God... Is Time.

[edthecynic]

Can we PLEASE stop quoting, debating and arguing Biblical Scriptures here? The thread OP specifically asks for you to check your religious beliefs at the door and consider the OP with an open mind. This is NOT a "theological" argument... YES, it's in the "Religion" forum because that is where topics about God and Philosophy go. There isn't a better alternative so this is where the thread resides.

Like virtually every other thread which mentions the concept of God, people like Hollie are going to exploit it to turn the argument into yet another endless and pointless argument about Christianity. She knows there are Christians who can't resist the bait and the evidence is clear she is correct. So let's get the OP train back on the tracks and off this silly bantering over various interpretations of the Bible, which have absolutely nothing to do with the OP.

If you guys wish to debate the Bible, start a damn Bible Study thread and have at it... don't hijack THIS thread!

That's right, only YOU can comment on the bible!!!

The Bible is the most read, most widely-distributed and printed book in human history... as such, I have studied it because I believe in broadening my intelligence. Nowhere in Genesis does it state God's creation of A&E was the original creation of man. In fact, if Cain was cast out of the garden for killing Abel and ended up married in Nod, there had to be other humans unless Cain married a monkey or something.

 

[Boss]

You are taking the lazy way out and not reading the thread because all of this has been discussed and explained.

"God ...is Time" is intentionally vague... God is actually greater than time, or light, energy, space, other dimensions, dark matter, etc. Omnipotent God can create the entire universe every nanosecond in order to create a "present" which we cannot observe until physics happens.

You say that we can only perceive the present but we can't, physics won't allow it. What we're perceiving as the present has already happened and is forever in the past.

Ah, so you are speaking of principles you don't understand that have been misinterpreted by others, which you have latched on to in order to form the fallacious opinions you share here?

Now.. "perceptions" are funny things... we can be all over the board with what we perceive as "now." ...I've been single my whole life but I think I'd like to marry now... do I mean immediately? Is it the same as "we need to get him to the hospital now!" And is that the same as saying "the time is now!" How about "the solar eclipse is happening now!" So, you see... our perception on "now" can vary greatly.

The Super Bowl example I presented earlier... You're watching the game happen "live" on TV, but the actual game is 12 seconds ahead because of network delay. Your perception is that it is happening in the present, even though you know it isn't. Furthermore, let's say you're watching "live" in the stadium... your perception of "present" in the nosebleed section is different than your perception of "present" on the line of scrimmage or the sidelines... light has to travel further... physics has to happen. We simply cannot observe the present, we can only have faith in our perception which is bound to the past by physics.

Grammatical semantics are irrelevant. What you perceive as you read these words is the present. Cones absorb light, synapses pass impulses, and your brain processes the stimuli to help you grasp what is in front of you.

You only perceive the present. You remember the past, with varying accuracy, and you imagine the future. But only the present is perceived.

What I perceive as I read these words is irrelevant to the actual moment of present becuase that moment has already happened. What we perceive as "present" is actually memory of the past and because of physics, can be nothing else. To make the statement that we can only have perception of the present shows an ignorance of what "perception" means. We can definitely perceive the past because we have a word for it... History!

Any perception you have of "present" is already history before you realized you've perceived it... this is not semantics, it's physics. Time and physics MUST happen first. You have faith your perception of present is "observing" the actual present. This is impossible to prove. Your observation is happening in the past... after present has happened... it's already history forever... what your perception is, has nothing to do with scientific proof.

We cannot, as humans functioning in a physical universe, observe the moment of present or future time. That is the profoundly deep point the OP is making.

 

[there4eyeM]

The profoundly deep point of human existence is that there is no other meaning to 'present' than consciousness, and being conscious is being so now.

 

[Boss]

The profoundly deep point of human existence is that there is no other meaning to 'present' than consciousness, and being conscious is being so now.

But physics doesn't support your argument. I can look into the skies and see a distant star "now" but am I observing the present? What if we are not conscious? Does Time stop happening? Is there not a present time? What if I am dreaming I am in Paris in the Winter of '72? Is THAT the present time? If you are watching the sunset in Hawaii and I am watching a meteor shower in Alabama, is our perception of "present" the same?

 

[there4eyeM]

You speak as if there were an objective reality, as if 'physics' existed apart from we humans. All these things are concepts, approximations created out of our intellect, limited and aided by our perceptions and how they function.
'Now' is where we are. The past is memory, and not the truth. The future is an idea, and only imaginary.

That leaves only now.

 

[Boss]

You speak as if there were an objective reality, as if 'physics' existed apart from we humans. All these things are concepts, approximations created out of our intellect, limited and aided by our perceptions and how they function.
'Now' is where we are. The past is memory, and not the truth. The future is an idea, and only imaginary.

That leaves only now.

What IS "objective reality?" "Now" is NOT where we are because if so, we'd all perceive the same "now" and we don't. Everything we have perception of is memory of the past and can be nothing else because of physics. You cannot observe the instant of the present in the moment of the present.

