Closer To Truth is broadcast on PBS stations. You can also watch Closer To Truth online at CloserToTruth.com or on our RU-vid channel. This is Episode 2 of Season 11, first aired on PBS stations in 2013.
I love this series SO much! The best part of it is that Kuhn is respectful of a wide variety of opinions while being sharp enough to hold the feet of those espousing the opinions to the fire. So much of what we can say authoritatively about a subject like time really resolves into vagueness not unlike the "waveform" of Quantum Mechanics. There is an idea. It has a mathematical expression. But that is all but untranslatable into human experience.
It is not very difficult if one keeps one's head focused. The first guy interviewed is obviously onto something, and very much influenced by Bertrand Russell's words from 1959 (short version; "don't assume based on trends, your feelings or desires". I wish more scholars would obey that advice, most don't at all). He doesn't get to finish however ,or doesn't want. The reason why there is no linear causation is that there is relativity. Yes, at all scales. There is only dynamic intercausation. The guy at 7'20 doesn't so much know what he is talking about except from mostly in the start, and feels like he wants to be nice to Newton by mentioning him. A bit of a cliché. Let's play the rest and see how much worse it can get :) :)
Khun is a worthless dreamer and no more than a pourer from the empty into the void; you only have to tread on his corns to discover what a mouse(nothing and nobody) he is, but that is true of all men(human beings). Before you seek to defend the worthless dreamer, look up the tu quoque fallacy. Would you say that it is a fallacy of relevance like the ad populum fallacy?
@@vhawk1951kl Kuhn is hardly susceptible to your assertion. He seem almost uniquely open to the range of ideas of many people. By contrast, you appear intent on closing our minds to his contributions before they, and the many other peoples' ideas he lifts up, can be considered. Tu quoque (/tjuːˈkwoʊkwi, tuːˈkwoʊkweɪ/;[1] Latin Tū quoque, for "you also") is a discussion technique that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by attacking the opponent's own personal behavior and actions as being inconsistent with their argument, therefore accusing hypocrisy. This specious reasoning is a special type of ad hominem attack. The Oxford English Dictionary cites John Cooke's 1614 stage play The Cittie Gallant as the earliest use of the term in the English language.[1] "Whataboutism" is one particularly well known modern instance of this technique
It is.....people want frivolous nonsense in their lives these days.....lots of morons walking the earth. It's amazing to watch.....ordinary society is like watching an old animal documentary to me sometimes. It's sad actually.....but what can you do? They'll send you to prison for eliminating the slow gazelles.
Children today are so lucky! All these great science programs they can explore just a click away. So I guess it’s possible to actually get clever using these shows
I find a lot young people who actually see science shows. But maybe their parents could do an effort to help them! I don’t know, I think you will see it in a statistic some years ahead?
You can learn as much from these programs as you would sitting in a classroom. One advantage is that you can rewatch all, or part, to better understand. The disadvantage is that you can’t ask questions.
"There was a young man called Bright who could travel faster than light. He set off one day, in a relative way, and returned the previous night". I'm off for a lie-down!
This is a good channel. I don't come here for answers but just to ponder those big questions with learned people who have garnered particular insights.
I am so grateful for this series. Magnificent production values from the beautiful settings, to the wonderful narration by Mr Kuhn. It offers an introduction to some of the most brilliant minds in science today.
@@mantoniol24 When Plato speaks of "eternity" here he is speaking of time as a dimension, like space. We could say space runs up and down, right and left endlessly, no? Just so with "eternity" -- time as a dimension extends forwards and backwards, endlessly. In the quote, when he speaks of "time" he is talking about "passing-time"; the sort of time that we experience as entities living in this materialistic sense-bound world. The illusion of "passing-time" is created because all we can experience with our materialistic senses is a present moment (a cross-section of the temporal dimension), constantly moving into the next. Hence, "moving image." Plato thought that everything existing in our material world are copies of a "true form" or idea which exists outside of space & time. These ideas are timeless, eternal. As they pass through the materialistic world, they "become" in passing-time. However we cannot grasp the eternal form with our physical senses - we can only grasp the moving image, which appears to us as growth and becoming.
