Transtemporal Physics

[Moth]

The question you should be considering is "What do we live inside?", the answer is "Existence as a Concept and Magick can edit any concept" I'm trying to figure out how to elasborate on that.

Yeah, but unless it purely involves your mental state, you aren't going to be able to edit it immediately.

There are good reasons that they say "Divine short & Enchant long".

So the "Existence as a concept" has some limitations. Just because you can choose your path, either normally, or through magical acts, it doesn't mean that you are conjouring up the physical universe around you. You do not change the universe; you move to the place where it is changed. A subtle but important difference.

I realise from your posts that you are desparate to be some kind of super-guru. And in your mind, you are! But you asked about science, not magical philosophy. I don't claim to have all the answers (utter certainty is the antithesis of what science is, after all) but 25 years of research have allowed me to hammer out some of the ideas of magic in a way that is compatible with the way science currently understands the universe, which is based on actual evidence.

[RaineAshford]

So the "Existence as a concept" has some limitations. Just because you can choose your path, either normally, or through magical acts, it doesn't mean that you are conjouring up the physical universe around you. You do not change the universe; you move to the place where it is changed. A subtle but important difference.

My mind contains all of time and space. So everything really is within reach.

That's why Remote Viewing works.

[Moth]

My mind contains all of time and space. So everything really is within reach.

That's why Remote Viewing works.

Well, certainly that's the belief you have that makes it work.

[Caerdon]

What are all the comparisons?

Corvidus and I have both traveled back to the beginning of Time and watched the First Moment, as well as explored what was laying around before that. We're comparing our experiences with such Visions. Perhaps somewhat creatively, but yeah. [yay]

If I had to guess I'd say stomach is reconfiguration and how space is always reconfiguring as we progress in time(temporal advancement catalysts reconfigurations). Possibly in the reverse, from Evil[shit] to Good Paradise[Pleasure].

You keep talking in terms of linear progression and reversal. Sit out and watch Nature move for a while. It isn't linear, it's cyclical. The moon orbits the Earth, the Earth orbits the sun, the sun orbits the hole in the core of the galaxy, the galaxy orbits another thing way on out there. An apple falls from a tree, slowly rots and decays until only the seeds remain; the seeds sink under the ground, another apple tree grows, and years later more apples fall from it. A forest burns and a new one grows, only to burn again. An ice age comes, only to melt away with a global warming, only for another ice age to come again later. You keep trying to come up with complex terminology, but it's all really very simple.



~:Shin:~

[RaineAshford]

complex terminology, but it's all really very simple.



~:Shin:~

[/quote]

I'm trying to become an immortal magick user.
To do that I need to transform my body into beautiful.

So to do that I need to be better at math which means I need more available syntax[complex terminology and usage of language]. Wordmath.

Because existence is a paradox, magickalmath is unstuck[it can be put between any other magickequation while simultaneously being on the other side of the equation]. Stacking magickmath is what I'm learning now.


The only thing simple is because existence is predestine I will always be presented with the relevent thing or spell I need to learn next.

[Caerdon]

what the... why did it just keep the quote and not post my actual response? [confused] In fact, I only used the quote tags and copy and paste for what I wanted to reply to for my responses! That's just plain weird as it had shown up properly on my computer when I posted last night [confused] Now I have to rewrite everything I had before [bummed]

Anyways, I am curious as to how the void differs from before the First Moment (which I have called the Initial Action before) to how it is perceived now as I have some experience with it (though I haven't yet gone back to the first moment myself) and I do agree, it shouldn't be compared to cartoons... or even contemplated lightly. The unprepared mind will have a bad time if confronted with it, to put it lightly.

My mind contains all of time and space. So everything really is within reach.

That's why Remote Viewing works.

