NOW

[Atla]

Past, present and future of spacetime all exist inseparably as one, the whole spacetime thing might form a loop and sits in the middle of timeless eternity.

Which is why it's always the "eternal present", "eternal now", even though we humans are also bound to the flow of time. (Without spacetime/entropy we couldn't change, couldn't think, couldn't have memories, couldn't have evolved etc. so humans necessarily have to be caught up in a place with such flow of time.)

[Veritas Aequitas]

What is NOW? Do you only define it as the national organization of women or does it have a deeper meaning, a deeper reality?

We can say something is happening now but what separates it from the past and the future? Maybe it doesn't exist. But if it doesn't exist what do we sense?

IYO how would you define NOW? Does it have an objective existence beyond our perception or is now limited to just a subjective meaningless measure of the passage of time?

In the conventional sense, 'NOW' is the time period between what is defined as 'PAST' and the FUTURE.

Definition of Time in Perspectives.
Therefore if we define 'NOW' as the 24 hour of the day 12/22/2018, then logically the time before, i.e. day 12/21/2018 24:00 is regarded as the 'past' and 12/23/2018 0:01 therefrom is the future.
Instead of day, the past-now-future can be defined in terms of hours, minutes, seconds, nano-seconds.
Where time cannot be measured beyond nano-seconds, then there is no consideration of 'NOW' but to fall back to the nearest available or practical definition.

Since the above time of past-now-future must be defined by humans, there is no absolute objective NOW in existence. Therefore there is no metaphysical NOW.

'What is NOW' should be defined in terms of its utility and benefit to humans.
To scientists, now in terms of nano-seconds in important. In terms of history, culture, traditions, evolution, and the likes, what is NOW in contrast to past and future is based on a period of time from one years to thousands of years.

In terms of theism [God], NOW is the present life and future is the after-life in a heaven. Such thinking is illusory but nevertheless useful in terms of soothing psychology for the disturbed soul.

In more wiser and matured spirituality the 'NOW' is to contrast one's attachments and rumination of events [positive and negative] in the past and future which could be a burden/liability/hindrance on what is needed to be done in the present [NOW].
Note 'FLOW' for example,

In positive psychology, flow, also known colloquially as being in the zone, is the mental state of operation in which a person performing an activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and enjoyment in the process of the activity. In essence, flow is characterized by complete absorption in what one does, and a resulting loss in one's sense of space and time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)

The above loss in one's sense of space and time is merely a mental state of detachment to the various concepts of time in terms of past, present or future.

So as far as 'NOW' is concern, what is critical is the definition, context and expected utility for humans.

[Nick_A]

V A

In positive psychology, flow, also known colloquially as being in the zone, is the mental state of operation in which a person performing an activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and enjoyment in the process of the activity. In essence, flow is characterized by complete absorption in what one does, and a resulting loss in one's sense of space and time.

Yes this is the desired horizontal animal perspective. It is incapable of experiencing the human vertical perspective making the experience of NOW impossible.

[Nick_A]

happens spontaneously.

Would you say then that a kalpa as a cycle cannot exist simply because there is no one to remember it?

Time in Buddhist cosmology is measured in kalpas. Originally, a kalpa was considered to be 4,320,000 years. Buddhist scholars expanded it with a metaphor: rub a one-mile cube of rock once every hundred years with a piece of silk, until the rock is worn away -- and a kalpa still hasn’t passed! During a kalpa, the world comes into being, exists, is destroyed, and a period of emptiness ensues. Then it all starts again.

I think the idea of "kalpa" was used trying to fit the absolute/eternal into the interpretative workings of the mind. Using an unthinkably huge number accompanied by a metaphor that blows your mind is as close as thought can get to the non-dual absolute. Its a way of pointing at, not defining, the undefinable, the unknowable. But, again, even this definition seems to get close to the real “thing” it is still infinitely far away from reality. Its like science, by becoming more and more advanced, seemingly closing in on truthfully explaining the workings of reality - alas, it will never reach this point. It can't, simply because it operates in a realm that doesn’t touch reality - again, it’s like making a map so intricately detailed that it seems to describe the territory in all it’s perfection, but no matter how detailed it becomes, it will and can never be the territory. Only the territory is alive, the map is a dead thing - this will never change.

I agree that science as it now exists is limited to duality so cannot touch "meaning" which assures that it discourages touching reality and awakening to man's place within NOW. But can it change? Can science itself evolve? Simone Weil seems to believe that science can grow to serve the purpose of connecting the map with the living thing. Is she wrong?

