Низовцев Юрий Михайлович : другие произведения.

Time as a sliding present, formed by alive

Самиздат: [Регистрация] [Найти] [Рейтинги] [Обсуждения] [Новинки] [Обзоры] [Помощь|Техвопросы]
Ссылки:
 Ваша оценка:
  • Аннотация:
    Consciousness manifests beingness through its own carriers, giving it meaning, and life to itself through the selection of information about being that it is able to decipher, copy and process for further use. Consciousness fixes the changes of beingness available to it in the form of an irreversible process, obtaining the duration in each present moment of a sequential series of technically separated moments, but without separating them in consciousness, thereby creating its own time by its own efforts. This present time becomes a condition for the separation of consciousness from the non-living.
  
  
  The person fears time which every moment approaches him to a mortal threshold, does him from the young, cheerful and carefree by the old, sick and tiresome. That is pleasant in such inevitable falling.
  Along with that, time fills a person by sense if he, not especially reflecting on fluidity of time, aims to make independently something special, aims to become other, to overcome, as it seems, irresistible, not to lose hope and optimism even on the deathbed.
  Some clever people tried to penetrate into essence of time, but time itself put them into place, showing narrowness of their views, apparently, because each of them thought by usual terrestrial categories, without trying to depart from them too far.
  Meanwhile, time for a person exists only when his consciousness is turned on, he feels its beating, perceives time in the form of own "now". If the consciousness of a person is disconnected, time for him disappears. It in itself specifies that not a person body leads him along life, but his consciousness.
  All remaining living beings generally don't aware time though they are applied instinctively to it. Perhaps, their happiness also consists in absence at them of self-consciousness and appropriate responsibility together with freedom that are piled on each person in life often as intolerable gravity.
  Similar approach to time is named subjective, but it is lawful nevertheless so as only in case of the acting consciousness a person comprehends own presence in the world. And it means that only the acting consciousness, understanding itself as such and present only at a person, is the main and top link of all beingness known to him. It is unlikely something in unknowns to us worlds and measurements is more, than understanding of itself though the level of consciousness can be other.
  Of course, bringing to the end the subjective approach to consciousness, i.e. exclusiveness of consciousness, is absurd as far any local consciousness is surrounded by similar consciousnesses which are forced to find jointly a support in the beingness surrounding them containing raging alive and lifeless, exchanging by information, changing the world and themselves.
  However, brought to the end, concept of objectivity of the external, or world time which, by the human representations, flows in the material world in the absence of consciousness, is also absurd.
  On the one hand, such a world, even if it exists, cannot reveal its existence. And in this sense, whether it exists or not is irrelevant. Therefore, it is meaningless to talk about time in such nothingness.
  On the other hand, the presence of consciousness is only felt by a person without understanding its material essence, but with full awareness that only it makes him alive, coming from nowhere. This fact cannot but mean the otherworldliness of consciousness in relation to the beingness known to us, and along with that, - the need for it to be present in this beingness in the form of alive.
  Apparently, the need for the presence of consciousness in the beingness, known to us, is caused by nothing other than the aspiration for changes, without which no development is possible for such an active phenomenon as consciousness. But the changes can only appear in the current time, which in itself manifests itself only together with space and material objects moving in it. That is, consciousness is forced to create this time with everything else, which it does.
  How consciousness does this, one can only guess, but no one forbids offering certain hypotheses about the connection between time and consciousness, which is obvious.
  Thus, time is an index of never of the stopping changes of the material objects for the human consciousness, and these changes can be represented as the course of events only for the top echelon of beingness - to consciousness as to the material object which is capable to grasp both itself, and these changes, participating in them as the subject. Only this material top structure is capable to control consciously as itself, and all remaining, changing infinitely under influence of the internal and external influences, comprehending not only these changes themselves, but aiming to them, i.e. developing infinitely.
  Consciousness is capable to transfer many changes of the material objects into information, i.e. into the data recognized by it.
  Thus, the true "food" for the human consciousness is information: a person, consuming it can grasp himself in "now", which is formed by consciousness.
