[notime] Early posts/discussions regarding 'No Time/No Motion' - More on 'no motion' / Processing nodes of a probability path

[Robert Vaessen]

All -

As I mentioned in an early post to this list - I’m planning to re-post some of my previous ‘No Time’ conversations in the ‘Akinetochronism’ forum.  Here’s one of the earliest discussions I engaged in with a correspondent. Your opinions are valuable - Please feel free to disagree with my ‘No Time / No Motion’ ideas, but lets keep the conversation civil.

In this particular discussion/conversation Simon and I discuss the concept of ’no motion’ as it pertains to ’no time'.

Hopefully your mail reader/email client allows you to see the ‘quoting’ levels in these two posts. In my email client, the levels of quotes result in different colors for the quotes of the correspondents (myself and Simon).

- Robert




Initial post:

> On Jul 14, 2003, at 06:23, simon k wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi how you doing. Just been through your site. I too came to the conclusion that time does not exist. I have spent a few years studying Buddhism in the past where that idea is quite concurrent and am now delving into quantum.
> 
> I've just watched Julian Berbours video and while I agree with both of you that time is relative, you both have stated motion does not exist, with this statement, I'm not sure if I agree yet.  Unfortunately it wasn't really elaborated upon in either source.
> 
> My own explantion re: time is that "time is the movement of matter/energy" time is the interpretation of the dynamic change of matter/energy (duration). Time does not exist absolutely, the notion of it is dependent on matter's dynamism.
> 
> It's interesting being presented with this notion of "no motion" cause my above explanation puts motion or dynamism as a given (from which time is dependent). I am not convinced of Berbours version of the "now" and the metaphor he uses of the snapshot. I've hardly had time to think about it but my instinct tells me its weak, possibly a concept that is itself temporaly dependent. Infact, of course it is.
> 
> I hope you don't mind this type of correspondance out of the blue like this but I figured its o.k considering the nature of your site!
> 
> Ultimately I find dynamism, activity, energy and motion something like the libido of the universe. It is relatively real (real in the relative and quantum universe). I also believe in the absolute singularity which is the source and which is non-dual. For the life of me the notion of "no time" covers all specturms but the notion of "no motion" in the relative universe I can't see.
> 
> Was wondering if you had time to elaborate on this idea?
> 
> Cheers,
> Simon

My reply: 

> On Jul 14, 2003, at 16:53, Robert L. Vaessen <robert at robsworld.org> wrote:
> 
> Simon -
> 
> Thanks for the email. Your questions/comments regarding my web page are appreciated, thanks for taking the time to email me.
> 
> To paraphrase from your email; Motion is dynamic change. Under traditional physics/time space models of the universe, dynamic change only occurs concurrent with passage of time. Motion is a measure of times passage, and vice a versa (A year is the amount of time it takes for the earth to move in its orbit around the sun (time = motion = time (circular logic)). In order for something to change, it must move from one state (or position) to another. In my model of 'no time', there is 'no change' either. All things/states of mater simultaneously coexist. The beginning and the end are static unmoving/unchanging events.
> 
> We (humans) perceive motion in state transitions because of the nature of our 'self'. We are only able to experience/comprehend these static events in a linear and sequential manner. Our experiential path choices are made, and the consequences processed in this manner because of the limitations inherent in/imposed on our state of being. If we were more advanced life forms, perhaps we would be able to understand/experience these events simultaneously, or explore alternate paths in the matrix.
> 
> All things in all possible states simultaneously exist. There is no physical movement from one state to another along the probability path. All change/motion is a perception created by the processing of nodal selections within the probability tree. As selections are made, as the path is chosen, it is processed in a sequential linear manner. Motion and the passage of time are byproducts of this sequential linear processing limitation.
> 
> I'm beginning to repeat myself, so I'll stop for now. I hope you understood what I was trying to illustrate.
> 
> - Rober

Simon’s Response:

> On Jul 14, 2003, at 20:24, simon k wrote:
> 
> Hi Robert, thanks for your reply. It helped me to understand how the notion of "no motion" is derived. I still have well reasoned objections to this, (particuarly the notion of static snapshots, but I won't spend pages arguing) for example "how does the idea of no motion affect such occurances as neurological processing, that is, does not electrical information travel to and from the brain to the body? or does this process exist as static events? one would think not, since it is the brains interprative mechanisms (and psychological ones) that purportedly piece together the static events in order to create a perception of time. I guess this is asking, what of those processes that occur prior to the observation and interpretation of the self..
> 
> I think this element of quantum thinking has gone of the track a little and awaits resolution.  Anyway, thanks for your correspondance and time.
> 
> Cheers,
> SImon

My parting words provided more elaboration on what I mean when I say things like ‘consciousness’ ‘processes a node’.

> On Jul 15, 2003, at 06:56, Robert L. Vaessen <robert at robsworld.org> wrote:
> 
> Simon -
> 
> 'Processing' of static events does not occur on a biological level (by the brain). The consciousness/self (Non-biological being) processes various static nodal events. These 'snapshots' of matter contain all the memories, thoughts and matter of that instantaneous event.
> 
> The electrical information does not travel to and from the brain. Break the process (as you described it) down into billions of static snapshots, and overlap them so that they simultaneously coexist in a timeless matrix. Now, in order to experience the sensation of any itchy nose, your 'consciousness/self' decides, interprets, and processes the nodal points necessary in order to experience the itchy nose. The processing is not done by the brain, it's actually done outside the physical matrix by the self or consciousness.
> 
> Our limited ability to experience this matrix (in a linear and sequential manner), leads us to perceive and believe that the events actually occur in a linear and sequential manner.
> 
> - Robert