time or no time?

[Twilightdance]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...me-an-illusion

Time is an especially hot topic right now in physics. The search for a unified theory is forcing physicists to reexamine very basic assumptions, and few things are more basic than time.

Some physicists argue that there is no such thing as time. Others think time ought to be promoted rather than demoted. In between these two positions is the fascinating idea that time exists but is not fundamental. A static world somehow gives rise to the time we perceive.

Philosophers have debated such ideas since before the time of Socrates, but physicists are now making them concrete. According to one, time may arise from the way that the universe is partitioned; what we perceive as time reflects the relations among its pieces.

In eastern thought both opinions are accepted. In monistic hinduism and buddhism time is more or less an illusion, but in much sanatana dharma relying on concrete selfs and universe - time is very real.

What's your take?

For me personally, it takes not much effort to realize time [as we perceive in day to day in our consciousness - leaving aside the more concrete definition physicists are looking for which as suggested may be partly real] is illusion. But it may be just my bias of thought. In reality if I can see the illusion of time completely I should be falling out of samsara.

Are you burdened by time?

[wundermonk]

In a thread talking about time and whether or not it is an illusion, it may be a good idea to begin by defining "time".

[Twilightdance]

it may be a good idea to begin by defining "time".

I'll let you do that if interested. For me and I hope many others, I believe it should be self obvious what is meant by "time as we perceive it".

[wundermonk]

I'll let you do that if interested. For me and I hope many others, I hope it is clear what is meant by "time as we perceive it".

Alrighty then...you are the boss. It is your thread indeed.

C'ya.

[sanjaya]

Actually I'm not familiar with any Hindu musings on time. Any suggested reading material?

[charitra]

Wunder,

your question is very valid, whentalking about time, one has todefine it first, just like when one talks about God one has to define God first.Aha. Iam turning poetic here.
We generally assume TIME is what we see as a human’s years on earth or a planets life and the like.

Time from any one reference point, say from the standpoint of July 12, 2012 (time) is linear. From cosmos stand point it becomes circular. If we follow any object’s linear propulsion path it simply cannot be infinite, since it has a start point it got to have an end point as well. (The hypothesis that all the physical mass out there has come after big bang from a very small mass is now losing ground and I predict will be discarded right in our lifetime). So therefore time like what we measure it in days or millennia can not go on and on if perceived as linear and only linear. But this apparently linear quality of time is in reality circular in nature. Given the fact the circle is very VERY large, it looks like as if it is linear between any two reference points, however widely the 2 ref points maybe separated.

Brahman’s periodic dissolution and reformation of cosmos thus makes time acquire a semblance of beads in a mala (rosary). For Brahman per say though, I am sure, time parameter is irrelevant, simply inapplicable.That which doesn’t have a mass/attribute cannot be measured in time. Thus there is ‘time and no time’ depending on a definable reference point, and is object specific. There maybe holes in my own hindu theory of time.

Namaste.