A theory

T

thesanctium

Temporal Novice
Hello, i found this sample of a time travel theory, I dont know who wrote it, and I have no idea where it came from, but i thought you might like it, even though it sounds a bit different and far fetched.

"Lets say time is just a moment, or a spot.
We alle live in a moment. If this is true, every moment within a moment, must be stored somewhere, because they happened, but they are still here, since we are all in one moment. And if the old moments are still here, there must be a way to find them, because they have to be all around us. Time is a spot, not a line, the sun rises and sets, but, why do we percieve this as time? Sunrises and sunsets are not time, they are cycles, cycles are not part of time, because they are part of a natural progression, one wich has always been happening. And thus, we are in one moment, always. And if we look hard enough, we can find these other moments that have already happened.

The mind, must be the only thing that can travel in time. Its the only part of us that is able to store memories, if you dont count scars, of signs of sickness, because those are not memories, but inflictions.
They are only memories in the sense that we can remember when they happened.
In our mind we store fractions of our life, we cannot remember everything, but certain spots of our life are there for us to remember.

Thus i believe that the only way to time travel, is through memory. And the only way to change the past, is to change our perception of our memories, lets say you have a bad memory of your pet dying. Now, if you can find that memory, and think about it, but think about it in another way, try to remember that your pet did not die, your pet died of old age, not in an accident. After enought time has passed, this is the true memory you will remember, and by thinking about this memory, you will no longer remember the pet dying in a freak accident. You will remember your family, all gathered, as the pet moved on, after many, happy years on this planet. And this will make you feel better, and that means you have changed your past, make enough people believe this and you will have changed all of their pasts."

What do you think?
 
As written by Bill Heidrick "the Road to the Sun "...

He who speaks too early of the world as "Maya" or illusion should be more careful. The entire world of the senses is often a sort of illusion; but, not because of that, nonexistent. If I walk in front of a fast moving car, something will indeed happen to me. A fly doubtless doesn't see or perceive the impact of a fly swatter in the same way a man perceives the impact of a car, but the result is in both cases death. No matter where your soul is, unless it can build up a body from scratch, you have no more chance with that car than a fly has with a fly swatter.

Doubtless death is not the simple thing it seems to be on the physical plane, but that doesn't make it nonexistent. A hurt hurts and a pain pains regardless of how or even whether or not it is noticed. The appearance is illusion, but there is a face behind each mask. It is the purpose of the mystic and the seeker after knowledge to unmask the many faces of reality, not to deny that there is some reality connected with what is seen.

By the simple process of continued stripping of one mask after another, a point is eventually reached where all faces seem to be the same; or there seems to be no face at all. The latter is rooted in that greatest of follies, the denial of one's own existence. The former is material for pleasure or meditation, but signals the need for a new beginning and a new unmasking rather than the end of thought.

One must not forget that the experience of the Oneness of the All is often only a denial of the Difference of the Many, and not anything more or less than that. It is a mental action in the first instance, not an observation.

All this is quite a different thing from that state of meditation which transcends unity and difference and experiences all things in all places at one time.

I have come to realize that such philosophical bits and pieces come from some higher mental state. They are communications, not speculations. Some part of myself knows something and takes any means open to it to communicate that something to the rest of me.

These communications may come in dreams, physical happenings or, as here, philosophizings. After the passage of much time, the character of these communications has changed. I find myself writing instructions to myself without being fully aware of the act or of the intent.

The Road to the Sun
 
I believe the following to be in error:

Sunrises and sunsets are not time, they are cycles, cycles are not part of time, because they are part of a natural progression, one wich has always been happening.
Click to expand...

I do not see any logic for saying that something (cycles) cannot be "part of time, because they are part of a natural progression."

Cycles actually do define time. Cycles of matter-in-motion. This is easy to verify with a thought experiment. Imagine if ALL matter in the universe just stopped all motion completely. Time is now frozen, because if no matter can move one would not be able to detect the passage of time. Indeed, the passage of time would no longer be evident to anyone or any thing. Of course, consciousness would have to cease as well, since consciousness manifests as matter (energy) in motion within our brains.

RMT
 
Ray,

He'll need to respond for himself but in my reading I came away with something a bit more positive. If I read him correctly he seems to be saying that cycles aren't fundamental physical processes called "time". I can agree with that.

I think that a more elegant description might say that defining cycles as "time" is circular logic because the term "cycle" requires a time component in the definition, i.e. the oscillator turns through so many radians, degrees or some other metric per unit of time. That would be defining time by using the word "time" as an intrinsic part of the definition - a tautology.

