Time & Mind: Was Einstein Wrong About Time?

[@DrFuzzyFace]

What a monochromatic world it would be without such resources as the Essentia Foundation and its quorum of brilliant and informed thinkers. Thank you all.🧡

[@rossmcleod7983]

Well said !

[@youtubebane7036]

Bernard the reason you are you is because that is your identity. That is the one thing that only you possesses that nobody else does out of an infinite number of infinite for an infinite number of eternities. Even when this most prized possession that is your own self is shared as it always is with infinity because you are part of it there is still that little part that is you because that is the only one that there is that is you completely unique 100% One of a kind for all Infiniti of Infiniti of eternity an existence is you are the only one of these things that there will ever be whether you're an atheist or religious that is a fact both ways. There's only one of you that will ever be and there's only one of you that's ever been and that is a completely unique thing that will never be replicated or reproduced anywhere else. That is what people don't understand identity is the very first thing besides movement.

[@seanmcdonough8815]

Interesting to read this comment when I just came up with my thought that if you go back far enough, time was just a color, Everything was fine.... Then nothing happened,; has been happening at the speed of light ever since

[@PursuitofWisdomPodcast]

I'm actually viewing in monochromatic mode and I can testify that, even without colour, this is an excellent video!

[@premakau]

We are fools to think the Universe is a permanently cooked cake and you can go on feasting.. but poor earthly creatures! If there is a meaning for the word volatile that is this universe.. the milky way is always moving changing directions and density... All life and matter in the sky of multiverses and milky way is ever changing.. actually the change is as quick as your wink..we look to move and change slow ..but that's how it's conducted.. all changes reach us , the earthly creatures , in relation to the ratio of changes in the universe and on this earth.. So all results of your experiments are not really giving correct answers.. all the results of your costly experiments are belated and worn out before it reaches the earth..still a few changes trickle down..that gives you a scope for further experiments...

[@hubertjosephposadas2643]

Thank you for hosting this conference. Though I am just a curious layman, I find that these inquiries and discussions add value to all of us even if I am just barely able to understand the ideas presented. It leaves me in awe and stretches my mind

[@walkabout16]

In realms where physics intertwines with thought, Where time's elusive dance is deeply wrought, The scholars gather, minds ablaze, to ponder, The mysteries of time, its spell we're under. Einstein's legacy, a towering might, Yet shadows linger, questions taking flight, Was he mistaken, in his grasp of time's embrace? Or does the truth reside in a subtler space? Newton's clockwork universe, precise and grand, With time as a river, flowing at its hand, But relativity whispers, bending the stream, A dance of spacetime, in a cosmic dream. Quantum mysteries, where particles entwine, In a dance of uncertainty, where time may redefine, Do they hold the key to consciousness's sway, Or is there more to time than we dare say? The second law, a decree of entropy's reign, A arrow of time, flowing against the grain, Yet within our minds, does time find its home, A subjective journey, where moments roam? Idealism's gaze, casting shadows long, Philosophical ponderings, a timeless song, Neurophysics, psychology, the mind's terrain, In search of answers, through each winding lane. Essentia Foundation, a beacon bright, Guiding seekers through the depths of night, In the convergence of minds, a symphony plays, Time and consciousness, in an endless maze. So let us journey, with open minds unfurled, Exploring the mysteries of this time-bound world, For in the union of science and thought, we find, The essence of existence, in the tapestry of Time and Mind.

[@globalticaret1316]

Time as a Superposition in Higher Dimensions: This notion suggests that our perception of time as a linear progression may be an oversimplification of a more complex reality. Instead of time unfolding linearly as we experience it, it could exist in a superposition state within higher-dimensional spaces. In this view, time would not flow strictly from past to future but could encompass multiple potential timelines or configurations simultaneously. Elaboration: Consider time as a dimension similar to the three spatial dimensions we perceive, but with additional dimensions beyond our comprehension. In this framework, time could exist in a superposition of states, analogous to how quantum particles can exist in multiple states simultaneously until observed. From our limited perspective, we perceive time as progressing linearly, but in higher-dimensional reality, time may exhibit a more intricate structure, encompassing multiple possibilities and configurations.

[@MatejPavšič-i3k]

A discussion along similar lines can be found in the paper "On the Quantization of Gravity by Embedding Space-time in a Higher Dimensional Space", Classical and Quantum Gravity 2 (1985) 869 and some other subsequent papers of mine.

[@mrhaze000]

❤

[@jasongreen6447]

Enjoyed that Thank you

[@garygoldberg9906]

The issue of 'separate identity' and the fundamental privacy of personal experience in the context of that which is inaccessible and internal is addressed in the work on 'quantum information' by Federico Faggin and G Mauro D'Ariano which also has deep implications for an understanding of time as a fundamental mediator of trans-action within the hidden relational realm of the quantum substratum. Which can be found in a paper titled 'Hard Problem and Free Will: an information-theoretical approach' co-authored by Faggin and D'Ariano which incorporates quantum information.

[@tamarakoltermann-vw7pe]

Thank you! I am following this shimmery path.

[@aaphantasiaa]

The inconsistency and uniqueness of Smolin’s slides is truly a work of art 😂

[@brendangreeves3775]

All truth is relative and dynamical. Change is absolutely fundamental. Patterns of change ( in magnitude and angle) manifest in infinite dimensions as energy, matter, consciousness, and the passage of time. The world of everyday experience is , given the constraints, a three - dimensional sum over histories in the infinite.

[@jasongreen6447]

Interesting

[@Wtf-eva]

Maybe consciousness originates in a higher or lower dimension and so it may not be included in our theory of everything in our dimension. And maybe time is actually in a superposition in a higher dimension and we perceive it linear in ours.

[@HarryAcorns]

Get your head out of the clouds. 😉

[@Wtf-eva]

@@HarryAcorns 😶‍🌫️ I do enjoy to theorize about such topics.

