Comprehending Time

tahmed:

The way you expressed your thoughts on the limitations of the human brain was quite confusing; it was difficult at least for me to understand your viewpoint. Your nomenclature of “extending the capacity of the human brain” perhaps meant developing the intellect further. We need not worry about it; it continues developing more and more.

But there is still some confusion about how you express your ideas. For example, you say “..that scientific advances have reached a stage where our ``reach`` has exceeded our ``grasp.``” At the frontiers of our scientific knowledge, there was always some vagueness, some gray areas, some tentativeness.. There were several possibilities at such junctures and the scientists didn’t know which of them would bear fruit. In due time, the mist lifted and the way ahead was lighted. A similar situation exists now.

There are many physicists who believe that the string theorists are wasting there time because they believe that this theory will not unify the fundamental forces. Such a strong ‘negative’ conviction is harmful for science. Many string theorists have staked their professional lives to pursue the trail in string theory. May be we’ll see the ‘light of the day’ soon or in the next fifty years (Weinberg) or perhaps never. It took more than three hundred years to find the proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem. The scientists can continue creatively only if there is hope for them to achieve something meaningful. Pessimism is the bane of scientific pursuit. Caution is the buzz word.

The way you tried to communicate your ideas on the limitations of the human brain was quite pessimistic. My supervisor had advised me never to believe “it cannot be done;” it may be only a matter of time.

The examples you have given prove my point. Your examples point to the achievements of the human intellect (brain). Please don’t believe that we have reached the end of the road. While we are exchanging these interacts, hundreds of scientists are busy attempting to understand the things which we might think are incomprehensible (or beyond the grasp of the human brain).

Mohammad Gill

freethinker: you write To say that our brain is limited hence we cannot go any further is very unscientific.

I am saying that our brain is limited, but am not saying we should go no further. Indeed, what I am saying is almost the opposite - namely, that scientific advances have reached a stage where our ``reach`` has exceeded our ``grasp``. To continue my example of the hummingbird from the previous post, we can ``reach`` the ultraviolet patterns of flowers by sensing them through special equipment which then translate them into a color that we can actually ``grasp``. But we cannot hope, with our ``current version`` of the human brain and 5 senses, ever hop to ``grasp`` these colors and patterns the way a hummingbird does.

you write I lose you and your argument when you say “..it would be necessary to extend the capacity of the human brain itself.” How do you know that our brain is not evolving every instant of the time? Is there any specific and direct method of extending the capacity of the brain (extending it mechanically, or what?).

Natual evolution is a slow process. It took perhaps 15-20 million years for the human brain to evolve to the level where - a mere (relatively speaking) .03 million (i.e. 30,000) years ago - it reached the level needed for the concept of ``human progress`` to emerge.

Your next question is I think very interesting: Is there any specific and direct method of extending the capacity of the brain (extending it mechanically, or what?). The short answer of course is ``yes``. The long answer gets more interesting, I think and I have attempted a short exploration of the answer below:

1. Extending our input (i.e. sensing) capacity - telescopes have for centuries enabled us to do this. Today, we can ``see`` planets, draw a map of the universe a few thousand years after the Big Bang, and so forth. Microscopes are another example. infrared cameras are another example.

2. Extending our processing capacity - computers are the obvious example.

3. Extending our ``memory capacity`` - writing was the first example, computers enhanced it, and the internet and google has extended it vastly.

4. Extending our output (i.e. motor) capacity - we can direct machines sitting on mars to lift a rock, examine it, and relay back the results.

The above are obvious examples. But even these merely scratch the surface of what I am talking about. What I am talking about is:

5. Extending beyond our five senses to directly grasp other dimensions - thus opening a world that our existing brain cannot even conceive. This is an area I can only indicate here, but in substance it would represent a quantum jump beyond the incremental progress made to date through 1-4.

6. Upgrading or capacity for rational thought to match the technological prowess we have now attained (Arnold Toynbee had a series of important lectures back in the 1950`s I think which rightly warned against the danger of mankind destroying itself due to the mismatch between our technological reach and our rational grasp.

5. is important since without it we will always be limited by our ``inside the box`` grasp of External Reality. 6. is important since without it there is a very real danger of mankind not even making it to the next century - either due to unwise handling of environmental issues, or of political conflicts that arise from our animal instincts but our resolved through weapons that can destroy earth.

masadi: I havent read your last few posts to me, nor intend to waste any time reading them. But thanks for writing. :-)

netizen:

Thanks for sharing your knowledge with the readers.

Mohammad Gill

Re: # 24

mr. gill

inspired by this article and curious about time-travel, i did some reading from the internet on this topic over the weekend.

