Board index › Topical Discussion › Computers, Math, Science, and Technology

Why can't we perceive time and math directly?

Page 1 of 2 [ 26 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Jitro
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 May 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 589

20 Oct 2012, 2:16 pm

We only perceive them indirectly.



redrobin62
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,009
Location: Seattle, WA

20 Oct 2012, 2:22 pm

???


_________________
One Day At A Time.
His first book: http://www.amazon.com/Wetland-Other-Sto ... B00E0NVTL2
His second book: https://www.amazon.com/COMMONER-VAGABON ... oks&sr=1-2
His blog: http://seattlewordsmith.wordpress.com/


BlueMax
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2007
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,285

20 Oct 2012, 2:27 pm

...because our brains are made of meat and goo instead of silicon?



Robdemanc
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2010
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,872
Location: England

20 Oct 2012, 3:55 pm

Not sure what you are saying. But I would say math is abstract relationships between abstract ideas. Time is percieved in relation to memories of events, or projected future events.

So the two obviously depend a lot on abstract mental ideas.

But I am not sure what you are talking about.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

20 Oct 2012, 4:12 pm

Jitro wrote:
We only perceive them indirectly.


Mathematics is about abstract mental constructs. There is nothing to perceive and a great deal to understand.

ruveyn



slave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Age: 112
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,420
Location: Dystopia Planetia

25 Oct 2012, 8:12 pm

Jitro wrote:
We only perceive them indirectly.


Clarify.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

25 Oct 2012, 9:02 pm

Have any of you perceived the number two lately. The number two is the class of all sets which can be put into one-one correspondence with the set {0, 1}. The best only one can do is see two of some concrete objects.

ruveyn



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

25 Oct 2012, 9:25 pm

Jitro wrote:
We only perceive them indirectly.


Math can't be perceived, but it can explain (and represent) everything eventually. Here's a thought experiment: If beings in a virtual world were conscious and the time between one state and the next froze for 2000 milliseconds—would these beings then notice anything? I doubt it.



Robdemanc
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2010
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,872
Location: England

26 Oct 2012, 1:26 pm

Kurgan wrote:
Jitro wrote:
We only perceive them indirectly.


Math can't be perceived, but it can explain (and represent) everything eventually. Here's a thought experiment: If beings in a virtual world were conscious and the time between one state and the next froze for 2000 milliseconds—would these beings then notice anything? I doubt it.


And we would not know if some higher time was suspended for an indefinate period between two of our time moments. That is freaking me out. If we have time moments that is.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

26 Oct 2012, 1:36 pm

Robdemanc wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
Jitro wrote:
We only perceive them indirectly.


Math can't be perceived, but it can explain (and represent) everything eventually. Here's a thought experiment: If beings in a virtual world were conscious and the time between one state and the next froze for 2000 milliseconds—would these beings then notice anything? I doubt it.


And we would not know if some higher time was suspended for an indefinate period between two of our time moments. That is freaking me out. If we have time moments that is.


Correct. You put it well. :)

Actually, it doesn't freak me out. The fact that time may be discrete and not some kind of mysterious, unexplainable, continuous event is a reassuring thought.



Comp_Geek_573
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Sep 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 699

26 Oct 2012, 9:42 pm

What about Planck times? Those have been worked out... so on a level imperceptible to us without specialized scientific instruments, our time IS discrete!


_________________
Your Aspie score: 98 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 103 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
AQ: 33


Robdemanc
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2010
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,872
Location: England

27 Oct 2012, 2:31 am

Kurgan wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
Jitro wrote:
We only perceive them indirectly.


Math can't be perceived, but it can explain (and represent) everything eventually. Here's a thought experiment: If beings in a virtual world were conscious and the time between one state and the next froze for 2000 milliseconds—would these beings then notice anything? I doubt it.


And we would not know if some higher time was suspended for an indefinate period between two of our time moments. That is freaking me out. If we have time moments that is.


Correct. You put it well. :)

Actually, it doesn't freak me out. The fact that time may be discrete and not some kind of mysterious, unexplainable, continuous event is a reassuring thought.


But imagine if we do have discreet instances of time, and there are other time paths or levels between those discreet instances, that means entire universes could be born, expand, and contract between any one of our time instances and we would be completely unaware.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

27 Oct 2012, 9:03 am

Comp_Geek_573 wrote:
What about Planck times? Those have been worked out... so on a level imperceptible to us without specialized scientific instruments, our time IS discrete!


Planck time is the required time for light to travel one planck length in a complete vacuum. Any time shorter than this doesn't "matter" per se, but many believe that time can be divided in even smaller parts, until you reach a point where it can be divided no more ( similar to how matter can be divided into elementary particles).



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

27 Oct 2012, 9:05 am

Robdemanc wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
Jitro wrote:
We only perceive them indirectly.


Math can't be perceived, but it can explain (and represent) everything eventually. Here's a thought experiment: If beings in a virtual world were conscious and the time between one state and the next froze for 2000 milliseconds—would these beings then notice anything? I doubt it.


And we would not know if some higher time was suspended for an indefinate period between two of our time moments. That is freaking me out. If we have time moments that is.


Correct. You put it well. :)

Actually, it doesn't freak me out. The fact that time may be discrete and not some kind of mysterious, unexplainable, continuous event is a reassuring thought.


But imagine if we do have discreet instances of time, and there are other time paths or levels between those discreet instances, that means entire universes could be born, expand, and contract between any one of our time instances and we would be completely unaware.


It wouldn't be able to do so without time. :) The big bang happened the very moment time began.



Robdemanc
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2010
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,872
Location: England

27 Oct 2012, 9:22 am

Kurgan wrote:
It wouldn't be able to do so without time. :) The big bang happened the very moment time began.


But that assumes time linear, that there is only one time dimension.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

27 Oct 2012, 11:57 am

Robdemanc wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
It wouldn't be able to do so without time. :) The big bang happened the very moment time began.


But that assumes time linear, that there is only one time dimension.


Dimensions and the laws of physics began at the time of the big bang as well. There never was a "before" the Big Bang.

While time in most string theories is perceived as one dimensional, there might be more than one time dimension. Nobody really kniws for sure. This does not make it possible for "before the big bang" to exist, though. :wink: I don't think an oscillating universe is compatible with a flat universe.