The problem of now

(Jan 17, 2021 07:35 PM)C C Wrote:

(Jan 17, 2021 04:45 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote:

(Jan 17, 2021 07:26 AM)Yazata Wrote: Well, the past doesn't exist any longer and the future does't exist yet. So an argument can obviously be made for the metaphysical position that now is all that really exists. The now is real, the past is a memory and the future is an anticipation. I'm inclined to think that myself in some of my moods.

I'm down for enjoying a fleeting moment but I've always thought that nothing happens at once and "at once" is not everywhere.

Where did this "now" take place? How fast was this "place" traveling through space?

"Now is not only a cognitive illusion, but also a mathematical trick, related to how we define space and time quantitatively. After all, if the present is a moment in time without duration, it can’t exist."

"Take a look around. You may think that you are seeing all these objects at once, or "now," even if they are at different distances from you. But you really aren’t, as light bouncing from each one of them will take a different time to catch your eye. The brain integrates the different sources of visual information, and since the differences in arrival time are much smaller than what your eyes can discern and your brain process, you don’t see a difference. The "present"—the sum total of the sensorial input we say is happening "now"—is nothing but a convincing illusion."

There is No Now

Reifying one's irregular, supposed microseconds in duration subjective "now" as an ontological fact that even the rates of sub-atomic events have to conform to seems to border -- on what? Not solipsism, since there would be no self-independent external world for the belief to relate to. But something along that line in terms of our egos.

However, the latter isn't even applicable since this commonsense thought orientation of ours (treating a subjective now as objective) isn't even subliminal in terms of its implications. Because everyone from people on the street to academic experts doesn't even care about or consider the consistency of such at a conscious level, except rarely, much less apprehend the situation subconsciously.

"The block universe is not a changing picture. It’s a picture of change."—Jenann Ismael

^New kids on the block.  

Hmm…space-time might be discrete rather than continuous, but if space-time is expanding, I’d say that we’re living in a continuous, ever-changing present. An expanding block might indicate an ever-changing future. 

Hey! Maybe that's the way out of the deteministic universe.

(Jan 17, 2021 08:18 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: If they lived an average human lifetime then how many of our years could an intelligent species survive if they spent 90% of their lives on a spacecraft moving 99% of the speed of light? How far could they travel? Would they only be limited to so many galaxies because of expansion?

Constant acceleration at one G (i.e., not stopping it at 99% and "coasting" from there) could in theory allow the occupants to travel over the currently visible universe in one lifetime. That's ignoring the ridiculously increasing mass, the ever vaster amounts of energy required, etc., which is why the speed of light itself could never be reached.

(Jan 17, 2021 08:56 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: "The block universe is not a changing picture. It’s a picture of change."—Jenann Ismael

^New kids on the block.  

Hmm…space-time might be discrete rather than continuous, but if space-time is expanding, I’d say that we’re living in a continuous, ever-changing present. An expanding block might indicate an ever-changing future. 

Hey! Maybe that's the way out of the deteministic universe.

Apart from the dogma of declaring that ALL events are systemic in origin (as some determinists may do), nothing forbids a conventional block-universe from having some random or arbitrary patterns, in addition to ones asserted to be strictly conforming to principles or laws. In figurative context, vaguely similar to a picture somebody draws dominated by geometrical forms, but then there is squiggly gibberish some kid added in as a prank.

By "expanding" do you mean the "growing block universe" (GBU)? A problem with it (for those who are incompatibilists, anyway) is that people in the past would regard their "present" as where the "next moment or new state of the universe" is being added, as much as we would regard ours as being such (i.e., both they and us would be considering ourselves "special" in location). Also, a resident in its past is occupying the same kind of fixed realm as that of eternalism, despite mistakenly conceiving themselves as existing at the creatively unpredictable(!?) growing edge of the block. There would always be doubt where one was located in a GBU (are we privileged or not)?

(Jan 17, 2021 10:56 PM)C C Wrote:

(Jan 17, 2021 08:56 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: "The block universe is not a changing picture. It’s a picture of change."—Jenann Ismael

^New kids on the block.  

