You can only see an object for as long as you look at it.

[Actor]

You can't see it for the entirety of it's existence.

[sploogook]

your job is jerking off not thinking

[LSA King]

[TheSexyBeast821]

Originally Posted by Actor

You can't see it for the entirety of it's existence.

If you are the creator and destroyer of the object in question, you can see it for the entirety of its existence.

[Figure-8]

Well, on top of that, time doesn't really exist. So if the "reel" ever got cut, or ended on you, you'd probably have "All the time in the world" to view the linear events as they played out in "linear" physical time.

How much time does it take for one to non-physically do something? That's the point.

But we do create with our vision, our perceptions, we bring forth more of the reality that we have begun to witness. The more intensely we focus, the more information we bring forth.

[Daily]

Originally Posted by Figure-8

Well, on top of that, time doesn't really exist. So if the "reel" ever got cut, or ended on you, you'd probably have "All the time in the world" to view the linear events as they played out in "linear" physical time.

How much time does it take for one to non-physically do something? That's the point.

But we do create with our vision, our perceptions, we bring forth more of the reality that we have begun to witness. The more intensely we focus, the more information we bring forth.

All of this is incorrect and has no basis in reality. Kill yourself.

[Danger]

Some physicists argue that there is no such thing as time. Others think time ought to be promoted rather than demoted. In between these two positions is the fascinating idea that time exists but is not fundamental. A static world somehow gives rise to the time we perceive.
Philosophers have debated such ideas since before the time of Socrates, but physicists are now making them concrete. According to one, time may arise from the way that the universe is partitioned; what we perceive as time reflects the relations among its pieces.

Time does not exist and I can prove it.

OK, you're in a spaceship that has traveled for billions of light years. Before leaving, your kind had found the secrets to immortality. As far as you can tell, you've been traveling in one direction, but you're not sure, because the universe has expanded to such an extent that you can find no matter, no stars, planets, asteroids or anything else, there is just you and open space. Suddenly all electrical power dies, you're propulsion-less, all your historical data is gone because the computers, your only record keeping medium, if off line, you are extremely thankful that life support utilizes a new technology that requires no electricity, for just such a case. You drift, due to inertia, for what seems like another billion light years, of course you have no idea, because all your 'time' keeping devices need electricity to function. You have all but given up hope, when a space ship shows up, you're saved! The aliens board your ship, which is unfortunately unrepairable, as their systems are not even remotely similar, they are more or less organic, much like your life support systems. After what seemed like forever, you break the communication barrier. Fortunately they offer to take to you home, but first they want you to tell them, so they'll understand, from where and when you are from. Tell me now, so I can take you back home, from where and when are you from? Give me the 4 dimensional coordinates. Where and when are you?

Do we actually measure time itself, or do we merely construct and observe electro-mechanical/chemical devices that relatively move within a frame of reference? How can relative movement indicate time and not just a sequence of movement, with it's periodicity dictated by it's mechanics and chemistry (physical properties) that can be manipulated with certain forces, ie. gravity/electromagnetic energy, etc.

I feel that one thing is certain, as Immanuel Kant put it: 'time is neither an event nor a thing, and thus is not itself measurable nor can it be traveled.'

But I'm not done. You are in the universe as I described above, meeting the aliens and such but in this scenario they are very advanced and you never bridge the communication gap, instead they don't understand you at all, without warning they shoot you with their expansion ray such that you instantly increase in size on the order of a billion googolplex's until you out grow the universe and pass through its boundaries much like osmosis through a permeable membrane. You find yourself standing there in a new reality with the universe from which you came, in the palm of your hand, looking much like a bead of water. From this perspective how far did you travel and how much time elapsed from the moment you left earth, until now? If you met some other aliens in this new universe, and you wanted to show them by sticking a needle in the universe (droplet of water) in your hand, pointing out where you originated and where you ended up, prior to being expanded, how much time would it take as compared to the actual journey you had taken? Come on, tell and show me how much time had elapsed.