I have learned so much by watching closer to the truth. Mr Kuhn attempts to find answers to many unknowns that we all have probably thought and wondered about.
As part of a project I have taken on, I had to unscramble this very question. To my astonishment one fact was made crystal clear. People, *especially scientists* are very *_confused_* about how they use the word "Time". Those trying to explain a nature , feature or characteristic of Time have actually weaved in and out of different understandings of the word, most often without even recognizing their segue.This I realize, has had a crippling effect on the pedagogy of the subject. I have since recognized 14 different definitions, meanings or uses of the word 'time'. Just some food for thought.
How true. I think (naively, I imagine) that many people confuse time way too much. Time (to my mind) is like distance. It's just a measurement. So the question is, what does it measure? Whereas distance is a measure of how far apart two objects are in space, time is a measure of change within that space. Distance describes where "things" are relative to other "things". Time describes how things change. They actually describe our reality. Without distance no matter could exist and without time no change would occur (isn't that the basis of our reality?)
@@Unshou i think the basis of reality is a wave because it is either one thing or it is nothing....1 or 0...matter or antimatter. It is binary. So why does physics lead to two states for any given particle? Because the state of that particle is rendered only as quickly as the processing capacity of the universal wave function. Every point in space has to be calculated at every moment of time. It is not random. It os executing code to show a value in the position. Time is that rendering frequency. And it is relative because the engine renders at different frequncy depending on how much information is concentrated in the area. Information being matter and its history of what has happened to it previously.
@@cecilmcintosh864 Yep - that's what I was trying to say - you just said it better. Where I say "Distance" I should have said "Position" - which is the wave function (position and time) I believe you're talking about.
@@Unshou Yes, and you may not agree with this but even more so i am saying the matrices of higher dimension is really that at these positions there is an unknown number of representations of 0 and 1 in a particular sequence which is a form of information of what is happening at that position. So if you could stop time entirely you would see a 1 or 0, but it is not random. You cannot prove that it isn't random, because if you look at the 1s and 0s generated for a simple line of code it appears to be random, and stretches very far. Imagine the code behind all our principles of reality. So you have an engine rendering the commands, and consciousness is the processor of those commands. We experience reality as an interpretation of those commands. That is what i believe causes mass effect. It is the lag on the processing of information at these positions due to matter. So how much time passes at a single point in space while all these 1 and 0s are being rendered in sequence, that is the real tick speed. Every simulation has a tick speed, and we will likely never know it. That is what time is in my opinion, the actual time between each 1 and 0, and i don't believe it can be known from within the simulation. Nor do i believe it is real. Just like numbers it is infinitely relative. The number of positions in the universe is not real either. I say not real, because it is not finite. Not tangible. It is being procedurally generated on an exponential scale which is why we think there was a big bang. There was never a big bang as an explosion due to heat, but it was a big bang of procedurally generated space, and the principles applied to that space made it so that a finite amount of matter would exist and become what it has become. That is why matter cannot be created nor destroyed.
But isn't saying how an increase of entropy explains the direction of time kind of circular? The word "increase" is a *temporal* word, implying a rising trend from a past and to a future. In other words, you can't really explain time by using time itself in your definition.
First Law of Thermodynamics: You can't win. Second Law of Thermodynamics: You can't break even. Third Law of Thermodynamics: You can't stop playing. One of these gotta work!
Yes. We hit a brain barrier. There's certain parts of our reality that are simply beyond our ability to conceptualize. No matter how easily understood we created an airplanes control panel an orangutan would hardly attempt to land an airplane.
@@tertiuswehmeyer7817 unfortunately that explanation does nothing to explain why changes occur, why is the universe not unchanging? What is the fundamental cause and process of change? Then you'll be getting to a better explanation
@@williamesselman3102 To think we are unable to do so is rather selfish. We have escaped our limits many times in the past, what makes you think our generation is the pinicle of understanding our reality?
Very interesting topics. RLK offers these wonderful programs that only serve the purpose of posing very smart questions that are basically unanswerable by any human being. To put it bluntly, we don't know shit about anything, however, it's entertaining to just listen what these 'luminaries' have to say about the rhetorical questions Robert asks. Never a dull moment watching Closer to Truth shows.