[@blijebij]

I totally agree on your last line, that is an interesting perspective. Nevertheless, I think we totally have a wrong view on what Time truly is. It is a bit like the label curved SpaceTime, as a teen what did that induce inside my imagination, well that SpaceTime is a fabric of something whats however. So something is really curved physically. I think the same effect plays on us for Time, we experience it as a Dimension on it self. I do not believe that is the case however. What am I sure of, that we humans are very conditioned, more then we like to admit probably.

[@Wtf-eva]

@@blijebij censored by the human perception of reality.

[@jasongreen6447]

It's brilliant to have thought's and ideas

[@spandon]

This is so good, many thanks. Keeping Don Hoffman and Bernardo Kastrup in the wings, ready for the next one....hopefully...

[@surrendertoflow78]

I’m sooooo happy these conversations are happening! I just wish they had been when I was in academia years ago and I had been a part of it! So grateful to the Essentia Foundation for putting this out there to keep us all thinking and wondering and delighting in the journey!

[@tamarakoltermann-vw7pe]

You very much are part of it. If anything, this implies that you may have always been part of this conversation, academic attendance notwithstanding. This is time to gather and embrace all aspects of yourself to fully participate at this time. The timeline that you are in has perfectly prepated you for full participation in this precious present moment.

[@surrendertoflow78]

@@tamarakoltermann-vw7pe I can’t thank you enough for taking the time to reply with such kind words. It means the world to me to be a part of it. ❤

[@goran586]

The Escher hands imply that the experiencer creates the experience that is then experienced in a recursive loop out of which reality rises.

[@James-ll3jb]

Trivial.

[@michaelodriscoll]

The experience is the experiencer, know Thyself. Namaste 🙏

[@dimitrispapadimitriou5622]

M.C. Escher was not a mystic or Idealist. On the contrary... He had expressed his point of view about such things...

[@goran586]

@@dimitrispapadimitriou5622 That may well be true, but once a work of art has left the artist's hand, he loses his exclusive right to its metaphorical implications, which are in the eye of the beholder.

[@jasongreen6447]

Interesting

[@ronaldbolton7338]

An interesting aside to the specious time idea is the great American baseball player who claimed back in the 40's, when he played the game, that time "slowed down for him to the point that he could see the rotation of the ball as it approached and could react to it in ways that others couldn't. Interestingly he claimed to be able to smell the impact of the ball against the bat the horsehide of the ball striking his bat. Many have claimed he was full of it, but there is little doubt he was most likely the greatest hitter of all time. And perhaps his explanation is an example of this phenomena.

[@jasongreen6447]

Super interesting And totally understandable The world is not just what we know but what we experience

[@garygoldberg9906]

The challenge of dealing with time is to recognize there is a fundamental distinction between a materialistic/nominalistic worldview with which one can associate the function of the left cerebral hemisphere and is a form of time which is synchronic and 'chronotic' and, effectively, spatialized, as Henri Bergson would argue, versus a form of time that is fundamentally relational, intersubjective, qualitative, diachronic and 'kairotic' and is associated with the function of the 'relationally-oriented' right cerebral hemisphere. The former 'chronotic' time is 'the time of the physicist' is quantitative and numerical involving the counting of oscillations of a physical system that is a stable oscillator--it exists but it is linear, and it is NOT continuous NOR is it real. The latter form of 'kairotic' time, associated with Bergson's 'La Durée', however, is relational, intersubjective, and it IS continuous, circular, AND it IS real.

[@tamarakoltermann-vw7pe]

Thank you so much for this!

[@dughlasmont]

Bernardo, Thank you. You have my sincere respect and gratitude for the work you have done. You have made a tremendous impact on my understanding of important philosophical concepts concerning the nature of reality.

[@MattsHandle]

Why do we corroborate each other’s experience? Under classical physics, the simplest explanation was that mentality is a map of physical territory. With QM, the Born Rule, Bell’s inequality, the invocation of internal symmetries in abstract Hilbert space, etc, this hypothesis of a physical world to explain our mutual corroboration is the no longer the simplest one; in fact it's become impossibly complicated (many worlds etc). Maybe QM suggests that we’ve been confusing the map and the territory. Maybe the realm of Mind/Qualia/Experience is the territory, and QM is the map, and then there’s no remaining impetus to invoke anything physical/objective at all. I suspect the mathematical models of physics are the best-yet attempt for predicting our mutual corroborations/constraints in a purely mental domain, and that's it. I wonder more people don’t entertain this “zero worlds” idea. This view is entirely scientific, if you reframe science as the most sophisticated and rigorous method for prediction of experience, rather than any description of a "natural world".

[@MarvinMonroe]

A lot of these people seem to conflate mind and consciousness. Im a fan of Vedanta which says mind is a product of the brain. So mind is just a more subtle form of matter than the body is. But both mind and body are matter. Consciousness/pure awareness/existence observes the mind. And thats the "true self"

[@Robinson8491]

Awesome, was really looking forward to this one. Much appreciated guys/gals!

[@bmillerbiop]

I so much appreciate these presentations and discussion. It further confirms what I’ve come to suspect about the fundamental nature of existence. One point of confusion though, is the concept of an evolving block universe. In the Einsteinian view, isn’t "block time" also part of the model? Evolution implies a process that unfolds over time, which wouldn’t square with an eternal, timeless “Now”. This might be resolved in the Idealist position that the Block is that inaccessible domain behind Bernardo’s frequent analogy of a dashboard, and it is simply our experience or “view” (Smollin?) that evolves. Perhaps this is also what Bernard Carr refers to as an additional dimension? At any rate, I look foreward to watching this again!

[@Autobotmatt428]

Glad you guys got George Ellis

[@nobodyxxxxxxxx]

What a condescending prick. The way he laughs while "answering" the questions presented to him is abhorrent.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

dream and imagination are different dimension(s) than 4D space-time?

[@andrebenoit283]

Been reading some Heidegger and Bergson lately. What a timely recommendation.

