Hi Judy
I know that Doyle is fond of explaining that time is not in the watch - does that help? (he also says that the maths is not in the chalk on the blackboard)
I understand that, though what he's saying is that time itself has no substance, it's just a conceptual thing we measure via the measurments of material things. As such, time simply doesn't exist except as a concept, but then neither do most things. 😉
I would also say that they only seem to be talking about the passage of time (and how it's measured) especially with reference to us being in a 4D space time. I prefer to look at it as a 5D space time, with our usual 3 dimensional space and 2 dimensions for time; one of which is the passage of time, and the other being the points of time within that (every moment of Now!) of which only one exists at any one time of course. 😀
Now you've really lost me Giles! 😮
Well, as you posted later in your reply, space has it's uppy-downy, lefty-righty, forwardy-backwardy dimensions which gives us 3 dimensions, and then they typically just say that time is the 4th dimension because 3d space is closely linked to time e.g. as time passes then space changes. My point was that the passage of time relies on looking at something at one point in time and measuring the change at another point in time, so that 4th dimension of time itself contains another dimension which are the points of time. A bit like the difference between you drawing a point with a pencil and drawing a line... the point representing the now moment and the line representing the past and future.
In quantum physics, there's something called the Uncertainty Principle, and typically this is explained as being: "we cannot know the exact location of something, and at the same time know the momentum/velocity/speed of it". To know the latter requires that we measure it's position over time and is why we express these things like "metres per second" because we have measured how much space has been covered by it in one second (for example). The former we can only measure at a single point of time, but if we measure exactly where something is at a particular point in time, we cannot know where it's going because the point in time is not enough for us to measure such things as speed (the Now moment does not have a size to it). Likewise if we're measuring the speed of something, that is done over a period of time, so we cannot say exactly where it is, because that requires a single point of time.
So, my point was that in his interview, he seems to talk mainly about the passage of time, rather than what exists in the "now" moments i.e. limiting himself to 4 dimensions rather than 5, in my understanding.
Actually, the original article [url]SCIENTISTS OF REALITY*/*The Christian Science Journal[/url]
that I opened this thread with some years ago is now online. It's an interview with two physicists (who are also Christian Scientists)That sounds up your street Giles! :p Yeesh. :rolleyes:
Now is this is the sort of thing you mean by the dimensions?
See above. 😀
Can't say I really understand him either! But I'm really glad you agree with most of it!
Say what you don't understand and I'll try and put it in as simple terms as possible. 🙂
I often think of the time my dog was attacked by another dog and there was a large hole under his ear, on his neck. I told the dog that it had never happened, that he'd always been in a state of perfection (that sounds daft I know, but in the higher consciousness I think of as Reality, nothing discordant can take place and matter isn't real, but simply thought objectified). The next day I couldn't tell which ear the hole had been under. I searched everywhere, but flesh and hair was all filled in and had it not been for the blood-stained cotton wool in the bin, I would have started to think I dreamed it all! 😉
Perhaps you passed into another parallel universe which only seemed a short time, but was a longer time for your dog and he had time to heal? Oooo! :dft003:
All Love and Reiki Hugs
... what he's saying is that time itself has no substance, it's just a conceptual thing we measure via the measurments of material things. As such, time simply doesn't exist except as a concept, but then neither do most things. 😉
Yup, totally understand (and agree)
I'm still in space though with the "uppy-downy, lefty-righty, forwardy-backwardy dimensions " - but don't worry, it's not worth trying to explain further! 😀
The pencil was helpful - thanks.
So, my point was that in his interview, he seems to talk mainly about the passage of time, rather than what exists in the "now" moments i.e. limiting himself to 4 dimensions rather than 5, in my understanding.
Right. I'm quite sure he understands the "now" moment, after having an experience like his broken finger mending instantaneously like that. I think the interview was more about trying to help the likes of me (bear with little brain) overcome the mortal view of the limitations of time
[Perhaps you passed into another parallel universe which only seemed a short time, but was a longer time for your dog and he had time to heal? Oooo! :dft003:
Huh - does the principle of mathematics know 2+2=5? Yet, if that had been accidentally written on a blackboard, you would have been able to see with with your eyes and yet, it was never true, it never happened - 2+2 was never 5!
Love and peace,
Judy
Perhaps you passed into another parallel universe which only seemed a short time, but was a longer time for your dog and he had time to heal? Oooo! :dft003:
All Love and Reiki Hugs
Could it be that dimensions/parallel universes are actually limitless concepts, just as numbers and ideas are limitless. Could what we interpret as time really be our consciousness passing between dimensions....In the case of the dog, in the new dimension the dog was never damaged in the first place.