Is eternity a physical or mental thing?

[rigney]

Didn't know quite where to put this post. Thought; if I put it in the religious forum some of you won't see it. But then, if I put it here perhaps some of the more religious folks won't see it either? I'll take my chance someone will either redirect or leave it be.

I was skipping around through Yahoo earlier (6AM) with a question. "What is Eternity"? Man, it was like adding an extra dose of salt peter to charcoal when making gun powder. Literally every kind of answer and conjecture imaginable. This link is broken into several different sub-sections, but none too difficult for even me to understand.

If you haven't seen it, you might find it interesting. My idea of eternity has always meant to be, at this very moment. Whee!!, Was I wrong! I'd Like to get your take on it?

 

Got it off Yahoo this AM. It's one mans opinion of eternity among other things, and seemingly without subterfuge.

 

http://actualfreedom.com.au/library/topics/eternity.htm

Edited July 13, 2011 by rigney

[ajb]

Something is eternal if it has existed for all time and will exist for all future time. Or it exists "outside" of time, say a jinn (particles or objects trapped on CTCs) .

 

Now we are faced with the question of what is time, did time start at the big bang, is time travel allowed and so on?

[rigney]

Something is eternal if it has existed for all time and will exist for all future time. Or it exists "outside" of time, say a jinn (particles or objects trapped on CTCs) .

 

Now we are faced with the question of what is time, did time start at the big bang, is time travel allowed and so on?

 

See what I mean? With just one reply, I'm already more confused.

[pantheory]

rigney,

Is eternity a physical or mental thing?

 

Of course the answer is solely a matter of conjecture. It would depend upon the definition of eternity that you choose to use. Here are the two primary definitions:

 

eternity:

 

1. Infinite or unending time.2. A state to which time has no application; timelessness.

 

For the first definition eternity is a concept, therefore it would be of mental and conceptual character based upon an unending progression in the future.

 

The second definition could have a spiritual component such as an eternal heaven. In such a concept if one's religion considers heaven, for instance, as a physical entity then "eternal" might then be considered physical. There are other hypothesis in physics where entities accordingly might exist outside of time either by their nature, or by some other means.

 

But for most, eternity would be considered a mental "thing."

Edited July 18, 2011 by pantheory

[ajb]

1. Infinite or unending time.

 

The trouble is that we do not know if we can have an "infinite past" nor do we know if we can have an "infinite future". I am not really sure how to pose these questions carefully. I am not sure how we define time before the big bang and how we define time in the heat death epoch. And of course we still have basic questions about time and the arrow of time. The quantum nature of time is a real mystery and so on...

 

So to resolve this (in part) I said "existed for all time and will exist for all future time". Which I think is the best definition given our current thinking.

[rigney]

The trouble is that we do not know if we can have an "infinite past" nor do we know if we can have an "infinite future". I am not really sure how to pose these questions carefully. I am not sure how we define time before the big bang and how we define time in the heat death epoch. And of course we still have basic questions about time and the arrow of time. The quantum nature of time is a real mystery and so on...

 

So to resolve this (in part) I said "existed for all time and will exist for all future time". Which I think is the best definition given our current thinking.

 

No! The question of eternity is not one that can be answered; easily or otherwise. If we can rationalize the earliest life forms on this planet, even they must have had an idea of being alive. And who knows of the creatures out in the universe at present, ones we will never see, or know anything about. Do they wonder about things as we do. If so, I wonder if they view eternity with the multitude of concepts as we have? Edited July 18, 2011 by rigney

[Pincho Paxton]

How does eternity get complicated? To be around forever... simples.

[jackson33]

Eternity:

 

All of time past or time to come, or both jointly; infinite time, without a beginning or an end.