I say that even though all time pieces that we normally carry with us are based on some sort of harmonic oscillator that can be perfectly described by Hooke's Law where the "time" output is related to the angular (cyclic) frequency of the system.

So, in the end, though the cycles aren't fundamental, they do give a very reliable description of units of time.
 
RainmanTime,

I am certainly no Physics scholar, but I would say your thought experiment is wrong. Time itself is another dimension (often referred to as space-time). As a child I always thought time was simply a measuring tool for distance, but as I got older and read about some of the theories for physics it became quite clear that time is an omipresent phenomenon as the other 3 dimensions of length, width, height.

While it would be true with everything at standstill it would be difficult to measure time without a reference point (even though in the universe all things are in motion and there isn't any known 'zero reference point), but wouldn't say time exists. The thought experiment is also meaningless as if everything is truly at rest (heat death of the universe) then there would be noone to measure or perceive time anyways. That is like saying when nothing exists you can't drive a car, which is redudant as there is no car to exist to drive, let alone you.

At least, that would be my understanding.
 
Hi Darby,

I understand, but I must pick a nit because it is important (IMO):

I think that a more elegant description might say that defining cycles as "time" is circular logic because the term "cycle" requires a time component in the definition, i.e. the oscillator turns through so many radians, degrees or some other metric per unit of time. That would be defining time by using the word "time" as an intrinsic part of the definition - a tautology.
Click to expand...

This is true if you are speaking of frequency, which indeed is cycles per unit time. But I was not speaking of the mixed metric. I was speaking merely of a cycle. The closed circle...or a closed loop... exhibits a cycle and it does so without reference to any time. It is when you add the idea of a finite object moving along that cycle that the issue of frequency arises.

So, it is just my opinion that a cycle is a fundamental aspect of reality. And it makes me wonder if (possibly) all paths are inherently cyclic when taken to their extreme. We learned this was so when we progressed from Eucliden to non-Euclidean geometry on a sphere. I would tend to think it would be odd if we did not discover the same was true with respect to universal space-time.

But again, just my conjectures.
RMT
 
Helo Stukov and welcome to the forum:

Time itself is another dimension (often referred to as space-time). As a child I always thought time was simply a measuring tool for distance, but as I got older and read about some of the theories for physics it became quite clear that time is an omipresent phenomenon as the other 3 dimensions of length, width, height.
Click to expand...

Well, I certainly agree that space-time is the more accurate, as it does indeed describe a 4-D manifold (as our science currently understands it). But by the same token, I believe we now understand that "time" is not a dimension unto itself. Rather, it is a more useful approximation to the integrated nature of space-time. It is useful to us because it allows us to define relative simultaneity, even though Einstein told us such was an illusion. It allows us to relate to one another in meaningful ways. But as a highly accurate description of reality, it falls short... and space-time takes over.

I merely take it the next step further. Where we currently discuss the idea of mass and matter as distinct from space-time, these are yet again just useful approximations. The greatest accuracy in describing reality seems to be via 3-way integrated metrics of mass, space, and time (what I call the integrated Matrix of Massive SpaceTime).
The Conservation Laws (Energy, Momentum, and others) all seem to attest to this very fact.

The thought experiment is also meaningless as if everything is truly at rest (heat death of the universe) then there would be noone to measure or perceive time anyways.
Click to expand...

Well, I would agree only with a qualification applied: There would be "no one" to perceive as far as we understand perception and concsiousness based on our human experience. But what if our universe is a "pocket universe" and there is something beyond it? If such is the case then one could also make a case for a higher level of perception which would still be able to perceive time on a different (higher) level. This may be the realm where folks traditionally talk about "God"...the Omniscient Being that can perceive all Mass, Space, and Time in our pocket universe as one entity. Contrary to this form of perception, we cannot perceive energy directly. Rather, we percieve the "shadows" of energy as matter in motion with respect to other matter.

I really find the idea of Flatland helpful in thinking about this. The 2-D denizens of Flatland can only perceive "slices" of a 3-D being as it passes through the plane which is Flatland. They cannot perceive the entirety of the 3-D being all at once, but we in 3-D can. The sphere moving through the plane of Flatland is the instructive example. To a Flatlander it appears as a dot which grows into a line, reaches a maximum extent, and then shrinks to a dot before it disappears completely. A time-oriented perception for the Flatlander.