Love the process of the human brain evolving in a lifetime gaining wisdom, insight, expanding it's understanding of life. Realizing things that only time could provide. To the mind time is a sort of vehicle that slowly changes perspective.
I love listening to these people who speak like musicians. My simple mind only sees time as a second way to measure the space between two events. I like the idea of it being measurable both ways when quantum mechanics is considered. The double split experiment seems to show that a futur event affects the present and that’s probably an example of where it applies. Much to learn with these videos. Thank you.
1 Why is everyone here talking like they are slaves in North Korea at a forced celebration of pictures of the dictator family? The "I am sorry for existing" tone. Yes, science docus are (obviously) better than average prime time rubbish entertainment (although they occasionally float together). Skip the melodrama .. 2 Yes time is the (only) second measurement of motion, like you call it. Second because all matter is always in motion. What we measure is not time itself. Time is the measurement of relative motions. That is it. Can we merge time and space? Well yes, by the simple fact that time is only measured in space (the background of the passing of events/interactions). 3 After 3 somewhat grown-up people interviewed we come to the hyperactive postmodernist at 16'48. They always want to appear everywhere now. Some call them flat-earthers. I guess that is too gentle. The guy starts out by saying that "classical physics" treat nature as determined. Well... Not really. Is he talking about the renaissance and confuse it with the late information age or the science of the industrial revolution? Anyway : That we obviously can't predict all events of the future is due to the obvious fact that Cosmos is crammed with events at huge and tiny scales, involving f ex relativistic motions. That doesn't mean that you can arrange a nothingness into boxes of probability and talk as if nature stops in each box and makes "freedom" decisions. These "quantum mechanics" priests tend to not understand the very basics of the meaning of the word mechanics, which is just another word for dynamics.
(Btw I forgot to mention a comment on the last thing you wrote. That a "future event" is affecting the present is a totally meaningless idea. It is what the old greeks called pareidolia. Why that idea is not plausible you have roughly well explained already in the total of the 3 first guys interviewed. I am not very surprised however when these kinds of mysticist speculations are hiding behind the "double slit experiment". An "experiment" where we can find the world record in a diarrhea of nonsensical superstitious garble being postulated or launched as "interpretations". (No, a wave pattern does not mean that the photons are illusions. The wave pattern can not possibly occur as such without particle mechanics operating in certain ways providing the outcome called a wave)
I always thought of time as the measure of change. The fact that quantum physics doesn't make a distinction between present and past, I'm not sure how relevant that is to the macro experience of time. Just as physics doesn't support the idea that matter is solid but rather the product of charges and nuclear forces, you best move is to get out of the way of a runaway truck rather than take a chance that it's charges or atoms will pass through you. In other words, I think that when people get too wrapped up in abstractions, they lose sight of practical outcomes or realities. The past may be fixed and have bearing on the future, but we can't change the past even if at the quantum level it's not different from the present or future. You can't make choices in the present that will change the past but you can make choices in the present that will change the future. I don't think that this is subjective. If it isn't true, then all choice is meaningless since the future is predetermined.
I like your idea...I do think there are things that you can change or that can change with a some equation removed or added. I think their are also things set in motion that can not be changed. Giving a false sense of reality almost that we have the power to change the future when really its the lack of understanding of reality and how it actually functions over time. Take someone being in the right place at the right time or visa versa. How do you know what actions to take to change ge your fortune. It almost seems inevitable if you are suppose to be at work at 8am at a specific location and tragedy strikes. Creating a pre destined future you might say?
“Physics doesn’t support the idea of matter as a solid”? Yes it does. What are you talking about.? The reason you don’t fall through a chair when you sit is because the negatively charged electrons on the outer shell of the stone of the chair material repel the negatively charged electrons on the outer shell of the atoms that make your body.