 

Timelessness; a state to which time has no application; the condition into which the soul enters at death; the afterlife (metaphysical). Oxford Dictionary

 

Peter: The first definition is the actual; the latter the wishful and imaginary hope of a ‘self’ being fearful of death. The fact of time being eternal – without a beginning or an end – has produced some of the most convoluted thinking and imagination known to humankind. The fact so boggles the minds of scientists that they are forced to invent all sorts of spurious meta-physical theories, such as ‘space-time continuums’, ‘bent time’, ‘black holes’, ‘cyclic time’, ‘time reversing universes’, etc. rather than acknowledge the fact. The mystics and shamans ply similar other-worldly theories, lapped up by those souls eager for their message and desirous of securing a ticket to ‘eternity’, some mythical dwelling place of their ‘eternal souls’.

 

For scientists, the fact of eternity negates the myth of a creation-event for the ‘beginning’ or a doomsday-event for the ‘ending’ of the physical universe. For the mystics, the fact of eternity negates the myth of a creator-God, a doomsday-God, or a Greater Eternity. [/Quote]

 

From your link...

 

Interesting rigney and I've seen similar articles dating well back in time, even believing my own perception of time is based on an infinite material existence, from such articles. One comment relative to you, might be the mention of "invention of cyclical time", which does seem to fit many of your thoughts. To complicate matters, I've often wondered if we're even existing in an overall reality of what is or are we some kind of a book being read in another realm or reality, but the one thing I am fixed on, is we live and exist in our own understanding of what might be and all this has come from earth's human mind/brain alone, no outside influence. Could we have it backwards?

[pantheory]

The trouble is that we do not know if we can have an "infinite past" nor do we know if we can have an "infinite future".

A totally valid comment. In this way I agree with standard model physicists that assert that time before the beginning of the universe has no meaning at all if the beginning was finite concerning time past. As to time ending in the future, seems like a logical possibility, but not one according to any cosmological models that I know of. Accordingly "infinite" is only conceptual that does not exist in reality according to many standard model versions (and others) -- such as space as a continuum, for instance.

 

... I am not sure how we define time before the big bang and how we define time in the heat death epoch.

Most BB theorists believe time would have no meaning before the beginning of the universe if this is the only universe. Defining time in the heat-death epoch is a standard model problem that is unrelated to alternative models.

 

And of course we still have basic questions about time and the arrow of time.

Logically there is absolutely no problem at all. Time is measured by change, and one could never undo what has already happened. Mathematical models may consider other possibilities, but I think such models totally fail in logic.

The quantum nature of time is a real mystery ...

The quantum nature of time is solely theory, and in my opinion a misguided one since again it fails in logic as well as supporting observations.

 

So to resolve this (in part) I said "existed for all time and will exist for all future time". Which I think is the best definition given our current thinking.

I think that the mainstream consensus still asserts that time began with a Big Bang, at least as the leading hypothesis.

Edited July 18, 2011 by pantheory

[ajb]

Most BB theorists believe time would have no meaning before the beginning of the universe if this is the only one.

 

So stating that time has no meaning before the big bang is fairly standard in cosmology. However, quantum gravity models cloud this and people do talk about pre-big bang physics. Classically, fair enough.

 

Logically there is absolutely no problem at all. Time is measured by change, and one could never undo what has already happened.

 

This sounds like the thermodynamic arrow of time, which is one type of arrow.

 

The notion of causality is an interesting one, people do wonder if we really need it or if we can somehow weaken it to allow time-travel.

 

The other point is in the heat-death epoch there will be no changes to speak of. Thus do we really still have a notion of time and the arrow of time?

 

I think that the mainstream consensus still asserts that time began with a Big Bang, at least as the leading hypothesis.

 

Yes, this is the mainstream classical consensus. Without a real quantum theory of gravity it is difficult to really say much about "time before the big bang" and what that really means. A theory of quantum gravity will presumably give time some quantum nature at energy scales near the Planck energy.

 

Anyway, the idea of eternal as a physical idea is clearly tied up with our understanding of time and the evolution of the Universe. It soon gets rather philosophical quickly and pushes us towards the boundary of our understanding of space-time and gravity.

[rigney]

From your link...