Hmm…space-time might be discrete rather than continuous, but if space-time is expanding, I’d say that we’re living in a continuous, ever-changing present. An expanding block might indicate an ever-changing future. 

Hey! Maybe that's the way out of the deteministic universe.

Apart from the dogma of declaring that ALL events are systemic in origin (as some determinists may do), nothing forbids a conventional block-universe from having some random or arbitrary patterns, in addition to ones asserted to be strictly conforming to principles or laws. In figurative context, vaguely similar to a picture somebody draws dominated by geometrical forms, but then there is squiggly gibberish some kid added in as a prank.

By "expanding" do you mean the "growing block universe" (GBU)? A problem with it (for those who are incompatibilists, anyway) is that people in the past would regard their "present" as where the "next moment or new state of the universe" is being added, as much as we would regard ours as being such (i.e., both they and us would be considering ourselves "special" in location). Also, a resident in its past is occupying the same kind of fixed realm as that of eternalism, despite mistakenly conceiving themselves as existing at the creatively unpredictable(!?) growing edge of the block. There would always be doubt where one was located in a GBU (are we privileged or not)?

Some people think the present is ontologically privileged. Peter Forrest thinks that activity can occur only at the absolute present but relativity doesn’t really deal in absolutes.

If the hallmark of determinism is that chaos creates information but some of that information is destroyed, loss as time passes due to unreachable distances through the expansion of the universe, or in a black hole beyond a firewall then it would seem impossible for something that no longer exists to affect future outcomes.

Nope…that doesn't work. Dang it!  Back to determinism. 

Side note: If the Universe’s expansion increases the cosmic horizon, while we might lose sight of some of the current visible galaxies, we’ll also gain sight of galaxies that are currently invisible. Weird, huh?

All speculation, of course. No one really knows for sure but it’s always fun to think about.

As far as being in the "now" is concerned, my present self always wins out. I’m currently eating a snickers bar. I’m happy now but tomorrow I'm going to be pissed.

(Jan 17, 2021 08:56 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: "The block universe is not a changing picture. It’s a picture of change."—Jenann Ismael

^New kids on the block.  

For anyone interested, here are the links to her papers about time. (If the url below doesn't go directly to them, then it's Part#2 of the newer section of papers on that page. Some if not all are in #2 of the old papers section as well.)

https://www.jenanni.com/published-papers#2%20Time

“Nowness is the sense that we are attuned to what is happening. The past is fiction and the future is a dream, and we are just living on the edge of a razor blade.”
― Chögyam Trungpa

(Jan 19, 2021 08:24 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: “Nowness is the sense that we are attuned to what is happening. The past is fiction and the future is a dream, and we are just living on the edge of a razor blade.”
― Chögyam Trungpa

No surprise that a leftist like MR thinks the past is fiction, as leftists are the most apt to rewrite history.

(Jan 20, 2021 01:08 AM)Syne Wrote:

(Jan 19, 2021 08:24 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: “Nowness is the sense that we are attuned to what is happening. The past is fiction and the future is a dream, and we are just living on the edge of a razor blade.”
― Chögyam Trungpa

No surprise that a leftist like MR thinks the past is fiction, as leftists are the most apt to rewrite history.

Unlike you, not everything in my life revolves around some political agenda. Have you ever tried to see people as just human beings instead of as conservatives or leftists? Have you ever tried NOT projecting all your emotional baggage on people you haven't even met?

(Jan 20, 2021 09:45 PM)Magical Realist Wrote:

(Jan 20, 2021 01:08 AM)Syne Wrote: No surprise that a leftist like MR thinks the past is fiction, as leftists are the most apt to rewrite history.

Unlike you, not everything in my life revolves around some political agenda. Have you ever tried to see people as just human beings instead of as convervatives or leftists? Have you ever tried NOT projecting all your emotional baggage on people you haven't even met?

Your entire worldview revolves around your political bubble, as you demonstrated countless times now. And you have to actually quit acting like a leftist stereotype for me to see you as anything but a parroting sheep. But I can see why challenging that would make you resort to accusations of "emotional baggage". Just quelling cognitive dissonance. 9_9

So uh..that would be a "no" then. Got it..