@@chrismathis4162 That is what I'm referring to. The actual mass of atoms is very tiny and would not by itself prevent matter from passing through other matter. It isn't their density or mass that gives them a physically solid appearance or behavior that we experience in the macro world, but rather energy and charge. The actual physical part of matter isn't enough to prevent one piece of matter from passing through another, it's the charges that repel each other. In terms of physical stuff, we're more not here than here. Matter is a form of energy.
"time as the measure of change," or a description of a description of a description.. Words about words; the specialite de la maison Khun. Pouring from the empty into the void.
@@vhawk1951kl That is the nature of all definitions. We use words to define other words. Occasionally, if the concept is very simple, a picture might suffice. How would you define time without using words? Yes, words have their limits and some things can only be approximated by language, but words and language are still very useful and powerful in defining, describing, or explaining existence. If I asked you to meet me at the corner of Sixth and Bryant and 10 AM, you wouldn't have to wax philosophical about it, you'd know what I meant. The perception of time is hardwired into all of us. We all perceive its passage as we get older and witness change and are aware of how "long" it takes to achieve certain things. According to Einstein's Theory of Relativity, time slows down as we approach the speed of light. The person traveling this speed would not perceive this. Five years would still feel like five years. Yet if they returned to earth, their friends and relatives would have aged sixty years or so. The first person perspective for both parties would be the same, only their differences in age "or rate of change" would be evident when you met again. I'm trying to reduce the meaning of time to its essence and how it is perceived or functions in our lives. The rate of change is the closest thing I can think of. A thrown baseball is "faster" than an old man crossing the street. The rate of change is the distance covered divided by the time taken to do this. The age we die at is the number of trips earth has made round the sun from the time we were born to the time we checked out. It's a frame of reference that is very useful and yet still an abstraction like math itself.
Honestly I’d rather to not have a clear conclusion than to believe something false,which is what I believe most of humanity does/has done anyway. We turn to things like religion and other fantasies when we don’t know the truth or have answers and that’s the key…there are things that we will just never know or understand.
"No matter where you go there you are." This episode makes me think of a time elapsed camera aimed at one spot. Upon review, in fast motion, you see the change, things decaying & becoming, etc, yet time isn't going anywhere. It remains the same; the sun shines then it doesn't... it rains... then it stops...etc. The snapshot of our lives does not remain still - it is simply in a constant state of change -the cause of experience. And while John Polkinghorne suggests that "God doesn't know our future"; I believe God must know "cause & effect" because HE created everything. Still so much more to learn about time though. Great video. Closer to Truth is such an epic program.
Time and space are real but intangible. Our minds construct a model that help us to make sense of these. Our model of space helps us to explain things like position, size and distance. Our model of time helps us to explain things like change, motion and causality. For now, I believe it is impossible to say "what is" time or space without these mental constructs.
As Immanuel Kant said, time is the inner mode of perception built into us humans. And space is the outer mode of perception, also built into us. Both of them define our reality.
Kant proved centuries ago that time is not a fundamental aspect of the universe but rather a fundamental aspect of the way humans perceive the universe
I just had a thought- Perhaps the present is a timeless stationary point which we experience as the now and the future flows to us from one point then flows out the other end giving us the illusion of time flowing, like sitting in a stationary train whist the train next to you is moving making you feel like you're the one that's moving.
Here is what puzzles me about present time and how Time “flows”. What is so special that I’m sensing present time right now? Is it like I’m alive and flowing on a Big Bang wave that is heading into the future with everybody else around me riding on it and experiencing? But what about before I was even born?; “present time” was still there and existed for everyone else prior. A person from the 1970s for example was in the “present time” the same way as I am now writing this. It makes me want to think that time does not “flow” but everything that will happen is already written and the people who are alive right now are just experiencing it which in turn is relative to each person. Are we riding in the Big Bang wave of time? I’m not sure about that since time is distorted with gravitational forces everywhere in the universe and where there’s a lot of gravitational force time can distort. What about planets or objects that are really close to a black hole of which distorts the fabric of spacetime? Probably for them, we are in the year 5061 while for us, we’re still in the year 2020. The notion of time as well as consciousness is very confusing and hard to grasp from many point of views.
