Your perseption of time?

[Isambard]

I had my I-pod earlier today. I used it at the gym as per my routine and had "Hope" by Apocalyptica when I removed the plugs from my ears. I set it down forgetting to turn it off and went about my day.
I got home just now and checked and noticed my I-pod was still playing. It had looped and was playing the same song as when I left it which is strange as its set to random.
The battery died shortly afterward.
Some may view this as an off-chance. That every song played in the sequence no matter how many times repeated is a unique occurance because the song before it is different everytime, and when chance plays out and the song before it is the same as a previous instance that song played, the song before the song is different etc. The occurance of the song then is unique and every moment then is once in a lifetime sort of deal.
Some may see the playing of the song as inevitable, merely a continous cycle that may differ in length but always arives at the same moment. The only discernable way to judge the sequence of cycles is from when I pressed Play and when the battery eventually runs out.
The third perspective (and maybe less taken one) is that in reality there is neither cycle of individual uniqueness within the transitions between songs, rather, it was all one massive song with individual songs simply being different instances of the same song. This promoted by highlighting that thruout all the time the I-pod was, there was no break in music.
With all this said, can this also apply to time? Is every moment precious, something that is without value for when you try to appretiate it, is already gone behind the sands of time?
Or is your life (or history for that matter) a collection of cycles. What has come will die, then rise anew as it has countless times in the past with choices and free-will little more than factors in determining the length of a cycle but ultimately unable to halt it? Destined for repeats till our battery also runs out?
Or is time one long string of events ultimately inseperable from each other, forever linked in casuality. Differences in perseption nothing more than limits of one's mind?
What are your thoughts?

 

[NavyGuy7]

My thoughts are that you need to be a little clearer in trying to get to teh "point" of the whole thing. What exactly are you saying? In English, not Ramblenese, please. I'm not being harsh; I just want you to be clear in whatever it is you are trying to say.
I know you are saying something about time, and that's about it. You kind of fried my brain before you got to the point (if you indeed reach it.) Plus, I just woke up, so that could have something to do with it.
Please clarify what your real question IS. In a simple sentence.

 

[R3quiem]

Well, time is a physical property of the universe. Einstein proved that time is linked to space, so it's a concrete, physical property of the universe.

Our life may very well be considered a collection of cycles, yet our brains are capable of remembering large portions of events that happened during these cycles. Therefore, each cycle builds upon the last cycle, so no cycle is meaningless.

If an individual dies, or their brain is unable to process memories, cycles are still not meaningless, because their life still affects those around them, adding and building onto their cycles. Until time ceases to exist, meaning will not cease to exist.

 

[Isambard]

My thoughts are that you need to be a little clearer in trying to get to teh "point" of the whole thing. What exactly are you saying? In English, not Ramblenese, please. I'm not being harsh; I just want you to be clear in whatever it is you are trying to say.
I know you are saying something about time, and that's about it. You kind of fried my brain before you got to the point (if you indeed reach it.) Plus, I just woke up, so that could have something to do with it.
Please clarify what your real question IS. In a simple sentence.

It is simple. If you like, you could try reading 100 Years of Solitude which is centered around all 3 perceptions thou it is much longer than my post.

 

[NavyGuy7]

Yet that is not what I asked. I asked for YOU to explain. Requiem did a much more satisfactory job in his short post than you did with your first post. If you cannot explain your own thread, then I see no argument can be raised here. Thus your claims would be just that, your own speculations. No explanation means no reason to prolong this weak thread.

 

[NavyGuy7]

And yes, time is a physical property, Requiem. There's a reason they say time AND space, lol. Einstein was a smart guy. I liked how he figured out we can see stars behind the sun by... ugh, I forgot the exact circumstances, and I saw it on a documentary recently! Something about how space is warped around an object in space?

Ah! It was off that documentary about Hawkin's Information Paradox Theory! Now I remember!

But still, do what Requiem seems to do with ease and explain yourself, Isambard. I am not going to take time to read something I don't have, and I'm not going to order it if it proves to be an actual waste of time. you brought this up, thus it is your responsibility, not mine.