Frankly put, I can bull on this. The mind cannot take the entirety of space and time. In fact, the average mind can only store approximately 400 years of experience and memories, some more, some less. And if you think being more magickally inclined expands on this, I would say you are wrong. It would actually fill it faster, atleast in terms of physical storage within your brain. Etherically, it can only hold what you yourself experience as an impression, so while the potential is theoretically limitless in that regard, it is based off of what you yourself experience.
However, to contain all of time and space would mean you have every possible moment in your mind, every possible variance and instance, every alternative for every action, every event. Every timeline, every facet of every possibility in the multiverse. Every possible life and every possible path every possible life can take in all of this, as well as every thought they have. I could go on, but I'm sure you can see the point

Anyways, one thing (and this is the part that I am most perturbed about losing as I don't want to reexplain this) is that Space and time, while having a symbiotic, or rather relational relationship (odd phrasing, but it's about the best I can think of right now) with eachother, they are distinct concepts within themselves. This is seen with it taking different times to travel same distances, or the fact that you can stand still in one place and let time just move forwards. This allows you to remain where you are and see through time, forwards, backwards and even laterally while staying in one place and not having to traverse the distance with traversing the time. It also allows the traverse of distance near instantly (psychically).

I'm trying to become an immortal magick user.
To do that I need to transform my body into beautiful.

So to do that I need to be better at math which means I need more available syntax[complex terminology and usage of language]. Wordmath.

Because existence is a paradox, magickalmath is unstuck[it can be put between any other magickequation while simultaneously being on the other side of the equation]. Stacking magickmath is what I'm learning now.


The only thing simple is because existence is predestine I will always be presented with the relevent thing or spell I need to learn next.

Umm... I am guessing you mean physical immortality? While there are many theories as to how to accomplish this, there is no one (that is known nor confirmed) to have bypassed the main issue of the body breaking down on a cellular level. However, even if you do manage to bypass this issue, you'd have to then contend with either your neurons shutting down as you get older, or your head filling up with too many neural pathways and synapses causing an overload. Beyond all of this, you must find a way to allow your body to evolve and adapt to new environments and keep up with the human race's evolution, let alone find a way to replace lost limbs and fix severe injuries. Plus, there is soul weariness to take into account, and perceptive time. Very, very few people would be suited to being immortal without going insane or stagnant. Quite frankly, there are so many variables that have to be taken into account that I doubt that anyone can think of them all.

I'm confused to what you mean by "magick math"... is this the "equations" used for determining magickal components and instances and their various effects and variables in order for spells to work, much like how astrophysicists use mathematical equations to explain the phenomena in the universe?

Also, existence is not predestined. To believe that is to believe there is no free will, no choice in anything. To keep the mindset that everything is predestined, that things will just fall into your lap because it is "destined to be", is actually a hindering mindset, and a stupidly dangerous one to hold onto. As it was said before by Shinichi, you have to empty that cup of yours first.\

You seem to have some very contradictory views on existence here RaineAshford, first existence is a concept that can be edited via magick, next it is a predestined fact... you can't have it both ways. Existence isn't something to be edited via magick, magick instead elicits change by manipulating a set of parameters allowed in that aspect of existence, following specific rules and laws that exist along side of the understood ones of science and physics.
Neither is it all predestined. The mere fact that you have choices and must learn things is evidence of it. If it was all predestined, then you would have all the knowledge you will ever obtain automatically at a certain point no matter where you are or what you are doing. Instead, you have to search and find it, you have to work things out for yourself, you have to experiment and see what works, what doesn't, and simply just see what something does. You would simply do things like an automation, you wouldn't question because there would be no point of questioning as there would be no free will!
While there are certain... aspects and events that I believe are focal points destined to happen in some way, this would not take away from free will as the choices made can change the how and the where and when of this focal point from taking place.

[RaineAshford]

That focal point is called a Witch Awakening, when she receives all Future Knowledge.

[Nahemah]

what the... why did it just keep the quote and not post my actual response? [confused] In fact, I only used the quote tags and copy and paste for what I wanted to reply to for my responses! That's just plain weird as it had shown up properly on my computer when I posted last night [confused] Now I have to rewrite everything I had before [bummed]

Uh yeh, I'm pretty sure you had more post there last night, too.

I'll let Admin know, but you should also, with full details. It may be related to recent glitchiness re new skin additions and such. My best guess atm.

[Shinichi]

My mind contains all of time and space. So everything really is within reach.

That's why Remote Viewing works.

Remove Viewing works because Consciousness is not restricted to the physical brain. Consciousness can travel anywhere that you can think, so if you focus on a particular time and place in a particular way, you can View that place Remotely. That is, you can See it without physically going there, because "the senses" are more than their physical parts.

