A big ball of timey-wimey?

I've always loved this question.

The most compelling notion about time is that we experience it all differently. In other words, "time" moves faster for some in certain circumstances, and slower in others, but this apparent burst or lag operates on an individual basis, without affecting others' experience of it.

For example, if I am engaged in what I am doing, time will go by quickly. Conversely, it drags when I am bored, or unengaged (my word) in my activity/task/being. I think it's safe to offer the blanket statement that we have all experienced this in some form or another in our lives.

But, I can be beside someone, whilst engaged in my time-speeding task, who is completely bored or unengaged, and their "time" will move like molasses in January in the Northern Hemisphere.
At the end, however, somehow, our watches - the real human construct of time - will still be in synch.

This gives me four elements to consider:
1) There is a "standard" time construct established by a pre-existing operational framework i.e. a clock
2) Speeding up time (focused and engaged on the task at hand) brings us to the measured value that matches the pre-existing operational framework, where from our individual perspective, we required less "time" to get there
3) Slowing down time (bored, distracted, lack of presence) also brings us to that same measure as established by the clock, where from our individual perspective, we got there by using more "time"
4) Both practices will see each person reach the measured point without an apparent final difference between the two i.e. both our clocks will read the same thing!

The watch establishes the objective basis from which the "passage of time" i.e. the rotation of Gaia around Sol is measured. That we both get there with a variance in what we experience to reach the measured value suggests, at the very least, that we are time travellers, experiencing that voyage differently from an individual perspective. Additionally, we can extrapolate that we also control the manner in which we reach the measured end value of the clock. If we are engaged, we require less travel than if we are not engaged in our life.

The construct of time itself is therefore irrelevant. We use clocks, calendars, dates, anniversaries, birthdays and so on to recognize that an objective, independent measured value has been attained. It is in the manner that we we engaged in our life that is relevant, since we can experience more within that objective construct, than someone who, let's say, is unfocused and has no direction. So what seems like a control of "speed" is actually a sensation of being alive.
(I put speed in quotes because it is a human word as defined by the mathematical formula of Change of Distance divided by Change of Time. Time, as I have just argued, is irrelevant - especially from the Jedi point of view - since it is what the person does that creates the value, not how much "time" it takes.)

As additional food for thought, I've toyed with the idea that time is the by-product of motion, but I'm still working on this one since motion cannot be defined without time - yet. I've also read that time is not linear: all of the cosmos' history - past and future - exists in the present, and that what happens now ripples through history "backwards" and "forwards". This model literally envisions time as an infinite "stack" of events, all balanced on the present moment, hence the value of existing only in the Now.

Alexandre mentioned in a post somewhere that it is not thought, but feeling that matters - or something to that effect. This tweaked something inside of me because one of my shortcomings is that I am a ruthless intellectual. But dammit, I feel that he's right because I sense the greater truth in that statement.

Time is a construct developed to appease our thought processes; it has no intrinsic value. What matters is what we do with the time that we have. And now that I've started to quote Gandalf, I'm going to stop.

Tando Bremma

Time as a measure of change might mean we need to have a context in our minds to compare our awareness against. When time flies for me it's when I focus onto the task and therefore the context of time becomes the process being focused on - which is dislodged from normal time.

I just watched the movie Limitless again, and...



It seems to be an interesting balance between observation and attachment perhaps, to alter the experience of time.

So at the other end of the spectrum, say watching grass grow, seems like an amorphic state of mind often experienced as boredom, perhaps literally having no context to measure change in awareness causes perception to seem empty and therefore time seem slower.

The shared 'normal' time would seem to me an derived from the subatomic upwards through all matter to an average of our environment, based on all the interactions at all the levels.

You mention 'stack' and it made me think of an alternate baseless theory I have, seeing the three dimensions as representing 'now', and the 4th dimension as representing past. Warning, coffee induced, baseless invented theory follows;

@Tando

Firstly, to your post...





Secondly, the feeling of time rushing, or crawling, by, is called time distortion... Im sure you are aware, i post it for others...

Im very NOW myself...

Tolle fan?

Jestor -



Dayum it's hard to find a good "Aw Shucks" animated gif...