I believe that one identical thought is to be found—expressed very precisely and with only slight differences of modality—in. . .Pythagoras, Plato, and the Greek Stoics. . .in the Upanishads, and the Bhagavad Gita; in the Chinese Taoist writings and. . .Buddhism. . .in the dogmas of the Christian faith and in the writings of the greatest Christian mystics. . .I believe that this thought is the truth, and that it today requires a modern and Western form of expression. That is to say, it should be expressed through the only approximately good thing we can call our own, namely science. This is all the less difficult because it is itself the origin of science. Simone Weil….Simone Pétrement, Simone Weil: A Life, Random House, 1976, p. 488

"To restore to science as a whole, for mathematics as well as psychology and sociology, the sense of its origin and veritable destiny as a bridge leading toward God---not by diminishing, but by increasing precision in demonstration, verification and supposition---that would indeed be a task worth accomplishing." Simone Weil

[Nick_A]

Past, present and future of spacetime all exist inseparably as one, the whole spacetime thing might form a loop and sits in the middle of timeless eternity.

Which is why it's always the "eternal present", "eternal now", even though we humans are also bound to the flow of time. (Without spacetime/entropy we couldn't change, couldn't think, couldn't have memories, couldn't have evolved etc. so humans necessarily have to be caught up in a place with such flow of time.)

Do you define NOW as a process which includes past, present, and future, or can this process exist within NOW or what IS?

[surreptitious57]

How large is the past you refer to as NOW ? How large is the present which distinguishes the past from the future ?
What is the eternal NOW ?

There is no such thing as the past or the future only the eternal NOW. The past and future exist as concepts not as actualities
The present is eternal and is probably continuous rather than discrete although this can only be known at the quantum level

The eternal NOW also exists differently for particles with zero rest mass such as photons for example as they do not experience time at all
Anything that cannot approach the speed of light has to experience time and so the eternal NOW has to exist for this reason if nothing else
Motion and entropy also cannot occur without time which is a measure of change between events which can occur within the eternal NOW

This is worth going into deeper if you are willing. For example consider the ancient symbol of the cross. I have learned that the vertical line represents the line of the scale of being itself or what was known in ancient times as the Great Chain of Being. The vertical flow of life forces along this vertical line is known as vertical time or the repetition of a moment. The vertical line is the expression of NOW so is not limited by linear time and space

The vertical line in contrast is intersected by the horizontal line of the process of existence within linear time. From this perspective the
process of existence in linear time moves through being rather than being moving along subjective linear time as normally perceived by us
during the process of our existence

If this is true NOW IS while existence is a PROCESS limited by time and space occurring within the Eternal NOW
Does this correspond with what you ve posted ?

I dont think it matters whether we perceive ourselves moving through time or time moving through us since both scenarios reference the eternal
NOW. The important thing is that the eternal NOW is ALL that exists as an actual experienced phenomenon. The past is a memory and the future
is imaginary so neither are real as such. You can reference time anyway that you choose but the map is not the territory and what is important is
to focus on what actually IS rather than the representation of what IS. Because they are not the same. Maps may be incredibly accurate but they
are still only approximations of the real and arent entirely reliable. Except through falsification or disproof all scientific knowledge is provisional

[AlexW]

I agree that science as it now exists is limited to duality so cannot touch "meaning" which assures that it discourages touching reality and awakening to man's place within NOW. But can it change? Can science itself evolve? Simone Weil seems to believe that science can grow to serve the purpose of connecting the map with the living thing. Is she wrong?

Yes, I think it can and does evolve. When we look at the findings of quantum mechanics (I am no expert at all) it seems to be going in the "right" direction.
We have to keep in mind though that all science, just like all previous attempts of "connecting the map with the living thing", are always limited by the tool that is being used to express this attempt - may it be words formed into sentences following certain grammatical rules or may it be mathematical expressions - the tool is always symbolic, it is an abstraction that can point to reality (in more or less intelligent ways), but it will never connect the map with the living thing.

Pointing yes, linking no.
There is no link between the symbol and the reality it points to (well... there is a link, but it is purely mental, it lives in thought only).
It is of course helpful to align science as much as possible with the reality that it is trying to describe - its the basic reason we apply ourselves to scientific research in the first place - but we will also have to keep in mind that all our efforts will and should never replace the real "thing". It is only a game that the mind plays because it wants to understand - reality is perfectly content without "knowing" itself in a descriptive way - it knows itself by being itself - this is the only true way of knowing.