This is not because the mind contains all of time and space. Quite the opposite, really. This is because the mind is finite and separate from all of time and space, yet dynamic and flexible in a way that means it can move through both of these things, which allows Consciousness to move from place to place and time to time without being dependent on the physical body.

I'm trying to become an immortal magick user.
To do that I need to transform my body into beautiful.

Sage's have been cultivating Immortality using magical and spiritual exercises for many, many thousands of years. Not one of them use the nonsense terminology and twisted ideology that you do, especially the ones who actually manage to live for hundreds of years physically and thousands of years spiritually. You are really over complicating things and working far too hard on ideas that are biased and unscientific.

Anyways, I am curious as to how the void differs from before the First Moment (which I have called the Initial Action before) to how it is perceived now as I have some experience with it (though I haven't yet gone back to the first moment myself) and I do agree, it shouldn't be compared to cartoons... or even contemplated lightly. The unprepared mind will have a bad time if confronted with it, to put it lightly.

The "before" is the Void "proper." The only thing I can compare it to is the vacuum of space, but without any space junk or planetary bodies or any of that stuff in it. Just...nothingness. Emptiness. This is why we use the term Void to describe it, there's literally nothing else there to describe the way we would describe, say, the contents of a room, and this makes it very difficult to describe and talk about. The "now" is likewise difficult, though the Void is still there. Again, it is somewhat like the vacuum of space. Whereas "before" there was nothing, "now" there is much, and "Void" went from becoming "nothing" to "the in-between of everything."



~:Shin:~

[RaineAshford]

Magick is something that needs to be researched. There's so much we don't know about Magick and Physics.

[Shinichi]

Magick is something that needs to be researched. There's so much we don't know about Magick and Physics.

Correction. There is a lot that you don't know about Magick and Physics.

The modern scientific approach that you are trying (and failing) to apply to Magick is something that's only a couple of centuries old, because people have only been trying to explain the universe in this particular way for a couple of centuries. Meanwhile, plenty of people all over the world have been actually doing magical things for many many thousands of years, and much of their trial and error development of craft and tradition is very much alive today. Numerous people on this very forum have a wealth of this traditional magical knowledge and wisdom, and have attempted multiple times to help you better understand what it is you are trying to learn. The only thing holding you back is you, yourself.

You are letting your undisciplined mind get in the way of actual experience and growth, and especially if you want to apply the scientific method to your craft, you need to learn how to approach a problem without preconceived bias. Otherwise, you are not really researching anything, you are just playing around with psuedoscientific justifications for what you already believe.

Nature is simple, people make it complicated. Remember this.



~:Shin:~

[Caerdon]

The "before" is the Void "proper." The only thing I can compare it to is the vacuum of space, but without any space junk or planetary bodies or any of that stuff in it. Just...nothingness. Emptiness. This is why we use the term Void to describe it, there's literally nothing else there to describe the way we would describe, say, the contents of a room, and this makes it very difficult to describe and talk about. The "now" is likewise difficult, though the Void is still there. Again, it is somewhat like the vacuum of space. Whereas "before" there was nothing, "now" there is much, and "Void" went from becoming "nothing" to "the in-between of everything."



~:Shin:~

You... basically put my experience with it into words there, and confirms what I expected, that I did not visit the Void Apparent (had experience with it before), but actually did visit the Void Proper. Though I accessed it (accidentally) a different way than going back to the First Moment. Nothingness is the most accurate between that and emptiness (emptiness implies there's still space to be filled, atleast to me, but then again I could be nitpicking the vocabulary like I sometimes catch myself doing). It is...pardon for this bad metaphor as it's hard to put into words... like you are seeing and reaching into the space the size between two sides of a piece of paper in every direction, but no matter how far you reach you don't think you went anywhere, you don't get any perception, no feed back, no nothing, and you expect there to be the other side, but there never will be despite you being certain there should be. There is just nothing.

what the... why did it just keep the quote and not post my actual response? [confused] In fact, I only used the quote tags and copy and paste for what I wanted to reply to for my responses! That's just plain weird as it had shown up properly on my computer when I posted last night [confused] Now I have to rewrite everything I had before [bummed]

Uh yeh, I'm pretty sure you had more post there last night, too.

