I’d add though, is that this whole topic seems to throw into question whether spatial location is actually a relevant factor to identity at all.
Have You thought about the relationship of spatial and temporal reality? Its too easy to make the distinction, but more difficuly to think in terms of spacetime.
Do things appear to fall away as spatial determinants increase and vica-versa?
Maybe consciousness is the result of the exterior.
like when it is only dark and silent you’re gonna go mad.
When its a result of the place you’re at between things, an atomic replica will still be a different dude with a differing consciousness. But very similar probably.
Two cars from the same production lines are ultra similar but due to a slight difference in place they end up wildly differently, one with ashes all over the fine leather and a dented grill and 486.133 on the teller, the other sparkling in an old timer show all fluffed up and having had the upholstery replaced with ugly velvet.
But on the other hand neither of them will grow a fifth or sixth wheel. Or maybe if one was bitten by a magic mosquito who could only be at one place in the same moment.
Jack: “Whats consciousness?”
Jill: “Where you’e at”
I don’t think there is such thing as space without time or time without space because it takes time to traverse space, d=rt. Two objects can be in the same place, but not at the same time, and as logical as that sounds, I’m not sure what law insists it be so: are absurdities objectively illegal or an artifact of how this universe is put together? Anyway, from the point of view of light there is no time or space and the emission and reception of a photon is the same instantaneous event. Actually, I think it was Max Planck who said that before a photon could be released, a particle would have to travel back in time from the destination and the arrival of said particle actually seemed to have inertia to move the emitting particle backwards as it released the photon (apparently this has been confirmed through observation). I’m not sure which direction “backwards” is since a photon is released in all directions. Perhaps backwards in time? Anyway, the point I’m making is that time and space are integral to each other.
If consciousness is the aperture through which the universe observes itself, then it seems likely that it could only occupy one spatial, temporal coordinate; otherwise there could be no feeling of self and other; I and everyone else. Then again, consciousness is not solely a function of s,t location or else our body would be irrelevant. So it appears therefore that continuity is what matters.
Going back to this thread: Probability of Spontaneous Martian Transference viewtopic.php?f=4&t=193940 It’s probably possible to suddenly appear on Mars and that raises a possible distinction between Michio Kaku’s teleporter and that of Star Trek’s because cloning someone is quite different than actually teleporting them. Through actual, natural teleportation, continuity is maintained (I’m guessing) but cloning is a discontinuity.
Don Lincoln at FermiLab says we are always traveling at the speed of light (whatever that means) through spacetime (not just space), but light travels exclusively through space (not through time) while matter has a spatial and temporal vector that sums to the same speed of light. Also, an object completely at rest (relative to spacial fabric) would be traveling at the speed of light exclusively through time and not through space (the opposite of light). The point is that when the spatial and temporal vectors are summed, the speed is always the same. Discontinuities would seem to violate that.
I think that’s is approaching another absolute limit just as in structuralism via. Set theory. There is correspondence there , where structural interpretation explains the explanations given, and they mutually verify each other. The third arm, logistics, appear to give a temporal foundation via, the prediction -hypothesis given by various paradoxical ideas, such as the Russell set, which implies backwards the correspondence to other archytipical paradoxes such as Meno’s and others paradoxical ideas. That such ideas later relate to more sophisticated ones, can be shown to access the beginning of the way hypothesis relies on what now is named a-priori knowledge.
The issue with the turtle winning a race against a hare relates to higher consciousness of dividing into a differentially smaller segments toward absolute minima. The niminalosm of later philosophy of mind through language, leads to the set theory .And that lead to Russell’s Paradox of , which actually showed the weakness of meaning against the logical structure of the mind.
Time and space evolved through the primary characteristic of extension, as separate from its temporal element, severely proceeding its modern sense of integrating with it.
That sense was pointed out by the paradox, and remained paradoxical until different twists of interpretation. of time itself looped in the answer through relative time.
Now, Your suggestion of going back in time makes sense, and this I am stumped with , although the idea of the direction relative photon emission is plausable, bringing in the idea of multu dimensional , rather then two dimensional linear time, forward and backward.
The calculus of figures of three or even more dimensional constructs, appear to support it, but I have a hard time wrapping my mind around it, unless the multi universe idea is theoretically more likely then not to underlie that idea.
The basic ancient view of the universe , as a series of turtles lying one upon the other is a prophetic archetype, further sign of an inherently pre-figured knowledge.
Note: Serendipity, Barbarian Horde -
Meno’s Paradox as an epi-phenomenal type learning , as somehow related to the later phenomenology of thee mind, as in Cantor’s and even later Russell’s Paradoxes, layes foundation to something that I am trying to work out in my mind, is thusly exemplified, so guys don’t be concerned about its primary relatedness to the topic at hand.
I hope to bring relevance into it later.
I guess so but if so, it would have to be hidden from our consciousness because else we would not even believe or be able to make out any subjective reality, let alone an objective one.
But I was living above a couple where the woman always was seeing dead people sit in chairs if she entered the room, like, spirits with bodies but apparently not bound to stopping at doors or walls, so being able to be at the same place in the same time, as another thing. Apparently these ghosts or whatever they are, parallel beings, are all over the place, maybe there are a bunch of them sitting in your chair with you.
Now that you mention it.
(Its not like me to be so forward with paranormal stuff)
Are you saying a photon has no direction?
