Big Crunch

[Spectre X]

Originally Posted by Vibecrewangel

IThat is how I feel about time. There is only NOW.

That reminds me of a certain Loservill expresse post:

Grim Reaper: Since time does not exist for me, this all just seems like one moment...One BIIIIG fucking moment *sigh*

The humor is great and there are some interesting phylosophical things there as well, well, a bit...ok, there's hardly anything phylosophical, but it's great.

Also, the way I feel about the big Crunch is that it won't happen.

Time on the otehr hand, there's a tough one. I think that time's a line that is like a knot. a knot with a beginning (the start of the universe, which is according to me an amalgam of all timelines and moments, and it's growing, it's like a temporal singularity) and that beginning is also the end as all timelines meet there.

Now, these timelines are of course in a giant knot of timelines, but that's not really a bad thing since time doesn't exist in this dimension and it is not made out of anyhting, it's just an extradimensional force. It exists outside of these three dimensions where we live like water around a submarine. That's why time goes by, you can't see the water in a sub, but it affects the sub doesn't it? This is the same with time as I believe.

Now, sometimes these timelines touch each other in such a way that they create a small rift in the dimensional thingy and people see the future, well, if they could (I'm not sure if they can, but if they can, it would go like this as I believe) that a special person's brainwaves are affected by the thingy and they can see the future like, say, Nostradamus.

So, according to my theories, time is like water, the three dimensions are like a submarine in that water, and time is a big knot with a that is everything and also the end, which there is not as all that time does is meet and expand, like our own three-dimensional universe.

So, according to me, what lies outside of this three-dimensional universe is pure time, and we, in fact, are the centre.

[The_voice_of_reason]

Yes but admitting that we don't know is the first step to admitting that we can't know. And we need to self-delude ourselves into thinking that we can answer the questions, because without an adequate answer we are unimportant. You need to think that something seperates us from the rest of the universe.

[Vibecrewangel]

VoR - But why? I see no need to delude myself. To think that I or anyone else has the answers. The search is so much more fascinating. Why stagnate? Why stop at one point? I see no purpose in that other than to make us feel ever so self important. Why is it that humans NEED that? Why is it so hard to accept that we are no more important in the grand scheme of things than anything else?
Seriously.....doesn't it seem quite obvious that what we believe is completely arbitrary? We came up with the models, the theories and then we tried to prove them. But the more we prove the more we disprove.
I have never understood how humanity could possibly be so vain as to think that the way we view things is how it really is. Our perception is not the ultimate reality. Only ours.

[The_voice_of_reason]

You say that the search is important but what is the point of a search? It is to eventually find something, but what if the thing we search for can be found? To continue the search we have to convince ourselves that we are looking for something that can't be found, so saying "I don't know" would be admitting that we should give up the search. "I don't know" would destroy not only some of the more theoretical sciences (cosmology, theoretical physics etc) but religion as well since religion is seeking to attain knowledge of the unknowable.


edit: changed "can't be found" to "can be found"

[Vibecrewangel]

That is the point VoR.....we DON'T know. And I am happy to admit we don't know. That in no way takes away from the search.
Quite the contrary, saying I don't know means I am willing to keep looking....with an open mind.

I have come to my own conclusion on what I think is likely, but because I can't prove it I am more than happy to continue to look at other options. Sometimes these other options reinforce what I think and other times they don't. Sometimes the ones that don't reinforce my theories end up making more sense based on other information I have looked into. And then my opinion changes.

Isn't it more likely that once you have the answer. Once you KNOW the truth you will stop looking? Why would you keep looking once you have found it?

It's a bad cliche', but it really makes sense "Life is a journey not a destination"
To me existance should be explored, enjoyed, lived in. I am constantly astounded by what is out there. If I had stopped searching at God, or at science, or at any one point I would have completely missed out on so much more.

I have seen so many people that are so adamant that their answer is the ONLY answer. They try to push it on others. They yell, they scream, they die for it and they kill for it. I've taken the time to really look at some of these people. To look into their eyes and you know I see for the most part? Fear. Fear that they might be wrong. Fear that someone else might be right. I've often felt that religious wars (for example) are less about being right, and more about making sure you can't be proved wrong.

I've never understood the need for an answer to existance. There are too many possibilities. Infinite possibilities. And I'll be damned if I'm going to stop trying to look at them all.

[The_voice_of_reason]

Yes but what i am saying is "I don't know" is the same as "I can't know". And we can't. Don't think that i am not interested in the search, i am going to college in august to pursue a degree in astronomy. But for a minute assume that there is an infinite amount of knowledge in the universe. No matter how much we learn it will always be some number over infinity, i but you know enough about math you know that any number no matter how large over infinity is zero. So no matter how much we learn we will always know nothing. Recognising this makes it easy to negate the whole search. So we must feign that it is possible to discover the truth to make the search worthwhile.

[Vibecrewangel]

So no matter how much we learn we will always know nothing. Recognising this makes it easy to negate the whole search. So we must feign that it is possible to discover the truth to make the search worthwhile.

I dissagree completely. If you already know you will never find the answer why pretend that you can? What purpose does it serve? Why not be happy to simply look at everything?

EDIT: I read the "makes it easy to negate" again and I realized you hit it on the head. Another human trait I never quite understood.....looking for the easy way.

I've always known I was wired different than most people.....sometimes it strikes me just how differently my brain works.

[The_voice_of_reason]

Originally Posted by Vibecrewangel

If you already know you will never find the answer why pretend that you can?

Because why search if you can't find the answer?

[Vibecrewangel]

Why search? To see what is out there. Simple enjoyment. To have as many different experiences as you can.