@@frank1803 Humans are their own worse enemy sometimes, due to the impulsive ways they try to deal with something, that makes them feel like they have less control than originally thought. Time, when looked at, for it's straightforward purpose, how we can use it on a day to day basis, then it an indicator for the moment you are presently occupying within a 24 hour period. But when someone starts describing it as an the silent control freak, or the invisible governor (as you need to give your time in order to read what time it is, which then prompts a thought of something that needs doing now or soon. Other get freaked out through the lack of understanding when it said to be the 4th dimension which most people can't get their head around even with a visual explanation, but the calming, and reassuring word people gravitate to is time being an illusion. This program is clearly adding to the confusion, B But there is only 1 definition. TIME is nothing more, and nothing less, than The period of rotation of a spin rate. To try and construct new way of expressing it with theatrical physics leading to a network of paradoxical rabbit holes, will definitely do something, but it doesn't change that everything from the the mass-less photon to the biggest planetary body to a super massive Black Hole, every atom, particle and magnetic field, to rotating charge, tornado and hurricanes. Even every wave in propagation, is just a 2 Dimension representation of a 3 Dimensional spiral. And everything is spinning toward something, that something is plank length, or it dielectric omega. golden ratio is present in all, which makes everything, macro to micro in and out, all interconnected interlocking rates of spin. The gears, and cogs, that keeps everything ticking like clockwork, and it's what no one even thinks or talks about any more.... CAUSATION... discarded because, simply describing the visible effect in front of their eyes is favored. The world is perpetually churning out eye candy for everyone and forgotten it's true importance when attempting to understand anything, when the cause is not even considered, less that half is actually understood, This is the direct reason why the advancements and breakthroughs in physics, science basically don't exist, well anything worthy of telling the world. All because around 75 years ago the world of civil engineering was snowballing with people inventing patents idea, it was happening too fast apparently, so they went to the CAUSE, and tore it apart, and remain that way to day, engineers were Scientists, Chemists, Biologists, Mathematicians Physicists, Machine operators, and 1 idea could incorporated all these skills, and all brought together with the bonding glue, of PHILOSOPHY a trait people seemed born with and was the way CAUSATION was the final UNIFICATION!!
Nice video. Philochrony is the theory that describes the nature of time and demonstrates its existence. Time is magnitive: objective, Imperceptible (intervals) and measurable (duration).
Time is a concept only. All temporal paradoxes evaporate with that realization. Realization is illusive after a lifetime of believing time to be something in the universe.
It is really much simpler than these experts think. First time is not a thing, not substance. Second time is only the measurement of motion. Since atoms are always in motion there is always time. The past is over. The future hasn’t happened yet and the present moment is all that exists, but it is infinitely small.
The brain is continuously gathering all informations, configuring and composing all details to the topic to complete a reasonable picture. It takes time for realisation of the informations. The conscious mind takes over, that's the "click" effect, I got it. It's not a waste of time, it's the evolving phase within time. Like a baby, when it finally realizes what it's seeing.
Nothing happend instantly, it required energy and se expirience it as time..it flows independent of us, and interract with other forces in nature..even light requires time to travel some distance and space itself expand becouse of time, or it would expanded already as you say that all can happend at once. We use radiation to mesure time,not invented some ilusionary values
They Said ,,you cant predict future, but you can always predict time , regardless of other fundamental forces Like gravity and other to...space is not infinite so time is real Like entropy
Time IS a construct but not made by man. And ppl age because the skin never stops growing and bones & skull shrink by design in this reality. You can slow aging down a bit by your intention and stepping out of herd mentality/ programing.
Hi Dr. Kuhn. I enjoy your videos. Here's my two cents about what time is: Space-time is a measurement that humans make or think about. Space-time is where particles exist at every instant of every day. Elements in nature, such as energy, planets, electromagnetism, light, mass, etc., interact with each other every instant of every day, and their constant interaction is what humans experience in space-time. Space-time itself is massless because it is simply a location at an instant in existence. Space-time itself cannot exert a force on anything and has no energy. Space-time itself is incapable of movement; space-time is more like a medium in which actions, forces and events take place. As a result, space-time itself should not speed up or slow down at any point in the universe. Space-time itself doesn’t flow, but the elements in it interact and may move or not move depending on their own properties. Space-time doesn’t have a direction; direction is just what humans observe in space-time. Space-time itself doesn’t have order, but events and/or objects in space-time can be causally related, which humans understand as order or sequence.