 

[there4eyeM]

But we DO all experience the same now!

 

[Boss]

But we DO all experience the same now!

And just how many examples do you need that we don't? As a matter of fact, none of us experience the same now.

 

[there4eyeM]

Our personal experience of it may be different, though we'll never know that for sure.
Everyone is experiencing the same moment, now.

 

[Boss]

Our personal experience of it may be different, though we'll never know that for sure.
Everyone is experiencing the same moment, now.

Again, no they are not and yes we most certainly know.

First and foremost... "Now" is an ambiguous term that can mean almost anything or any frame of time. I gave examples earlier... Now is the time to elect a Republican president... I am ready to retire now... We need to get to the hospital now... he died just now... it's 3:15 right now. All mean something entirely different.

I gave you an anlogy earlier of being at the Super Bowl. Someone who is sitting in the nosebleed section is not experiencing the same "moment of now" as someone on the sideline. Light reflects off the players and has to travel further to the nosebleed section, so what they perceive as "now" is happening later than for someone watching the same player on the sideline... this is physics.

We know for certain that our experiences of now are different because even if you and I are sitting beside each other experinecing the exact same thing, your "now" includes me but my "now" includes you. They are therefore, NOT the same.

What we experience as "present" is a perception which happens in the past. It cannot happen in the present because physics and time have to happen first.

 

[there4eyeM]

All you've explained is that perceptions are at work. Perceptions are one hundred percent subjective, so almost certainly different from every other sentient being's. The only thing we have to perceive, and the only time we have to perceive it, is in the now.
Playing with the poetic meanings of a word is not addressing what has clearly been intended in this thread.

 

[RandomVariable]

Until everyone agrees on the definition of the primary terms, such as time and perception, this will be endless talking in circles. But screw it, It's a message board!

 

[theword]

Time isn't something that's real. It is an illusion that an observer can sense if he's aware of it. Otherwise, an observer can only perceive one picture at a time that gives him the sense of motion, which is needed to sense time. Since we're only stationary information until processed into pictures, time, motion, space and matter, everything we experience is an illusion.

No one can perceive any picture until light travels. My argument is that we can't observe the present. Regardless of your theories on time, this remains true. If you want to imagine time as slices or frames which give perception of motion, that's fine... it has nothing to do with my argument.

Both light information and information that forms visible objects are processed at the same exact time to form a picture we can observe. That picture is always the present unless God gives us pictures of the future or past to observe, in which, the present can't be observed at the same time.

It seems as if you feel compelled to explain how light works to me. Try to get this through your head... We can't "observe" anything in the present. The "picture" is a snapshot of the past. This is NOT A THEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT! I don't really care what you believe God gives us or doesn't give us. I am discussing the scientific fact that physics has to happen before we can perceive anything. Light has to travel, images have to be processed, our perception of "the present" is no longer in the present, it is forever in the past.

I'm not compelled to explain how light works. It's obvious you don't understand what physicists don't understand. Physicists don't understand

Time isn't something that's real. It is an illusion that an observer can sense if he's aware of it. Otherwise, an observer can only perceive one picture at a time that gives him the sense of motion, which is needed to sense time. Since we're only stationary information until processed into pictures, time, motion, space and matter, everything we experience is an illusion.

No one can perceive any picture until light travels. My argument is that we can't observe the present. Regardless of your theories on time, this remains true. If you want to imagine time as slices or frames which give perception of motion, that's fine... it has nothing to do with my argument.

Both light information and information that forms visible objects are processed at the same exact time to form a picture we can observe. That picture is always the present unless God gives us pictures of the future or past to observe, in which, the present can't be observed at the same time.

It seems as if you feel compelled to explain how light works to me. Try to get this through your head... We can't "observe" anything in the present. The "picture" is a snapshot of the past. This is NOT A THEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT! I don't really care what you believe God gives us or doesn't give us. I am discussing the scientific fact that physics has to happen before we can perceive anything. Light has to travel, images have to be processed, our perception of "the present" is no longer in the present, it is forever in the past.

I know what you're trying to say but what you don't understand is that there's no such thing as time. Time is only observed as each picture is observed that gives us the sense of motion. All we ever see is one picture at any given moment, which is always the present. We can't possibly observe the past or present unless our Creator gives us some past or present pictures to observe, which is something I have experienced many times.

Think of us watching a movie from film, which are still pictures strung together and observed at 24 frames per second. This gives us the sense of motion as we observe the movie, even though all those pictures were filmed in the past. However, the past, present and future all exist in that film that you can store on a shelf. As you watch that movie, all you can observe is the present picture, even though it is also the past and present as it sits on that shelf. You don't even need a projector to look at the pics on film. You can observe the pictures backwards or forwards but only one picture at a time. This means you can only observe the present picture, no matter how long ago it was formed on film.