[@marlobardo4274]

Nathan Seiberg is absolutely correct when he says: "I am almost certain that space and time are illusions. These are primitive notions that will be replaced by something more sophisticated"... the more sophisticated notion he is wanting to make space for is none other than spacetime....

[@Jacobk-g7r]

The relationship between mind and time is simple. Time is a measurement of difference. That’s why time is set by an atomic clock and we have time zones for light but not other things. Time itself is just the measurement of the differences between each other. The mind is grown differences through experiences and such. The mind grows its folds in relation to the differences absorbed by our sensors. Those folds are the neurons and the differences grown into our body/difference. These folds influence the body and the body manipulated reality to find things within the connections of differences. So time and mind are similar because the differences and connections that build both of them.

[@Ryan-eu3kp]

That was a good read, thanks.

[@FrancisGo.]

If an observer were to approach a null geodesic by accelerating close to the speed of light, they and their clock would perceive less time passing than a standard, earth bound dudebro. So time is not absolute. The absolute substance is by definition the only substance from which all things are derived. So time must not be a fault in the stars, for entropy is in the eye of the beholder. 😂 Kenosis. 😮

[@nickergodos1554]

It would be interesting to hear the panel's view on the Free will theorem by Kochen and Conway

[@techteampxla2950]

I enjoyed = The Setting of the talk felt very traditional and was welcoming and warming. The Guests where amazing and every one was epic and information presented in the time given was amazingly compacted by each guest very well, finally the topic did center on TIME but I was happy it felt very investigative and thus not to dismiss all areas of our reality, like philosophy, psychology, physics, and so many more subjects involved it was great!

[@KipIngram]

13:04 - No one ever makes this point as strongly as they should. The idea that "mind is fundamental" outright SOLVES the fine tuning problem. It just makes it go away. It's a simple argument. Minds exist, and they have perceptions that they call "the physical world." It's manifestly necessary that whatever physical world we perceive be one that is compatible with the existence of minds, since minds exist in the first place as a POSTULATE. Problem solved. Next?

[@Just1morehour]

Ok first we need to talk about terminology in the way that “changing” and “creating” are COMPLETELY different….we don’t CHANGE the future…we CREATE it. We cannot CHANGE something that hasn’t happened yet. A completely different concept. Moving on…..

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

might branching in quantum time be based on conscious experience rather than choice?

[@michaeldillon3113]

It would be good to have the great spiritual orator Swami Sarvapriyananda at a conference like this . His knowledge of Advaita Vedanta ( plus his knowledge of physics and consciousness) would add a lot to this discussion. It may also help introduce Advaita Vedanta to scientists who aren't yet aware of it . Many scientists already are , Schrödinger certainly was and very impressed by it . E=🕉️

[@KipIngram]

Kaluza did not require that the fifth dimension was compactified to the Planck scale. It just needs to be smaller than we can observe.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

could an electromagnetic field expand space away, sending back photons (light) as it does? in pulling the past away, expansion of space makes room for future?

[@riadhalrabeh3783]

I found a mechanical definition of time. If we have a universe of radiation alone, it is not possible to define either time or space. But the moment radiation self-traps to form mass by going in closed loops, time is formed. It is the number of rounds radiation makes as it goes round. This is a number and goes in one direction exactly like time. If there is more than one mass created in this way, space is defined by sending light to go an reflect back while counting time. The distance is derived from d=c . f. So, both time and distance are created when matter is created. This is also the way the SI standard of units defines the second and meter, by the frequency of rotation/oscillation and the meter by the number of wavelengths.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

conscious experience, abstract thought, emotional free will, physical choice

[@Jacobk-g7r]

The intro where he says time is an emergent property and then says the small doesnt have time is wrong but close. Time is an emergent property of difference, its a measurement of the difference between differences. between 1 and 8 there are several differences and math equations that expose the differences just like our differences expose realities differences.

[@dbz5808]

Not far from Cincinnati Ohio there is a somewhat smaller scale reproduction of the Eiffel Tower in an amusement park called King's Island. From the top of the tower one can see the entire park all at once- rollercoasters, games, food, water rides, and water park, you name it. But as you can imagine, experiencing the park in this manner is very different than actually riding the rides. When a soul descends the Eiffel Tower of the block universe and starts riding the rollercoasters, it experiences time and everything else entirely differently.

[@thecosmicdoorway]

There’s not just a theory of everything. There is a theory above everything.

[@Meditation409]

That was very nice!! Awesome debate and I am always learning new things!!!❤❤

[@KipIngram]

No one has ever seen a tachyon - they've only talked about them. And no one has ever seen a closed timelike curve either. Just because our model predicts correct results does not mean that every prediction of our model is valid. There is no traveling into the past, because what MAKES something the past is the formation of memories of it. Once those memories are formed, they're formed and they don't go away. I'm not talking about just "our" memories - I'm talking about the memories of Bernardo Kastrup's single universal consciousness - some of which we consciously share, and some of which we unconsciously share.

[@butgazzi]

This conference would have profited from Chris Langan’s cognitive theoretic model of the universe (CTMU). But great discussion.

[@user-cg3tx8zv1h]

I wish the subtitles were fully complete...

[@donahunt832]

yes, i found it difficult to understand a lot of the speakers on subjects which is already difficult to comprehend...was anyone else stuck by the fact that so many of these experts seem to have some neurologic issues?? is that a function of age??

[@winstongludovatz111]

@52mins: the first speaker seems to say that a physical system dynamics is linear if things move along straight lines!!. Earlier is unaware that Bohmian mechanics explains delayed choice experiments without retrocausal activity from the future (arXiv:1602.06100v1).

[@dimitrispapadimitriou5622]

26:30 ... and what about hypothetical spacetimes that expanding and then contracing to a Big Crunch? These also have a global arrow of time.

[@rckindkitty]

An absolutely wonderful collection of perspectives. Thank you, all.