[Nick_A]

There is no such thing as the past or the future only the eternal NOW. The past and future exist as concepts not as actualities
The present is eternal and is probably continuous rather than discrete although this can only be known at the quantum level

The eternal NOW also exists differently for particles with zero rest mass such as photons for example as they do not experience time at all
Anything that cannot approach the speed of light has to experience time and so the eternal NOW has to exist for this reason if nothing else
Motion and entropy also cannot occur without time which is a measure of change between events which can occur within the eternal NOW

This is worth going into deeper if you are willing. For example consider the ancient symbol of the cross. I have learned that the vertical line represents the line of the scale of being itself or what was known in ancient times as the Great Chain of Being. The vertical flow of life forces along this vertical line is known as vertical time or the repetition of a moment. The vertical line is the expression of NOW so is not limited by linear time and space

The vertical line in contrast is intersected by the horizontal line of the process of existence within linear time. From this perspective the
process of existence in linear time moves through being rather than being moving along subjective linear time as normally perceived by us
during the process of our existence

If this is true NOW IS while existence is a PROCESS limited by time and space occurring within the Eternal NOW
Does this correspond with what you ve posted ?

I dont think it matters whether we perceive ourselves moving through time or time moving through us since both scenarios reference the eternal
NOW. The important thing is that the eternal NOW is ALL that exists as an actual experienced phenomenon. The past is a memory and the future
is imaginary so neither are real as such. You can reference time anyway that you choose but the map is not the territory and what is important is
to focus on what actually IS rather than the representation of what IS. Because they are not the same. Maps may be incredibly accurate but they
are still only approximations of the real and arent entirely reliable. Except through falsification or disproof all scientific knowledge is provisional

Are you open to the possibility of conscious evolution for Man? Anyone seriously contemplating the Great Chain of Being or the vertical line of being can be open to the idea that as we are we reflect one level of being. Yet suppose Man is capable of consciously evolving into a higher quality of being? Then it seems that it is essential to see how the horizontal line of existence moves through the vertical line of being. Evolution along the vertical line must be the path within the eternal NOW by which conscious evolution becomes possible.

[Nick_A]

I agree that science as it now exists is limited to duality so cannot touch "meaning" which assures that it discourages touching reality and awakening to man's place within NOW. But can it change? Can science itself evolve? Simone Weil seems to believe that science can grow to serve the purpose of connecting the map with the living thing. Is she wrong?

Yes, I think it can and does evolve. When we look at the findings of quantum mechanics (I am no expert at all) it seems to be going in the "right" direction.
We have to keep in mind though that all science, just like all previous attempts of "connecting the map with the living thing", are always limited by the tool that is being used to express this attempt - may it be words formed into sentences following certain grammatical rules or may it be mathematical expressions - the tool is always symbolic, it is an abstraction that can point to reality (in more or less intelligent ways), but it will never connect the map with the living thing.

Pointing yes, linking no.
There is no link between the symbol and the reality it points to (well... there is a link, but it is purely mental, it lives in thought only).
It is of course helpful to align science as much as possible with the reality that it is trying to describe - its the basic reason we apply ourselves to scientific research in the first place - but we will also have to keep in mind that all our efforts will and should never replace the real "thing". It is only a game that the mind plays because it wants to understand - reality is perfectly content without "knowing" itself in a descriptive way - it knows itself by being itself - this is the only true way of knowing.

You are probably familiar with Plato’s Divided Line analogy.

https://www.john-uebersax.com/plato/plato1.htm

The basic features are as follows:

• Using a line for illustration, Plato divides human knowledge into four grades or levels, differing in their degree of clarity and truth. First, imagine a line divided into two sections of unequal length (Figure 1, hash mark C). The upper level corresponds to Knowledge, and is the realm of Intellect. The lower level corresponds to Opinion, and concerns the world of sensory experience. Plato says only that the sections are of "unequal" length, but the conventional view is that the Knowledge section is the longer one.
• Then bisect each of these sections (hash marks B and D). This produces four line segments, corresponding to four cognitive states and/or modes of thinking. From highest to lowest, these are:
o noesis (immediate intuition, apprehension, or mental 'seeing' of principles)
o dianoia (discursive thought)
o pistis (belief or confidence)
o eikasia (delusion or sheer conjecture)

Science is limited to discursive thought or what takes place below the line. But if higher knowledge humanity is capable of experiencing and necessary to become realistically human is above the line it seems we must be able to open to noesis; this quality of immediate intuition. How does an intelligent person proud of and proficient in dianoia make the transition into noesis? Can art of a certain quality which invites contemplation of what lies beyond or behind the surface help to inspire the mind dependent on discursive thought in order to open to the experience of noesis and the reality of NOW we are within?