 

Interesting rigney and I've seen similar articles dating well back in time, even believing my own perception of time is based on an infinite material existence, from such articles. One comment relative to you, might be the mention of "invention of cyclical time", which does seem to fit many of your thoughts. To complicate matters, I've often wondered if we're even existing in an overall reality of what is or are we some kind of a book being read in another realm or reality, but the one thing I am fixed on, is we live and exist in our own understanding of what might be and all this has come from earth's human mind/brain alone, no outside influence. Could we have it backwards?

 

Man, that's deep conjecture at the least. Perhaps 65 or 70 years ago my brother (5) years older, related to me that: "we are a figment of our own imagination". Where he hell he ever heard such philosophy, I haven't a clue since he never went beyond the sixth grade. Too busy playing cards, shooting pool and dice. Even today I have no idea who originated the comment. Can you help?

[pantheory]

So stating that time has no meaning before the big bang is fairly standard in cosmology. However, quantum gravity models cloud this and people do talk about pre-big bang physics. Classically, fair enough.

Although I don't believe the standard model is a valid model, its beginning of time concept I believe is totally valid and logical.

 

This sounds like the thermodynamic arrow of time, which is one type of arrow.

I believe that time is an extremely simple concept to understand and that there is no other meaning to it. Accordingly "time" is solely an interval of change(s) which occur between two instances, and nothing more.

 

The notion of causality is an interesting one, people do wonder if we really need it or if we can somehow weaken it to allow time-travel.

Again in causality, I think the BB concept (even if the model is wrong) is dead on correct logically. Accordingly the consensus version is/ was that the beginning bang was self-contained concerning the potential energy that caused it, and that there was no external cause.

The other point is in the heat-death epoch there will be no changes to speak of. Thus do we really still have a notion of time and the arrow of time?

This I agree seems to be a conundrum, but would be of no consequence if the BB model were wrong.

 

Yes, this is the mainstream classical consensus. Without a real quantum theory of gravity it is difficult to really say much about "time before the big bang" and what that really means. A theory of quantum gravity will presumably give time some quantum nature at energy scales near the Planck energy.

I believe that time, like space is a simple analog defined by atomic changes, and particle spin in particular. Some believe space could also be digital but I also think that such models are barking up the wrong tree

 

Anyway, the idea of eternal as a physical idea is clearly tied up with our understanding of time and the evolution of the Universe. It soon gets rather philosophical quickly and pushes us towards the boundary of our understanding of space-time and gravity.

I do not think I would ever seriously consider any model where "eternal/ eternity" could be considered as something physical. As to gravity, I think the concept of warped space will in time be replaced, and that space-time will come to be understood as a very simple concept, such as a point in space identified by the relative coordinates of its observable surroundings, at a particular point in time -- and nothing more.

Edited July 18, 2011 by pantheory

[jackson33]

Man, that's deep conjecture at the least. Perhaps 65 or 70 years ago my brother

(5) years older, related to me that: "we are a figment of our own imagination".

Where he hell he ever heard such philosophy, I haven't a clue since he never

went beyond the sixth grade. Too busy playing cards, shooting pool and dice.

Even today I have no idea who originated the comment. Can you help? [/Quote]

 

rigney; While your brother probably meant something other than my interpretation, many teachings in those days, were designed to keep an open mind to the improbable. Other realms of reality or dimensions were commonplace in Science Fiction books later movies and very popular. I recall, while trying to explain an afterlife, according to astrophysics of the day, it was easier to understand a Heaven being in another dimension to the one we exist the soul then passing into that realm after death, kind of coexisting, but not determinable to the other. Later the "Twilight Zone" seemed to enforce my thoughts and more than once while attending science lectures, the speakers (a couple authors and at least one scientist) found this interesting, one mentioning the "book theory", I relayed to you.

 

On this, I've argued a few times that in my mind while dreaming our mind could be entering another dimension and the more I watch some older folks sleeping 20+ hours a day, wonder if it's not subconsciously a choice, noting these folks are often near and over 100 years of age.

