Time Doesn't Exist

I think one of the main ways that people are controlled in life, is by our acceptance of the popular conception of time without critically thinking about what time is, because if one critically considers what our ideas regarding time are based upon, one will realize that it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.


THE FALLACY OF PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE

Take for example our idea of time basically consisting of the combination of what we call "past", "present", and "future".  Our working idea of the past has to do with what has already occurred, but isn't it true that what we are really discussing when we mention the past is only our memory (or written/oral history) of the past?  Further, it depends entirely upon only what was observed, which is itself dependent upon the observer along with whatever limited tools were used when the observation occurred.

Our idea of the present has to do with what is presently occurring, but there are problems with that idea as well.  To a large degree, we really have very little idea of what is presently occurring except that which we observe directly.  In other words, if you cannot directly observe what is presently occurring, then you must rely on anecdotal evidence of it, and even that is based upon incomplete information due to the fact that our senses and our technology for perceiving occurrences are both quite limited and narrow in their scope.  Finally our idea of the future, has only to do with what is likely to occur based upon all present and past circumstances, or an interrelationship between "processes-in-progress" and related modifying forces (or elements of chaos such as last-minute decisions).  In other words, the "future" is simply a set of interrelated probabilities, and is in no way set in stone as it were, so it's entire existence can only be speculated until it is observed in what we call the "present".

So let's get back to our idea of the present for a bit.  Since we cannot observe everything that is occurring at any one time, and can only observe what our senses and technologies allow us to observe, and further, since what our senses are capable of observing is usually limited to what we focus upon, which itself is based solely in a desire to focus upon it, we could rationally and more precisely think of the "present" as "desired and currently focused observations".  This definition actually jibes more easily with quantum discoveries of the behavior of "matter" as being influenced in its behavior by us noticing or focusing upon it.

So let's rethink our terminology to attempt to deduce the actuality of time.  For now, let's just call the "past" memory, since the term memory inescapably and necessarily includes mental images of observed occurrences/written histories/genetic memories, etc.  But by using this different terminology, we begin to see how the limitations in observable occurrences and the focus on what was actually recorded results in an incomplete record, as well as a dependance upon the awareness (and any lack thereof) of an observer.

By the same token, if we think of the "present" as "currently focused observations", and finally the "future" as "a set of probabilities", then we can begin to build a new model.

"Past" = Memory

"Present" = Currently Focused Observation (CFO)

"Future" = Set of Related Probabilities (SORP)

The reader should notice that at no point do our new terms violate the intended meanings nor the ramifications of the words they replace.  They are similar enough, and possibly even more precise than the terms past, present, and future.  We could even analogize "past, present, and future" to "memory, desire, and probability" respectively and still do no harm to the intended meanings of the former.

So now let's do some "Word Algebra" and a couple of logical rearrangements, shall we?

If "Past" is similar to "Memory", then let A = Past, and A! = Memory.

If "Present" is similar to "CFO", then let B = Present, and B! = CFO.

If Future is similar to "SORP", then let C = Future, and C! = SORP.

A and A! are functionally equivalent.

B and B! are functionally equivalent.

C and C! are functionally equivalent.

Now let's create a couple of memetic equations:

If A = Past, and B = Present, and C = Future, then let {A + B + C = "TIME"}

If A! = Memory, and B! = CFO, and C! = SORP, then let {A! + B! + C! = "NOW"}

(The reason I use the word NOW as the result of the second equation is because a "memory" of the past is always observed in the NOW, a 'Currently Focused Observation" is always done in the NOW, and any likely "Set of Related Probabilities" is also observed in the NOW, then the present or the NOW is the only observable, and therefore real, phenomenon.)

So, using these equations we can begin to really look at "time" more logically.  The question then becomes which of these two equations can best describe our definition of time.  Let's test:

Can A + B + C = NOW?  No.

Can A + B + C = TIME? Yes.

Can A! + B! + C! = NOW?  Yes.

Can A! + B! + C! = TIME? Yes.

If that is so, then can TIME = NOW and NOW =  TIME? 

Yes, because nothing about A!, B!, or C! violates our ideas about time.

THE CAMOUFLAGE OF CLOCKS AND CALENDARS

To further explore this idea, let's look at the two major methods by which we measure time: Clocks and Calendars.  Let's deal with clocks first.