[AlexW]

How does an intelligent person proud of and proficient in dianoia make the transition into noesis? Can art of a certain quality which invites contemplation of what lies beyond or behind the surface help to inspire the mind dependent on discursive thought in order to open to the experience of noesis and the reality of NOW we are within?

The mind, the machinery of thought, has to become quiet to make this transition. This type of knowledge is not something that can be achieved via contemplation, it's rather the opposite, when contemplation makes room for the reality of the now then the light can enter and true knowledge shines on its own - it actually is always here/now it's just covered by too many layers of thought.
Thought is an important tool in the arena of "dianoia" but a hindrance for the "intuitive"/natural wisdom that exists on the "other side of the line".

[Walker]

Can art of a certain quality which invites contemplation of what lies beyond or behind the surface help to inspire the mind dependent on discursive thought in order to open to the experience of noesis and the reality of NOW we are within?

Yes, it’s possible after shamatha joins vipashyana like the junction of a cross, in whatever way that personally comes about.

An explanation of shamatha and vipashyana.
https://www.shinzen.org/wp-content/uplo ... rt_How.pdf

From the link:

“Researchers at Tokyo University made an interesting discovery about brain wave behavior in Zen practitioners. A group of meditators and a group of non-meditators were asked to sit quietly with electrodes attached to monitor brainwaves. A click sound was repeatedly presented to both groups. At first, both groups showed momentary "blocking" of alpha. This was as expected, for such blocking is part of the normal orienting response to a new stimulus. After several clicks, the non-meditator group no longer showed this blocking. This also is normal. They had accommodated to the stimulus: it was no longer new and fresh. But the Zen practitioners continued to momentarily block alpha with every click as if each time they were hearing the click for the first time. This fits nicely with the Zen ideal of "living in the moment." In India, a similar click experiment was done with some yogis. They showed no alpha blocking. Apparently, withdrawn in trance, they did not hear the sound.*

* they did not hear the sound due to pratyahara

Commentary: often when the sensory gates are closed via pratyahara, when sound is not heard in the NOW because no separate hearer exists to react although the ear sense is still open, the specific sound will later will be remembered in the NOW as a thought from the past, a memory of the sound, although the sound was not experienced in the NOW.

[bahman]

Now is the moment which separates past from future in a given framework.

[Nick_A]

Alex and Walker

I appreciate your replies and agree with them. However that wasn't my question. I simply don't understand resistance to what seems to me a natural process. We would agree that the majority of the young experience wonder and awe. Yet for some reason, society seems to have been minimizing the value of experiencing awe and wonder in favor of the celebration of discursive thought as the definition of intelligence.

The open mind which understands the value of transcending reliance on discursive thought opening to noesis in pursuit of human meaning seems to have gone out with the horse and carriage. The computer has become society's god. It is omnipotent.

What IYO is the primary reason why the normal opening to the noetic experience is so ridiculed and the feeling of the human connection to higher consciousness is attacked with such a passion as it is with atheism? Why is there such a strong attack against the idea that discursive thought when it reveals our essential contradictions is serving as the beginning of a bridge to higher knowledge through conscious contemplation?

Why is there such resistance to what should be normal for the human organism during its process of evolution?

[attofishpi]

IYO how would you define NOW? Does it have an objective existence beyond our perception or is now limited to just a subjective meaningless measure of the passage of time?

Now, is a moment in time that is incomprehensible to any brain. Since in a moment in time, a now, there is not an electron spinning, a photon emitting.

TIME reversed = EMIT. (www.androcies.com)

At that point of time, there is not time...until there is an event...when a photon EMITs. Ergo - Now is dark and incomprehensible, since our comprehension requires atoms within our brain, doing their thang, as well as the requirement to receive information from said events of matter.

So NOW permits nothing to be comprehended, but in the next moment a binary effect occurs, an event.

[Walker]

Alex and Walker

I appreciate your replies and agree with them. However that wasn't my question. I simply don't understand resistance to what seems to me a natural process. We would agree that the majority of the young experience wonder and awe. Yet for some reason, society seems to have been minimizing the value of experiencing awe and wonder in favor of the celebration of discursive thought as the definition of intelligence.

The reason is, awe + wonder + a buck will get you a cup of coffee at McDonalds, any size.