Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id JAA06310 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:08:22 GMT Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 01:04:09 -0800 Message-Id: <200201290904.g0T949M17488@mail6.bigmailbox.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary X-Mailer: MIME-tools 4.104 (Entity 4.116) X-Originating-Ip: [65.80.161.53] From: "Joe Dees" <joedees@addall.com> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: necessity of mental memes Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)
> "Grant Callaghan" <grantc4@hotmail.com> memetics@mmu.ac.uk Re: necessity of mental memesDate: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 07:16:57 -0800
>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>
>> >Only when viewed from the outside-- that is, from the point of view of
>> >space-- does it appear to be purely relative to space.
>> >
>>Nither is dependent upon the other; they are interrelationally correlative
>>with neither being prior or posterior.
>> >
>> > The same is true of
>> >the mind. It exists intrinsically and irreducibly but only when viewed
>>from
>> >inside of it. Obviously, when you view something from outside itself,
>>you
>> >no longer see its self-nature but only its relativity to other things.
>>This
>> >is how physicists approach time (from the pov of space)
>> >
>>Nope; they label both spaceless time and timless space as cognitive
>>misunderstandings from the pov of spatiotemporality.
>> >
>> >and how biologists
>> >approach mind (from the pov of brain).
>> >
>>The brain is the amterial substrate for the emergent mind. Neither space
>>nor time provides the substrate one for the other; 'they' are aspects of a
>>single perceptual manifold, and we perceive that manifold, in which we
>>perceive matter/energy, because that is a valid reflection of the way
>>circumstances actually proceed according to the field equations.
>> >
>> >> When you travel faster, the temporal aspect slows (empirically verified
>>by
>> >around-the-world-flying B-52's carrying atomic clocks, compared with
>>clocks
>> >that weren't flown) and the spatial aspect shrinks (gets shorter) on the
>> >axis of travel direction.
>> >>>>
>> >
>> >Yet, no matter how fast you travel, you still perceive time-- from
>>within--
>> >the same way you always have. At no point does the person on the rocket
>> >ship perceive a change in tempo. As far as the direct experience of time
>>is
>> >concerned, nothing has changed. The rate of time's passage varies only
>>in
>> >its external relation to space and the objects moving through it more
>> >slowly.
>> >
>>That is because you are not distinguishing between the subjective
>>experience and the objective passage. The objective passage of time is
>>indeed relative to a frame of reference, and one resides in a referential
>>frame moving at one's own velocity in either case. But, subjective,
>>existential duration experience may vary. An evening in the arms of
>>Catherine Zeta-Jones might seem to just speed by (time flies when you're
>>having fun), but that same afternoon strapped to a hot eye on an electric
>>oven would seem to last much longer.
>> >
>> >Ted
>> >
>Maybe my perceptions here are wrong, but I thought time was a measurement of
>change, not the change itself, just like length, width and height are
>measurements of what it that is changing, not the thing itself. How we
>experience time is a perception that has nothing to do with the measurement
>but is a reaction to our experience. It's not just the brain that perceives
>and reacts to our experience, it's the entire body -- a body that generates
>chemical reactions of its own to create the perception of time speeding up
>or slowing down.
>
>But spacetime does nothing. It is a meme. A set of measurements comparing
>the motion of one thing with the motion of something else, most often the
>rotation of the earth around its axis and subdivisons thereof -- i.e. hours,
>minutes, seconds, nanoseconds, hertz, megahertz, etc. All of these are
>comparisons of the earth's motion with what we are measuring. The
>measurement itself only exists as an abstraction in our minds. Light
>doesn't care how fast it travels compared to how fast the earth rotates.
>The feet and miles we compare it to are comparisons with some English king's
>foot.
>
>So when you say time does this or time does that, you're confusing
>subjective reality, which we create inside our heads, with the objects we
>are thinking about. Galaxies, stars, light waves, etc., have nothing to do
>with the earth's rotation or the king's feet. Or even the rods we created
>to define a meter because it was "more precise" and fit more easily into our
>base ten counting system.
>
>This personification of time based on our experience leads to such nonsense
>as "going back in time," as if yesterday were a place and tomorrow something
>more than just a prediction. If you could jump to where the earth, which is
>traveling around the sun, which is traveling around a galaxy, which is
>traveling with a group of galaxies toward some unknown destination, will be
>after one more rotations of the planet, it won't be there. You would find
>yourself standing in airless space. It would be the same if you jumpped
>backwards to where earth was yesterday. You wouldn't find it. Time is a
>function of how we perceive the universe, not the universe itself.
>
>Anyway, there's two cents worth of my perspective on the subject. I doubt
>it will cause Mr. Hawking to start changing his book. ;-)>
>Velocity, or speed, is the distance divided by the duration. Velocity exists. It involves the rate of positional change in the spatiotemporal manifold. I would rather someone throw a bullet at me than shoot it.
>
>Grant
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
>http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>===============================================================
>This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
>Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
>For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
>see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 29 2002 - 09:17:21 GMT