In order for a device to qualify as a clock, it must measure three things: seconds, minutes, and hours.  24 hours = one day, or one full rotation of the earth.  60 minutes = one hour, or 1/24th of a full rotation of the earth.  60 seconds = one minute, or 1/1440th of a full rotation of the earth.  Notice how all of these definitions are all based solely upon the rotation of the earth.  I'll come back to that because it's an important observation.

The Gregorian or Western Calendar is the world's standard measurement of the aspects of time, namely days, weeks, months, years, etc.  However these terms are also themselves dependent upon the movement of planetary bodies.  Since we have defined days as full rotations of the earth on its axis, let's continue.  Weeks are then 7 full rotations of the earth, months are tricky because some months have a different number of days (rotations) than others and the determining factor of how many days per month seems to be quite arbitrary, and years are each a set of 365 rotations of the earth, or the time it takes the earth to make a full orbit around the sun.

Let's get back to months for a moment.  A month is roughly the length of a lunar cycle, give or take a few hours.  A lunar month is exactly 29.53 days, which if we round up, gets us 30 days.  If we divide 365.25 days (the length of  a full year) by 29.53, we get 12.4 months per year.  This 4/10ths of a month overage gets us into the reason why we use leap years, which is because of the imprecision of our Gregorian calendar.  If we had no leap years where an extra day is added to the end of February every 4th year, our calendar would be off by about 6 hours every year.  While 6 hours per year of variance doesn't seem like much, it adds up to being 24 days off every 100 years.

Okay, so let's think critically about calendars.  Each unit of measurement in a calendar depends entirely upon planetary movement.  And those moving planetary bodies reside only within our solar system.

So I want to pose a few key questions to expose the fragility of our time measurement system using clocks and calendars.

1) How would you measure time in a different solar system? 
2) How can you measure time precisely over long periods when the earth is slowing down in it's rotation year by year?
3) Could you accurately measure time if for some reason the earth stopped rotating?
4) Would time go in reverse if the earth somehow reversed it's rotation?

These questions, and their answers, serve to prove that our idea of time is not absolute since it is not the same everywhere and in all circumstances.  Time is not a law, nor is it a real part of the natural world.  Time is simply a means of measurement for the matrix that we call western civilization, and it is used because anything manufactured must have a means of measurement.  Time is manufactured and therefore illusory, if for no other reason than it depends upon an observer and methods of observation.

Let's now look critically at our idea that time only moves forward.  This is a most insidious fallacy because only clocks and calendars move forward, so we take a mental leap to say that time only moves forward.  However, and as always, "the map is not the territory".

Another mental leap is that we don't have access to the past because it has "already happened".  However, using our new definition of the past, namely memory, we always have access to memories so therefore we always have access to the past.  Further, if by using techniques such as hypnosis we can sufficiently change our memories of the past, then both our present and future will change accordingly.

If nothing else, I hope this expose drives home the necessity of an observer in all measurements of time.  Without an observer, time as we know it does not exist, and further, the focused awareness (or lack thereof) of said observer is of primary importance.  If the observer could not see the sun, or the moon, or understand exactly what a clock or calendar measures, then our ideas of time could not exist for them.  So then it follows that the presence of an observer cannot be divorced from the idea of time, because without that observer, time is meaningless and undefined.

The ramifications of that idea are immense.  It brings to mind the age-old question: "How old would you be if you didn't know how old you are?"


TOWARDS A BETTER DEFINITION OF TIME

I looked up Google's definition of time and it included the following:

time
tīm/
noun
noun: time; plural noun: times

1.  the indefinite continued progress of existence and events in the past, present, and future regarded as a whole.
    "travel through space and time"
2.  a point of time as measured in hours and minutes past midnight or noon.
    "the time is 9:30"

I found this definition to be inadequate, since as with much of Western scientific thought, the presence of an observer, nor the focus of their observations or even consciousness is nowhere mentioned.  So I'd like to propose an alternative definition (which includes a reference to consciousness as a co-factor).

TIME: A measurement of the distance between discrete events which includes the set of all decisions, forces, and vectors separating those events.

