Chapter 2 - Past, Present and Future

I have been able to enlarge the chart by clicking on the image BELOW the whole post!
This it is legible.

Again I beg pardon for the inconvenience but even a week after my enquiry, Gather didn't responded.

From the photon's point if view there is no time. Since that point of view must also be true, our perceptions of past and future (and present for that matter) must be only a partial and very incomplete picture of reality. Just remember that the entire universe, including all of time, exists. The future exists in the same sense as the past and present exists.

Larry: please keep into account that we are Observers of any event we contemplate and analyze.

The problem is not only a philosophical one , it is as well - AND MAINLY - the way WE deal with any information as such dealing generates the response.

If time is a human invention for our own comfort, timing is still an element of our analysis.

Yes, time is. But we should not expect the rest of the universe to relate to time the way we do. And it appears that it does not.

Larry: keep in mind, please, that >I am an economist. My researches deal only with our own welfare. I cannot deal with what I ignore as any people living in any exo-planet.

For the time being, we should deal with our problems and the philosophy we instate into them. We may disagree with any present economic system (capitalism, socialism, communism, etc.) but we should know how come the system(s) is(are) failing.

Otherwise we shall keep repeating the same errors, over and over.

Gilbert,

What does our understanding of physics have to do with economics? I was thinking only physics when I wrote my comments above.

Strange, isn't it? However economy is as well a science ... and interdisciplinary research helps to understand our gaps.

". . . to be perceived an object or an event HAS to be “filtered” by our own referential system made of cultural accumulated experience, our own organized system, our own personality. Human beings are unable to subtract themselves from such a subjective way of grasping things."

Many thanks Gilbert. I keep saying the very same thing in my comments. We cannot avoid subjectivity and perception is based on what we already accept as true. Therefore scientific theories are not truths; (the are not supposed to be meant to be) they are simply convenient ways for us to perceive and interpret the world and the universe about us. They are bases on which we make predictions. The ones considered valid are the ones we can rely on to produce accurate predictions. For that reason, two theories can contradict each other and both still be treated as valid (case in point: Quantum and Relativity)

Indeed, Dennis. This why I gave up explaining our present situation/position (and mess) through economic history. It could be done that way. However it would imply using words which raise questions and would, if I may say so, instead of "filtering" an information, distort it (in-formed it in the latin language way: changing its shape) at our convenience.

Here the chart is "static" as it doesn't allow to understand the "how come" of our own distortions.

Next week (I hope and expect) I will provide the dynamic chart and then slowly I will open each step (12) for discussions and comments.

Then my idea is to start trying to "sort" the received and issued informatiions.

I look forward to it Gilbert.

Dennis, I didn't revert on your statement "scientific theories are not truths" previously because it puzzles me.

Greks and Romans were "scientically" sure that atoms cannot be divided, Earth was a flat disk and, even, that we were at the very center of the Universe.
In fact, Euclidian geometry is accurate up to the limits of our "then" knowledge.

At that time they were and could be considered as "absolute Truths", as axioms.

This doesn't mean that they are "wrong" today. It just means that Truth is related to scale and knowledge.

And knowledge depends on each individual acceptance which, obviously, vary every day according to our ability to conceive accurately increasing tools.

Per example, never before the DNA discovery it would have been possible to understand that a chimpanze has a 95% similar DNA than present human beings, neither to find out that Cromagnon is 98% compatible with us.

We still ignore so many things: last year discovery shows that becoming old is due to the degrading of the DNA spirals ends.

Scientifically speaking we could consider that if the track we are on is being repeated in any circumstances for decades - often more than 6 - by many different tests AND testers, the track is scientifically confirmed but in no way the end of such a track.

However to go forward we have to understand and often confirm how come the track evolved and where it drives us. Most probably at some point it will imply us to switch on an appearing "branch". However, following this new branch implies "accepting" new granted knowledge as you will be able to see on the graphs I will publish later on.

I omitted the word "absolute". Sorry about that. I meant ". . . theories are not absolute truths". They can only be accepted as " 'truth' according current available information." It is always expected that the current accepted "truths" will most likely be replaced when additional information or more accurate explanation are presented. In the mean time however what we have accepted as "true" will influence our perception. That subjectivity cannot be avoided.

YES, indeed. EOM.