I'll let Admin know, but you should also, with full details. It may be related to recent glitchiness re new skin additions and such. My best guess atm.

Ah, so I am not just going crazy! Yeah as soon as I find who/where to bring up the issue I will.

[Nahemah]

@Caerdon:

You should pm Stukov about it.

I can't help with this one, I'm afraid.

[Caerdon]

@Caerdon:

You should pm Stukov about it.

I can't help with this one, I'm afraid.

Mhmm, I did so last night and explain the situation with a link to the post in question [thumbup] thank you!

[RaineAshford]

Gravity is created by predestined time reaching back into an impossible prebeginning of time thus causing a solidness that can only be represented by a gravitational pull.

So we could create artificial gravity by having a machine trying to travel further back in time than the beginning of time. Just a musing I discovered about transtemporal physics.

[Moth]

She said: What is history?
And he said: History is an angel being blown backwards into the future
He said: History is a pile of debris
And the angel wants to go back and fix things
To repair the things that have been broken
But there is a storm blowing from Paradise
And the storm keeps blowing the angel backwards into the future
And this storm, this storm is called Progress

[Sweetgum]

Hi RaineAshford

You have written :-
"Transtemporal: Temporal represented as spacial: with environment, body(;math)"

I reply
Transtemporal usually relates to time travel, even though temporal relates to the world rather than to time
I'm guessing you perceive time as consisting of space, matter and human logistics

You have written :-
"Existence is built of math visible and invisible"

I reply
You could definitely write a paper on the problems arising from that phrase
Human mathematics depends upon the figure zero
Yet there is no zero in nature. There is no zero in space. There is no zero anywhere in the creation
Zero does not exist. Humans invented it in order to make their mathematics work
So logically, nothing humans have ever constructed should work because their maths are wrong
Yet it does
There is proof of God
and proof that our 'reality' does whatever he tells it to do

You have written :-
"I wanted to start a conversation about Transtemporal physics"

I reply
Transtemporal physics as in time travel, right?
The most interesting thing about time is that no human scientist and no published human genius has ever been able to explain it
They know it can slow down, speed up, bend, and generally do whatever it wants. And many accept that time is not sequential
But that's all they know.Why or How remain a mystery to them. All they can do is conjecture
Which is why time travel, so far, eludes them

Any serious occultist should be able to explain 'time'
Everything else in The Creation has life and personality. It would be strange if time, alone, did not
Time is alive. It has a will and a personality. It is an aspect of Godhead
What this means for us, in practical terms, is that when time travel is granted to humans, they can travel into the past, do whatever they want, and it won't matter

The human past is being altered continually, thousands of times a day, though naturally we know nothing about it
The personality of time is in authority on this matter and ensures the process works
Many human scientists are coming to the view that time is not sequential - that the past, present, and future were all created at the same time
This means that the perfected humans of the distant future live now, as we do
So how do you think they occupy their time?
By travelling back in time and correcting the errors of the past, perhaps?
That means they are doing it now
Perhaps this relates to what people call UFOs?

Best wishes

[Nahemah]

@Sweetgum:

Predestination.

She was all about it. Rational Calvinism to the max, lol. All roundabouts and swings.

[Rayn]

Still - if you want to talk about transcending time, then a good place to start in science is the Wheeler DeWitt equation. What this basically says is that when you combine quantum physics and relativity (something that has not yet been achieved to everyone's satisfaction), then what you end up with is a timeless universe. This is because it looks at the universe from "outside" (if it had an outside ) rather than as we see it, from the inside, where we experience the passage of time.

From this perspective, you see the universe as a set of branches, branching every time there is a quantum "choice" to be made. One version of you will go down each path, but you are normally only capable of experiencing a single path at any one time. (Just as well, or consciousness would be almost impossible )

Think of the Universe as one of those "Choose Your Own Adventure" books. The whole book already exists, but you can only perceive your path through it.

The Wheeler DeWitt equation does no such thing... Information is actually conserved in such a way that a consistent history is formulated, otherwise, on a macroscopic level, things would actually blink in and out of existence. To say it a simpler way, if it were possible to hit rewind on the universe and have things go backwards, you will end up with a consistent history.

