[MD] Reality Lies Outside Linear Time

[Khoo Hock Aun]

Hi Carl,

My apologies for turning around weeks away from your original post as I live
in a different time "zone". All the points you raise are valid ones from the
relativist point of view; no doubt. But the units that we have devised are
ultimate sol-based; days, months and years as we experience it on planet
earth.

The "now" we experience is in effect a synchronicity of events occurring at
the same time, related to each other if we 'communicate". In that sense the
common reference is an anchor; other wise this relative reality makes
communication impossible.

In August 2005, I posted on the same topic but linked time to religion. But
I repeat two paragraphs from then:

"Then I think about being achronostic; where one is not bound by any notion
of time. Let not any of the time based mechanisms that man invented hook
on to your mind and weigh it down. Let not any man made structure about
the notion of age and evolution grow like barnacles around your brain and
paralyse you.

My physical body may age and be at a certain chronological point. However
my mind is eternally youthful, perpetually in the same state the day it
saw through the shallow chronocentricity of the world and their attempts
to enslave it to time. It as stayed as young as the day it broke free
from the shackles of time."

But I will relate now where I am trying to go with this - and its fairly
important.
Everything (patterns of existence) changes. Everything is dynamic. Maybe
with a capital  "D"ynamic. Nothing is static. If stuff is static, we won't
have change. We observe Dynamism and denominate time as the constant metric
of change. However it is our invention and nothing to do with reality.

Reality is Dynamic, outside of our own instruments of measuring time; but we
seem to have accepted this as (GOD ?)-given - unquestioningly. Yet it
remains at the root of what we take for experience and in emprical
observations for our subject object worldview.

Our experience of time is always in relation to other events happening
around us. We isolate changes and measure observable variables in relation
to each other. Our sense of time varies with how much we are into the moment
(back to the eternity on a hot stove or how fast the moment passes with a
hot blond comparison).

Often the our minds have become conditioned to rhythms and changing patterns
and latched on to the arrow of time as the interminable trajectory of our
lives. When we meditate on this; and by this to be totally aware - of the
synchronous changes taking place around us, in us, about us - we step
outside of the experience of time, so to speak.

Nothing that I have said here relates to any dogma or method.

But I find the moment we step outside of Time to be incredibly congruent
with being in a Quality moment; the peace of a monastery away from the daily
papers, bloomberg TV, boom and bust cycles, ordinary experiences of living
and dying.

I will get back to ya, when I can.