I don’t understand. Also not about the instantaneousness. Doesn’t a foton take 8 minutes to travel from the Sun to our eyes and trees?
Yeah definitely. You have to be at least able to recognize a pattern from one moment to the next to recognize that you’re recognizing anything so I guess to exist as a consciousness you have to be conscious of something which is steadily changing.
Maybe this is how Zen works. You stare into a wall where nothing is altered, and eventually you stop remembering yourself.
Or a new root (of spacetime continuum).
Im a bit skeptic about this Don Lincoln.
Basically if you travel at the speed of light, everything that doesn’t is completely flat, undifferentiated. That doesn’t seem to be my world.
Meno, I’m sorry, it was Feynman who said that; not Planck.
From physics.stackexchange.com/quest … a-receiver
[i]Richard Feynman’s PhD thesis was about just this topic, if I am understanding your question rightly. Here is an earlier question about Feynman’s thesis that addresses some of the fascinating issues involved with this.
At the suggestion of his thesis adviser John Wheeler, Feynman explained photon emission as a two-way interaction in which the regular photon is emitted and follows the “retarded” solutions to Maxwell’s equations. “Meanwhile” (in some rather abstract sense of the word indeed) a target atom or particle in the distant future emits its own photon, but a very special one that travels backwards in time – a type of solution to Maxwell’s equations that had been recognized since Maxwell’s time but had been ignored. These solutions were called the “advanced” solutions. This advanced photon travels back in time and “just happens” to arrive at the source at the exact instant when the regular photon is emitted, causing the emitting atom to be kicked backwards a tiny bit.
Amazingly, Wheeler and Feynman were able to write a series of papers showing that despite how mind-boggling this scenario sounded, it did not result in violations of causality, and it did provide a highly effective model of electron-photon interactions. From this start, and with some important changes, Feynman eventually produced his Feynman-diagram explanation of quantum electrodynamics, or QED. The curious time relationship continue in Feynman’s QED, where for example a positron or anti-electron simply become an ordinary electron traveling backwards in time.
Staying fully consistent with his own ideas, Feynman himself described photon interactions as always having an emission and a reception event, no matter how far apart those events occur in ordinary time. In his view, if you shone a flashlight into deep space, the photons could not even be emitted until they found their “partner” advanced photon emission events somewhere in the distant future. The proof of it is in the very slight push back on your hand that happens when you shine the light, that kick coming from the advanced photons arriving from that distant point in the future and nudging the electrons in your flashlight filament.[/i]
If that is true, then light doesn’t plow into nothingness eternally and that seems to support my circularity theory of the universe folding into itself so that if one could travel a straight line long enough, he’d eventually reach the point he started… or at least some point where there are “things” to receive photons instead of forever travelling through nothingness with no possible destination.
I honestly don’t know what to think about spirits. If they exist, they would have to be a part of this universe because things outside this universe cannot be said to exist relative to us and if they could, they would just be a part of a larger universe than what we previously thought. What plagued Descartes was how the spirit controlled the material and the answer to that can only be that they are not separate things (unless absurdities are allowed in which case who can know anything). If something is not of this world, then how does it affect it? If something affects this world, then how is it not of it?
Perhaps what the woman is seeing is temporal overlays or temporal artifacts piled on top of each other like superimposed holograms. There isn’t anything actually there, but her mind formulates it in that way as a mechanism of understand something she is perceiving. She could be personifying (reifying) some abstract perception.
There is not supposed to be a direction. The problem is the division in physics between classical (waves) and quantum (particles). I prefer the classical waves as I believe that is a picture that is most real, but the quantum “quantizes” a bit of the wave into a particle like calculus quantizes infinitesimals and then adds them up. It’s a mathematical crutch imo that happens to yield the right answer via the wrong picture by chopping things into pieces that are not actually made of pieces. Physics is a mess imo. It’s not that terribly difficult to understand, but the difficultly lies in making sense of the various perspectives and vague and variable definitions. I mean, there are pages and pages on quora answering the simple question “what is heat?”.
Yes, light takes 8 min to reach us from the sun from our point of view. But from the point of view of light itself, it was instant. That’s Einstein’s relativity. The light from the farthest galaxies took 13 billion years to reach us from our point of view, but was instant from the point of view of light. Light doesn’t travel trough time, but only space and only relative to things travelling less than the speed of light through space.
Zen is to live as how you beat your heart (unconsciously, mindlessly, purposelessly).
Reginald Blyth en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reginald_Horace_Blyth told Alan Watts that he had abandoned satori and had begun becoming attached to as many things as possible. Evidently living as a animatron is not all it’s cracked up to be lol
A lot of people like Don Lincoln because he explains physics so the average person can understand it.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2JCoIGyGxc[/youtube]
The Universe is expanding beyond light speed so no one could ever reach any point they started out from even if they had an eternity to do so
The notion of a photon travelling back in time sounds crazy but makes sense because they do not actually experience time so presumably causality cannot be violated
In theory a photon can travel in flat space forever because it can only stop when it comes into contact with something that causes it to disintegrate or to be absorbed
How can that be possible since a photon needs a destination before it can be released?
The only way to stop a photon is to cancel it.
Good video:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiHN0ZWE5bk[/youtube]
The thing to remember is nothing stops light and only the re-radiation of the wave, 180 degrees out of phase, can cancel (stop) the original wave.