I can only look at it all philosophically because that is the only valid way of "seeing" it ... as the UNIverse exists and all things that we consider withIN it, everything is in a stage of flux, of change, and thus there are no "absolutes", all is relative only and those relativities are all interconnected infinitely ... and there are no two things exactly alike, the closest to alike-ness would be the exact opposite which would be equal in all respects only "reversed" (such as our "Soul-Mate", UNIversal perspective)

The only things that are defined are but those things we, as thinking humans, define ... and thus that only lasts the moment we believe it to be so and immediately changes into the next different moment.

Reality is thus only what we believe it to be at the moment of such belief ... and were a moment to be defined more specifically, that definition will also be "fleeting" and of no real value ... except to those of us who have "agreed" to call it a "fact" or "truth" ... each of which is but an "approximation" by agreement and nothing more ...

In the True UNIverse, in the "absolute" sense ... the sense of the Total, the Whole, Holistically, everything is happening all at the very same time and in the very same place ... that would be from the perspective of GOD (not God nor gods) ...

Everything in that UNIverse is then but an aspect, or subset, a fraction, of, the whole ... and only in the sense that a "part" is "different", is in the "displacement" that part is to another relative aspect ... and until each aspect has an "absolute" to relate to, that being "all other", all relationships are also relative only ... and thus Time and Space are our measurements of "Relativity" ...

As a "world people", what we as the entire species agree upon, is then only an arbitrary "fact", useful only for our present communicative "facts" ... they have no bearing nor relationship to anything or anyone else in the entire UNIverse ... except that such "others" agree with us ...

The "speed of light" is an arbitrary "limitation" only as long as we agree it to be so ... to change that at this point would require changing the accepted facts and truths of everything else that it is related to ... not likely to be done ... thus we have "trapped" ourselves into "this" shared reality ... it is all fabricated !

I could go on and on ... maybe later :-)

IMnsHO

PS ... but from the point of shared commonality, as I tend to understand it, I do agree with your graphic presentation ... it being "a method" of communication. :-)

Indeed, Jerry: it could be confusing the projection of a static universe onto a dynamic one.

The way I see it, static externally as a whole, dynamic internally as the parts relative to each other.

The dynamism, Jerry, is not within each part as a separate share of the chart: no communication speed can excess light speed.

Next chart will show how the dynamics works. However the several implied analysis will start, I hope, if the my agenda allows it, early September.

In relating to a "somewhat similar" line of thought on another post, I followed your link there, back to here, and reread not realizing that I had already been here.

Related to my comment on the other post, I see what I said here earlier has the validity I intended then ... and the point "there", I will repeat here; is that considering "the speed of light", it is compressed to ZERO, a form of INFINITY "depending upon" just HOW you look at it, as ALL or NOTHING, same thing different perceptions, expanded and/or compressed. (like GOD and man, I will get to that soon)

THAT ZERO being the "point" of REVERSAL (as in Focal point change in lensing or reflective point in mirroring) ... SAME AS "O" IN GRAPH SUPPLIED.

Mankind must "Break things down" into related PARTS to SEPARATE into fragments, and thus ENVISIONING them each as an UNCHANGING (time stopping image) of SEPARATION in order to VISUALIZE A PARTICULAR PERCEPTION LONG ENOUGH TO FIGURE OUT THE RELATIONSHIPS TO OTHER SUCH "FRAGMENTED", BUT RELATED, PARTS THAT MAKE UP THE WHOLE OF INTEREST.

Without doing that, everything just moves along at it's actually "changing" speed (everything is moving at one rate or other relative to everything else), and we cannot "grasp it" without such ANALOGY.

That is partly why we have been so "enamored with" DUALISM ... (+/-) which is, in it's expanded (broken down) form; (+=+) AND (-=-) ... maximum separation ... easier to get our minds around !

The "problem" is that we have gotten used to that kind of thinking and have become to believe that it might be more real than it actually is ...

In Dualism, we have placed a VOID or GAP between DIFFERENCES, (the (/) in (+/-))... ESPECIALLY BETWEEN EXACT (more or less) OPPOSITES ... EXTREME POLARIZATION. (There is NO such EXACTNESS in the UNIverse, the very closet thing to such "sameness" is EQUAL BUT OPPOSITE ... [that expressed in the BET (Basic Equation of Truth) as (+=-) !]