  "Now" (the present) of a person are the data, processed in his consciousness through the corresponding organs from information packets which providing the moving picture of interaction of the person with the environment surrounding him outwardly and containing inside of him.by sequential appearance with the pause which isn't fixed by a person required for copying and transfer information to consciousness from the corresponding objects,
  This as if the self-moving picture, reminding the movie which a person watches and, at the same time, in which he participates, is the sequence of the events perceived by him from everywhere on which he anyway responds, considering, evaluating them from the side or taking a direct part in them. When he watches the events occurring round him every day, they are represented to him by time flowing round him, and when he participates in them, they become by his life. It is own time of a person. It does not accompany him like the independent external time, but it is formed by him immediately.
  This passing of a person through beingness by means of "now" which is formed by the discrete processing of the information packets coming into his consciousness every moment, people can't comprehend during millennia, expressing different opinions and raising various questions: What is actually "now" of the human"? Why it, to all appearances, lasts and, at the same time, disappears irrevocably? The external time and the present of the human coincide or not?
  The own time of a person differs from the external time that each instant for a person is his "now", and all his life from the birth till death is inscribed in sequence of these instants - he passes all own life in "now" which is formed by himself. Along with that, his life occupies a certain interval of the external time. Therefore, as it seems, after any moment of human life, except moment of the birth, all moments, which passed irrevocably, are situated; and up to any moment of human life except the moment of death are situated remaining moments. This feature together with impossibility for the person to notice discreteness of moments of life is the base for formation in consciousness of the person of representation that the material present moment of life is absent, but there is a certain non-material edge between the past and future in the flowing time.
  The paradox of the own time of a person is in the fact that his consciousness, being within the external time, along with that, is being held all life in "now" in spite of the fact that in relation to external time which cyclically repeats (days, years), every moment of the human life immediately goes away to the past forever.
  Possessing "now", more precisely, being during life in it always, a person is capable to perceive all current changes of the environment, which are represented to him as events, and, realizing himself, to participate in them, modifying by own understanding this environment. Otherwise, the aware life for him would become impossible - he couldn't separate himself in own consciousness from the environmental.
  Therefore, the own time of a person is the information process representing itself copying of changes of the material objects surrounding a person, in the form of the irreversible sequence of the discrete durations (instants) bearing information and merging in consciousness in a picture of the surrounding which is changing incessantly and in which he is able to interfere consciously.
  The own time of a person is within the framework of the external time, and a person confounds unconsciously own time, which is imperceptible for him due to the deep formation of this time by an irreversible sequence of the discrete, information-bearing durations, with clearly observable by him the external, world time.
  Therefore, a person watches himself only in external time with its periods: days, months, years, measured in conventional units - seconds, minutes and hours.
  In other words, a person loses sight of his own time, although it is it that makes up his life and manifests itself in slowing down or accelerating his actions during the life, whereas the stable external time is being given to him vividly. That is, a person only senses the outer side of the process of forming his present time without comprehension it.
  The external time, marked by man as the only one, flows indifferently through the years in accordance with the revolutions of Earth around the Sun during billions of years by the human reckoning, and a person cannot influence these global cyclical changes, but he even now cannot compare the indifference of external time in relation to him with the time of his life, the basis of which is just his own time, or his present, and which he is more or less able to manage, not understanding what he manages, but manages based on his own aspirations and intentions, not noticing his own present, but stubbornly analyzing the external time, unsuccessfully trying with all his might to discover its attachment to himself.
  That is, being in the external time visible to him, a person does not notice the sliding own time, considering each moment of his present as an ephemeral boundary between the past and the future in view of the quite real external time, as if carrying him.
  The relation of time to a person as an objective and along with that subjective phenomenon has been noted still by Aristotle and he quite clearly formulated the concept of external time, indicating that it is associated with the "movement of the celestial sphere", being objective in this regard.
  But, along with that, Aristotle absolutely fairly has marked that "if time - the measure of motion, it assumes number because there where is a measure, there is also a number, and the number should be counted by someone" [1]. Here Aristotle has hinted that time is being fixed exactly by consciousness. Actually, it is equivalent to ascertaining of the fact of problematical character of existence of time outside consciousness.
  Newton has specified the concept of the external time, having designated it as a measure of duration by means of which it is possible to evaluate intervals of these or those processes for their comparing [2].
