Exactly. Much more concise and better surmised than my braindumps, good shit.

I've gotten 'better' at speaking to an individual about these topics, but in a community, knowing everyone hears it different, i just throw shit out there, and am very ineffective at resonating with anyone who doesnt already get it lol.

it wouldn't matter once you've lost your sense of time


however human beings are intrinsically tied to the concept of time, and therefore science matters

agreed once more my friend.

two great points there which are inter-related. it wouldnt matter once you lost your sense of time -- but it takes it mattering for a period of time for it to ultimately help us lose our sense of time.


and human beings are intrinsically tied to time -- indeed, time matters, and science matters... and we made both of them up ;)

Time is a mathematical function, not a human construct. The only human element concerned with time is how we measure it.

definitely agree it's mathematical. everything is mathematical, and ratios are the essence of relativity itself. but this is where people can start talking around each-other anyway, it's all based on perception (which too is relative).

but word, time is definitely a measurement tool which existence uses to give meaning (and significance) to the relative 'space' between life milestones, just as distance gives meaning to the space between matter.

based on my vantage point, mathematical functions and human constructs are not at ends though. without the perceived space between life and death, would time exist? guess its up to the individual to discern for themselves.

Lol'd

yes. it would. mathematics is not based on perception whatsoever, it's the complete opposite.

time is a measurement of change. Change occurs regardless of individual discernment (another hated law of physics - entropy). whatever meaning you derive from that is subjective, but nobody is talking about that.

I read the first half then stopped.. So I apologize for redundancy if so but...

If a human lifespan was eternal... Meaning no set duration... N we were free from parasites, bacteria fungi infection ect... Wed all die of cancer... Cancer in its broadest sense.. Absent of carcinogens.. Is a disease of aging.

Now about the cycle... A line goes on for an infinite length, and although seeming linear, that line will eventually form a circle... But bc of our own limitations we perceive it as linear.

See also... Shrodingers cat as far as an object viewer is concerned...

Lastly.. Energy can never be created or destroyed.. Just altered in form or function.

Btw on old Nc I made a quantum entanglement thread lol

nigga this existence is a couple lines of code.
now go play
fuck bitches get money
all this extra deep thought is giving me a damn headache

Yall talked until science and philosophy merged under the flag of bullshit.
for what?
get a PSvita and take a walk.

good shit @oats. by 'without life and death, would there even be time' i was more alluding to the 'ol "if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it..." adage (which is why i brought up the subjectivity of the answer). But totally with you re: "time is a measurement of change".

Maybe where our perspectives differ (if they actually do) is in the concept of 'perception is reality' itself?

In a world that rewards "logic" (and in a job that pays for it), I eventually became so left-brained, to like a sad/robotic degree, that I wouldn't entertain any new 'information' if it couldnt be substantiated by science. As I kept asking 'why?' that learning process became exponential, until i became soo left-brained that i woke up one day more right-brained than i'd been since i was child. That's when i found myself in the "perception is reality" camp (a camp i used to literally think was naive - and don't blame those that still do).

I bring that up because you seem like a savvy dude so am interested in your thoughts on:
1. Jones' Double-Slit Experiment
2. what it means in terms of perception's impact on reality

Again, just curious in terms of how our perspectives might differ (and where they differ more than what on) -- because even the results of that experiment are subjectively debated amongst the scientific community today, but it's a good example of a left-brained study with (some) right-brained results.

pardon the long post, and again, good thoughts pawtna.

Please elaborate, mate.

Isn't mathematics a human concept? And isn't any human concept based on perception?

umm, pretty sure math isn't a human concept based on perception...

just mo tho

tonio

my nigga hit me up during my last bid a real smart ass book typa nigga. Said all dis already happened already. Sho is cuz I still got dem bitches screaming and dem fiends feeening nigga.

MIB?