In fact, only material fluids can flow. The very choice of metaphor shows that time is inseparable from matter. It is not only a subjective thing. It is the way we express an actual process that exists in the physical world. Time is thus just an expression of the fact that all matter exists in a state of constant change.
A sense of rhythm underlies everything: the heart-beat of a human, the rhythms of speech, the movement of the stars and planets, the rise and fall of the tides, the alternations of the seasons. These are deeply engraved upon the human consciousness, not as arbitrary imaginings, but as real phenomena expressing a profound truth about the universe. Here human intuition is not in error.
Time is a way of expressing change of state and motion which are inseparable features of matter in all its forms. In language we have tense, future, present and past. This colossal conquest of the mind enabled humankind to free itself from the slavery of the moment, to rise above the concrete situation and be "present," not just in the here and now, but in the past and the future, at least in the mind.
Time and movement are inseparable concepts. They are essential to all life and all knowledge of the world, including every manifestation of thought and imagination. Measurement, the corner-stone of all science, would be impossible without time and space. Music and dance are based upon time.
Art itself attempts to convey a sense of time and movement, which are present not just in representations of physical energy, but in design. The colours, shapes and lines of a painting guide the eye across the surface in a particular rhythm and tempo. This is what gives rise to the particular mood, idea and emotion conveyed by the work of art.
Timelessness is a word that is often used to describe works of art, but really expresses the opposite of what is intended. We cannot conceive of the absence of time, since time is present in everything.
There is a difference between time and space. Space can also express change, as change of position. Matter exists and moves through space. But the number of ways that this can occur is infinite: forward, backward, up or down, to any degree.
Movement in space is reversible. Movement in time is irreversible. They are two different (and indeed contradictory) ways of expressing the same fundamental property of matter—change. This is the only Absolute that exists.
Space is the "otherness" of matter, to use Hegel’s terminology, whereas time is the process whereby matter (and energy, which is the same thing) constantly changes into something other than what it is. Time—"the fire in which we are all consumed"—is commonly seen as a destructive agent.
But it is equally the expression of a permanent process of self-creation, whereby matter is constantly transformed into and endless number of forms. This process can be seen quite clearly in non-organic matter, above all at the subatomic level.
The notion of change, as expressed in the passing of time, deeply permeates human consciousness. It is the basis of the tragic element in literature, the feeling of sadness at the passing of life, which reaches its most beautiful expression in the sonnets of Shakespeare, like this one which vividly conveys a sense of the restless movement of time:
Like as the waves make toward the pebbled shore,
So do our minutes hasten to their end;
Each changing place with that which goes before,
In sequent toil all forward do contend
The irreversibility of time does not only exist for living beings. Not only humans, but stars and galaxies are born and perish. Changes affects all, but not only in a negative way. Alongside death there is life, and order arises spontaneously out of chaos. The two sides of the contradiction are inseparable. Without death, life itself would be impossible.
Mortals understand that as finite beings their lives must end in death. As the Book of Job reminds us: "Man that is born of woman is of a few days, and full of trouble. He cometh forth like a flower, and is cut down; he fleeth also as a shadow, and continueth not." (29) Animals do not fear death in the same way because they have no knowledge of it.
Human beings have attempted to escape their destiny by establishing a privileged communion with an imaginary supernatural existence after death. The idea of everlasting life is present in almost all religions in one form or another.
It is the motive-force behind the egotistical thirsting for an imaginary immortality in a non-existent Heaven, which is supposed to provide a consolation for the "Vale of Tears" on this sinful earth. Thus, for countless centuries men and women have been taught to submit meekly to suffering and privation on earth in expectation of a life of happiness—once they are dead.
@Iosif_Stalin, I hate to break your intelligent essay, but I posted 1 thing about absolutes from a philosophical point of view, not a scientific one. I was talking about moral absolutes, and was just randomly posting something, not trying to be intelligent. ;V
It is not my own essay; it is copy and paste. For me to rewrite this all into my own words, it would take a much deeper understanding of it. Also, what I am posting about is about the Theory of Relativity as well as Dialectical Materialism (which is based in both Philosophy, Science, and observation).
The search for a Moral Absolute is also, in my own view, futile, since morality is an illusion created by the mind, with each person having his own morality. With each person having a different perception of morality, it can be impossible to argue to find an Absolute in morality as well as an Absolute that there is no Absolutes, since all moralities may yet be connected by something that we have yet to discover.
As far as I know, there must be at least one Absolute in the universe (which could also be applied to an individual field that one is thinking about). An Absolute that there is no Absolutes is a very unlikely Absolute since there always seems to be one thing true of everything (in a particular area).