  I. Kant, in fact, agreed with Aristotle's hint as regards of the fact that outside consciousness time isn't present: "Time isn't something objective and real ..., and it is an objective condition which is necessary by the nature of human intelligence for coordination among itself sensually perceived by a certain law, and - pure contemplation" [3].
  Hegel also didn't object to this idea of Kant: "Time as the negative unity of beingness outside of itself is such something wholly the abstract and the ideal; it is beingness which existing, doesn't exist, and, without existing, exists, - the contemplate formation ... But not in time everything arises and occurs, and time itself is this formation ..." [4].
  Aristotle, developing some hints of Heraclitus on the fluidity of life and on the fact that "from flow of time, which is whirled aimlessly is born logo ..." [5], selects out of a problem of time the problem of "the present", naming it "now". He asks: " "Now" is part of time or not? Always "now" is same or not? Or "now" is different each occasion? Does "now" associate the past and the future or it separates them? Is "now" divisible? Whether is motion in "now"? Or "now" is calmness? Where does "now" disappear? And generally, what is "now"?" [1].
  Thereby, Aristotle has pointed out difference of the present time of a person from the external time and he even tried to define "now" in his responses, however, unsuccessfully so as the mechanism of formation of "now", or the own time for consciousness remained to him by unknown.
  Augustine in the middle Ages developing Aristotle's idea about the present time, or "now", supposes "now" as the subjective time, or as the change of perceptions. He also supposes that there is the past, which is given in memory, and the future, given in waiting, together with the present time. Time, essentially, encompasses the events that are irreversible. Time itself finds itself in soul: "Certain these three times exist in our soul and anywhere in another place I don't see them ... And how we can measure the present when it has no duration?" Augustine takes the present past and the present future for the duration, and for time - the present of the present [6].
  Though Augustine in compliance with the concept of the subjective time considers that there is in beingness the past and the future together with the present, he, surprisingly, accurately marked what exactly in consciousness, or soul exists "now" which passes irreversibly. However, he, as well as Aristotle, considers that the present time has no duration, artificially transferring it on a combination of the past, the present and the future.
  Actually, the present time has duration, containing some phases, the past is manifested only in the present instant in the form of the required data from memory, and the future can be manifested in "now" only as the speculative construction on the basis of the extrapolation of what consciousness has at the concrete moment in databases available to it.
  S. Kierkegaard believes that time is an infinite sequence. However, he denies existence of the past and the future. As for a present, then, according to Kierkegaard, it is impossible to determine of it. However, he believes that "now" is infinite disappearance, and the eternal is the true present [7].
  Really, Kierkegaard in the positing of time as the infinite sequence hinted at existence of the external time. Along with that, he has been subtly noticed "the infinite" both in "the eternal", and in a disappearing instant of "now".
  However, it only seems that the instant of "now" disappears completely. Actually every moment, giving place to the next moment, remains in "now" in the form of that memory which can be reproduced at any time in the corresponding moment of "now". "Now" comprises in itself everything for the human consciousness because it is formed by consciousness in the specific duration and in the irreversible sequence.
  Henri Bergson has made attempt to define "now" on the basis of the evolution and becoming. He has marked that self-development of a system determines a current of the own internal time [8]. At the same time, Bergson refuses in representation of the own time as "now". He doesn't imagine the specific duration without the past: "In fact, our activities aren't the moments replacing each other, then permanently there would be only the present, there would be neither continuation of the past in the present, nor the evolution, nor the specific duration" [9].
  Thus, Bergson couldn't represent the present, or "now" as the process developing in sequences of the moments being by a condition of human activities, withdrawal for limits which for consciousness is possible only in imagination. The permanent existence of "now" doesn't mean at all absence of development, duration as far every instant of "now" has the duration during which from memory, just as from computer databases, this or that information can be requested and received. Information, again in "now", but not in the past or in the future, is used for the human activities. Unlike this approach, Bergson supposes that consciousness really "captures" the passing moments: "The pure duration is the form which accepts the sequence of our states of consciousness when our "I" simply live when it doesn't set the distinction between the present states and that preceded them" [8].
