"An Experiment With Time" and Time's 3 Levels
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
In the audio recording of his lecture series on psychotherapy, GS Brown discussed a book titled "An Experiment With Time" by J. W. Dunn, and its relationship to Chapter 11 of his own "Laws of Form."
In that discussion he relates 3 levels of constructed "time" that both he and Dunn seem to share. The first two make sense to me (I think) but the third I don't yet grasp. The first two are, as far as I know:
1) Formal reentry (eg: "This sentence is false.") without which there is no "now" vs "then" distinction.
2) Utilization of the level 1 oscillation to, in some sense, count the number of reentries to provide a measure. This construct a kind of temporal metric from simple topology. (I suspect this is the temporal analog of the spatial construction of geometry from points set topology.)
Can anyone help me understand the third level and/or correct my misapprehension of the first 2?
PS: I recall Tom Etter's recommendation of Robert Sokolowski's "Introduction to Phenomenology" as pertinent. In that book Sokolowski describes 3 levels of phenomenal "time" along what may be similar lines. In a book reviewer's description of these these 3 levels:
I found the chapter on time particularly intriguing. In phenomenology there are three levels of time. The first level is world time, which is the time of clocks and calendars. The second is internal time or subjective time. The third level is called the consciousness of internal time. Interestingly enough world time is dependent on subjective time as the subjective experience of it is given metaphysical priority. It connects our experiences giving us the feeling of 'a flowing nature of time, leading ultimately to a consciousness of self experiencing the world. According to phenomenology if we did not have this subjective experience of time then we would not get a sense of duration, or a continual time process. (Everything around us would instead).... 'be nothing but momentary flashes.' (Sokolowski) Time is given priority by phenomenology because it serves as a compass which we use to navigate our experience of the world with.
Dear James,toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Sorry for the sluggish response ... but I've been slogging through
a mass of mindless link repair due to the slew of url-extinctions
and url-mutations afflicting our web of maya over the last few years.
I've been working to recover-revise my better contributions to the
old LoF list along the lines of what Spencer Brown wrote about time
and imaginary logical values and the impact it had on my own work
with logical graphs from the early days on.
There was a time when I spent a lot of time thinking about the
“phenomenology of internal time consciousness” and such things
but that was a long time passing. I think I first learned the
word “phenomenology” from readings in Bachelard and Sartre but
my current take on it is more heavily influenced by subsequent
experiences in physics labs and libraries.
Physicists speak of the need to reflect on the circumstance that
even our most exalted theories get their first leg up from our
“naked eye” perception of “pointer readings", that is, from the
superposition in our visual field of a needle on a graduated dial,
or the analogous incidentals in other sensory modes. As a rule,
a working physicist would never think of taking that “observation
of obvious” truths in too reductive a sense, since that would lead
to sheer sensationalism, and even the purest experimentalist has
more appreciation for the role of theoretical conception than that.
Well, I didn't know I was gong to write this much when I opened the page,
but I started remembering experiences and thoughts from the earliest days.
At any rate, I think I'll blog this on my series about Process and Paradox
since that is occupying my mind at present and I wouldn't want to sidetrack
the time-phenomenology line.
On 3/6/2021 10:58 AM, James Bowery wrote:
In the audio recording of his lecture series on psychotherapy
Thank you for the links to the GSB lectures. This was the first time I had heard his voice and it confirmed to me that he was chosen for this particular time. It also confirms my sense that the "motive" of the Creator of the Universe (CotU) is to create a living story, a moving picture show in which He is the Author, Producer, and Director and we are the actors. (Since we are made in the image of the CotU, everyone wants to write a novel, play or movie!) As actors, we are complicated computing entities made up of a large, but finite number of computing elements.
The simplest of this in operation of various enzymes that read strands of DNA or RNA to produce various organic molecules, e.g. proteins. This is as close to a Turing Machine as it gets. Remember that Turing showed that his machine could compute anything that was computable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine
In his 1948 essay, "Intelligent Machinery", Turing wrote that his machine consisted of:
The enzyme acts as the finite-state machine (FSM) and the DNA/RNA acts as the program part of the Turing Tape. The FMS machine has a memory of its previous states, and recognizes the current symbol. As "time" progresses, the Turing Machine moves and does it's thing. It remembers where it has been, knows where it is "now", but, usually, doesn't "know" what will be next. Sound familiar?
The other thing that I want to point out about "time" is the script is laid out "before" it is acted. Even if there are "rewrites" that result from the "actors" ad-libbing something not in the script, the author still prepares the new script before it is acted. The Turing Tape exists before the FSM begins to operate upon it. Similarly, the "arc of history" was laid down from the beginning. I have yet to find any evidence that the Hebrew Script(ures) are not the script for this cycle of history. Therefore, one can gain an understanding of what is "in the future" from reading them in a holographic manner.
Experience shows that some people can gain independent access to the Turing Tape, or the Script, directly. If the access is to things that have already happened, we say they have a "eidetic memory". There was a Scientific American article about this in the 60's where if two panels of 10,000 random dots were superimposed by crossing your eyes, a recognizable 3d symbol "popped out". I know from experience that our brains can process the information from our two eyes to do this. The person with eidetic memory could look at one of the panels, "remember" it, then, some time later, look at the other panel and superimpose the remembered panel to identify the symbol. That was the article that first suggested to me that our "brain" was like a radio receiver.
On the other hand, if the person is granted access to the "coming attractions" part of the Tape/Script, then we call them a prophet, seer, or clairvoyant. GBS touched on this as well when he talked about the young girl who knew things before they happened, but had that capability socialized out of her.
Luckily for us, the Script is firmly under the control of the CotU! "The End was determined from the Beginning" is not just a slogan, it is the Way of Life! For a delightful examination of what might happen if people took control of the "Script", I recommend The End of Eternity by Isaac Asimov.