Raise the dimensionality one more level and ask if it might be the same for a 4-D being. What we perceive as fluid motions of matter which yields our conception of time, perhaps some 4-D being can perceive all as one integrated entity. We would call it heat death of our universe for it would appear to that perciever that all motion has ceased, but it is merely due to their perspective. Such a being would only perceive their version of time as some 4-D object moving through our 3-D space. Always intriguing things to think about, IMO.

That is like saying when nothing exists you can't drive a car, which is redudant as there is no car to exist to drive, let alone you.
Click to expand...

Well yes, that is a hint at a paradox. But one of the things I have always claimed is that wherever one finds a paradox, there one finds an opportunity to grow beyond the limits of our current knowledge. New levels of understanding tend to resolve the paradoxes.

RMT
 
Well, I certainly agree that space-time is the more accurate, as it does indeed describe a 4-D manifold (as our science currently understands it). But by the same token, I believe we now understand that "time" is not a dimension unto itself. Rather, it is a more useful approximation to the integrated nature of space-time. It is useful to us because it allows us to define relative simultaneity, even though Einstein told us such was an illusion. It allows us to relate to one another in meaningful ways. But as a highly accurate description of reality, it falls short... and space-time takes over.

I merely take it the next step further. Where we currently discuss the idea of mass and matter as distinct from space-time, these are yet again just useful approximations. The greatest accuracy in describing reality seems to be via 3-way integrated metrics of mass, space, and time (what I call the integrated Matrix of Massive SpaceTime). The Conservation Laws (Energy, Momentum, and others) all seem to attest to this very fact.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it would probably be best to consider all 4 dimensions as interconnected or 'all of the same thing'.

Well, I would agree only with a qualification applied: There would be "no one" to perceive as far as we understand perception and concsiousness based on our human experience. But what if our universe is a "pocket universe" and there is something beyond it? If such is the case then one could also make a case for a higher level of perception which would still be able to perceive time on a different (higher) level. This may be the realm where folks traditionally talk about "God"...the Omniscient Being that can perceive all Mass, Space, and Time in our pocket universe as one entity. Contrary to this form of perception, we cannot perceive energy directly. Rather, we percieve the "shadows" of energy as matter in motion with respect to other matter.
Click to expand...
I think my purpose of there being "no one" to perceive is that as far as I know, all measurement of time is different for every other frame reference point. In the 'heat death of the universe' time wouldn't necessarily stop, only any ability to measure time, or measure time's effects. Because if space-time is all one entity or phenomenon abscense...dammit got interrupted at work now I can't recall where I was going with that.

I really find the idea of Flatland helpful in thinking about this. The 2-D denizens of Flatland can only perceive "slices" of a 3-D being as it passes through the plane which is Flatland. They cannot perceive the entirety of the 3-D being all at once, but we in 3-D can. The sphere moving through the plane of Flatland is the instructive example. To a Flatlander it appears as a dot which grows into a line, reaches a maximum extent, and then shrinks to a dot before it disappears completely. A time-oriented perception for the Flatlander.
Click to expand...
We cannot perceive what our mind cannot conceive.

It is entirely possible that there is another dimension of something that we cannot not fathom or ever understand where unicorns and fairies really come from and the giant spegetti monster poops meatballs. Could this exist? Sure it could exist outside our perceived reality and awareness, but thumbing our mind to the possibility that it exists outside our abilities of understanding does nothing to expand our understanding of what we do know.

While hypothetically anything could exist outside our awareness if we cannot know, perceive, or conceieve it it effectively doesn't exist. If something isn't perceivable to us, then it does not exist. While it remaines plausibly possible for such to exist any hypothetical use something outside existance as we know it serves little purpose to explain what we know.

If on the other hand something does actually exist and we simply just do not have the tools to see or measure it, that is something else. But to say there is maybe a mystical being that can bridge all unknown ways of understanding, well, that is about as useful a the spegetti monster and his noodle apendeages being the masters of everything in the universe.

I don't mean to sound like an ass, I just don't know another way to put it.

Raise the dimensionality one more level and ask if it might be the same for a 4-D being. What we perceive as fluid motions of matter which yields our conception of time, perhaps some 4-D being can perceive all as one integrated entity. We would call it heat death of our universe for it would appear to that perciever that all motion has ceased, but it is merely due to their perspective. Such a being would only perceive their version of time as some 4-D object moving through our 3-D space. Always intriguing things to think about, IMO.
Click to expand...
While such thoughts are intriguing I don't see how it is entirely helpful in attempting to understand phenomenon that we can perceive by believing something we cannot perceive may have something to do with it. If even on face value that was true, we would have no reason to dig futher, learn, or attempt to better understand the existance we can know.