So you are saying that we experience time as a serial flow but in reality time is parallel all at once, like the difference between a serial computer cable and a parallel cable
The hypothesis that time is an emergent property of entropy makes a lot of sense, and may explain why no one can actually identify what it actually is. Hence, it may not actually exist in any real way at all...
There are indications that time could be infinity. Since time and space move in opposite directions, for example time slows to zero as space travel faster at speed of light; when space is zero, such as outside universe, time becomes infinite.
To the devil with words about words about words; how do I actually *e-x-p-e-r-i-e-n-c- e what-I-call "Time"?-What *exactly am I *experiencing* and how? Suppose X and Y do not have watches or similar machines and agree to meet at the intersection of A street and B street. do they just both go there and hope to encounter one another?
It is utterly futile for men (human beings to speak of infinite because they only last for such a short period of what they call time(although they have no more idea of what time might be than they have of what they are). Men speaking of infinity or eternity is like fish speaking about the niceties of bicycles. Men appear on a planet move about a bit chatter a lot and then are (for themselves) destroyed forever, and when they are not chattering or moving they are dreaming; they are tiny ephemeral and worthless, save insofar as .they are food.
@@lizicadumitru9683 By reference to what definition of relevance to you make that bare assertion which cannot amount to reasoned argument? Presumably you advance no reasoned argument for want of the wits to mount one, in which case you are wasting my time. Seeimingly Lizica Dumitru is the relevant string to go into the google auto-delete box that you may no further waste the time of your betters.
I think you may be right. But the word "moment" may be misleading. perhaps there is just us and what we see around us, in which you and other things are moving. mm a brief history of timelessness.
it was explained once that if a 2 dimensional being saw something in 3d it would be difficult to understand, so much so they may literally not see some of it. so is the same with time. a higher dimension than the 3rd, which we are. and so we only see time as forward movement, when in fact all of time exists all at once
or, perhaps the world is just as it appears to be and we habitually see and define all motion as being "forward".... ? have you ever seen a cloud going backwards ? does you bank card go backwards into an atm, then forwards out of it, or does it go forwards in and backwards out... or is it forwards each way :^? mm
“No time left for you on My way to better things Found my self sone wings Distant shores are calling you You gave and take and gave And take “ The guess who
"To appreciate Time is to touch the texture of reality." Hummmm. One cannot say this until 'Reality' is defined. It has become a defacto std. that ~ reality~ is what one sees in the environment, the world, the cosmos. I think I'd call it a bit differently. I'd say Absolute Reality is that which is unchanging, without break or pause, seamless would be the term I'd use. If I subscribe to that definition ( of which could also be honed a bit more) , wherever I look I see change. Constant change , transformation, peturbances; this could go by the term 'relative' reality. Science measures this ( relative reality) in frequencies, oscillations, cycles of movement, mass, quanta , galaxies moving every where. Earth ( and therefore you) is never-ever in the same place twice within the vastness of space. Where then is the 'firmness ' of an unchanging Reality vs. a casual / relative reality ? Again, based upon on the definition I offered ( Which is anchored in the knowledge offered in the veda's, upanishads. agama's , etc. ); this has been my orientation. My intent is not to convince or cajole anyone into this view, but perhaps offer a different window to look out of when viewing the landscape of epistemology .
I Hope he meant with reality not what we see though what our largest telescopes and best calculations mean. This would Be really imperfect but still better.
So, that means we can travel through our own consciousness; since consciousness does not end at the death of the physical body; thus we can travel back in time.
