A
discussion of the meaning of life lead to the topic of
time, which is off topic, hence this new thread. See the previous thread to bring yourself up to speed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cordis  So if you accept the theory that time is just an illusion and really the universe is just made up of infinite seperate 'instants', or different configurations of the Universe. |
I don't accept the theory that time is just an illusion. It seems to me that time is a conceptual construct which aids our understanding of relationships between events. It's as illusory as love, or beauty. All three are based on the relationship between observer and observed. All three can be described as certain types of brain activity. Just because it's not a concrete object which we can point at doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, conceptually.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cordis Then time being illusory and the universe being nothing but a series of separate "instants," is like frames in a movie, they appear to have motion only when viewed through a projector when in fact they are all just motionless complete and seperate frames. |
That theory also isn't convincing. It requires the motion of something through those separate instants in order to simulate the passage of time, which requires that that something be separate from the universe. It also begs the question, how did those separate instants come to exist? And what stops the illusion of the passage of time from running backwards? It also means that causality is an illusion, that events are not linked to one another, they only appear that way. That makes it a more complex theory to explain the same thing as the standard model. Of course being more complex doesn't make it wrong, but it does make it less likely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cordis Everything we call "the past" is, literally, nothing but present memories. Likewise, everything we call "the future" is nothing but present memories inverted, or rearranged, to form a prediction or expectation. The appearance of "time" is little more than a trick of memory, as the Avatamsaka Sutra (Flower Ornament Scripture) says. You can easily discern this for yourself: simply figure out what it is you consider "the past" and "the future." You will discover that it is nothing but thoughts--nothing but memories, nothing but expectations, nothing but mental commentary. |
This disagrees with the theory of a universe of infinite instants, which states that those instants exist, thus the universe in what appears to be a past/future state exists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cordis It's "all in your head," so to speak. There's really no such thing as time. There is really only Now--an eternally present Present with no beginning and no ending. Everything is completely new, distinct, and original every instant, with no real "change" or "motion" at all. The mystic-philosopher Heraclitus, explaining this point, said, "A man cannot step in the same river twice." |
I agree that the past and future are accessible only via thought, and that time isn't a concrete, external construct, but the fact of our experiences shows that events really do occur, in a uni-directional sequence.
So in conclusion, if both theories are correct, that time is an illusion, and that the universe exists as infinite, distinct slices of existence, one or the other theory needs to be altered so that they're compatible. (Or if they already are, could someone explain how?)
And finally, how does this impact our existence? Does it mean we lead our lives any differently?