``The physics of wormholes is paradoxical and implies transmission of information at a speed greater than that of light. Hence the possibility of time travel. ``

i don`t think we need to travel at a speed greater than light. wormholes would just reduce the linear distance between to distinct points in space by providing a ``tunnel`` or a ``bridge``, if i may.

but the problem is about reaching the speed of light because the mass would be too tremendous and the energy required to move it would be immenese. hence the technical difficulty.

regarding wormholes, even if they are found, we would need to find a way to stabilize it so that it remains open.

---

``That way, remarks Hawking, the universe can be made safe for historians. ``

regarding keeping the past safe for historians.

it has been discussed that based on heisenberg`s principle of uncertainity, there are too many probabilities for things to happen. may be there are ``parallel``: universes where all the probabilities are taking place. even if someone goes back to the past and kills his grandparents, that would happen in the parallel universe and hence won`t be able to distort history of this universe.

our civilisation has just barely scratched the surface of this science. may be there are other far more advanced civilisations in the universe who have already figured out a way to travel in time.

some say may be someone from the future is already with us and is altering the direction the world is moving in their favor!

tahmed writes <<< ...in other words, our brains simply lack the capacity to understand this property of the fourth dimension.

3. As has been long understood our brain is limited to understanding a ``model`` of reality....Thus, the point I am trying to make is this: At some point in human progress (assuming mankind does not destroy itself in the meantime), it would be necessary to extend the capacity of the human brain itself....>>>

These are the rants of someone who has absolutely no clue about time whatsoever as physicists define it. Nothing that relativity talks about or string theory tries to grasp goes beyond the realm of logic. Increasing brain capacity will do nothing to change the rules of logic dependent on which is all understanding~ and human understand less about the brain than they do about time, so if understanding time needs enhanced brain capacity then enhancing brain capacity will require even greater requirement for enhanced brain capacity, according to this person`s logic if applied. He is just throwing words together without having any capacity for rational thought. In fact he has no clue about evolution as well, most mutations are disastrous, if humans start tinkering with mutations in order to produce beneficial traits, working on people as guinea pigs they will destroy millions and still not be guaranteed any results. His masters the Anglo Saxons used African Americans as guinea pigs and introduced diseases among indigeneous populations that they wiped out wholesale while claiming they had superior brain capacity and the others were less evolved, maybe he wants to go in the same direction of that long disproven pseudo science.

tahmed:

We should not feel discouraged if some concepts are too complex for physical visualization. If we were restrained by such constraints we would have already closed the shop. Mathematics is the strongest and most effective tool that we have; it helps us to progress into the darkest domain.

Four dimensional spacetime was an unfamiliar concept at the beginning of the twentieth century; now we use it as a matter of routine. Likewise ten or eleven (nobody mentioned 9 dimensions) dimensions in which the string theory seems to work are no longer daunting (not excessively); the physicists are working with them (mathematically, of course) and forming new concepts. If we close the shop simply because we cannot easily visualize what we are doing, we’ll not march ahead. The physicists and mathematicians fumble around and try everything and whatever seems to work, they take it and develop it further.

To say that our brain is limited hence we cannot go any further is very unscientific. I lose you and your argument when you say “..it would be necessary to extend the capacity of the human brain itself.” How do you know that our brain is not evolving every instant of the time? Is there any specific and direct method of extending the capacity of the brain (extending it mechanically, or what?).

In the second decade of the twentieth century, Kaluza had sent his paper to Einstein in which he had unified the theory of relativity and theory of electromagnetism in five dimensions. The idea of the fifth dimension was so outlandish and unreal to Einstein that he sat over Kaluza’s paper and did not send it for publication. That was a mistake!

P.S:

You’ve solved your own problem when you say “..Why should I waste my time with an individual who writes insults over the internet that he would never have the courage to repeat to anyone`s face in real life?” Avoid interacting with masadi if he doesn’t stop insulting you. The same goes for masadi also. You guys can make your point without hurling insults over each other.

Mohammad Gill

and in addition to #58, I`d say the same things to you on your face tahmed, you are the most pathetic kind of human being, one whose mind is enslaved and by the way you defend the US elite in all their crimes, it is of the same value as a rat`s fart.

tahmed writes <<< As for masadi, please see what Dot has to say. Why should I waste my time with an individual who writes insults over the internet that he would never have the courage to repeat to anyone`s face in real life? >>>

The person who was talking about my ``barking`` and wanted me to fetch his stick is now talking about me writing insults, this is the same person who called the political articles of the author ``communal garbage``, yet when I conceptualize his dimwit reasoning ability as the `mirasi mentality` he gets all worked up and points to his other ``dot`` mirasi friend who instead of dealing with my arguments points to an half a year old claim by a certain Ali Sina who claims I lied about his failing to meet my challenge~ of course to the mirasis the discussion is about the subjective personality of the poster and not their argument. Every post these people make provides further empirical evidence for their ``mirasi mentality``.