Time is just a figment of mans imagination, used to organize sequential events in relative movement.

trippy

[TheSexyBeast821]

Originally Posted by Danger

trippy

If we remove consciousness from the equation and assume the universe exists independently of consciousness (which I disagree with), then time is energy, usually viewed as energy transferred into motion.

[arleybob]

The universe's "consciousness" and human consciousness are very closely linked.

This I know for sure.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Originally Posted by arleybob

The universe's "consciousness" and human consciousness are very closely linked.

This I know for sure.

Strive to be in communion with the Universal Consciousness, God brings good pleasures and graces.

[Figure-8]

Originally Posted by Daily

All of this is incorrect and has no basis in reality. Kill yourself.

Surely you jest.

Tell me then, when does time "end". And "space"? It is inconceivable, no? Or do you ignore that perspective and see through another? If so, reveal it for the good of all and your own intellectual expression. Plus, you kind of already commented without it.

[Danger]

Originally Posted by Max Plank,: one of the most important German physicists of the late 19th and early 20th century, winning the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1918; he is considered to be the founder of quantum theory.

I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.

As quoted in The Observer (25 January 1931)

We have no right to assume that any physical laws exist, or if they have existed up to now, that they will continue to exist in a similar manner in the future.
The Universe in the Light of Modern Physics (1931)

Anybody who has been seriously engaged in scientific work of any kind realizes that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words: Ye must have faith. It is a quality which the scientist cannot dispense with.
Where Is Science Going? (1932)

It is not the possession of truth, but the success which attends the seeking after it, that enriches the seeker and brings happiness to him.
Where Is Science Going? (1932)

Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and therefore part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.
Where is Science Going? (1932)
Variants:
Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are a part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.
Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature, for in the final analysis we ourselves are part of the mystery we are trying to solve.

New scientific ideas never spring from a communal body, however organized, but rather from the head of an individually inspired researcher who struggles with his problems in lonely thought and unites all his thought on one single point which is his whole world for the moment.
Address on the 25th anniversary of the Kaiser-Wilhelm Gesellschaft (January 1936), as quoted in Surviving the Swastika : Scientific Research in Nazi Germany (1993) ISBN 0-19-507010-0

Both Religion and science require a belief in God. For believers, God is in the beginning, and for physicists He is at the end of all considerations… To the former He is the foundation, to the latter, the crown of the edifice of every generalized world view.
Religion and Natural Science (Lecture Given 1937) Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers, trans. F. Gaynor (New York, 1949), pp. 184

As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.
Das Wesen der Materie [The Nature of Matter], speech at Florence, Italy (1944) (from Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 11 Planck, Nr. 1797)

A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.

Eine neue wissenschaftliche Wahrheit pflegt sich nicht in der Weise durchzusetzen, daß ihre Gegner überzeugt werden und sich als belehrt erklären, sondern vielmehr dadurch, daß ihre Gegner allmählich aussterben und daß die heranwachsende Generation von vornherein mit der Wahrheit vertraut gemacht ist.
A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.

=)!

[mizled]

Mostly.

[Danger]

“All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.”
― Max Planck

[Irukanji]

CREATE PARTICLE IN ATOM-SMASHER, OBSERVE CREATION FROM NOTHING, ALSO WITNESS DESTRUCTION OF SAID PARTICLE INTO SMALLER PARTICLES(in no way related to the original particle in any way, shape or form).

What now, OP?

[Danger]

Originally Posted by Irukanji

CREATE PARTICLE IN ATOM-SMASHER, OBSERVE CREATION FROM NOTHING, ALSO WITNESS DESTRUCTION OF SAID PARTICLE INTO SMALLER PARTICLES(in no way related to the original particle in any way, shape or form).

What now, OP?

hardly "creation from nothing". They smashed particles together at near light speed and the +/- quarks/leptons separated at temperatures similar to those just after the big gang bang. Quarks/leptons are the building blocks of matter.

