Next: Elaboration 4.3
Up: Elaboration 4
Previous: Elaboration 4.1
Elaboration 4.2
Although virtually nothing is known about time itself, it might be
useful to explore some theories, especially when derived from
'merely' manifestations of time. Just as we have no knowledge of
what exactly gravitation is, but we can do a lot of calculations
with regard to the manifestations of gravity that are known, just
so, can we say things about, for instance the (our) subjectivity to
time. Time, like gravitation, is always there, it cannot be
screened-off. We are continuously subject to it, but, ... unlike
gravitation, we cannot even-it away as weightless astronauts do, nor
is time strictly limited to physics, as gravitation is. We are
constantly aware of time, the very idea of existence is merely a
synonym for extension in time, to be or not to be, is time, the
words 'is' and 'are' denote time (existence), and 'follow' is, and
so are all verbs, and we can not even observe a simple object save
for the mental trick to make it into an event. Nouns, therefore, are
time too. Yet we know not what time is. Mind too, is subject to time
and extended in time, but it is absolutely a NON-physicum. This
latter statement forces us to decide that time stands somewhat
outside the whole universe, that is to say, outside the whole of our
physical and non-physical reality. Both are subject to time.
Spencer's law of evolution demands that: All structures increase in
complexity with time. It is the natural conclusion from a) all
causes have more than one effect and b) all effects are causes
(Essay on Progress). Thermodynamic laws seem in contradiction with
this. They expect a de-crease in Order. Yet, the latter are based
upon the universe being a closed system (including time). When time
is added continuously, from outside, a closed system cannot exist
whatever the scale we take. Therefore, evolution (increase) is more
basic. But what is the analog factor in the idea of a dead cat and
the dead cat (physics) itself? Both are extended in time. Between
two absolute incomparables, like physics and non-physics, there can
be no other form of relation than, that one is the representation of
the other. An idea has no form-, no likeness-, no equivalent (as T.
H. Huxley thought) in common with that, what it is the idea of. The
two then only share time (-structure) with each other. The two are
incommensurate for the rest. There is a theory about the genesis of
our universe, known as the Big Bang theory, a super dense point
somewhere in space (often thought to be all space). Although there
is more likelihood of such a B. B. occurring in a sequence, a
pulsating universe, it does not seem necessary to suppose that
before this B. B. there was no time. Time could well have been
before B. B. , only matter and energy then found their existence,
had a beginning. There is probably one thing we know about time, and
that is its one-directioness, the arrow likeness. Never was there an
effect before its cause. In fact, we are only aware of time, we
measure time, just because of-, and through-, these cause-effect
relations, of events. The B. B. may very well have been a point on
this arrow, of which the tip represents the present, the now. In
reality there is no such precise point, the arrow has no present,
only a past on the line, and a future in front of the arrow. The
present is only an ideational trick in order to understand this
flabbergasting phenomenon, time. It is no more than a name for a
thing not actually in reality. A slice of a process, a digit (idea).
There is only the binary, the pair of 'in-class', and 'outclass'.
Every hour that we call now because we are somewhere in it, has a
future part and a past part. No matter when we make the arrow-tip as
sharp as we can, in seconds, milli-seconds or nano-seconds, the
phenomenon itself is not there, we only call it so. Students in
fundamental ideascience soon come to surmise that an idea is
basically binary (a long string of plusses and minusses). They
reason as follows: Clearly, idea, knowledge, is as well
classification as it is comparison. For both, a pair is needed.
Comparison of X and Y is out of the question, no common factor. Only
comparison between X and Not-X is possible. This 'is' classification
in an in-class and an out-class. The string of the ultimate 'atoms'
of idea, in 'Yesses and No's', is itself a time principle (adding
'sequence'). Ideation, now, does exactly this, it compa(i)res the
two parts of the pair past - future, or past - not (yet) past, with
each other and calls the result 'now'. In order to be able to do
this, it has to take slices and pretend that they are internally
unchangeable, digits, amorph parts of an ever changing process,
(analog). Only after digitalization, can mind start to compare two
digits, two seconds or two hours, and call them past or future. Mind
has learned the trick of taking such a digit as long as is
convenient. The year for the growth of trees, the seasons when
blooming or leaves dropping is interesting, seconds when we drive
our car into it, etc. There is the duration of a lecture, the
accademic year, the 15 minutes pause and so on, all on the principle
that they are amorph slices of a real changing process, a continuous
process of adding and adding. It is usual to divide our reality in
two strictly distinguished parts, the binary of physics and
non-physics (mind). We cannot put time itself IN one of these two
because physics as well as ideation are just as time dependent.
Reality thus consists of one whole; time, which is divided in two
digits, physical (existence) and mental (existence). Mind, ideation,
always works in binary form, making pairs and compare them."In a
lifeless universe", said Russell, "there is no 'here' and 'now'."
True, here and now are structures, descriptions of structures, i.e.
ideas, and a lifeless universe contains no ideas (minds, beings,
opinions, appearances, forms), contains therefore no structures. To
give away an idea, and idea being identical with structure, means to
give away a physical, shaped into a structure (sound, ink on paper,
clay tablet, etc.). A structure that the other would make (give
away), when he wanted to induce that idea. Since many philosophers
after Descartes are Cartesians, the problem they tinkered with could
be called the Cartesian Knot. It consists of the following two (pair
of) statements:
Ideas (can) represent physical entities.
and
In order to represent, the two must have some aspect in common.
It would mean more or less that an idea of very large buildings or
many of them, would contain so many spores of concrete and brick
that the mind cannot hold it. Or, what have ideas in common with
what they represent, if it is not matter or energy? This, it was
thought, must be structure, ordering, or, as the old classics said:
form. It now seems a perfect way to hack at the Cartesian Knot, but
it still leaves a question. Structure, indeed, is in physical
reality. But, this only when there is mind, otherwise not. The
common factor for both, i.e. structure, thus, is a false one. It is
there, it is not the same in, but common to, both reality and ideas
about reality, yet it is not the crucial factor for making ideas
represent (physical) reality. As I remember doing, the proof of
Pythagoras' theorem, in which unobtrusively I had used the same
theorem, a circular proof, not true. We must have a factor in common
that leaves BOTH parties, physics and non-physics, strictly
separate, as Plato's mind/matter, or as Zeno's active/passive. We
can think of nothing but time, subjection to time. It is another way
of saying that ideation is solely an operation in time, nothing
else. But then, structures in idea (mind) themselves MUST be
structures IN time. There is no other (known) possibility. Physical
structure only seems (to the mind) to be like the mental structure,
in common is only time. So we have arrived at the statement that the
whole universe consists of time-structures in the form of matter,
energy, space (physics) and as ideas. They all are structures in
time. There are then, two time-appearances, an amorph type,
duration, to which all in the universe is subject, and a highly
structured time, called matter, energy space, and ... mind. One may
even speculate further upon where all matter, energy, and space goes
to when it enters a black hole. The answer then is that they merely
become UN-structured, they are converted into amorph time, into
duration. What is obvious however, is that in our (wild)
speculation, time is so far outside the universe that it seems
fruitless to Pythagoras it as 'the square of time-space equals the
sum of the x, y, z, and time squares'. It seems merely mathematical
exercise. We can square the frequency of some colour but because
this is only an operation of a ratio, we get not the square of say,
green. In the same manner can we summate the number of apples, but
multiplied by their colour frequencies first. Merely exercises.
Next: Elaboration 4.3
Up: Elaboration 4
Previous: Elaboration 4.1
Ven
2007-09-11