freethinker #55 I agree that progress in science is incremental - as Newton said, ``We stand on the shoulders of giants who came before us``. However, I dont think I made my point clear since you missed it. So let me try to illustrate with some examples:

1. At microcosmic scales, String theory calls for a 9 dimensional universe. Of these, three (length, breadth and height) are part of our everyday life, and the fourth (time) we are struggling to comprehend even partially (per your article). The other 5 are beyond our realm of intuitive understanding - in other words, our brains simply lack the capacity to comprehend reality beyond our three dimensions.

2. At macrocosmic scales, the Theory of Relativity calls for the slowing down of time itself. This concept of time itself slowing down is beyond our realm of understanding - in other words, our brains simply lack the capacity to understand this property of the fourth dimension.

3. As has been long understood our brain is limited to understanding a ``model`` of reality, not what Kant called the Ultimate Reality itself. Furthermore this model is based on our understanding of reality as conveyed to us by our five senses only. Our brains simply lack the wiring to understand anything beyond that.

The above are just some obvious examples.

Thus, the point I am trying to make is this: At some point in human progress (assuming mankind does not destroy itself in the meantime), it would be necessary to extend the capacity of the human brain itself. This may seem a strange concept, but not so strange when we realized that man`s reach has already exceeded his grasp (per Robert Browning`s famous lines) in a number of ways - we can ``see`` colors that are invisible to the naked human eye, but quite visible to the eye of a hummingbird (as has been recently demonstrated).

PS: As for masadi, please see what Dot has to say. Why should I waste my time with an individual who writes insults over the internet that he would never have the courage to repeat to anyone`s face in real life? THere are enough decent posters on chowk to interact with.

#53 Mr. Dot - greetings. Agreed on masadi. I think the problem is with his diet. :-)

tahmed:

Progress in science is systematic. Theory of relativity could not be developed before Newton`s laws of gravitation and Maxwell`s theory of electromagnetism were discovered. Newton had to follow Galileo and Kepler. Likewise, theory of quantum mechanics came to us at its opportune time. Miracles just don`t happen in science. And remember there would, most likely, be always some unanswered questions otherwise the human life would become very insipid and unexciting. If there are no problems to work upon, there will not be any research.

masadi has correctly mentioned the progress of human knowledge by ``incremental`` steps although he said it in a rather deprecating manner. Why don`t you two show some respect for each other?

Mohammad Gill

#53, little wonder the no name mirasi is an Ali Sina troll who has stumbled across here. His followers were crying and wailing to Wikipaedia because his mythology was busted. The so-called ``mathematical error`` of inheritance he presented actually revealed his ignorance of the whole concept of `warith` in the Quran, he successively adds the shares where no such successive addition is recommended by the Quran, when you bust his fuzzy math his followers run to the Wiki editors asking them for a judgment on how his mythological shroud of contrived intelligence was busted.

A Hindu hater of Islam appealing to tahmed following the ``the enemy of my enemy`` mirasi logic. Note that this is added to this thread, to answer the irrelevant and incoherent post and link by the no name mirasi in #53. If you are so sure about the mathematical error in the Quran regarding inheritance write an article on it and I will deal with it there to your heart`s content. Sina is no different than the other Hindu haters of Islam, his intelligence is just as pathetically dimwitted as all bigots.

TAhmed32 (various interacts), sir, what you say is nothing new. The detractor has previous form.
Anyway I would humbly suggest you see the following Lies and Deception which gives you a small flavour of the events and certain wiki entires and the arguments. remove the gratutuious religious insults you will see that obsfuscation and confusuion are a trade mark - very much visible here.

In addition to #51, Michael Talbot`s, ``The Holographic Universe`` is an exposition of this perspective for the layperson though he takes it to absurd directions at times. Here is a short read on it

The author regarding Iqbal <<< The eye of God sees all the visibles and His ear hears all the audibles in one indivisible act of perception. The priority of God is not due to priority of time; on the other hand, the priority of time is due to God’s priority.” This is all metaphysical and I do not believe it is going to help us in understanding what our mundane time is. >>>>

You cannot dismiss all that as ``metaphysical``. Check out the physicist David Bohm`s concept of the holographic model of the universe, a model that explains the experimentally verified non-local events of Quantum physics. Where there is no location, as in a hologram, it is no metaphysics for one viewing it to ``see all visibles and hear all audibles``, neither is it metaphysical for him to say ``be`` and it is.