 

[Isambard]

And yes, time is a physical property, Requiem. There's a reason they say time AND space, lol. Einstein was a smart guy. I liked how he figured out we can see stars behind the sun by... ugh, I forgot the exact circumstances, and I saw it on a documentary recently! Something about how space is warped around an object in space?

Ah! It was off that documentary about Hawkin's Information Paradox Theory! Now I remember!

But still, do what Requiem seems to do with ease and explain yourself, Isambard. I am not going to take time to read something I don't have, and I'm not going to order it if it proves to be an actual waste of time. you brought this up, thus it is your responsibility, not mine.

Im sorry you have problem with simple reading?

Honestly, the title says it all.

The rest is merely identifying the three main viewpoints
Instances
Cyclyes
Eternal

 

[WingsOfTheNeophyte]

From your post I would say it is all 3 actually

In the grand scheme point 3 is right, in the smaller and more understandable scheme point 2 is right, and on the level of personal perception point 1 is right.

If one were to extend ones level of personal perception, one would perceive time as 2 or as 3, you can expand the perception of space as well

(To your implications of causality I would say that we are merely following chains of cause and effect, the way a ship floats on sea, however if we choose we can create our own cause, and therefore create change)

 

[NavyGuy7]

Im sorry you have problem with simple reading?

Honestly, the title says it all.

The rest is merely identifying the three main viewpoints
Instances
Cyclyes
Eternal

Umm, I did read it. Remember, I specifically asked for a "simplification", if not in so many words. Please breakdown these three viewpoints, with a brief description for each. If you cannot, then I do not believe I can trust everything you say. That's just me. If you know what you are talking about, and not just repeating things you have heard, you would not have objected to my earlier request and assumed I am illiterate, or ignorant, or whatever is in your mind right now. I cannot say what you are truly thinking, but I am sure you would have gladly broken these concepts down, if only to prove your point. Whatever that is.

Perhaps Requiem should be the one to ask about this. He seems to have more of an idea than I do.

 

[ArchaicTruth]

I agree with Neophyte on this one

 

[Isambard]

Umm, I did read it. Remember, I specifically asked for a "simplification", if not in so many words. Please breakdown these three viewpoints, with a brief description for each. If you cannot, then I do not believe I can trust everything you say. That's just me. If you know what you are talking about, and not just repeating things you have heard, you would not have objected to my earlier request and assumed I am illiterate, or ignorant, or whatever is in your mind right now. I cannot say what you are truly thinking, but I am sure you would have gladly broken these concepts down, if only to prove your point. Whatever that is.

Perhaps Requiem should be the one to ask about this. He seems to have more of an idea than I do.

..........

They are broken down
They are simplified (twice)
And examples were given...

Honestly, out of the 20 or so ppl Ive discussed the topic with you are the only person who seems to not understand.

 

[NavyGuy7]

LOL. Maybe cuz Time is just that to me, TIME. It goes at one speed, even if it SEEMS to speed up or slow down. The speeding up or slowing down isn't true; it's just our PERCEPTION of it at the time. That's what I think, anyway.
Really, didn't you think I had considered that Time is just that, another force acting in our universe?

Besides, that's me in a nutshell... I like to complicate things when I don't really care about them too much. I just thought I'd get you to try and state your opinion in a paragraph or two, instead of the rambling on your first post, but I guess you can't do it. Or at least are unwilling to do so, for some reason. Is it too hard a concept that it cannot be simplified this way?

BTW, I have a time machine at home. It can only go forward at a regular speed, though. It's essentially a cardboard box I sharpied "Time Machine" on. I love this Demetri Martin joke. He's one of my favorite comedians.

I guess I'll leave you "Thinkers" to ponder if we really exist or not. LOL.

 

[RyanLeeParis]

Time doesn't exist. Time is man-made in order to make sense out of the day.

 

[R3quiem]

Time doesn't exist. Time is man-made in order to make sense out of the day.

And what you basing that assumption on?

 

[ArchaicTruth]

I would think that if we perceive something, it exists, because it is within our sphere of comprehension, and therefore our existence..

 

[Pathfinder]

Here is a question: can time exist if we live always in the present?

 

[R3quiem]

Here is a question: can time exist if we live always in the present?

Time doesn't flow at one speed. There is no absolute present, only a relative present for each person or object.