[Lanny]

Interestingly object persistence is one of the traits used to define sentience. So I guess that means OP is a lower order animal :\

[nshanin]

Originally Posted by Lanny

Interestingly object persistence is one of the traits used to define sentience. So I guess that means OP is a lower order animal :\

What is a thinker and why is having a mind like this (reality)?

The book has a number of problems and a number of strengths. One of the strengths is that it isolates and identifies no fewer than nine independent arguments that have been offered for the doctrine that everything has a mind or mind-like quality (250-1) [...] there is a broad historical pattern in which panpsychism has been regarded as the single best solution to a number of perennial philosophical problems. These include the problem of how minds and bodies interact, the problem of how bodies behave in an orderly manner if they are not intelligent, and the problem of how mentality can emerge from things that do not have minds themselves.

I am using a repressive book review to talk about repressed history...
http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/24899-panpsychism-in-the-west/

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by nshanin

What is a thinker and why is having a mind like this (reality)?



I am using a repressive book review to talk about repressed history...
http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/24899-panpsychism-in-the-west/

That has nothing to do with anything I said, or if it does you did a piss poor job of explaining it.

[nshanin]

Originally Posted by Lanny

That has nothing to do with anything I said, .

Perhaps not, but it's certainly all we've been talking about for this entire thread.

Sanskrit Language: The Most Scientific, Ancient, Spiritual - 2 - YouTube

Sanskrit Language: The Most Scientific, Ancient, Spiritual - 2 - YouTube
Video: click to display

Ring a bell?

Originally Posted by TheSexyBeast821

If you are the creator and destroyer of the object in question, you can see it for the entirety of its existence.

Originally Posted by TheSexyBeast821

Strive to be in communion with the Universal Consciousness, God brings good pleasures and graces.

or if it does

Atman=Brahman, the truth that is.

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by nshanin

Perhaps not, but it's certainly all we've been talking about for this entire thread.

Then I have to ask why you decided to quote my post in your reply.

[nshanin]

Originally Posted by Lanny

Then I have to ask why you decided to quote my post in your reply.

You were talking about sentience and lower beings. Then I pivoted into helping you to understand if that test really means anything by showing that panpsychism answers all the unasked questions. Then I straight-up enlightened ya ass by posting that sick video. Anything you disagree with here? XD

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by nshanin

panpsychism answers all the unasked questions.

[p6867]

[arleybob]

Originally Posted by Lanny

Interestingly object persistence is one of the traits used to define sentience. So I guess that means OP is a lower order animal :\

Is this along the same line of logic used by pets who have no concept of time when you leave the house? All they care about is food and losing waste, which is controlled by you their master.

I mean if you have a dog and you go out for a few hours, you might as well have been gone a year and it would make no difference to the dog. You know what I'm saying?

Like playing peek-a-boo with a baby.

[SoulButter]

Originally Posted by LSA King

Nice grammar.

http://www.zoklet.net/bbs/showthread.php?t=248299

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by arleybob

Is this along the same line of logic used by pets who have no concept of time when you leave the house? All they care about is food and losing waste, which is controlled by you their master.

I mean if you have a dog and you go out for a few hours, you might as well have been gone a year and it would make no difference to the dog. You know what I'm saying?

Like playing peek-a-boo with a baby.

Yeah, exactly like that. Like if you throw a blanket over a dog, they'll just lie down and do nothing. Because they don't perceive the world, it stops existing as far as they're concerned. Obviously this poses a problem for higher intelligence, ideas like state are pretty much ruled out without persistence.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Originally Posted by Lanny

Yeah, exactly like that. Like if you throw a blanket over a dog, they'll just lie down and do nothing. Because they don't perceive the world, it stops existing as far as they're concerned. Obviously this poses a problem for higher intelligence, ideas like state are pretty much ruled out without persistence.

Dogs have object permanence, otherwise they wouldn't be able to dig up a bone they buried in the back yard or be able to find a toy you pretend to throw but actually just hide under a pillow or something.

Dogs definitely have object permanence.

