Does time exist outside of consciousness?

Pinball1970 said:
Well at least you posted in English which is harder than posting in English.
Click to expand...
To do this, I had to get into the dictionary. I learned English at school, but without practice, everything is quicly forgotten.
Maybe you should learn Russian. It is much more melodious and richer than English.
 
ольга said:
To do this, I had to get into the dictionary. I learned English at school, but without practice, everything is quicly forgotten.
Maybe you should learn Russian. It is much more melodious and richer than English.
Click to expand...
I tied to learn some Czech and Polish, I like the Slav languages
 
Pinball1970 said:
I tied to learn some Czech and Polish, I like the Slav languages
Click to expand...
Если выучите, мы сможем с вами свободно общаться. Я неплохо понимаю польский, чешский, сербский, и хорошо знаю украинский. Это всё похожие языки.
 
ольга said:
Если выучите, мы сможем с вами свободно общаться. Я неплохо понимаю польский, чешский, сербский, и хорошо знаю украинский. Это всё похожие языки.
Click to expand...
If it was a different site I would totally do that.
 
ольга said:
Если выучите, мы сможем с вами свободно общаться. Я неплохо понимаю польский, чешский, сербский, и хорошо знаю украинский. Это всё похожие языки.
Click to expand...
The dream is to get you to post in English.
 
Pinball1970 said:
The dream is to get you to post in English.
Click to expand...
Пин, меня невозможно заставить сделать что-либо против моей воли. Меня можно только убедить. Мне с самой собой приходится договариваться, чтобы сделать что то, чего мне делать не хочется. Если найду для себя нужную мотивацию, то делаю.
 
Killjoy said:
What if I need that 5 seconds to confirm "War Plan R" and turn my key on the ICBM control panel ?
:tongue::tongue::tongue:
Click to expand...
Ha! A cogent case for time-wasting activities as one dawdles over War Plan R and thus saves Earth from nuke holocaust.

Or one could, while translation is chugging along, go on a deep dive of sixties elevator music. Here's one of my earworms, which seemed to be playing in every department store, elevator, supermarket when I was around age 12:

 
ольга said:
I meant - what does the memory of conscious creatures look like? The mechanism itself. Well, for example, like a wood on a tree in non -biological systems. And in biological conscious systems - how? ......
Я имела ввиду - как выглядит память у сознательных существ? Сам механизм. Ну, например, как зарубки на дереве в небиологических системах. А в биологических сознательных системах - как?
Click to expand...

Setting aside the apparent classification error of trees being categorized as non-biological...

Surely you've seen graphics of the brain before, and specific regions like the temporal lobe. Or just the convoluted texture of neural tissue in general, if you want to contrast that to tree bark or the appearance of cellulosic fibers of wood underneath that. Components or sub-structures heavily involved in memory -- such as the hippocampus -- can sometimes have a more distinct appearance.

Aside from maybe broad diagrams abstracted from the connectivity of various areas, there's probably no particularly precise and static schematic that is universally applicable to all human brains, since the activity of the latter itself can reciprocally bring about "re-wiring" or changes in structure unique to the individual. For instance, even identical twins who were standing beside each other when they observed the same the past event might structurally encode the memory about that incident via different neural configurations.

Such brushes against multiple realizability, the philosophical view that an equivalent mental property or state can be realized by different physical arrangements or even different physical substrates (like electronic versus biological). Which has arguably stimulated additional proposals like anomalous monism, where psychological states do indeed correspond to physical states, but not in a wholly lawful or universally reliable manner.

At the microscopic level, there's the recent novelty of single neurons that can supposedly retain a concept, all on their own -- general ideas that we use to recognize or classify specific things under. Kant would presumedly have been delighted by that -- that even the biological instantiation of mind relies on concepts for understanding.
  • What makes humans intelligent? Concept neurons might hold the key
    https://www.salon.com/2025/03/25/wh...gent-these-unique-neurons-might-hold-the-key/

    EXCERPTS: You probably have a general understanding of the human brain: a network of nerve cells connected by synapses. [...] This means that a concept or memory or idea is the result of a distributed pattern of neural activity.

    [...] Unfortunately, you may be badly out of date. As it turns out, in human brains, we also have a specialized type of cell called a concept neuron, which does what was long thought to be impossible: each of these cells encodes entire concepts, so that that single neuron fires whenever you’re exposed to a stimulus relating to that concept, or even when you think about it without an external stimulus.

    This would be like having a single neuron that fires when you see a photograph of your grandmother, hear her voice, read her name or perhaps even smell her familiar perfume...     (MORE - details)
 
Last edited:
TheVat said:
Ha! A cogent case for time-wasting activities as one dawdles over War Plan R and thus saves Earth from nuke holocaust.

Or one could, while translation is chugging along, go on a deep dive of sixties elevator music. Here's one of my earworms, which seemed to be playing in every department store, elevator, supermarket when I was around age 12:

Click to expand...
Он себе ннправильную
C C said:
Setting aside the apparent classification error of trees being categorized as non-biological...

Surely you've seen graphics of the brain before, and specific regions like the temporal lobe. Or just the convoluted texture of neural tissue in general, if you want to contrast that to tree bark or the appearance of cellulosic fibers of wood underneath that. Components or sub-structures heavily involved in memory -- such as the hippocampus -- can sometimes have a more distinct appearance.