Thus is time seen as a line connecting two or more points.  To illustrate, let's imagine the building of a house.  The process of building the house begins when the idea is formed, and then possibly planned on paper.  Once all of the building materials are collected and then assembled together, the process ends.  Time would be the line connecting discrete event A, which is the formation of the idea, and discrete event Z, which is the end of the construction process.  The movement of planetary bodies has a direct, yet unrelated affect upon the process, thus this movement should not even be considered in the time calculation.

Time only describes the process of the immaterial (ideas) becoming material, and then the material becoming historical (memories).

Faith is The Curse of Religion

Belief and doubt.  These are the poles of the false dichotomy which is generated by the use of religion as a moral baseline, as opposed to science aka 'observation'.

Believing in something which cannot be proven or reliably observed, and worse, defending the same sometimes to the death of a perceived disbeliever, or other adversary, is a ridiculous practice which has been made normal by the acceptance (and tolerance) of 'religion'.  

 

When something has been 'observed' as being true, valid, or authentic, anything to the contrary reveals itself to be a delusion (aka 'Apep').  Discernment is key.

 

This habit of rigorous belief in spite of contrary evidence, should be classified as a mental illness, not as something noble or upright.  Yet, false pride and intellectual laziness typically combine to keep one locked in their unproven and unprovable  position.  That reveals an emotional immaturity; immovable 'dogma' has no place in science or in life.

Adherence to the principle of Ma'at does away with all of this. When you only operate on the basis of what can be proven and observed, it simplifies everything.

Signs of Being Mentally Weak (copied from Quora Digest)

 

1. You care too much what other people think of you. Everyday, there’s a number of people who wake up, with the sole goal of becoming offended by you. Don’t disappoint them.
2. You can’t keep promises. I’m not even talking ’bout promises to others, but to yourself. Best example is working out: You told yourself you’d get into shape, but as soon as you tired from work or school, you won’t even go to the gym.
3. You get overwhelmed with the smallest problems and immediately throw your hands up and surrender. Nothing worthwhile in life comes easy or without failure, rejection and sacrifice. Don’t expect that everything is handed to you on a silver platter! I failed two businesses before I started one that did “okay”. I failed two relationships, before I met my dream wife. I failed at getting lean and muscular numerous times, before I got the “hang” of it….
4. You’ve been FAT for years but you’re doing NOTHING to fix it. Look, there’s nothing wrong with being fat. If that’s what you really want, then you do you. But…if deep down inside, you’d love to be lean, healthy and confident in your own skin, then why don’t you change?
5. You’re inauthentic. Contrary to what you might think, I wasn’t always as harsh and straight forward as I am now. In fact, I was a shy, timid, spineless idiot. I never spoke my truth and always agreed and smiled. Needless to say, my life was a mess. I was being used, manipulated and treated like a doormat. That was entirely my fault. I let it happen to me, because I couldn’t say “No.”
6. You’re a DDD (Dopamine Dependent Dreamer) and watch porn and play video games - Do you struggle with motivation? Do you struggle with being productive or keeping promises to yourself? Do you struggle to do hard things, like writing, reading “dry” texts, building a website, working out….? This might very well be, because you’re jackin’ off to porn or playing endless sessions of “League of Legends”. You see, our brains crave dopamine. Every time you engage in a behavior that’s fun, entertaining and engaging, your brain releases dopamine, which feels incredibly good to us and prompts us to repeat that behavior (pleasure and pain principle at work). Here’s the problem…You can train your brain to release dopamine to unhealthy and unproductive behaviors! Porn for example, feels incredibly good to us. It might even rival crack for that matter. The problem is, when you “spend” all your dopamine on porn, the hard things, the valuable task such as learning, reading, creating feel even MORE boring because there’s no immediate dopamine rush. It’s not exciting. It’s not highly stimulating. So, you won’t do it and thus..become mentally weaker and weaker.
7. You always WAIT for Motivation to Strike - This one is related to #6, but deserves to be a standalone. You’re always waiting to feel motivated to change your life, but because you never “feel” the motivation, you don’t do the hard stuff that’s necessary. Motivation will always be a fickle beast and you can’t rely on it to show up when you need it. That’s the bad news. The good news is, you can create motivation by ACTING as if you’re motivated. Motion beats meditation.