I read The Power of Now and loved it. I started A New Earth but found it somewhat repetitious and put it down after the first couple of chapters. What I needed to understand the most at that time was how the past does not exist in the manner that we think - thus the importance of letting stay in the past. Simplistic as that sounds now, it wasn't that apparent to me at the time, and it was a concept that proved valuable. I've never gone back to his works but I have a feeling that with my training here, that may change...

Adder - I read your post 3 times and I think that with all I've done today, I'm experiencing brain burnout. I haven't seen Limitless but I'll give it a watch now that you mention it. I was intrigued by your coffee-induced theory but I will defer comment until I have rested. I will say that I find your idea of observation and attachment affecting the flow of time intriguing. I also need to ponder your statement that: "'normal' time would seem to me an derived from the subatomic upwards through all matter to an average of our environment, based on all the interactions at all the levels.". I'd be ineterested on hearing you expand on this, as well as your theory once I can get my brain working again...

Tando Bremma

See what you think of this.

This was a basic Idea for Time. A way to explain the function of time in relation to a being that is in a given time "line".
This is Very basic, I can add more if you like.

What are some of these other places? Let’s start with time. Something we never seem to have enough of. The ironic thing is, we are not only in this time, but all time. Time, by most, is seen as a line. In fact, time is more like the ripples in a body of still water. Coming from the center, and spreading ever out ward, away from us. All present, but some more distant. The Past, is actually, ahead of us, and the future, is actually beneath us heading to the surface to create another ripple in the circles/spheres emanating outward from this place where we are. The ripples you see on this water of time, would actually be spheres emanating forever outward. If the surface of the water is a given plane that we can see, the ripples are the effects of the circles spreading away from us. We only see the ripples to start. An effect, and not the larger picture.

Notes for a book.
There are several types of time. A watch or clock is just to measure where in a given day (one revolution of our planet) it is compared to the next or last. To me, thats not Time with a capital T.
Thats "What time is it" meaning where in this revolution are we. Where time, being one word, means more then one thing.

Space Time, to me looks like an endless stream of mobius doughnuts all interlocked, and intertwined, eminating from a center. Forever expanding in on it self.
Can you have a spherical doughnut?
Something else I wrote recently was that, people looking into the future, actually need to look into the past to get it right.
It might better explain my ripple theory.

Most psychics call the wrong number when they make a connection. They don’t know they’re doing it, but it’s true. Instead of dialing the future, as they do, they need to dial the past.
Ok, I can hear the minds blowing with that statement. Let me explain.
It’s a way of routing their call to find out the future, through a different switchboard, to get the party they were looking for in the first place. Remember when I said the future and the past, was a matter of perspective from the one looking at it? Someone a month from now, would see tomorrow, as their past. What if you were that someone? Your own future now becomes your past. Again, a little explanation is needed. To refresh, you are in the middle of a series of ripples, or bubbles. Each connecting or effecting the other. Past, present, and future. You stand in the middle of ALL, of them. If the person a month from now is looking in the past, and we are looking into the future, and the point we are both looking at is the same? What if we are the same person? We could then look into our past, to understand, what’s to come.

Just some notes I wrote to my self to remind me of some things.
Again, there is much more to this concept, but its how I see true time.

Jestor wrote: So far, all I've got is it is a way to measure the "now"

I agree... time began as a way to measure the earths rotation around the sun.

it's a man made concept, there is only "NOW" and now there is only now... and when I post this message there will only be then but that hasn't happened now.

I like yourself Master Jestor have plenty of life experience but am somewhat lacking in education on the topic of physics, so I can't quote anything outside of what I know I've been told, and I've been told energy is constantly moving and it can't be created or destroyed, therefor I summarize that our energy is "now" and now it is "now", no past no future... only the eternal moment.

(which is a pity because Dr Who is a pretty awesome show *well it was when Tennant was in it*)

I'm grateful you pointed me toward the book whilst I was awaiting apprenticeship, I've based a lot of my thoughts on Watts, Krishnamurti etc on the concept, it's one I think everyone should read, though I admittedly did find it somewhat tedious at points.