[SoulButter]

Originally Posted by TheSexyBeast821

Dogs have object permanence, otherwise they wouldn't be able to dig up a bone they buried in the back yard or be able to find a toy you pretend to throw but actually just hide under a pillow or something.

Dogs definitely have object permanence.

This. Plus, how else would my dog know what's up every time I grab a jar of peanut butter and say "Lolli-time"?

[arleybob]

Dogs work on repetition, not logical perception

[TheSexyBeast821]

Originally Posted by arleybob

Dogs work on repetition, not logical perception

So if I pretend to throw a toy and hide it behind my back, he runs a little bit before realizing I didn't throw it, and comes back and barks at me until I give him the toy, it isn't object permanence?

According to Lanny, the dog should simply forget the toy ever existed and find something else to occupy its time.

[arleybob]

It isn't. Newborn puppies don't chase toys you pretend to throw.

The dog is expecting you to throw the toy because you've thrown it before.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Originally Posted by arleybob

It isn't. Newborn puppies don't chase toys you pretend to throw.

The dog is expecting you to throw the toy because you've thrown it before.

But then the dog knows the toy is still in existence, probably behind my back, or where ever I've chosen to hide it. The dog doesn't simply forget the toy existed after I pretend to throw it and it doesn't appear where it should land, he keeps looking for it because he knows it still exists somewhere.

[arleybob]

Only because he's used to you having it and being the sole thrower of his toy. If you walked through the front door every day getting off work, that's where your dog will wait for you. You could sneak in through your bathroom window and your dog won't know to look around for you if you don't come in through your usual door at your usual time.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Originally Posted by arleybob

Only because he's used to you having it and being the sole thrower of his toy. If you walked through the front door every day getting off work, that's where your dog will wait for you. You could sneak in through your bathroom window and your dog won't know to look around for you if you don't come in through your usual door at your usual time.

The thing is, the dog still knows an object exists even if it isn't perceptible at any given time. That's what object permanence is, the ability to recognize that an object doesn't disappear from the universe just because it disappears from sight. If dogs had no object permanence, you could hold a toy in front of its face then put it behind your back and the dog would find something else to occupy its time since the toy would be "gone".

[southernsun]

My old dog used to go and her her own lead from inside the kitchen table drawer if I said to her are you coming for a walk? she'd start wagging her tail and run to get her lead, it was awesome.

[nshanin]

Originally Posted by Lanny

there is a broad historical pattern in which panpsychism has been regarded as the single best solution to a number of perennial philosophical problems. These include the problem of how minds and bodies interact, the problem of how bodies behave in an orderly manner if they are not intelligent, and the problem of how mentality can emerge from things that do not have minds themselves.

It's a significant philosophy to say the least, though we might not yet understand the deeper patterns linking the multitude of thinkers who have advocated this.

Originally Posted by arleybob

Dogs work on repetition, not logical perception

A dog is chasing a rabbit down a path when he comes to a fork in the road. Not knowing which way the rabbit went, the dog smells one side of the fork and finding no smell, immediately runs in the opposite direction without having to sniff again.

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by nshanin

It's a significant philosophy to say the least, though we might not yet understand the deeper patterns linking the multitude of thinkers who have advocated this.

It would be worth considering too, if it wasn't total bullshit.

A dog is chasing a rabbit down a path when he comes to a fork in the road. Not knowing which way the rabbit went, the dog smells one side of the fork and finding no smell, immediately runs in the opposite direction without having to sniff again.

If that happens (which you haven't established, just fyi) it doesn't indicate that dogs have deductive powers. That trait could easily arise through evolution by natural selection, without any need for dogs being able to devise more efficient algorithms for hunting prey.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Originally Posted by Lanny

It would be worth considering too, if it wasn't total bullshit.

Panpsychism isn't even worth considering in your high and mighty brain? Wow, you are arrogant as hell.

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by TheSexyBeast821

Panpsychism isn't even worth considering in your high and mighty brain? Wow, you are arrogant as hell.

"panpsychism is the view that all matter has a mental aspect"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panpsychism

'nuff said.