What we observe in this world isn't something outside of us, meaning there is no real universe. Everything we observe has already been programmed long before we observe it and contained as waves ( stored information ). The past, present and future exists in these waves ( information ), which can't be observed until this information is processed for us to observe a picture. If it would be possible for us to stop this flow of information like we can with a movie projector, you would be observing one picture, which would be the present picture. It would be impossible to see the next picture or the one before it, which would be the past picture.

This means we're always observing the present picture despite all the rest of the pictures that exist in that program that contains the past, present and future pictures as only information.

 

[Boss]

I'm not compelled to explain how light works. It's obvious you don't understand what physicists don't understand. Physicists don't understand

Hold on... Physicists DO understand light travels and that what we "see" is reflection of light which has travelled. Do you have anything to offer which contradicts this or not?

 

[Boss]

All you've explained is that perceptions are at work. Perceptions are one hundred percent subjective, so almost certainly different from every other sentient being's. The only thing we have to perceive, and the only time we have to perceive it, is in the now.
Playing with the poetic meanings of a word is not addressing what has clearly been intended in this thread.

What you seem to not be grasping is, our 'perception' isn't relevant. We can't OBSERVE the present.

I am not playing with words or poetic meaning of words, whatever the hell that meant, I am explaining that the instant we perceive as "present" or "the now" or whatever term you wish to apply to that instant, is unobservable to humans. Before we can observe it, physics has to happen and time has to pass... this means, ANYTHING we perceive is already in the past. The only perception humans have is of time passed.

 

[Boss]

I know what you're trying to say but what you don't understand is that there's no such thing as time. Time is only observed as each picture is observed that gives us the sense of motion. All we ever see is one picture at any given moment, which is always the present. We can't possibly observe the past or present unless our Creator gives us some past or present pictures to observe, which is something I have experienced many times.

Think of us watching a movie from film, which are still pictures strung together and observed at 24 frames per second. This gives us the sense of motion as we observe the movie, even though all those pictures were filmed in the past. However, the past, present and future all exist in that film that you can store on a shelf. As you watch that movie, all you can observe is the present picture, even though it is also the past and present as it sits on that shelf. You don't even need a projector to look at the pics on film. You can observe the pictures backwards or forwards but only one picture at a time. This means you can only observe the present picture, no matter how long ago it was formed on film.

What we observe in this world isn't something outside of us, meaning there is no real universe. Everything we observe has already been programmed long before we observe it and contained as waves ( stored information ). The past, present and future exists in these waves ( information ), which can't be observed until this information is processed for us to observe a picture. If it would be possible for us to stop this flow of information like we can with a movie projector, you would be observing one picture, which would be the present picture. It would be impossible to see the next picture or the one before it, which would be the past picture.

This means we're always observing the present picture despite all the rest of the pictures that exist in that program that contains the past, present and future pictures as only information.

Why do you keep explaining this like I don't get it? I fully understand the concept you're talking about and it has nothing to do with my argument... this makes the third time I've tried to explain that to you. I am not contradicting what you're saying here but it just doesn't relate to what I am saying.

The "present picture" you're observing has already happened and you couldn't possibly observe it when it happened because physics and time had to transpire first. Just as you don't see a movie or film until light travels through the film and gets projected on the screen, bounces off the screen and travels to your eyes, then is computed by your brain... all that didn't happen instantly. It took time for light to travel.. it seemed like "now" to you, but it wasn't.

The physical fact is, we are NOT always observing the present, we can't observe the present. We have a perception which relies on faith.

 

[edthecynic]

I'm not compelled to explain how light works. It's obvious you don't understand what physicists don't understand. Physicists don't understand

Hold on... Physicists DO understand light travels and that what we "see" is reflection of light which has travelled. Do you have anything to offer which contradicts this or not?

But physicists know that time is independent of sight, as was already pointed out to you.

 

[edthecynic]

The physical fact is, we are NOT always observing the present, we can't observe the present. We have a perception which relies on faith.

The physical fact is, the present does not depend on being observed to exist and thus requires no faith.

 

[edthecynic]

If you are watching the sunset in Hawaii and I am watching a meteor shower in Alabama, is our perception of "present" the same?

Your perception of WHERE is different, but the present, which is not a perception but a slice of time, is the same.

 

[theword]

I'm not compelled to explain how light works. It's obvious you don't understand what physicists don't understand. Physicists don't understand

Hold on... Physicists DO understand light travels and that what we "see" is reflection of light which has travelled. Do you have anything to offer which contradicts this or not?

We don't see reflected light at all. Light is actually information in the form of waves. These waves have to be processed along with the waves that form the objects for us to observe a picture. We observe waves of information, not actual moving objects. These waves of information are like observing a cinema film, one picture at a time at a fast enough rate to make objects appear to move. Light isn't something that moves. It's observed one picture at a time at a very fast rate that we call the speed of light. There are physicists who understand this now.