[rigney]

rigney; While your brother probably meant something other than my interpretation, many teachings in those days, were designed to keep an open mind to the improbable. Other realms of reality or dimensions were commonplace in Science Fiction books later movies and very popular. I recall, while trying to explain an afterlife, according to astrophysics of the day, it was easier to understand a Heaven being in another dimension to the one we exist the soul then passing into that realm after death, kind of coexisting, but not determinable to the other. Later the "Twilight Zone" seemed to enforce my thoughts and more than once while attending science lectures, the speakers (a couple authors and at least one scientist) found this interesting, one mentioning the "book theory", I relayed to you.

 

On this, I've argued a few times that in my mind while dreaming our mind could be entering another dimension and the more I watch some older folks sleeping 20+ hours a day, wonder if it's not subconsciously a choice, noting these folks are often near and over 100 years of age.

 

Why the hell would anyone want to sleep even a dozen hours in one day? Don't get me wrong. I may even come to such a conclusion in a few years, but right now that isn't the issue. Eternity effects everyone, young, old, and in between. That is the discussion I would like to maintain. To believe there is more to this existance than many of us want to admit is nothing new. Everyone wants to put a new twist on the idea, regardless if it's theological or not.

[rigney]

I guess we all have thoughts of the "Here After", and Eternity. This little ballad best sums it up for me.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsUM7V6Ku_8&feature=related

[pantheory]

rigney,

 

Why the hell would anyone want to sleep even a dozen hours in one day? Don't get me wrong. I may even come to such a conclusion in a few years, but right now that isn't the issue. Eternity effects everyone, young, old, and in between. That is the discussion I would like to maintain. To believe there is more to this existence than many of us want to admit is nothing new. Everyone wants to put a new twist on the idea, regardless if it's theological or not.

Sleeping for a long time may be unrelated to understandings of eternity. If one's mentality is based upon the future, then sleeping longer each day might enable one to live longer into the future. If this is one's belief then to live longer may seem like a good idea. For me the future will most likely be more exciting than the present, true or false, since I am a futurist in general. Much also has to do with motivation. If one has such a belief then one might try to live longer by sleeping longer, which is my opinion is a valid strategy to living longer. As far as living the "most valuable life" I would suggest that most people should spend at least 7-8 hours in bed. As for me it's more like 9. Twelve hours per day sleep may be a wee bit too much unless your health is really failing.

 

In my opinion eternity is simply a mental concept that does not exist in reality, so my entire life-strategy concerns the best that I can do here and now, with an attempt to live a little less now, and a little bit longer in the future In my belief humanity could never ultimately be more important than ants, for instance, or rocks for that matter -- although personally I have a fondness for Earth-life in general, probably even extra-terrestrial life if there is such a thing . What do you think?

Edited July 24, 2011 by pantheory

[rigney]

rigney,

 

 

Sleeping for a long time may be unrelated to understandings of eternity. If one's mentality is based upon the future, then sleeping longer each day might enable one to live longer into the future. If this is one's belief then to live longer may seem like a good idea. For me the future will most likely be more exciting than the present, true or false, since I am a futurist in general. Much also has to do with motivation. If one has such a belief then one might try to live longer by sleeping longer, which is my opinion is a valid strategy to living longer. As far as living the "most valuable life" I would suggest that most people should spend at least 7-8 hours in bed. As for me it's more like 9. Twelve hours per day sleep may be a wee bit too much unless your health is really failing.

 

In my opinion eternity is simply a mental concept that does not exist in reality, so my entire life-strategy concerns the best that I can do here and now, with an attempt to live a little less now, and a little bit longer in the future In my belief humanity could never ultimately be more important than ants, for instance, or rocks for that matter -- although personally I have a fondness for Earth-life in general, probably even extra-terrestrial life if there is such a thing . What do you think?

 

What you say in general is true. "Eternity" to each of us is used as a metaphor to convey an individuals inner thoughts of yesterday, today and tommorrow. As you say, every form in nature is very special and important to someone or something. An ant, as you suggest has a life to live and things to do with that time. A bee, bird, cat or dog is no different. Then neither is a rock. We see the rock as being inanimate, but in reality; is it? Perhaps one day we may be part of a rock, a grain of sand, or that single drop of rain that Johnny Cash so eloquently spelled out? Eternity, regardless of how you think and feel about it, is a "deep well" subject.