Besides, the universe cares not of your morality. It cares not for your deeds. When you pass away, time will pave the pathway forward without you. It will pave over whatever you have done, leaving no trace of your beliefs, deeds, and existence.
Sounds like hardcore relativism except that you said this, which I find interesting.
"it can be impossible to argue to find an Absolute in morality as well as an Absolute that there is no Absolutes, since all moralities may yet be connected by something that we have yet to discover."
So, it's futile to try to look for a moral absolute, yet it's equally futile to assume that there are no absolutes? Interesting...
But how are we going to discover whatever it is that we have yet to discover without looking for it? I know you're a science guy, and if there is something we have yet to discover, I would assume that you would be all over it. :V
Well, I believe that there is and only could be 1 Absolute in every field that is being questioned or observed. As I said before, the Absolute of Matter is quite likely well realized.
"Movement in space is reversible. Movement in time is irreversible. They are two different (and indeed contradictory) ways of expressing the same fundamental property of matter—change. This is the only Absolute that exists."
The reason why I said finding the Moral Absolute, whatever it may be, is futile is because in terms of everything else (existence, matter, etc.), morality means absolutely nothing. However, to us, this Absolute of Morality may mean everything. A meaning to life even.
As I said before: "Besides, the universe cares not of your morality. It cares not for your deeds. When you pass away, time will pave the pathway forward without you. It will pave over whatever you have done, leaving no trace of your beliefs, deeds, and existence."
I also proposed a possible Moral Absolute before as well. It goes: "For example, an Absolute within the field of morality may be the Absolute that every morality held by every person is, at least to them, correct."
However, to find a proper Absolute in every subject, I genuinely believe it needs a proper Scientific, Dialectical, and Materialist examination. For example, the Absolute in Morality may be something that determines that our Morality is just a product of our mind trying to give reason to life. Perhaps something else.
"I also proposed a possible Moral Absolute before as well. It goes: 'For example, an Absolute within the field of morality may be the Absolute that every morality held by every person is, at least to them, correct.'"
By definition that's not an absolute though. :V Absolutes don't vary from person to person. Otherwise, they aren't absolutes anymore.
Well, Morality is subjective, so a subjective Absolute may as well be the case. However, why we have Morality and why/how our mind creates it can be explained by a non-subjective Absolute. We could study the neurology behind it and such. Then again, there could be a thing that is Absolute in subjective Morality that links them all together.
I mean, the Absolute that their morality is correct is Absolute to themselves in the case of an individual, when applied to the general Morality of all, it serves not to be Absolute.
So perhaps, there is yet an underlying Absolute to be found in the general Morality of all, something that all of these Moralities share. What it is though, we have yet to find.
My apologies if my talk of Morality seems flawed; Morality is not the subject that I take much interest in; it seems to be a futile pursuit due to its role in existence (absolutely minuscule, much like a speck).
You know, an Absolute of Morality may just as well be dissatisfaction. All humans are driven by dissatisfaction; it is why we do things, any sort of things. Our lives are centered around it; it is why we gather food, attempt to succeed, attempt to improve our lives, and more.
Morality may just as well arise from dissatisfaction with society and how people act. We believe that other people should act in a certain way and when they don't; dissatisfaction arises. This may be the basis and Absolute of Morality.
Iosif, I have my own theory about the link between time and mass actually. What mass actually is, is how much force is required to move an object, through an invisible Higgs field.
But time and mass are linked so what if there is an invisible Skulduggery Field (TM) through which time moves. Shifts in this field, perhaps by objects of huge mass could be happening everywhere and all the time, but we humans would never notice, as our own time-measuring devices and brains are also being affected.
So time would be matter that would have to move through a field of its own? If it is not matter, it cannot pass through a field since it doesn't exist materially. And yes, you can bend the effects of time of individual objects by going at a certain speed. Say, for example, you were heading towards Proxima Centauri at 99.5% of the speed of light.
Proxima Centauri is 4 light years away from us, so one would assume it would take a tad bit longer than 4 light years to get there, right? Right. However, for the astronaut in the spaceship, it will take him 0.4 years. He will experience 0.4 years of flight and aging while traveling 4 years into the future.
Not only will you experience time taking effect on you, a piece of matter, at only 10% of what you would on Earth, you will also weigh 10 times more than what you would on Earth. On Earth, allow us to say that you were 100 kg. While traveling 99.5% the speed of light, you will weigh 1,000 kg.
Time is the process through which matter constantly changes into something other than what it is. It ends life and it creates life. It destroys stars and it creates stars. This is all done through the unity of opposites and the need for contradiction in motion.
Comments on Profile Post by iMacro