Why live if you are only going to die?

[Perndog]

I think just enjoying life is infinitely more worthwhile than looking for answers to the big questions. It's not about being unable to find the answer, it's about a lot of things being more interesting. Like sex with a beautiful woman. Like being on stage in front of an audience (that's what I do). Like mercilessly flaming people in Mock Wars.

Oh, and going back to Spectre X's post about time..I disagree with a lot of that in a lot of different ways, but I'm not really given to arguing about speculation - plurality is great. What I want is for experimental science to develop a means of time travel and send someone back to change the past just so we can see what actually happens and which movie/video game/novel got it right (if any). My theory is that out of infinite universes, every possibility happens in at least one, and if you go back and change something, life in the time you left from continues as usual but you end up in a new universe where the future is different.

[The_voice_of_reason]

Originally Posted by Perndog

I think just enjoying life is infinitely more worthwhile than looking for answers to the big questions.

There are those of us who enjoy life by looking for answers. I want to know the answers, it will help me sleep at night. Life is only as important as the truths that underly it. If you want to ignore everything and just be happy with your little cosmicaly unimportant life, go right ahead.

[Decadent Maestro]

Originally Posted by Perndog

My theory is that out of infinite universes, every possibility happens in at least one, and if you go back and change something, life in the time you left from continues as usual but you end up in a new universe where the future is different.

I have that theory, also. It's an exciting theory, to me, because if this theory were in fact reality, there'd be a hell of a lot of possibilities. An unimaginable amount, because every little thing you do would spin off and create another alternate universe.


Has anyone else read Diane Duane's To Visit the Queen? Although it's a young adult book, it covers this topic excellently.

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by Vibecrewangel

Seriously.....doesn't it seem quite obvious that what we believe is completely arbitrary? We came up with the models, the theories and then we tried to prove them. But the more we prove the more we disprove.
I have never understood how humanity could possibly be so vain as to think that the way we view things is how it really is. Our perception is not the ultimate reality. Only ours.

As you're not too big on the concept of time (re: existence of), then you're probably not a big proponent of evolutionary theory ... but I'll give it a shot anyway. What would you say to the theory that mankind preceives things the way they do because we have evolved, I daresay molded by nature, to only explicity know things (for certain) empirialistically and, at our best moments, logically. Metaphysics is enjoyable to me too but are we really designed to be able to know much more than hypothetically in that sense.

[Vibecrewangel]

Kelly -

How to explain this.....Hmmmmmmm

I am not a creationist nor am I an evolutionist. I think that the infinite is concious. The problem is that the human idea of conciousness is too small...too limited....to grasp it one needs to let go of that preconception. Buddha called it enlightenment. The letting go of the individual and being the whole.

I don't think that time has anything to do with evolution or creation. Both sets of possibilities exist. All possibilities exist for lack of a better word.....now.

Time exists for us perceptually because we can only perceive our own "now" We can remember our own past "now's" and imagine our own future "now's" but we aren't experiencing them in our own particular "now".

Have you ever had your life flash before your eyes? That particular description in no way accurately describe that event. For that moment, you perceive all of your "now's" There is no linear connection.

Or time dialation? This is one of my favorite. (It's one of the reasons why I like psychedelics so much)


I'm going to try to put our a theory here. I'm going to try to make it simple, so please bear with me when I use words that may not be the best technically. Remember, it is the concept that is important, not the story.

Imagine for a moment that you are all that exists. You are every possibility. You are everything. You are aware of every possibilty that you are. Now imagine that you want to experience each possibity independently. So because you are everything you can do this all at once. Read every choose your own adventure book at the same moment. The ultimate multi-tasking.
For you this happens instantly. But for each of the "adventures" it happens event to event causing a linear sense of time as it happens.

It's why I really liked the end of Matrix Reloaded. The room with the architect. Neo was only aware of his own now, but the architect could see all the possible nows.

[kellychaos]

How would you explain the fact of continuity of experience (i.e. the agreement that THIS is what happened) amongst people ... and what about the fact that our lives seemed bound to the laws of cause and effect? Isn't time, after all, merely an accounting of cause and effect? I think I'm missing some critical points here. Do you have any suggested reading to clarify your points for me. It sounds interesting (preferably not religious material).

Sometimes, your thoughts scream Hegel mixed with theorectical physics to me. :P

Anyway, you reminded me of this poem:

A Note Slid Under The Door by William Stafford

Some people don't know this.

A sound lower than silence
begins out of the night that waits
lower than silence, and the voice
descends finer than dust or moonlight
where people awake listen
beyond the dark, finer than
dust and the mistake called life.

In that breath beyond silence
people awake hear this:

"It is the same if you die
or if the world is destroyed -
the world is here because
people found it, a faint
line low in the sky, then
an island, or mainland, then
the place where you live.
Afterward, after you are gone,
the world won't be there any more."

Some people don't know this.

[Vibecrewangel]

If we had continuity of experience there would never be any disagreements. No two people ever remember anything exactly the same way.

The critical piece is being able to think outside of the human box. I actually have trouble thinking inside the human box.

I wish I could point you towards specific text, but to be honest everything I've been talking about comes primarily from my own experience. I've spent my whole life looking at different religions and sciences and eventually, I began to see that much of the problem lies in how we choose to describe things. Many of the stories, both religious and non-religious say the same thing. But for some reason we get so caught up in the words we can't see past them. Can't see the forest through the trees.
In addition to that, we have a serious preoccupation with they physical part of existence. We equate our sense of self with the physical. We base what we believe to be conciousness on the physical form. Yet both science and religion try to move us past that. For some reason we choose not to see it.