That is kind of an over simplification that is not quite accurate... See, the difference between quantum statistical mechanics and classical statistical mechanics is that in the classical sense, a particle has a unique trajectory that is distinguishable. I can say particle A is different than particle B based on where particle A has been, for example. In quantum statistical mechanics, particles with the same quantum properties(spin, mass, charge, etc.) are said to be indistinguishable, or this is to say if I switch the particles, they will create the same exact state in such a way that redundancies don't count towards the entropy in terms of the information that describes the system(that is if and only if the quantum states are the same, otherwise, you don't have redundancies though the same state is created). That and path integral formulation leads to an approximate, and not exact, nature of the particles. The wave function that The Wheeler DeWitt equation speaks about references the fact that a description of a particle does not emerge from that particle in that system rather it describes the entire system and all the particles in it where the exchange symmetry of those identical particles results in, for example, bosons being more attracted to each other due to being antisymmetric or symmetrical which impacts your probability densities in terms of your expectation value.

To sum it up, particles with the same quantum states are identical, so the idea of a unique trajectory becomes meaningless where the wave function of that system, and not that particle, can cause those identical particles to exchange symmetry in how the wave function collapses where the probabilistic nature emerges due to a sum of infinite pathways. That sounds fancy; however, it is not mathematically impressive. It is pretty much like me telling you to draw a conceptual line that goes on and on forever where I then begin to give you restrictions on what you can look at in such a way that I start breaking it down into finite brackets. Something like that would be called piecsewise linear spaces. You kind of don't get a timeless universe. To be frank, it is impossible to have a physical universe without time. Mathematically, you kind of can't get that either... The implication is you get a frozen universe, but the asymmetrical geometry of our universe makes that impossible. Think of it like this. If there was a one to one mirror image in terms of forces, you would get an equal but opposite reaction which would make you be where you started in such a way that it kind of cancels you out; however, a special type of symmetry is required.

As far as the original question; you can't have transtemporal physics, because that presupposes there are physical things beyond time. That is not the case.

Pretty much, there is nothing in Physics that describes anything as a "Choose Your Own Adventure" book in the way you are explaining. You take the sum of the mutually exclusive paths you speak about where they cancel each other out or add up, to say it simply, in such a way that you are left with a single approximation that is the sum...

Hi RaineAshford
The most interesting thing about time is that no human scientist and no published human genius has ever been able to explain it
They know it can slow down, speed up, bend, and generally do whatever it wants. And many accept that time is not sequential
But that's all they know.Why or How remain a mystery to them. All they can do is conjecture
Which is why time travel, so far, eludes them

They have, though. Pretty much, if we are talking about a definition, we have what the definition connotes followed with what it denotes(in the logical context of course), or this is to state that in order to be something, we can state the necessary conditions(what is connoted) and the sufficient conditions(what is denoted). That pretty much gives us a theorem, but since scientific "theorems" take place inductively, it gives us a theory which means that the theory is not necessarily true since it was formulated within an inductive paradigm, which we do have. Definitions are syllogistic, so this pretty much means that when a definition is offered, you get intensions filled with extensional members. To sum this up, yes, we have various theories about time and whenever anyone states a definition, one is pretty much stating a theorem or a theory. You don't get conjecture if your argument is valid, and you don't get speculation if your argument is not inductive, and if your argument is inductive, it can be proven via experimentation and encompassed in a theory. Those theories become grounded in geometry which pretty much revolves around deductive proofs.

[Moth]

Ok, I think I understand just enough of what you are saying to reply :-)

I wasn't specific enough. When I said "timeless universe" I didn't mean a universe without time - that would (as you quite rightly say) be nonsense. I meant that there is no *passage of time*; no dynamics. There is a body of work (Page & Wootters amongst others) who are trying to derive dynamics purely from entanglement. (There is also work showing that entanglement may cause space, but that's a bit rich for me right now). Summing the probabilities implies the dynamic. I believe that the many-worlds theorem (whilst removing the measurement problem) means that each of the possible paths exists, and I further believe that this is a suitable quantum modification to General Relativity's "Block Universe" that combines the two geometrically.

I think it is some limitation of the physics of the human brain (possibly coupled with the second law of thermodynamics through decoherence) that means we experience the passage of time.