I suppose time is just a relative amount of change. F.e. If You want to visit the 1800s You theoretically just have to rearrange the atoms how they were Back then. And If quantum particles can tuunel in space and take multiple paths at once they can also appear to or actually influence their past selfes about whom dont know too much since they were entangled before
Recently I was running late (thanks to a rainstorm and sluggish traffic) for a dinner meeting with a friend. When I finally arrived and approached the table where he was already seated, he remarked, "Well, it's about time! That got my head spinning, and later on that night (after I'd returned home), the comment took on a Machiavellian persona, so to speak. What exactly is it “about time” that is so fascinating to us? We talk about having the time of our lives, about running out of time, about how fast (or slowly) time passes, about time getting away from us, about where did the time go, and the real kicker-how we spend our time-as if it’s some kind of commodity to be bought and sold. In fact, sometimes it’s impossible to talk about time without using time words like timely, timeless, time to go, time on our hands, and taking time out. That last one is one of my favorites because I often wonder where exactly that “out” is that I should take the time. The reality is that, prior to that night, I’d never really given any thought to the expression “it’s about time, ” and it gave rise to a whole chain of thought for me. What does it really mean, for example, to “spend” time? We spend money. Is it like that? When we spend money, we can do that because we got it from somewhere else (usually our work or in payment for some service we’ve performed), and we either bank it for future use or (and I would suggest this is the more common behavior) use it to purchase something we suddenly decide we really must have. Then we hand over that money, giving it to the store, business, restaurant, theater, church, or sporting event we’ve decided to spend it at. And (I would again suggest) we never see that particular money again. (At least I don’t keep a list of the serial numbers of every item of currency I’ve ever had and then check any of the new currency I get against that list to see if I’ve gotten it again. Sorry, but I have more important things to “spend my time” on than that!) So is it the same with time? If we truly do “spend” time doing this or that, what happens to it after we’ve spent it? Does it go into some ethereal “bank” and get stored up? Does it simply disappear into some unknown void? Or does it become available for someone else to use at some point in the future? Curious thing about time, too. We often think of it as totally linear with the seconds, minutes, hours, days, months, and years going by like beads on a necklace. But maybe it’s not always so. Perhaps “our” particular time sometimes bends back upon itself. I mean, have you ever had that feeling of being in a place you just “know” you’ve been to before-a feeling known as déjà vu-or have a dream that seems so real that you’re sure you’ve just lived whatever occurred in it? Perhaps it intertwines with the time of other people, like the guy you passed on the street you’d never seen before-and aren't likely to see again-or the woman you spoke with while waiting in the line at the supermarket, talked about “kids these days,” and then left the store after you’d checked out, the likely result being that you’d never see her again. For just those moments in time your lives crossed, and your “times” merged. The end result is that time remains one of life’s great mysteries. We all experience it, it frequently governs our lives and decides when we need to do (or should do) certain activities or be at certain locations, it comes and goes with no effort on our part, and yet none of us truly understands it. We all have time to live (some more and some less), but when our “time is up,” then we experience what we so blithely call death. What happens then? Does time truly end for us-or do we, as many believe, enter into another “time” that is somehow different (or as some profess-eternal)? And what happens to all the time that we have now passed? Or, perhaps, more to the question, where does the time come from that we call the future? Excerpted from my copyrighted book "Up into the Beyond" (on Amazon).
Everything that will happen has already happened, we are just experiencing it...just kidding, I don't know what the hell I'm talking about, sure sounds nice on a T shirt though, imagine the minds blown of all the pot heads that read it.
You would be shocked if you knew how many astronomers & physicists that smoke weed. However, when dealing with serious concepts such as ultimate reality, you don't need to be stoned to have your mind blown.
You don't know how true you are, the jury is out.. at the last check they are not coming back. Any ideas we have about "ultimate reality" are by nature ideas then so limitations. To understand the nature of time is to understand our own nature.
Time is a construct by which probabilities can be imagined and from which a casual series involving a process can be imagined. NOTHING MORE; NOTHING LESS.
@@DawnHub666 I suppose you know all about god and have all the answers in your little mind. Maybe you are jealous because you know Mr Kuhn is smarter then you.
@@JeffSpehar-ov1cn Faith in what ? . You have faith but cant intelligently articulate what you have faith in. Really ! Am I suppose to guess what you have faith in ? Hummm ! There are over 2500 gods. Maybe its Zeus. Well its futile to have a dialog with someone who is inarticulate