Is Leo's view of time correct?

[Leo Gura]

Do you remember that time you were a kid?

Well, you're imaging it.

Funny how time works.

[Anderz]

Quantum mechanics is definitely an accurate theory. But it's not necessarily random. The pilot wave interpretation of quantum mechanics is deterministic, and it has gained popularity recently. For example experiments with ordinary droplets have produced quantum effects such as shown in this video:

And physicist Stephen Hawking wrote:

Quote

"Maybe that is our mistake: maybe there are no particle positions and velocities, but only waves. It is just that we try to fit the waves to our preconceived ideas of positions and velocities. The resulting mismatch is the cause of the apparent unpredictability." - A Brief History of Time, Ch. 12

 

[mandyjw]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Do you remember that time you were a kid?

Well, you're imaging it.

Funny how time works.

I remember that my parents used to argue all the time about past shared memories, one remembered it one way and the other another, and it always ended with my dad calling my mom crazy, but mom didn't have to call dad crazy because she already knew he was crazy. 

Oh wait.  DO I remember that? 

 

[Anderz]

@Leo Gura But instead of imagining the past, what if the past is actually real? I even propose that the past is changeless and indestructible. Imagine (well, that's maybe not the best word to choose here but anyway) all of the past infinitely compressed into the present moment. And the past has a definite timeline of the entire history of the universe, even though it only exists now.

[seeking_brilliance]

What about the home videos? What did they record? 

[Leo Gura]

10 minutes ago, Anderz said:

@Leo Gura But instead of imagining the past, what if the past is actually real? I even propose that the past is changeless and indestructible. Imagine (well, that's maybe not the best word to choose here but anyway) all of the past infinitely compressed into the present moment. And the past has a definite timeline of the entire history of the universe, even though it only exists now.

Imagination IS reality.

Reality is however you imagine it is. So if you imagine definite timelines of the entire universe, that's what you create. And if you say you didn't create it, but that it was there before you came along, then that's what you imagine/create.

The key is to understand that YOU ARE FUCKING DOING IT!

6 minutes ago, seeking_brilliance said:

What about the home videos? What did they record? 

You mean the ones you're imagining now?

[Member]

1 hour ago, Anderz said:

@Member Your view sounds similar to Leo's view of time. I have a problem grasping that view. Time being a result of a changeless foundation makes more sense to me. And with consciousness being the infinite changeless reality experiencing itself in finite form makes all parts one: 1) the unmanifested, 2) the manifested and 3) consciousness. The problem I have with multiple timelines is that I don't see how any choice-making function can exist that can alter reality by whim, choice or randomness.

“If you want to find the secrets of the Universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.” — Nikola Tesla

[Leo Gura]

If you want to find the secrets of the Universe, don't think at all.

[seeking_brilliance]

27 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You mean the ones you're imagining now?

yeah those ones. Just speaking within story terms, watching a home video is at least a more unified "sequence of events" than two people trying to recount the same story from memory.  It appears to stay the same whether I show the home video to no one, or to hundreds, quite unlike telling a story with words.  Maybe this has nothing to do with time but do you have any thing to say about it? Maybe I'm asking more about recording vs recounting. 

Edited July 7, 2020 by seeking_brilliance

[Member]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

If you want to find the secrets of the Universe, don't think at all.

But Leo, thinking is part of the Uni-verse. Isn't the Universe mental?

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, seeking_brilliance said:

yeah those ones. Just speaking within story terms, watching a home video is at least a more unified "sequence of events" than two people trying to recount the same story from memory.  It appears to stay the same whether I show the home video to no one, or to hundreds, quite unlike telling a story with words.  Maybe this has nothing to do with time but do you have any thing to say about it? Maybe I'm asking more about recording vs recounting. 

Well... your consciousness and mind is going through a very complex and elaborate process to link up those images on the recording to your entire view of reality and your mind is positioning those images within a certain mental framework which you call time and your personal story.

This mental process is so sophisticated and complex that it's basically impossible to map out in a logical linear sequence.

3 minutes ago, Member said:

But Leo, thinking is part of the Uni-verse. Isn't the Universe mental?

The deepest part of the mental is prior to thought.

[seeking_brilliance]

whew good thing the character doesn't have to do all the leg work.. just sit back and enjoy. Thanks. 

[Member]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The deepest part of the mental is prior to thought.

True that, but thinking won't hurt either, right? Should I stop thinking? Or there should be a balance between thinking/empty mind?

[Anderz]

Sometimes people say that time is thought. That may be true for past and future. There is also the flow of time in the now. And the flow of time can be experienced without thought.

And the past is experienced through memories, or recordings like the home videos mentioned. That's a representation, a re-presentation, of the actual past. I still believe though that the actual past always exists and is indestructible. A memory loss is a second order phenomenon. Memory can be gained again sometimes. The true past is the information Leonard Susskind talked about. Wait, I will do a YouTube search to see if I can find where he said it....

Yay, I found it! From around 11 minutes into this video Susskind says: "At the moment, this is the deepest law of physics I know: and it's that bits of information are indestructible."

 

[Leo Gura]

Time is purely a function of your current state of consciousness. If your state changes enough, time will cease to exist.

[Anderz]

@Leo Gura I assume you are talking about direct experience. I try to figure out time intellectually. I will take a look at your interview with Peter Ralston.

 

[remember]

On 1.7.2020 at 4:16 PM, Anderz said:

There isn't any past stretching back an infinite numbers of years into the past. Time has a beginning, now, and no end. So the correct way to say it is that the now will exist forever, not that it has existed forever.

no. this is actually just an explanatory construct to make a sense of time understandable, but you fail to see that time does not exist. there is a huge difference in making the experience and illusion of time graspable but it does not point towards the underlying phenomenon. there is actually only the now and the now is forever.

[Anderz]

@remember I believe that time is real and can be explained. To deny time altogether seems like a cop out to me, although I'm not entirely sure yet about my understanding of the existence or nonexistence of time.

[remember]

7 minutes ago, Anderz said:

@remember I believe that time is real and can be explained. To deny time altogether seems like a cop out to me, although I'm not entirely sure yet about my understanding of the existence or nonexistence of time.

yes, go on believing. believing is not understanding - those who want to stay ignorant stay ignorant. time is the cop out for what is unexplainable, it is the measuring stick for how fast energy can move or decay. your perception of it is the relativity of speed to your awareness. but speed is not time, it is movement.

Edited July 7, 2020 by remember

[seeking_brilliance]

Stories can't be written without 'time'. They would be senseless. The time phenomenon can be appreciated without being believed or identified.