I have to thank you for your answer, which I have almost certainly not fully understood :-)
Few people (in the world in general) seem either willing or equipped to talk about these things, and reading can only take one so far.

[corvidus]

I think it is some limitation of the physics of the human brain (possibly coupled with the second law of thermodynamics through decoherence) that means we experience the passage of time.

I think it has more to do with the naturally established illusion of time (the rotation of the Earth giving rise to 'night and day' times, as well as the revolution of the Earth around the sun which gives rise to 'seasonal' times) and the metaphysics of the human brain (our ego and false perceptions, false definitions).

[Count Zero]

Time isn't an illusion, it's an observation. Time as a measurement system is man made, yes - we have set in place the periods of time which we use for measurement, a second/hour/day/week is a man made contrivance, but it's based on observable and objective events, we do move around the sun, the Earth does rotate, these things are not man made and form the basis for the measurement system we call time. Time, and our passage through space, then go on to act as factors in the Special Theory of Relativity (STR).

The Special Theory of Relativity is a calculation which forms the basis of Spacetime, or the fourth dimension. Our co-ordinates in spacetime are dictated by our movement through space relative to the speed of light, which is a constant. The faster you travel through space, the slower you travel through time - this is also a proven fact, atoms decay at a slower rate the faster they travel, meaning that time has effectively slowed down as the objects velocity has increased.

In relation to the original post then, I'd suggest you actually do a little bit of research into physics before you start exposing spurious theories, as science and magick can be used together, hand in hand, and if you actually understand the core principles of physics then you might be able to generate a theory that actually has some weight, rather than sounding like you just pulled it out your ass.

[Rayn]

Ok, I think I understand just enough of what you are saying to reply :-)
I wasn't specific enough. When I said "timeless universe" I didn't mean a universe without time - that would (as you quite rightly say) be nonsense. I meant that there is no *passage of time*; no dynamics. There is a body of work (Page & Wootters amongst others) who are trying to derive dynamics purely from entanglement.

The idea most people have about time is that time passes in such a way that we move through time; however, that is not the case. Well not quite. It is more accurate to state that information which describes us creates us moment to moment. Information can pretty much be modeled as that which makes something distinguishable from another. If I have oxygen and carbon, for example, they are not identical particles where their behavior can be abstracted in terms of statistical mechanics. I can tell you where oxygen and carbon is going to likely be in the room without knowing every particles location because of their trajectory. In other words, there is a catalog of their states that says based on this state they will be somewhere else in a different moment. This is modeled in terms of a probability. Here is where it gets interesting. Redundancies among identical particles allow for correlations and symmetries to drawn, and when they can't, you have what is called entropy in the system(that is where you get the decoherence issues you spoke about). That is pretty much what quantum entanglement is, mind you. Quantum entanglement is the correlation of entangled particles in such a way that information is derived from that symmetry. The idea is that information can be derived from symmetries like that which in turn creates a type of history that creates states moment to moment. It is agreed; however, that information is conserved where you can kind of see this if you look at the Hamiltonian operator in that equation you mentioned. This pretty much means that if you hit rewind, everything goes back to its initial state. When people think of time, they typically also think of cause and effect; however, there is nothing about time that says it must go forward; rather, that is a limitation of matter and energy due statistical physical laws. I can't physically go back to tomorrow for example, but the reason is not that time moves only forward; rather, it is because of the second law of thermodynamics that governs how energy and matter and information spreads out. As information spreads out, symmetries break because of the more possible states you have. Think of it like a wave that starts small and gets bigger and bigger. As the wave scales up, you kind of lose a particular structure where if in reverse, the wave would get smaller and smaller.

Summing the probabilities implies the dynamic. I believe that the many-worlds theorem (whilst removing the measurement problem) means that each of the possible paths exists, and I further believe that this is a suitable quantum modification to General Relativity's "Block Universe" that combines the two geometrically.

Not quite... The quantum property of say, for example, spin is which direction a particle will spin through a magnetic field. Well, in this, you end up dealing with angular momentum. This is an additive property, or, in other words, you end up taking the sum of a lot of vectors. This does not mean that the angular momentum of a particle is infinite and happens in different worlds for every possibility; rather, this means you get something that is a sum. In quantum physics, angular momentum would correspond to those "uncertain" eigenvalues. An example of angular momentum is if you spin pizza dough to make it all nice and flat. It is rotational. Well, that is additive. Quantum physics just introduces an idea of uncertainity and eigenvalues. The problem is how quantum physics is sold to the public. It requires a lot of mathematical knowledge to make heads or tails out of it, so it typically gets sold to the public in a generic and incomplete form.