Aside from maybe broad diagrams abstracted from the connectivity of various areas, there's probably no particularly precise and static schematic that is universally applicable to all human brains, since the activity of the latter itself can reciprocally bring about "re-wiring" or changes in structure unique to the individual. For instance, even identical twins who were standing beside each other when they observed the same the past event might structurally encode the memory about that incident via different neural configurations.

Such brushes against multiple realizability, the philosophical view that an equivalent mental property or state can be realized by different physical arrangements or even different physical substrates (like electronic versus biological). Which has arguably stimulated additional proposals like anomalous monism, where psychological states do indeed correspond to physical states, but not in a wholly lawful or universally reliable manner.

At the microscopic level, there's the recent novelty of single neurons that can supposedly store a concept, all on their own -- general ideas that we use to recognize or classify specific things under. Kant would presumedly have been delighted by that -- that even the biological instantiation of mind relies on concepts for understanding.
  • What makes humans intelligent? Concept neurons might hold the key
    https://www.salon.com/2025/03/25/wh...gent-these-unique-neurons-might-hold-the-key/

    EXCERPTS: You probably have a general understanding of the human brain: a network of nerve cells connected by synapses. [...] This means that a concept or memory or idea is the result of a distributed pattern of neural activity.

    [...] Unfortunately, you may be badly out of date. As it turns out, in human brains, we also have a specialized type of cell called a concept neuron, which does what was long thought to be impossible: each of these cells encodes entire concepts, so that that single neuron fires whenever you’re exposed to a stimulus relating to that concept, or even when you think about it without an external stimulus.

    This would be like having a single neuron that fires when you see a photograph of your grandmother, hear her voice, read her name or perhaps even smell her familiar perfume...     (MORE - details)
Click to expand...
В России огромные лесные массивы, и чтобы не заблудиться в тайге охотники делают на деревьях "зарубки" топором. "Зарубки" - это некие метки, ориентиры, помогающие не заблудиться. Я не подумала, что для западного человека это выражение может быть непонятным. Имелось ввиду - оставляет ли взаимодействие с различными объектами какие-либо физические следы в памяти?
 
ольга said:
In Russia, huge forest areas, and in order not to get lost in the taiga hunters make a depid on trees "deads" with an ax. "Fathers" are some marks, guidelines that help you get lost. I did not think that for a Western man, this expression may be incomprehensible. Was there any physical footprints in the memory?
Click to expand...

What average person anywhere in the world would be associating the bare phrase "like a wood on a tree" with hunters making marks, as their first choice? Either the translator app is repeatedly failing spectacularly at representing whatever you are trying to convey, or perhaps you have no idea yourself. But I assume it's surely the former. ;)

And I'm not a "man", though in this mixed-up day and age where even "species dysphoria" is probably looming on the horizon (otherkin), physical facts like that apparently take a back seat to personal opinion when forms are filled out. Plus, from a historical standpoint, even women authors of fiction often used initials in place of first names because it was advantageous back then to be mistaken for male. And arguably still is, which is why I've rarely tried to correct assumptions in here. This might even be the first time, so pin a medal on yourself for managing to provoke that.
_
 
C C said:
What average person anywhere in the world would be associating the bare phrase "like a wood on a tree" with hunters making marks, as their first choice? Either the translator app is repeatedly failing spectacularly at representing whatever you are trying to convey, or perhaps you have no idea yourself. But I assume it's surely the former. ;)

And I'm not a "man", though in this mixed-up day and age where even "species dysphoria" is probably looming on the horizon (otherkin), physical facts like that apparently take a back seat to personal opinion when forms are filled out. Plus, from a historical standpoint, even women authors of fiction often used initials in place of first names because it was advantageous back then to be mistaken for male. And arguably still is, which is why I've rarely tried to correct assumptions in here. This might even be the first time, so pin a medal on yourself for managing to provoke that.
_
Click to expand...
Переводчик здесь иногда действительно сильно искажает смысл. Вероятно, ИИ только учится переводить понятно, и у него ещё не всегда это получается.
 
Time is about movement , duration , measured . Of physical things movements .
Time in and of its self can not move a physical three dimensional thing into movement . Time is not a real dimension . Because in and of its self , time can not move a physical thing into movement .

To your OP.

No . Time does not exist outside consciousness . Time in the Universe is irrelevant . By any measure .
 
Last edited:
river said:
Time in and of its self can not move a physical three dimensional thing into movement . Time is not a real dimension . Because in and of its self , time can not move a physical thing into movement .
Click to expand...
Space cannot "move a physical thing into movement" either. I guess it's not a dimension either?
 
DaveC426913 said:
Space cannot "move a physical thing into movement" either. I guess it's not a dimension either?
Click to expand...
Space is not about movement , although it allows movement . Space is about room . The room needed for anything to exist .
Space in and of its self , with no physical objects , is three dimensional . The physical object in space does not need to exist , to give space its three dimensions . Space is independent from the Physical .
 
Last edited:
river said:
Space is not about movement , although it allows movement . Space is about room . The room needed for anything to exist .
Space in and of its self , with no physical objects , is three dimensional . The physical object in space does not need to exist , to give space its three dimensions . Space is independent from the Physical .
Click to expand...
None of which addresses the nonsense you posted about time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top