (which cannot be reversed, ... yet) we can measure that change.

But, Time is also much more than that. Time is intrinsic in our understanding of basic distance measures as well. It is not mere coincidence that ancient civilizations, like the Sumers, used measures of Time to locate and calculate the movements of Stars and Planets. This is why, we have Measures of Circular Angles that work in Degree Minute Seconds. We also have circular angle measures that work in Decimal Degrees.

Without going too far in-depth about distance measures and how we came about them, the concept of time, and it's passing was paramount in harnessing the full force and extent, with as much precision and accuracy as was possible, of distance measures. The Radius of the Earth is 3960 miles (approx.). The radius of the Moon is 5040 miles-3960 miles = 1080 (approx.). These numbers have significant importance with them, and the way they were found was through the very precise and what I can only imagine was pain-staking calculation of the passing of Time in the sub-lunar sphere. If you have any confusions as to why I put these distance measures and numbers here, they are all significant, I believe, anyway, and so do many other people, to the understanding of physical and spiritual reality.

Time is a perception, which is subconsciously and spontaneously created, for the purpose of understanding the observations of our memories. Because we can inherently connect a stream of observations by observing our memories, we simultaneously bring into existence the perception of time to solve for the equation. We call this variable that connects one memory to another, a reality in itself . But it's not. It's a perception. Perceptions are only interpretations of observations. No different than the perception of space.

Space/time is a perception, a form of observation, not a reality. The perception gives birth to the related concepts. Lately, we argue concepts as if they are realities. When instead, concepts are formed from perceptions and Perceptions aren't reality either. They're observations!!!

Interesting thread,
I guess time, or our perception of it, is what makes the world go round in a sense. (or maybe literally?)
If we didn't have time, we would certainly invent something else to justify our actions and/or reality.

But at the end of the day, Time is TIME

sorry