Best.,
Khoo Hock Aun


On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Carl Thames <cthames at centurytel.net>wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Khoo Hock Aun" <khoohockaun at gmail.com>
> To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 9:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [MD] Reality Lies Outside Linear Time
>
>
> Sorry this should read:
>>
>> ....In reality, time is "NOT" only linear but multilinear and omnilinear
>> and
>> happening all at once and everywhere.....
>>
>
> Noted.
>
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Khoo Hock Aun <khoohockaun at gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>>  Dear all,
>>>
>>> I would like to reply to at least two threads this weekend, when I get
>>> past
>>> some meetings tomorrow and some work laid out for me.
>>>
>>> But before then I want to catch this thought before it flies away.
>>>
>>> Take Time. Time is percieved as linear because we have clocks constructed
>>> to measure it. We have it around us everyday, embedded in our computers,
>>> our
>>> phones, every manmade device around us.
>>>
>>> Yet it is the approximation of changes that we observe around us when we
>>> look at the world in an empirical sense. The seasons change, the day
>>> transforms into night, the world around us manifests changes every
>>> moment,
>>> every second and we try to capture the change through our invention of
>>> time.
>>>
>>> Since we think we percieve change as linear, as a chain of cause and
>>> effect, particularly when in isolation, we think therefore that time is
>>> linear. But it is a construct of time that we have invented ourselves,
>>> manmade so that we think through this device, we can control the
>>> environment
>>> aorund us.
>>>
>>
> I spent a LOT of time on this one.  Time is a concern of mine because of
> it's inclusion in the Space/Time concept.  The current Newtonian physics say
> that everything exists in a specific place at a specific time.  That's how
> we know it exists.  The problem is that time is almost totally subjective,
> depending on the focal point from which it is observed.  If I'm travelling
> at 99% of C, my concept of time's movement is different from yours as you
> sit in your recliner watching television.  To me, this makes it "not real."
> If it were a real thing, then it would appear the same to both of us. Within
> that, I understand that your perspective isn't the same as mine. (The
> problem of consential reality rears it's ugly head here.)
>
>  The reality is that Time is an artificial manmade pattern that is a
>>> result
>>> of our empiricism; our objective worldview; where we as the subject view
>>> the
>>> world around us as the object.
>>> The reality is that cause and effect is only linear when viewed in
>>> isolation, when we have taken a laboratory experiment and suspended all
>>> other causes and effects, save the one we choose to observe. The reality
>>> is
>>> that cause and effect, and "Time" itself spreads out as would a ripple
>>> affecting everything in its path, every molecule in its lattice at the
>>> same
>>> time.
>>>
>>
> I asked a friend who is a lot smarter than I am about this, and her
> response was that time is an anchor.  That makes sense to me.  For example,
> if someone asks you what you did last Tuesday at 11:30 in the morning, you
> think about what happened on Tuesday.  If you can't remember exactly, you
> try to narrow it down by thinking about what you did on Monday and
> Wednesday.  As you zero in, specific events come to mind until you're able,
> with a bit of luck, to remember exactly what you were doing at 11:30 on that
> Tuesday.
>
>  In reality, time is [not] only linear but multilinear and omnilinear and
>>> happening all at once and everywhere. When we have mastered what time
>>> really
>>> is, we have then mastered the universe. Which then opens up what others
>>> regard as mysticism.
>>>
>>
> I guess this is the heart of the problem.  Exactly whose reality are you
> talking about?  I think it's all a matter of perspective, when you're
> talking about time.  Because it's so subjective, I question again how valid
> it really is.  To throw a huge monkey wrench into my own concept, when a
> national level event occurs, we are told about it and that locks that event
> into a specific time, reguardless of who was thinking about it.  Then again,
> there are time zones involved, which makes it even more questionable.  We
> could both argue, correctly, that the event happened either at 8 a.m. or at
> 10 p.m., depending on where we were at the time.  See how easily this gets
> confusing?  Am I picking nits here?  I don't know.
>
>  Subject Object Metaphysics has its roots in this framework of linear
>>> time.
>>> The Reality, the Metaphysics of Quality if you like,  that lies outside
>>> this worldview shows us an interlocked and interrelated uinverse where we
>>> are all connected and all the same at the same time. And the secret to
>>> the
>>> time machine; or a machine that transcends Time.
>>>
>>
> I think I agree with this.  If there is no time, in a reality we can agree
> on, then even the concept is irrelevant.  We know that the only time we can
> actually experience is the "now."  We have ingrained the concept so firmly
> that if we eliminate time as a concept, especially linear time, what happens
> then?  We know people are born, live, and then die, and we need to account
> for that in some way.  We have developed a system wherein even distance is
> measured by it.  How do we describe it in a relevant way without referring
> to time?  "How far away is the sun?"  "It is about 8 light minutes from us."
> What's a light minute?" "The distance covered by light in one minute."
> Minutes are linear time.
>
>  The idea of an individual has no meaning or sense in such a world view.
>>>
>>
> So the concept of an individual has no concept outside of linear time?  As
> of 9:21 on Satuday morning, I'm sure you exist.  I'm reasonably certain that
> I exist.  Do you see the problem?
>
>  Khoo Hock Aun
>>>
>>
> Glad to meet you.  Be warned, I can get a bit annoying with my questions.
> The probem is that I don't understand very much at all, and am constatnly in
> doubt about what I think I do understand.  Because of that, I keep asking
> questions about just about everything.  I ask patience. <G>
>
> Carl
>  Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>



-- 

khoohockaun at gmail.com
6016-301 4079