[@massoverride478]

when you time your perfect clock(subatomic) with the perfect time(a proper conjunction) of the universe you will start to understand the connection to all matter when the mind finds and remembers it can finally grasp the infinite

[@josephturner7569]

Most scientists have many theoretical propositions. Some of us have only two. Consciousness is fundamental. Evolution us true.

[@nathanfilbert2649]

Is it a variation of where a 'cut' occurs? The event of activity of a participant (of any participantly available scale) determines (in a scalar way) experiencable change (at scale of participant)? inherently? All 'is' as registering of change? And therefore a constant & complexly participantly unique registering of activity/change but only ever referential or indicative at scale of participant register?

[@PaulHigginbothamSr]

The wave function of the universe has time trapped inside it as the wave nature means a time between crests. Not stubbornly consistent illusion but a prime factor of space/time.

[@youtubebane7036]

The guy saying that the universe will never be infinite is wrong because potential Infiniti is just as valid as infinite Infinity because something that is always expanding that has nothing to stop it as Newton's law says that something in motion tends the same thing goes for expansion growth and multiplying deciding and condensing.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

nesting of time provides choice of emotion and abstraction as well as experiencing consciousness?

[@jupiterthesun3217]

The Toroidal universe model is so similar to the understanding of our ancient ancestors who somehow were able to imagine the snake ( the universe ) eating its own tail. I am at awe 🫢 of how our ancient ancestors had had the understanding of that possibly very true nature of our universe.

[@roundedges2]

Relaytivity: It seems to me that two things far apart do not exist in the same reality. In order to be in the same reality, you need to establish a physical connection between the two. But to do that you need Communicate I.E. something must travel from one to the other-and that takes…TIME. The farther away from each other the more time it takes and the greater the separation from each other’s (instantaneous) reality. An independent observer is even worse, because he/she must connect with both at the same time.

[@cuddywifter8386]

Interesting, how the same people who want to deny or reduce the wave function also want to deny extension across time, to take us back to classical Newtonian picture.

[@barryzeeberg3672]

"Time & Mind: Was Einstein Wrong About Time?" should be: It's About Time that Einstein was Wrong

[@KipIngram]

Wheels proposed quasars as a SOURCE OF PHOTONS, and those photons are definitively quantum. He wasn't doing anything with "the whole quasar" as a macroscopic object.

[@Luke1959]

"Time flies like an arrow........fruit flies like a banana."

[@davidboonzaier4098]

Sayings

[@davidboonzaier4098]

Said

[@deepblack67]

Regarding Paranormal experience, the abstract void of Spacetime has messed up our thinking, a Medium or Substrate for the different vibrations that we see - light, matter, radiation, electricity, EM fields, gravity, Mind, Space (vacuum energy) - answers what and how we experience the Paranormal, as well as Memory and consciousness. Mind or big C (consciousness) as the Buddhists say is Space, and Space is Information. There is no Self, no observer, in isolation, Relationship and Process are the Functions of a Resonant Medium defined by a Harmonic Structure. "The Universe is a Wave, which manifests Harmonics, and each of these Harmonics manifest their own Harmonics." Ray Tomes.

[@user-cg3tx8zv1h]

@3:04:07I believe it is a conflicting notion to state that; having a meter to gauge these aspects would enable a skeptic to embrace open-mindedness... With all due respect.

[@karlschmied6218]

We have Wittgenstein, but everyone here is ignoring him, playing word games with terms like "Illusion" , "reality", "existence" etc.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

is quantum mechanics needed for the future, and is the future needed to start universe?

[@johndunn5272]

Using the notion of time if we consider half the expansion of the universe does then this imply a Fourier unfolding of the universe where this is a link between the fourier and the laws.

[@dr.satishsharma1362]

Excellent.... thanks 🙏.

[@deanchadwick7443]

Thank you for a brilliant time listening to experts about what else time. It’s one of many topics that has had conscious humanity puzzled, but certainly one of the few that really does get the philosophical mind going. Three dimensional space , time and energy, keep delving deep into our conscious minds

[@andrei_fyi]

the evolving version doesn't mean we have free will, the computation is still determined, even if it's executing

[@mornnb]

I'm not sure why we need to give the universe new properties to explain subjective experience including the subjective experience of the passage of time - is the concept of emergence not enough to make sense of how it may arise out of a neural network system? And why are we surprised that we have yet to figure out the exact working of it, the brain is insanely complicated. The most complicated thing in the known universe.

[@baraskparas9559]

Space and time are man made definitions. Even though an objects' dimensions can change with time there is no such thing as space- time which is more confabulation than science. Just change definitions to make descriptive equations work? Hell no. Gravity warps space-time? Hell no.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

what could be objective time for physical reality / universe? can ratio of dark energy expansion of space and age of universe be used to develop objective time?

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

an infinite time of consciousness would be of different character (subjective?) than objective nature of physical reality, emotional energy, and abstract thought?

[@user-bu9nb8wr6e]

Just change the word time to change and movement that’s what time is. From the smallest movement to the largest. It’s not hard life if you don’t let the ego blur your vision.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

quantum wave function measured in present when expansion of space pulls classic past away?

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

is quantum mechanics needed to make observations of past? the past has both classical and quantum?

[@JungleJargon]

Scientists have no response for this observation. The speed of light C isn’t constant since the measures of time and distance aren’t constant over larger distances. It’s like changing from 60 kilometers an hour to 60 miles an hour increases your speed. Then if you go from 60 miles an hour to 60 miles a minute it increases your speed even more. This what is happening in general relativity when less gravity increases the measure of distance and speeds up the rate of time over large distances. It also means that the earth is younger than what they claim. The universe doesn’t care about how young the earth is. Actually the changes in time and distance compound the changes in the speed of light. Do a thought experiment. Hold your hands a foot apart representing 186,000 miles saying “one thousand and one” representing one second while pretending to see an imaginary photon going from one hand to the other. Now expand the distance saying “one thousand and one” as fast as you can. You should notice that the speed of the imaginary photon increases the farther away from the center of the galaxy it is. This eliminates the need for dark matter because it makes everything move faster the less gravity there is. Dark energy isn’t needed it’s accumulation of the pull of gravity on the light that causes the redshift.