Well yes, that is a hint at a paradox. But one of the things I have always claimed is that wherever one finds a paradox, there one finds an opportunity to grow beyond the limits of our current knowledge. New levels of understanding tend to resolve the paradoxes.
Click to expand...
I will not disagree that we should learn new ways of thinking in order to attempt to better understand what we don't know, but that is different than attempting to gain that understanding through means of magic.
 
It is entirely possible that there is another dimension of something that we cannot not fathom or ever understand where unicorns and fairies really come from and the giant spegetti monster poops meatballs.
Click to expand...

I prefer the giant taco that craps ice cream (another South Park ref, BTW).

You sound like an "old friend from times past". LOL

I don't mean to sound like an ass, I just don't know another way to put it.
Click to expand...

LOL. Then you aren't trying all that hard, are you? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/yum.gif

Welcome back.
RMT
 
well, if you can believe time in a 4th space then you can imagine a 5th space outside time, space, matter and all known energy that can be explained by (what you would consider normal) physics.



the glue of universes, and that is just the beginning...
 
Well, I would agree only with a qualification applied: There would be "no one" to perceive as far as we understand perception and concsiousness based on our human experience. But what if our universe is a "pocket universe" and there is something beyond it? If such is the case then one could also make a case for a higher level of perception which would still be able to perceive time on a different (higher) level. This may be the realm where folks traditionally talk about "God"...the Omniscient Being that can perceive all Mass, Space, and Time in our pocket universe as one entity. Contrary to this form of perception, we cannot perceive energy directly. Rather, we percieve the "shadows" of energy as matter in motion with respect to other matter.
Click to expand...

Again (and with slight sorrow), believe your post will be completely ignored, as usual...

A Cycle can also be described as 'ritual'. I might suggest, as these may have been decided before time, they also transend time. "Song lines" were a metaphor for cycles but are not as abstract as they apear. Love is the law...a ritual is movement, planets follow 'their' own - producing another well known 'shadow' force. As ray once said, our current notion of time (or at least its measurement) is based on their movements. However no-one knows what 'their' notion of time is based off...or do they?

I think that people need to open their minds on this subject to achieve personal growth on the concepts of "time". True, an aborigine (or indeed an Indian or african shaman) will not offer you the schematics for a time machine (especially if you are white), but those who are wishing to design such-like, may benefit from racking their brains either by hook or by crook...oh no...scratch that, they already have.

we cannot perceive what our mind cannot conceive
Click to expand...

There was once a time, where people would openly expect to 'perceive' what they couldn't 'conceive', with the distant hope that the tables would finally turn. of course by its very nature they could never repeat it for others to 'percieve' second hand.

Perhaps this died the day the OTO was established.

A portrait of 'Lam' may help, but suspect that was intended to merely keep the riff-raff away from god's door. Good thinking, i say.

Anyway i digress, i believe that the current perception of time can be transcended, and a new level opened up. Just Imagine what can be learnt away from the linear contraints of time. I wonder, with our minds in continuous motion (as they are designed), is there a key hidden somewhere? Is it possible to unlock that faction of our higher mind by TRYING to observing the time...inbetween...time, triggering a sort of catalysis process.


I feel that mental tap on the shoulder. So perhaps i shall quit while i am ahead. Or at least, while i still have one. besides i can already feel the rush of wind from the titor threads blowing us further from the shore.


Best wishes,
OB
 
I feel that mental tap on the shoulder. So perhaps i shall quit while i am ahead. Or at least, while i still have one. besides i can already feel the rush of wind from the titor threads blowing us further from the shore.
Click to expand...

Welcome back, Olly! Always great to see you return and share. I can tell from your writing subjects that you are delving much deeper into the OTO. Good on ya!

RMT
 
/ttiforum/images/graemlins/devil.gif Not intentionally, you understand. I'd more regard it as an off-shot to expanding my mind. I mention it purely because it really doesnt occur to people (why would it) that such minds have their claws even in a forum such as this one.

Who KNOWS - 'Titor' could be one of the golden dawn's creations (maybe). How much further/faster could we have trecked up the mountain path without that little scratch down our pants. I hope those who are maintaining it are getting paid well, because even they must be tired of it by now.

It still phases me as to why moderaters havent put a complete ban on titor related subjects on this part of the TTI forum.

We could talk about "Dreamtime" and more on those songlines and thier cycles, for the scientific amoung us, they could even try putting a tangible take on it for others to percieve. but i fear titor is more interesting...shame...
 
smells like trolls inhere,don't ya think so? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Back
Top