Time as a measurement system is man made, yes - we have set in place the periods of time which we use for measurement, a second/hour/day/week is a man made contrivance, but it's based on observable and objective events, we do move around the sun, the Earth does rotate, these things are not man made and form the basis for the measurement system we call time.

It actually isn't though. The reason why clocks were so useful in measuring time has to do with the idea that you pass a period for a given interval. If you cut a triangle out of a circle, for example, you can get sine(x). f(x)=sine(x) yields what is called a periodic function. In other words, the idea of periods and intervals were not contrived; rather, you see them as emerging in nature. Take, for example, the DNA in your body. Helix structures end up having trigonometric functions to them which implies something analogous to periods.

[Count Zero]

It actually isn't though. The reason why clocks were so useful in measuring time has to do with the idea that you pass a period for a given interval. If you cut a triangle out of a circle, for example, you can get sine(x). f(x)=sine(x) yields what is called a periodic function. In other words, the idea of periods and intervals were not contrived; rather, you see them as emerging in nature. Take, for example, the DNA in your body. Helix structures end up having trigonometric functions to them which implies something analogous to periods.

The math you use is also a contrivance, the definition of contrivance being 'a scheme, device, strategy or tactic'. I think you may have misread what I wrote to mean that I'm suggesting time itself is a man made thing, and this isn't the case - not even the measurement of time is illusionary, its an observed contrivance, or device for measuring the passage of time itself - this being the objective of observed time, to measure travel through it. A contrivance is simply a device, or method, for creating structure around a natural event - like how you explain with trigonometry, though as trigonometry is periodical, as you have explained, it is directly related to periodical observances such as the movement of waves, and particle physics, and not actually analogous. If you were suggesting that sine waves are comparable to something that cannot be directly measured through them, which I feel you may be alluding to if I understand you correctly, then yes - this is an analogous comparison, you can say that the regular frequency of a wave function is comparable to the formation of helix structures, and therefore comparable to DNA itself.

[Rayn]

The math you use is also a contrivance, the definition of contrivance being 'a scheme, device, strategy or tactic'. I think you may have misread what I wrote to mean that I'm suggesting time itself is a man made thing, and this isn't the case - not even the measurement of time is illusionary, its an observed contrivance, or device for measuring the passage of time itself - this being the objective of observed time, to measure travel through it.

You said that minutes, seconds, and hours are contrived. They are not in that the reason why there are 60 seconds and 60 minutes has to do with a base 60 system tied to geometry. You also said it is structured around observing something. Again, that is not the case in that math is not empirical, in itself, so it is not really structured around observations. As I said, geometry revolves around deductive proofs. We get 60 seconds from something we derive from a triangle. You would derive 60 seconds, for example, with a secant function. The 60 seconds you get would thus be a derivative. You're grounding the idea of periods into measurements when in actually has very little to do with measurements... It's a theorem where things are derived, and not contrived, from that theorem in that a proof goes with it... Base 60 and base 10 systems seem a bit arbitrary and contrived, but when you look at the proofs, you see they are not. They are derived from theorems which means they are always true, pretty much, and not arbitrary and do not rely on observations, because, again, math is not empirical. Science is. Math is not. Science is not Math and Mathematics is not Science. We can describe periodical behavior without grounding it into observations or measurements. To be frank, it is metaphysical. Purely theoretical frameworks are metaphysical which means empirical observations or measurements are not necessary condition for them to be true.

I've been lurking for a while. I decided to address some things, because I disliked the derisive tone of a few members when they know just about as much as the people they are being derisive to on the topic. By the way, I believe that is against the rules. I suppose I should introduce myself, formally. For now, though, I'll just speak about my background. My educational background is in Genetics and Engineering.

To be fair, this is a site on occultism, so I am not going to go on a tangent about science, but if people are going to criticize other people on grounds of logic, science, and math, I believe they should be accurate.