[@holgerjrgensen2166]

Life and Consciousness is Eternal, Stuff-side of Life, is a Motion-Ocean, time is the 'shadow' of Motion. Time do Only exist in the Mind of Living Beings, Life-side. Change become Motion, Motion become Time, and Time become Time-Spaces, memoires in our Consciousness.

[@MatejPavšič-i3k]

I greatly enjoyed these talks. I would like to bring to attention of the audience that the connection between consciousness, physics, and higher dimensions was discussed long ago in my paper "On the Quantization of Gravity by Embedding Space-time in a Higher Dimensional Space", Classical and Quantum Gravity, 2 (1985) 869. Among other, in that paper it stays: "In a normal, awake, state an observer is continuously measuring (at least with his sense organs) the proper time; he has no idea of ’other worlds’. Besides this situation, our theory also predicts a situation in which an observer does not measure the proper time, and as a compensation he can then have some knowledge about the distribution of matter through the higher space, i.e. he can experience in some way the existence of alternative worlds. Has this last prediction any relation to reality? My conjecture is that it has. Remember that an observer is not always in an awake state of consciousness. He can be under the influence of hypnosis, drugs, etc, or he can simply sleep and dream. When in such a state of consciousness, he is no longer precisely ‘measuring’ the proper time; he is not aware of the usual three-dimensional space or world, but nevertheless he is aware of something: he experiences various hallucinations, dreams, etc. Is this related to some certain extent with the existence of higher dimensional space and alternative worlds?" At that time, mentioning consciousness in a physics paper published in a physics journal was not very common. The concept of a three dimensional "now", perceived by consciousness, moving in a higher dimensional space (for example, one with three time dimensions), has been explored in several of my other publications. How Einstein's "block universe" can be superseded by introducing, besides the special relativity time coordinate, t, an additional time, referred to as "evolution time" or tau, has been considered by some physicists following Stueckelberg's initial proposal. In such theories, the wave function depends on tau and four spacetime coordinates and can be localized in spacetime, meaning it is localized not only in space but also in the time coordinate t. The region of such localization moves forward along t as tau increases. In my paper "On the interpretation of the relativistic quantum mechanics with invariant evolution parameter", Foundations of Physics 21 (1991) 1005, I argued that the localization of wave function in time implies that the observer is sharply aware only of a brief time interval around the "now", and that the tau is the time perceived by consciousness. This concept corresponds to "specious present" as considered by Bernard. In the works, superficially discussed in this brief comment, one can find how some of the concepts presented in the fascinating talks on this KZbin channel can be formalized within the framework of higher dimensional theories and parametrized relativistic quantum mechanics.

[@blijebij]

* Is this related to some certain extent with the existence of higher dimensional space and alternative worlds?"* Personally I do not think so, Consciousness has always an experience intrinsic quality in it (see hypnosis or dreaming, where association is central, or lucid dream research from Stephen Laberge). Your interest in self reference is one i also share. Awareness is in my view a holographic, information&relation system with self reference.

[@KipIngram]

We don't KNOW that space becomes granular and non-continuous. We are simply unable to observe physical space at scales smaller than that. That's it. Please be careful what words you choose.

[@lorenh763]

Interestingly, no one who thinks time is unreal is able to make a description or even a single statement without invoking it. Made that is evidence enough it is real and even fundamental

[@jj4cpw]

I hope at some point Bernardo explains what Lee Smolin was saying as, in the view of this amateur (in the Latin sense of the word), it seems extremely consequential, especially considering the source.

[@dpec2895]

I dare say that Einstein’s claim of time being an illusion is being grossly misinterpretated…. He surely meant time-space is different from just time perception of the common people. He does not mean literally that time frame doesn’t exist (or is a mere illusion), but that it is entangled with space and speed of light….

[@winstonsmith8240]

I've recently suffered a great loss 😢. I'm told "time's a great healer." 🤔 Anyone know where I can get some ?

[@xeniko1226]

You need energy to have time. Time is simply how we perceive all the processes and energy transfers occuring simultaneously around us all the time. Chemical energy converted into kinetic energy for all living beings who survive off of nuclear energy from the sun being converted to thermal energy and warming our planet thus creating countless and constant energy transfers. Anything that moves or changes gives us the perception of time and anything that moves or changes contains energy. That is my ideas on time. Does being near a very dense object slow these processes down so that they occur at a slower rate (aging would be one of these processes and possibly conciousness or perception itself could be one of these processes. Edit: I believe time doesn’t go in reverse because it isn’t even possible. If it goes backwards in time we might perceive it as forwards anyways. In the literal sense without any “handicaps” it would be simply because the energy transfers do not and cannot behave in that way. You would have to change physics in a very specific and seemingly impossible way to allow energy transfers to reverse but if every single energy transfer that changed the world around you doesn’t reverse then the time wouldn’t “reverse” as it was. Every energy transfer that carried away the energy of our loved ones or they could not come back the same way. This would be incredibly complicated and is completely theoretical.

[@youtubebane7036]

mind is definitely composed of the multiple streams of Consciousness we are just tuned into one frequency right now.

