[notime] Expanding on the topic 'No such thing as motion'

Sat Aug 8 00:22:20 MST 2015

The idea that something can coexist simultaneously in multiple states is
not too far from reality. I'm not an expert physicist, but I think a moving
earth versus a multiple-state earth is more or less comparable to bits
versus qubits.

A bit can hold two possible values, usually denoted as 1 or 0. Bits can be
physically represented in multiple ways, one of which is a flip-flop. This
is a little circuit that can "remember" the state of an input signal, which
can be later read at any time. Flip-flops can be aggregated to form
registers. A register consisting of N flip-flops can hold N bits, and as a
consequence, can represent 2^N possible values or states. A bit can only
hold either 1 or 0 at a particular point in time, however, so an N-bit
register can only encode one of the 2^N possible values at a particular
point in time.

A qubit is like a bit in that it can hold values 1 or 0, but unlike the
classical bit, a qubit actually holds both 1 and 0 simultaneously. It is
only upon measurement of the qubit that the qubit yields values 1 or 0, and
it happens to do so with a certain probability. Qubits can be implemented
in multiple ways, one of which is using polarized photons. Qubits can again
be aggregated to form a register. An N-qubit register would be similar to
the N-bit register, except that the qubit register can simultaneously
encode all 2^N possible states at the same time. Upon measurement, the
N-qubit register yields one of its possible 2^N values with a certain
probability, but it is not until we physically measure the qubit that its
value is determined.

The moving earth or waving hand can be seen as a classical bit register.
Each bit combination encodes one of the positions of the earth or hand.
Since the register can only encode a single value at a particular point in
time, the register is made to tick from one state to the next from time to
time. At every tick, the register changes its value, and the earth or
waving hand its position. An observer perceives this change of position in
time as movement. Note that this scenario can only be explained if we add
time to the equation.

The static earth or hand can be seen as a qubit register. The register
simultaneously holds all of the earth's or hand's positions, and it is only
upon measurement that we perceive one or the other. My analogy kind of
breaks here, because once you measure a qubit, its value is determined, and
measuring it again yields the same value. But we can think of the static
earth or hand as some kind of qubit that yields different values upon every
measurement, with a certain nature to how the values are yielded so that
the earth or hand do not appear to jump from one place to the other but
instead follow the motion we would expect. Now there is no time. All there
is is a qubit register simultaenously holding all of the possible states of
the earth or hand and an observer making measurements to get a perception
of the system.

Just my 2 cents :)

On 8 August 2015 at 01:47, Robert Vaessen <notime at robsworld.org> wrote:

>
> All -
>
> I thought I’d spend a few minutes talking about the concept of ‘No such
> thing as motion’
>
> It’s a concept that many seem reluctant or unable to grasp. In
> conversation with skeptics and those who question me on my ideas (Ideas
> about the non-existence of time and motion).
>
> The skeptical party (in face to face conversations) sometimes break down
> and begin to employ theatrical arguments to their counter arguments. I’ve
> had this happen on more than one occasion. It seems to satisfy some primal
> urge to flail the limbs in a primal display of certainty in their physical
> existence.
>
> They wave their hands in the air (or flail their arms about), and say -
> "Well Mr. Smarty-Pants, what did I just do if there's no such thing as
> motion?”
>
> Oh, how I'd love to respond with something like... "You just demonstrated
> your childish grasp of reality and your juvenile method of arguing points
> of logic". Then I go on to explain how they can only measure time by
> comparing objects that appear to be moving. Think about this: When you wake
> up (and don't look at a clock) do you feel like some amount of 'Time' has
> passed? If so, how much time do you think has passed?
>
> Time can be described (in traditional definitions) as a way of
> measuring ‘observable change’ between objects or observed events.  In other
> words, you can only measure change if you can observe physical change. If
> you can’t compare objects through their apparent change, you can’t apply
> a ‘time’ measurement to the event.
>
> If your environment is a sealed room containing a table and no other
> objects, you could only create the illusion of time if you moved the table
> about. If the table were bolted to the floor, what movement what be used to
> observe change? How could you possibly ‘measure’ the change if there is no
> apparent change?
>
> How much time would have to pass before you could exclaim, Aha! We have
> proof of movement, therefore we have change, therefore we have time! How
> much time has passed?
>
> Time (the unit of measurement/it’s use when measuring change) has
> traditionally been based on the apparent motion of the stars, the moon, the
> planet as it rotates around the sun.  If we separate time from the apparent
> motion of astronomical events (as modern time measurements purport to do),
> we’re still basing the proof of time on apparent or observed change.
> Molecular decay, atomic fluctuations, the motion of cesium atoms. Dividing
> and subdividing the infinite quantity of an untouchable thing (time)
> doesn’t make it real.
>
> In my argument that everything coexists simultaneously, I argue that all
> possible matter states are static. In saying ‘static’ I mean that they are
> unmoving.  They do not move in relation to each other or on their own.
> They exist in multiple possible matter states that simply don’t change or
> move ever.  Multiple versions of the earth exist in every possible orbital
> position.  As we (our consciousness) process the possible matter states or
> nodes, our brain creates the illusion of motion from a linear series of
> nodal events.  Our limited cognitive capabilities process the nodes in this
> linear/sequential manner and as a consequence, we synthesize a reality
> which allows us to comprehend the multiple simultaneous states.  Our minds
> can't comprehend the simultaneous nature of reality so we create a reality
> that appears to be changing, and we measure that change by applying a
> measurement to the change. We call that method of measuring observed
> change ’Time’ - Or, as has been suggested by others, we (as a race) have
> devised this ‘illusion’ of time in order to interact with other
> souls/consciousness as it/they process overlapping nodes. Nodes which I
> process and you process. Given the number of possible matter states, it
> seems unlikely that two of us would ever intersect ‘adjacent’ matter
> states, but this limited processing capability may have the added benefit
> of allow us to observe apparent like lifeforms, and in that observation we
> become a distinct race of beings or lifeforms…
>
> O.k. that was pretty heavy. I think I’ll take a break now, while you
> like ‘lifeforms’ ingest and digest my musings.
>
> - Robert
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> akinetochronism mailing list
> To post message: akinetochronism at robsworld.org
> To unsubscribe: akinetochronism-unsubscribe at robsworld.org
> List information:
> http://robsworld.org/mailman/listinfo/akinetochronism_robsworld.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://robsworld.org/pipermail/akinetochronism_robsworld.org/attachments/20150808/e1be5ec8/attachment-0002.html>