consciousness is non-orientable. reality is a knot. (Quantum Theoretic Machines)

Originally posted by Tayesin

Originally posted by Jezus
Time only seems more complex because it is the movement of consciousness rather than our physical body.

But all dimensions are products of observation.

Hi,
I don't see Time as a dimension, to me it is only a concept that has no existence outside of Expected Observation.

And other "subtle" dimensions pre-exist our ability while human to perceive them. To me, what is poorly called the astral layers/levels of awareness are only the support stages for experience in this human realm.

You seem to be differentiating between time and other dimensions because you feel time does not exist outside of our perception.

You say "pre-exist" because you feel that first three dimensions are more "real" and exist without observation.

However, all dimensions are products of observation.

The distinction is just an illusion.

Originally posted by Jezus
You seem to be differentiating between time and other dimensions because you feel time does not exist outside of our perception.

You say "pre-exist" because you feel that first three dimensions are more "real" and exist without observation.

However, all dimensions are products of observation.

The distinction is just an illusion.

Not really. Science considers Time to exist as a Dimension.. Space-Time. I don't. To me all time exists at the same time and it is only our observation that differentiates it... hence it doesn't exist as a separate thing

No. I don't feel the lower dimensions are more real... not sure how you can make that statement without ever knowing me.

I understand your assertion that all dimensions are products of observaton, but I disagree. To me, everything is only a dissemination of the whole, and in some "areas" that disseminated energy is more dense in order to supply Experience, and that all levels in and around that are only support levels for the denser Experience offerings.

Observation occurs once awareness is within the Experience, which has as part of its makeup a limited perception available.. what I call the Mundane.

Please, before you go making statements about what I believe or Feel about a thing, try to get to know me first to avoid being wrong about me.

Just woke up, having a first coffee so this may not have come out as I would have liked

Originally posted by Tayesin
No. I don't feel the lower dimensions are more real... not sure how you can make that statement without ever knowing me.

You said time is

"only a concept that has no existence outside of Expected Observation"

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by Tayesin
No. I don't feel the lower dimensions are more real... not sure how you can make that statement without ever knowing me.

You said time is

"only a concept that has no existence outside of Expected Observation"

I'm not sure exactly what he meant myself, but what I took away from the comment was that what he meant by "expected observation" is thing's like, a day is a day because the sun rises and falls on a regular basis. We expect the sun to rise and fall and our perception and language calls that cycle a day.

Time is currently according to Eisnteinian religion a fourth dimension of temporal travel in which we currently move forwards through, but his equations also allow for things to naturally move backwards and accordingly we SHOULD see this on a regular basis. There is no reason why we don't according to his physics, yet nothing has ever been observed to move backwards and violate entropy.

Scientists are just now getting around to understanding that there is no fourth dimension of temporal travel. We can't reconcile quantum physics with a fourth dimension. Once we hit the quantum level, time itself simply vanishes. It doesn't exist at the very smallest fundamental level of reality. The only thing we can count on is entropy. We perceive entropy and sequential cycles as time. We then over think the whole situation with our math in an attempt to understand the universe and our understanding of reality has suffered ever since.

We see structures in our observable universe that simply can not exist within the time frame and theory of the big bang according to Einsteinian religion. Structures that could not form unless they've had well over a hundred billion years to form. Our observations disprove Einsteinian religion, just as archeology and recorded history disproves all other religious views of creation. What we observe tells a different story than all these creation myths. Yes, I consider Einsteinian religion a creation myth as it's just as wrong and observations prove that.

Originally posted by sirnex
Scientists are just now getting around to understanding that there is no fourth dimension of temporal travel. We can't reconcile quantum physics with a fourth dimension. Once we hit the quantum level, time itself simply vanishes. It doesn't exist at the very smallest fundamental level of reality.

But what exactly is the significance of differentiating time as not a dimension.

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by sirnex
Scientists are just now getting around to understanding that there is no fourth dimension of temporal travel. We can't reconcile quantum physics with a fourth dimension. Once we hit the quantum level, time itself simply vanishes. It doesn't exist at the very smallest fundamental level of reality.

But what exactly is the significance of differentiating time as not a dimension.

I'm not sure what you mean...

According to Einsteinian religion, time as a fourth dimension of temporal travel is part of it's very foundation. Without a space-time matrix to reality the very thing's it ultimately predicts for our universe would simply not be true. Yes, it's prediction is close enough to work, but it still ultimately fails to predict accurately how thing's actually work, which is why we've invented a plethora of unobserved thing's. Things like an inflationary period, dark matter and dark energy, etc. The list is huge.

We invented the concept of time but time itself as a physical dimension just doesn't exist. We've never directly measured it. We can't even observe it. Watching a ball bouncing at a steady rate for x amount of counts from one to ten and observing that ball bounce slower and slower till it comes to rest does not mean time stopped for that ball.

The reason I gave that analogy is because we currently define time by an arbitrary amount of oscillations of a cesium atom. A cesium atom may last longer than our entire species, but it will eventually decay. Does time itself end when our most "accurate" atomic clock stops functioning? Does time stop when a ball stops bouncing? Do days end when the sun goes supernova? No... things just move and change and our perception of these sequential cycles is what gave birth to the concept of things "slowing through time".

Originally posted by sirnex
We invented the concept of time but time itself as a physical dimension just doesn't exist. We've never directly measured it. We can't even observe it.

Originally posted by sirnex
The reason I gave that analogy is because we currently define time by an arbitrary amount of oscillations of a cesium atom.

But aren't the spatial dimensions defined in the same way?

Arbitrary units of measurement.

If change per change is not a direct observation of time couldn't you say that space itself is never directly measured as well?

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by sirnex
We invented the concept of time but time itself as a physical dimension just doesn't exist. We've never directly measured it. We can't even observe it.

Originally posted by sirnex
The reason I gave that analogy is because we currently define time by an arbitrary amount of oscillations of a cesium atom.

But aren't the spatial dimensions defined in the same way?

Arbitrary units of measurement.

If change per change is not a direct observation of time couldn't you say that space itself is never directly measured as well?

A spatial dimension is one we can travel in, x,y,z axis. Up, down, forward, backward, left and right. The units to measure distance along this axis may be arbitrary, but the movement along still is measurable regardless of what we call an inch. Time defined as a fourth dimension of temporal travel is Einsteins attempt to conclude that objects within the universe not only move through the three spatial dimensions, but also through a time giving our perception of things changing/flowing in time. No such fourth dimension of temporal travel has ever been observed or measured upon. Things can not go against entropy and things do not go against entropy. We don't see time travelers because you can't reverse entropy for the entire universe.

Originally posted by sirnex
Time defined as a fourth dimension of temporal travel is Einsteins attempt to conclude that objects within the universe not only move through the three spatial dimensions, but also through a time giving our perception of things changing/flowing in time.

So we aren't moving through time?

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by sirnex
Time defined as a fourth dimension of temporal travel is Einsteins attempt to conclude that objects within the universe not only move through the three spatial dimensions, but also through a time giving our perception of things changing/flowing in time.

So we aren't moving through time?

I've yet to see any tangible evidence of a fourth dimension of temporal travel myself. What I have seen is the misuse of cycles and sequential events being attributed to time instead of entropy and natural known and measurable laws that govern physical processes. According to Einsteinian religion, objects can and should freely move both forwards and backwards along his illusory fourth dimension of temporal travel. Things do not move backwards because things can not overcome entropy. Should things freely move backwards, thus showing there is indeed a fourth dimension of temporal travel, then we need to either throw out entropy entirely or have a complete revision of what entropy is and how it works.