[@X-boomer]

I think Carr has lost the plot. He admitted right at the start that he is obsessing over meaningless questions like “Why am I me”? He supposes that his sense of self has some kind of fundamental importance. It really doesn’t. His body exists; there has to be *somebody* in there. And whoever it turns it out to be will be astonished to find himself there. Just like everybody else does. And that’s all there is to that. Regarding block spacetime vs the mind’s special role in time: neither rules out the other. Block spacetime is just a coordinate system. The minute somebody describes “all points in time co-existing simultaneously” I can tell they don’t understand what they’re looking at. You can’t make an animation of block spacetime, only a static drawing. Time is already IN the picture. “Simultaneous” just means “being located at the same time co-ordinate in that picture, having selected a particular relativistic reference frame”. The simultaneity of all parts of the diagram being visible to an observer outside the picture is irrelevant because his time coordinate does not apply to the picture. The role of the mind is simply that by virtue of the physical nature of brains, they only evolve in terms of experience, consciousness, memory, learning etc as one point in time follows another. This imposes an arrow of time for our brains . So our sense of time results bring the fact that we can only remember the past. And this does not depend on where the future is predetermined or not.

[@ready1fire1aim1]

[A year ago the observable universe went from "locally real" to "not locally real" and why that matters to Religion vs Science debates]: *"It is impossible for a contradictory thing to be true.* A non-contradictory thing could be true or false, depending on context, but at least has the *possibility* of being true." - relevant quote for context ❌️Contradictory Theology, Mathematics and Physics (Knowing Good; functions; limit built into every operation)❌️: 1. The Genesis 1 character and the Genesis 2 character are the exact same character. 2. Zero is not fundamental and nonzero numbers are fundamental (Newton/Einstein calculus). 3. 0D is not locally real and 1D, 2D, 3D, 4D are locally real (Newton/Einstein physics). ✅️Non-contradictory Theology, Mathematics and Physics (Knowing Good from Evil; relations defined by constraints; limit is a separate operation)✅️: 1. The Genesis 1 character and the Genesis 2 character are polar opposite characters. 2. Zero is fundamental and nonzero numbers are not fundamental (Leibniz calculus). 3. 0D is locally real and 1D, 2D, 3D, 4D are not locally real (Leibniz physics). [🐴Materialism/Empiricism💩 version of Religion]: Interpreting the Bible with the Genesis 1 character and the Genesis 2 character as the exact same character generates near 70,000 contradictions (see reason project) and requires heavy apologetics. A Bible interpretation which includes near 70,000 contradictions (impossible to be true) is what a snake-oil salesman would sell you. 🐍 [🐶Materialism/Empiricism💩 version of Science]: The standard model of physics is Einstein's 3+1 space-time, which are considered locally real, where 0 is considered not locally real...been that way since Newton for zero vs nonzero numbers. Problem is...quantum physics proved the observable universe (1D, 2D, 3D and 4D) is actually not locally real...and that was over a year ago! (Yes, Leibniz was correct after all.) 🦧 [Layman's terminology of locally real vs not locally real]: locally real = more real (Leibniz said "necessary") not locally real = less real (Leibniz said "contingent") [Closing arguments]: The Materialism/Empiricism package brings with it all the contradictions, false dichotomies, paradoxes and literally "life's biggest questions". It's been a year why is everyone still using Logic, Calculus and Geometry that is contradictory at the most fundamental level? Legitimate question 🙋. If both Religion and Science removed their "Materialist/Empiricist-perspective shades 👓" (which hasn't been true for a year) and put on their "Realist-perspective shades 👓" (which has been true for a year) they would not only cease to argue...they'd agree with each other (world first 🪙).

[@ready1fire1aim1]

[infinity and zero, God, soul]: in·fin·i·ty MATHEMATICS a number greater than any assignable quantity or countable number (symbol ∞). (In counting numbers 0 is the subject where positive integers "1, 2, 3 and 4 etc" are the objects). What is the meaning of zero in Webster's dictionary? a. : the arithmetical symbol 0 or 0̸ denoting the absence of all magnitude or quantity. b. : additive identity. specifically : the number between the set of all negative numbers and the set of all positive numbers. Zero is the most important number in mathematics and is both a real and an imaginary number with a horizon through it. Zero-dimensional space is the greatest dimension in physics and is both a real and an imaginary dimension with an event horizon through it. Isn't⚡God⚡supposed to be outside of space (1D, 2D, 3D) and time (4D)? Well, 0D is outside of space and time: 0D (not-natural) = dimensionless and timeless 1D, 2D, 3D (natural) = spatial dimensions 4D (natural) = temporal dimension Read Leibniz's Monadology 📖 and consider that the Monad is the zero-dimensional space binding our quarks together with the strong force (it is). The other side of the Monad is Monos (Alone) and this side is Monas (Singularity) and there's an event horizon between them. So El/Elohim or Theos/Logos etc pick your language. Quarks are dimensionless (no size) and timeless (not-natural). The two main quark spin configs two-down, one-up (subatomic to neutron) and two-up, one-down (subatomic to proton) could easily be construed as the male (upward facing trinity) and female (downward facing trinity) image that Elohim made us in during Genesis 1. Quarks (no spatial extension) experience all 3 fundamental forces plus have a fractional electric charge⚡and that's why protons and neutrons (spatial extension) have electrons orbiting around them. In Geometry any new dimension has to contain within it all previous dimensions. This holds true with it being impossible for protons and neutrons (spatial extension) to exist without subatomically containing within themselves quarks (no spatial extension). "Something (spatial extension) from Nothing (no spatial extension)". A) The postulated soul, 👻, has 1. no spatial extension 2. zero size 3. exact location only B) Quarks are mass with no size measured in Megaelectron Volts. Mass with no size is a unique equation in that it has no spatial extension. Conclusion: A and B are the same thing.

