Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Time and space
JaySon
Florida Veteran
in Philosophy
Impermanence makes time possible.
Emptiness makes space possible.
0
Comments
As an attempt to relate impermanence (annica) and emptiness (sunyata) to space-time it lacks a certain something... I feel Einstein said it better. However, it is brief, which is a not inconsiderable virtue.
No, it makes it irrelevant.
No, it renders it pointless.
I think I have to agree with @federica on this one. For instance, if you look at time, really it is exactly our attachment to permanence that helps form our idea of time.
Nope, I'm right. Lol
I like the sound of it but I guess I'm not quite making the links. Maybe some elaboration would help.
Time would stand still without impermanence. It is the very thing that makes time possible.
Space couldn't exist as a group of separate "spaces". Empty of independent selves, all objects in space are possible only through their interrelationships. Thus, nothing can exist in space without emptiness as its nature.
Ok. Gimme a day or so to wrap my head around that and I'll get back to you.
Possibly....
Sort of agree on time, it doesn't make sense if nothing changes. Time is such an uncertain thing though, what is it exactly, that I don't know if it can even be thought of as thing that is separate from events. So saying that time depends on impermanence, while more or less true, I think misses the target somewhat.
I think there are actually two kinds of space. There is the relative kind of space like the space in a room or the size of an object. That kind of space %100 relative and dependent upon emptiness. The space of a room depends on the distance of the walls, the size of an object depends on comparison to other objects.
Then there is the kind of general space that allows things to flow and move and exist. I have a hard time even conceptualizing what that might mean without objects to give it definition.
Some interesting food for thought that occurs to me is what about space-time as a unified thing? What would that mean in regards to impermanence and emptiness? Is there a unified annica-annata field?
Sure, I suppose you could call it impermanent emptiness.
This is because that is. That is because this is.
I would sum it up as reality, endless interbeing.
Time is the measure of distance between points in space.....
And the converse is true, space is the measure of the amount of time between two points.
It's also wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff too
yesimanerd #sorrynotsorry
"The universe is timey wimey wobbly wibblies." Thich Nhat Hanh
A nutjob ????? "E eeeee"
The Riddler
Ee by gum, we need a Dr ...
... meanwhile ... lost in cyberspace
we ozmonauts travel in and out of reality
Guess that one went over my head.
/Brief thread hijack....
RIP John Hurt
He was the dragon in the BBC show Merlin, wasn't he?
Easier for me to see these as the other way around. Time makes impermanence possible. That is, it is the passage of time in which impermanence manifests.
My thought is that it is the constant movement of impermanent dharmas that creates time itself.
I wonder about an existence where all dharmas are permanent.
I don't see how the concept of time would be possible if all things were permanent.
This idea makes sense because of no causality and all that. Is the idea to relate permanence with no-time? Does that imply a converse relationship that impermanence is related to time? It's a mind-bender then to consider the photon because they get created and destroyed but time doesn't pass for them.
(I love these spacetime topics especially now that I'm older because time passes slower for a 50 year old playing tennis than for a 30 year old couch potato. Thanks Einstein!)
YES!!!
Oh, please - let not this be his claim to fame. The man was epic, by any standards. One of the best actors to emerge in this nation.
It will be a while before we see his like again.
I would class him in the same quality mould as Richard Harris.... Extraordinary actor, a great loss to us, and very missed.
Yep
Love this.... It's the first role I ever witnessed him in, and I knew then he was phenomenal.
A publicity still for 'The Naked Civil Servant' - a bio-pic of Quentin Crisp, left of picture. Now he was another character...!)
PS, sorry for thread-jack.
I would say the other way round, in both cases. Though I'd be cautious about equating Buddhist teachings with sciency stuff like this.
True to say though, Science and Buddhism have walked hand in hand a while... but are not interchangeable.
Awesome. Merlin is one of my favorite shows of all time. That's the only thing I've seen John Hurt in. I hear he was a legend across the pond. Sorry for your loss.
Yes, he's been around for so long, like so many but I remember him most in recent times from J.R.Hadden in the movie, Contact. Yet, as a young teen/adult on tv, saw him in a movie where he played a part where he revealed his insanity on the witness stand, having murdered someone...something doesn't stick in one's mind like that without his being one of the true greats. (Can't remember name of the movie)
If I am not mistaken, he was also in the elephant man. The movie made me cry.
He was in a film called '10 Rillington Place' in which he played a young father wrongly accused, prosecuted and hanged for the murder of his wife and daughter.