NOW ... (a MOMENT in TIME of ZERO DURATION)(precisely) ... IS THE SAME AS the ZERO POINT that exists in EVERY TRUE CHANGE OF REVERSAL ... such as in the Graph supplied at the VERY CENTER ... THE PLACE WHERE WE ARE, anticipating and realizing, IN OUR MINDS, the difference between the INtersecting "quadrants" ...

Minor (major personally from ego view) point being, WE ARE at the CENTER OF EVERYTHING we THINK about. WE make the momentary decisions on whether to "go" one way or another ... WE are that zero point on the graph ... WE are "a" zero point in our universe ... a valid and uniquely different Being, a particular FRACTION OF THE WHOLE !

The "ego" sees that all more dualistically, as either the relative (+) or (-) related to the "opposite other" of it's thoughtful "differentiation" ... the ego sees NO "spiritual" interconnection between THINGS (and people) ...


SPIRITUALLY ... "we" (those of us realizing our Spirit) see things CONNECTED ... by SPIRIT as the (=) (Equalizer) in A TRINITY (+=-) which INcludes THE GOD which would be the Ultimate or Absolute WHOLE ... UNIVERSE ... of which we are each a PART as a god (made in the image of)


Getting back to the graph ... it is our TOOL to break things down into manageable parts to be able to get our minds around them (as I said earlier) ... and the mentioned case, it was broken down into two major areas of four quadrants, where the horizontal ones are "secondary" in the sense of being compared to the two vertical ones being "primary" ...

With the "primary" being our major interest, we tend to forget, relatively, that the secondary pair also affect the Zero Point (O) JUST AS MUCH AS THE OTHERS ... we dismiss that though as relatively unimportant compared to our primary area of focused interest ...

We have to ... because our minds (at least our brains) cannot "handle" more than that one (quadrant pair) at a time ... at least in order to make some "rational" sense of it ... (rationality being akin to "sequential logic") ...

NOW ... getting the REAL POINT that I am trying to make ... EVERYTHING IS HAPPENING ALL AT ONCE AND COMING AND GOING THROUGH OUR MINDS (not Brain) FROM EVERY POSSIBLE (INFINITE) DIRECTION(S) ... UNIVERSAL-WISE ... we are living in a HOLOGRAPHIC UNIverse ... and THE PORTIONS we REALIZE, are what makes up that which we call our REALITY ... (and THAT leaves out a whole bunch of potentials)

AS human beings we have certain "senses" that are "tuned" to certain "frequency ranges" of the available energies which are infinite in range(s) ...

IMnsHO

And what about the anti-matter discovered some decades ago? It can be "made" of several discrepancies when related to matter as, per ex., all the same particles but one spinning the other way while weighing the same?

The problem is that the "ether" is just not existing as 0 is not existing neither.

I guess that I see (posit) that the "Anti" (Dark) aspects are just across their own Zero Point from their related Matter ... I see the aether as also being effectively a Zero Point except where it serves as a specified mixture of something else.

PS ... that being what "Black Holes" are all about ... what is more, I see Stars, along with their materialistic compositions, of being CONNECTED energetically TO other Stars, each being a relative "White" Energy Portal ... the "opposite of" the "black holes" ...

IMnsHO

PPS ... the above was about the relationship between what we call "positive" aspects of the "known" universe and the "negative" aspects of the "dark" or unknown ...

As for the "aether" (which I believe in) it is "all potential", the "mix" of everything just waiting to be "created" by intention of beings equipped to make use of it. (it being what I call Spirit)

IMnsHO

I like the chart. It makes sense to me.

What we teach is what the current majority has agreed upon, and then it is accepted by the majority of those that were taught. This new majority then sticks with their truth, never thinking they have experienced something different than anyone else. I could be shown a color, for example, and be told it is "red." It exists in my world only as I see it. I call it "red" from then on. My "red" and your "red" could be completely different, but since we both recognize it every time as "red," we think we see the same thing.

I think people forget that time is man made. Everything exists all at once, everywhere. As you imply, it's only the angle from which we look. We see what is agreed upon. We organize it so that it makes sense for the majority.

A perfect analysis of a static world, Heidi. Thanks.

Einstein Minkowski Space-Time Diagram
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474980008202

As I have problems with these drafts and Gather.com, you may see large and legible ones on:

http://geebee090.hubpages.com/hub/Drafts