[@ready1fire1aim1]

[Important point 👉 (dont forget)]: 0D (zero) is different from 1D-10D (nonzero) because 0D is a not-natural dimension whereas 1D-10D are natural dimensions. 0D monad (Creator event horizon) 1D, 2D, 3D are spatial (space) dimensions 1D line 2D width 3D height 4D, 5D, 6D are temporal (time) dimensions 4D length 5D breadth 6D depth 7D, 8D, 9D are spectral (energy) dimensions 7D continuous 8D emission 9D absorption 10D black hole (Destroyer event horizon) It is impossible for anything 1D-9D to approach 0D or 10D due to their event horizons. 10D contains a placeholder 0 (not locally real) for its event horizon. Only 0D is locally real on this side. The other side of the event horizon at the zero-of yourself (near horizon) is God. The other side of the event horizon of a black hole (far horizon) is not God. Anything we know about black holes (Destroyer) we know the opposite of that is true for monads (Creator). It's a mirror universe with 0D at the center. This side (Elohim; Singularity) is contingent and less real (the natural dimensions anyway) and the other side (El; Alone) is necessary and more real (pretty sure the entirety of the other side remains locally real or "more real") The zero-of ourselves (more real 👻) was made by the Holy Trinity (Elohim; possessive; God's) in Genesis 1 which should not be confused with the Unholy Trinity (Elohim; plural; gods) in Genesis 2-3 who constantly messes with the 1D, 2D, 3D parts of us (less real 🤷‍♂️). Elohim was "syncretized" to simply mean El during the Babylonian captivity. To avoid this simply use the Latin, "unsyncretized", counterpart Deity for possessive (God's) and plural (gods) context. Nephilim are sons of the false Elohim associated with Yahweh (the BAAL, or LORD, of the gods). "smartest dummy".

[@ready1fire1aim1]

[Monad in philosophy/cosmogony]: Monad (from Greek μονάς monas, "singularity" in turn from μόνος monos, "alone") refers, in cosmogony, to the Supreme Being, divinity or the sum "I am" of all things. The concept was reportedly conceived by the Pythagoreans and may refer variously to a single source acting alone, or to an indivisible origin, or to both. The concept was later adopted by other philosophers, such as Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who referred to the Monad as an *elementary particle.* It had a *geometric counterpart,* which was debated and discussed contemporaneously by the same groups of people. [In this speculative scenario, let's consider Leibniz's *Monad,* from the philosophical work "The Monadology", as an abstract representation of *the zero-dimensional space that binds quarks together* using the strong nuclear force]: 1) Indivisibility and Unity: Monads, as indivisible entities, mirror the nature of quarks, which are deemed elementary and indivisible particles in our theoretical context. Just as monads possess unity and indivisibility, quarks are unified in their interactions through the strong force. 2) Interconnectedness: Leibniz's monads are interconnected, each reflecting the entire universe from its own perspective. In a parallel manner, the interconnectedness of quarks through the strong force could be metaphorically represented by the interplay of monads, forming a web that holds particles together. 3) Inherent Properties: Just as monads possess inherent perceptions and appetitions, quarks could be thought of as having intrinsic properties like color charge, reflecting the inherent qualities of monads and influencing their interactions. 4) Harmony: The concept of monads contributing to universal harmony resonates with the idea that the strong nuclear force maintains harmony within atomic nuclei by counteracting the electromagnetic repulsion between protons, allowing for the stability of matter. 5) Pre-established Harmony: Monads' pre-established harmony aligns with the idea that the strong force was pre-designed to ensure stable interactions among quarks, orchestrating their behavior in a way that parallels the harmony envisaged by Leibniz. 6) Non-Mechanical Interaction: Monads interact non-mechanically, mirroring the non-mechanical interactions of quarks through gluon exchange. This connection might be seen as a metaphorical reflection of the intricacies of quark-gluon dynamics. 7) Holism: The holistic perspective of monads could symbolize how quarks, like the monads' interconnections, contribute holistically to the structure and behavior of particles through the strong force interactions. [Monad in mathematics, science and technology]: Monad (biology), a historical term for a simple unicellular organism Monad (category theory), a construction in category theory Monad (functional programming), functional programming constructs that capture various notions of computation Monad (homological algebra), a 3-term complex Monad (nonstandard analysis), the set of points infinitesimally close to a given point

[@ready1fire1aim1]

"Some first follow the true Savior but then turn away to worship a dead man." - the revelation of Peter THE WORLD RULER TRIES TO KILL ME And then a voice of the world ruler came to the angels: “I am god and there is no other god but me.” But I laughed joyfully when I examined his conceit. But he went on to say, “Who is the human?” And the entire host of his angels who had seen Adam and his dwelling were laughing at his smallness. And thus did their thought come to be removed outside the majesty of the heavens, away from the human of truth, whose name they saw, since he is in a small dwelling place. They are foolish and senseless in their empty thought, namely, their laughter, and it was contagion for them. The whole greatness of the fatherhood of the spirit was at rest in its places. And I was with him, since I have a thought of a single emanation from the eternal ones and the unknowable ones, undefiled and immeasurable. I placed the small thought in the world, having disturbed them and frightened the whole multitude of the angels and their ruler. And I was visiting them all with fire and flame because of my thought. And everything pertaining to them was brought about because of me. And there came about a disturbance and a fight around the seraphim and cherubim, since their glory will fade, and there was confusion around Adonaios on both sides and around their dwelling, up to the world ruler and the one who said, “Let us seize him.” Others again said, “The plan will certainly not materialize.” For Adonaios knows me because of hope. And I was in the mouths of lions. And as for the plan that they devised about me to release their error and their senselessness, I did not succumb to them as they had planned. And I was not afflicted at all. Those who were there punished me, yet I did not die in reality but in appearance, in order that I not be put to shame by them because these are my kinsfolk. I removed the shame from me, and I did not become fainthearted in the face of what happened to me at their hands. I was about to succumb to fear, and I suffered merely according to their sight and thought so that no word might ever be found to speak about them. For my death, which they think happened, happened to them in their error and blindness, since they nailed their man unto their death. Their thoughts did not see me, for they were deaf and blind. But in doing these things, they condemn themselves. Yes, they saw me; they punished me. It was another, their father, who drank the gall and the vinegar; it was not I. They struck me with the reed; it was another, Simon, who bore the cross on his shoulder. It was another upon whom they placed the crown of thorns. But I was rejoicing in the height over all the wealth of the rulers and the offspring of their error, of their empty glory. And I was laughing at their ignorance.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

does the expansion of space have a role inomentum of objects?

