Pinning down NOW

[Runewolf1973]

If we were somehow able to reach close the speed of light and time slowed down till it was almost at a standstill, perhaps only then could we truly experience the now without it passing by before we realized it was already a thing of the past.

 

[factseeker88]

If we were somehow able to reach close the speed of light and time slowed down till it was almost at a standstill, perhaps only then could we truly experience the now without it passing by before we realized it was already a thing of the past.

When something bothers me and I want to go away, I dismiss it by pointing my thumbs behind me. Shuts it out of my thoughts every time.

Acting it out works, thinking it out doesn't. Ruskin was right

“[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is WHAT WE DO.” John Ruskin (1819 - 1900) [/FONT]

 

[raw_thought]

"now" is like "here". It applies to whenever the person says it. Similarly, "here" refers to where I am standing when I say "here".
Time is a dimension just like space. Similarly "future" is not a specific location in spacetime, it is a direction relative to the observer like "east" or "west". Detroit is west of New York and east of California. Similarly, Waterloo is future relative to the creation of the pyramids and past relative to WW2.

 

[Curious George]

Chasing through the here and now, I tripped upon the where and when, falling through the there and then, landing on my end and how.

Is this original? It is very good, shell Silverstein-esque. I like it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Except when it's before or after.

Before once was now, but is no more.
After will become now, but isn't yet.
Thus, the only now is now.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

There is no NOW, only past and future. The NOW most of us take for granted happens in a nanosecond, so fast it cannot be pinned down. First person novels also utilize NOW, but can't capture it, only write about it. Another aspect of NO NOW, are the words that describe it all ending with "ing, doing, running, acting, to name a few of many.

“What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is WHAT WE DO.” John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)

I'd say it's quite the opposite. The past doesn't carry any physical existence - only mental existence, which therefore only exists as a thought. The future doesn't carry any physical existence - it's only processed as the present.

I do agree that the present is a constant shifter, on the infiniteth of a decimal, but there is a present simply because there is a time we perceive it.

 

[Straw Dog]

Focusing on the 'now' depends upon some understanding of time. Even if someone is proclaiming that there is only the eternal NOW, this is still based around a conception of temporality.

 

[raw_thought]

See post 23
To say that only the now exists is like saying that only here exists. However, one can say that one is always in the now, just as one can say that I am always where I am ( rather then 5 miles from here.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternalism_(philosophy_of_time)

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

time is illusion there is only now

"Now" is an illusion, too:

[youtube]wteiuxyqtoM[/youtube]
Simultaneity - Albert Einstein and the Theory of Relativity - YouTube

 

[The Sum of Awe]

"Now" is an illusion, too:

[youtube]wteiuxyqtoM[/youtube]
Simultaneity - Albert Einstein and the Theory of Relativity - YouTube

I think it's more of a point of view rather than illusion.

 

[raw_thought]

See post 28
Now is an illusion in the sense that it has no privileged status. It is a position word, like east and west. True, east and west are relative to an observer ( Detroit is east of California and west of New York). However, to say that "now" doesn't exist is like saying that west is a meaningless term. "now", "past and future, east and west" are contextual.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

See post 28
Now is an illusion in the sense that it has no privileged status. It is a position word, like east and west. True, east and west are relative to an observer ( Detroit is east of California and west of New York). However, to say that "now" doesn't exist is like saying that west is a meaningless term. "now", "past and future, east and west" are contextual.

I think it's all fine and dandy to use the words, they come in handy sometimes!

But how can now be an illusion? If present doesn't exist, there'd be no experience. No matter how small a measure, now happens, perhaps it's so infinitely low a measure that now isn't a specific time, but the procession of time. Either way - it's awfully absurd to call it an illusion unless you call all subjective things illusions.

 

[raw_thought]

I do not believe that now is an illusion. * I do not believe that east and west are meaningless terms. Only that east can only be defined in the context of something west of it.
As for the procession of time, that is an illusion.
" "Now Besso has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion."
Einstein
From
Michele Besso - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If time progresses, at what speed does it progress? Seconds per what?? Obviously "the progression of time" is a logical absurdity.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternalism_(philosophy_of_time) and posts 23 and 28
* Similarly , I do not think " I am here" is a delusion.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I do not believe that now is an illusion. * I do not believe that east and west are meaningless terms. Only that east can only be defined in the context of something west of it.

Yeah, but that's the point of the terms. If you take away all adjectives that are subjective, you've taken away a majority of them. Fast, slow. Up, down. Bright, dim. All are examples of words you lose if you consider them meaningless due to the fact it depends on what is comparing it.

As for the procession of time, that is an illusion.
" "Now Besso has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion."
Einstein
From
Michele Besso - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If time progresses, at what speed does it progress? Seconds per what?? Obviously "the progression of time" is a logical absurdity.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternalism_(philosophy_of_time) and posts 23 and 28
* Similarly , I do not think " I am here" is a delusion.

Seconds per seconds. Time is the unmoved mover. If it didn't move, if there was no progression, nothing would exist. It'd be frozen at 0, absolute nothing, no existence or reality.

 

[raw_thought]

Seconds per seconds? That means no duration is measurable. That is like saying one foot per one foot, a tautology.
Duration is a dimension, it does not move. At least that is the consensus among physicists. Plus it makes sense, for time to move is absurd. I am not saying that there is no such thing as time. I am saying that it does not move. It is a dimension like height, depth or width.
Think of a time line. The line does not move. However, there is a beginning to the line ( when you were born) and an end to the line ( when you die). Nothing moves.
Time is the fourth dimension. The first 3 dimensions are height, depth and width.

 

[raw_thought]

" Up, down. Bright, dim. All are examples of words you lose if you consider them meaningless due to the fact it depends on what is comparing it."
The Sum of Awe

Where did I say they are meaningless? I said that they derive their meaning from the context they are in. There is no "up" without a "down". In space there is no universal "up". Similarly, I specifically said that "west" is a meaningful term even tho it is contextual. "west" only exists relative to something "east."
For example the statement "I am here" does not refer to a specific place in spacetime. It refers to wherever you are. However, that does not make that statement meaningless.

 

[factseeker88]

See post 28
Now is an illusion in the sense that it has no privileged status.

Yes but NOW does exist, in words, thoughts, literature and movies.

“What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is WHAT WE DO.” John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)​

 

[Straw Dog]

Presence in the situation is more useful than grasping at the 'present'.

 

[factseeker88]

Presence in the situation is more useful than grasping at the 'present'.

In literature and movie scrips, yes, but not in real life

:no::no::no:

“[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is WHAT WE DO.” John Ruskin (1819 - 1900) [/FONT]


:yes::yes::yes:

 

[DreadFish]

I had a thought last night that maybe grasping at the present is what we're doing when we conceptualize what is going on. We try to hold it, make it stable when we conceptualize things "this is this", "that is this" "I am this". Maybe we feel that if we can surely define that "this is this" then we can get a firm hold on it. The present seems to be more liquid and flowing than a particular thing.