[@tommoody728]

Experience is all and time is a feature of experience

[@felixvandriem1515]

The ads are very irritating

[@truthlivingetc88]

Bernard Carr is also (such) a great guy !

[@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time]

This is an invitation to see a theory. Could light be a wave with particle characteristics as a probabilistic future unfolds photon by photon? This idea is supported by the fact that light photon ∆E=hf energy is continuously transforming potential energy into the kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy of matter, in the form of electrons. The dynamic geometry of this process would form an uncertain ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π probabilistic future continuously unfolding relative to the electron probability cloud of the atoms and the wavelength of the light. In this theory, the wave particle duality of light and matter (electrons) is forming a blank canvas that we (atoms) interact with relative to the energy and momentum of our actions. This process forms a constant of action in space and time that we see mathematically as the Planck constant h/2π.

[@georgelobuonoAuthor]

Since time is used to describe change, does time have discrete (universe-spanning, hence fractional) intervals, or is time simply extra-dimensional order-in-complexity, energy being any change in that? Expansion, or changes in volume of time, create mass (alt t) in black holes, so time seems to ping the distant future there, as much as the past. But how do super-fluid trans-locations of time (dark matter flux) encompass a gravitic space?. in other words, when E=mc2, we can replace E with 'change in extra-dimensional complexity' = (alt t) x c 2 (volume of time), no?.

[@digbysirchickentf2315]

Time is only a notion, it has no physicality.

[@Stacee-jx1yz]

The polar opposite of black holes (cosmological) are monads (quantum): [Monad in philosophy/cosmogony]: Monad (from Greek μονάς monas, "singularity" in turn from μόνος monos, "alone") refers, in cosmogony, to the Supreme Being, divinity or the sum "I am" of all things. The concept was reportedly conceived by the Pythagoreans and may refer variously to a single source acting alone, or to an indivisible origin, or to both. The concept was later adopted by other philosophers, such as Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who referred to the Monad as an *elementary particle.* It had a *geometric counterpart,* which was debated and discussed contemporaneously by the same groups of people. [In this speculative scenario, let's consider Leibniz's *Monad,* from the philosophical work "The Monadology", as an abstract representation of *the zero-dimensional space that binds quarks together* using the strong nuclear force]: 1) Indivisibility and Unity: Monads, as indivisible entities, mirror the nature of quarks, which are deemed elementary and indivisible particles in our theoretical context. Just as monads possess unity and indivisibility, quarks are unified in their interactions through the strong force. 2) Interconnectedness: Leibniz's monads are interconnected, each reflecting the entire universe from its own perspective. In a parallel manner, the interconnectedness of quarks through the strong force could be metaphorically represented by the interplay of monads, forming a web that holds particles together. 3) Inherent Properties: Just as monads possess inherent perceptions and appetitions, quarks could be thought of as having intrinsic properties like color charge, reflecting the inherent qualities of monads and influencing their interactions. 4) Harmony: The concept of monads contributing to universal harmony resonates with the idea that the strong nuclear force maintains harmony within atomic nuclei by counteracting the electromagnetic repulsion between protons, allowing for the stability of matter. 5) Pre-established Harmony: Monads' pre-established harmony aligns with the idea that the strong force was pre-designed to ensure stable interactions among quarks, orchestrating their behavior in a way that parallels the harmony envisaged by Leibniz. 6) Non-Mechanical Interaction: Monads interact non-mechanically, mirroring the non-mechanical interactions of quarks through gluon exchange. This connection might be seen as a metaphorical reflection of the intricacies of quark-gluon dynamics. 7) Holism: The holistic perspective of monads could symbolize how quarks, like the monads' interconnections, contribute holistically to the structure and behavior of particles through the strong force interactions. [Monad in mathematics, science and technology]: Monad (biology), a historical term for a simple unicellular organism Monad (category theory), a construction in category theory Monad (functional programming), functional programming constructs that capture various notions of computation Monad (homological algebra), a 3-term complex Monad (nonstandard analysis), the set of points infinitesimally close to a given point

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

what momentum is fundamental?

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

how is causation described in five dimension brane?

[@michaelodriscoll]

The observer is the observed... know Thyself... Time is a method of measure, created to quantify change, or the rate of change, an illusionary tool. Know Thyself. " The thinker is the thought ". Namaste 🙏

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

might quantum probability virtual particles be generated by inflation or sometimes like it?

[@wadeyes]

Saying "we are not conscious" is pointless. For us to have impetus to do anything, we must believe we are conscious - that our decisions affect something. Schroedinger's cat is equally as pointless, except to contrast it with reality.

[@FringeWizard2]

Some of these guys need better audio equipment I struggled so hard to listen to the guys with bad audio.

[@adamkorbiak8171]

those processes are not taking place

[@adamkorbiak8171]

his taking from a false perspective. the first old guy anyway

[@adamkorbiak8171]

there's only the bleeding edge of creation from which the entire "block" universe is creating all times at all times affecting all-time. the entire block is creating itself in entirety now and now and now and now. It's not a process unfolding. you are Bernard and Bernardo. there's only one thing.

[@slow-mo_moonbuggy]

​@@adamkorbiak8171Astronomy isn't Natural Science. It's speculation. There isn't one verified scientific hypothesis constructed in the entire history of astronomy. I personally don't have a physicality assumption bias for the celestial lights. Most people do.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

objective time of universe from dark energy expansion of space? based on electromagnetic field?

[@booJay]

The biggest problem with Smolin's theory is that he relies on subjective experience to say something about time, which has been proven to be unreliable in so many other (if not all) other aspects of reality. The title of his talk alone reinforces this biased view and he's already shot himself in the foot. Like Daniel Dennett, he thinks something is true because it "feels" that way.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

why does speed of light / causation not experience time?

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

nesting within objective time to emotional level to abstract level to conscious level?

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

the classic universe backs into a quantum future as the present?