  E. Husserl suppose that "... in case of switching off of the natural world cosmic time is replaced by the phenomenological - the necessary form which links experiences with experiences... this time is not measured by the position of the sun, or using hours, or by any means of physics... to the thesis of the world - the world is accidental - opposes the thesis of my pure "I", - the life of my "I" which is "necessary", absolutely undoubted" [10].
  These theses of Husserl mean de-facto recognition of the external time by him and, along with that, - opposition by him of external time to experiences which, in essence, are the present of his "I" for him. He even goes further in the opposition of life of own "I" to some accidental world, beingness. However, Husserl couldn't associate with consciousness both types of time marked by him, as and - with beingness. Like many philosophers-idealists, he has recognized as the doubtless only the life of his "I".
  However, the world isn't accidental for consciousness, it is necessary for consciousness, at this, the present, or "I" for consciousness is the formation of conditions for life of consciousness in the sequential and irreversible chain of instants upon the most direct involvement of beingness.
  Heidegger's thesis that self-consciousness is possible because there is a finite existence, absolutely fairly let know that the eternity gives to consciousness its infinite dipping in the finite. Really, only in finite the consciousness can find the support for itself - beingness. However, instead of coming to understanding of that a condition of determination of consciousness in the finite, or in its own time is sequential, discrete instants of "now" in which consciousness contacts with beingness, Heidegger claims that is available the past, the present, the future, they are equally initial with a primacy of the future. Besides, he supposes that time is the attribute of beingness which is being temporalized, proceeding from the future [11].
  This approach of Heidegger to time shows misunderstanding by him of "now" as single real support of consciousness on beingness thanks to which consciousness receives own life every instant. Naturally, all remaining reasonings of Heidegger on time aren't quite adequate.
  J. P. Sartre recognizes time only coming to the world through a person as the property of the soul experiencing it. Time, supposes he, is the permanent evasion of consciousness from identity with itself, and it exists in the form of three temporal states: the past, the present and the future. The past, Sartre considers, turns out by the present if the past expresses it: "I am my past and if I am not present, my past won't exist longer than me or someone else. The past won't have more communications with the present. It definitely doesn't mean that it won't exist, but only that its beingness will be unopened. I am the single in whom my past exists in this world" [12]. Sartre equates present to the instantaneous comprehension "now" or "nothingness" in correlation with the past and the future: "... if we isolate the person during a moment on the island of his present and if all modes of his beingness become as intended by the nature to the eternal present, we will remove considerably all methods of his rational relation to the past" [12]. Future, according to Sartre, is unrealizable so as at the time of achievement of the purpose it passes into the past: "The valid future is possibility of such present which I continue in myself and which is extension of the valid in itself. My future involves as future existence the outline of future world" [12].
  Sartre had no knowledge of the mechanism of formation of the present time for human consciousness. Therefore, he could only guess something in phenomenon of "the present". And he guessed a lot of things. In particular, he considered that time comes to the world only through a person.
  Really, without consciousness, which is present at a person, the world is dead, more precisely the world can't be present since there is no one to take him into his hugs, since all other living beings are not aware time, although they are forming it.
  Absolutely fairly Sartre has noted that the past exists via the present, and the future is connected to the present.
  And still Sartre considers the past, the present and the future as forms of time whereas really for consciousness exists only "now" in which there is always the past, and the future is originated. Sartre, on the contrary, equate "now", or present" to "nothingness" probably because he does not assume existence of duration at the instant of the present.
  I. Prigogine has also marked that the idea of the direction of the internal time, the irreversibility of changes in system arises owing to complexity of such open systems which are far from equilibrium and possess many degrees of freedom [13].
  Thus, Prigogine as well as most of the above - mentioned thinkers, has noticed existence of the present time and its directive it.
  As for subjectivity of time, it is related not only to the individual consciousness, - "now" in the same way is own time for cumulative consciousness, in particular, consciousness of mankind. All its history is always present into its present. And to change this history or "to creep" in the future still any people or a civilization didn't manage the same as any person didn't manage to get to own past or the future.
  It is necessary to state nevertheless that most of all thinkers, stated above, having marked fairly existence of the own time, or "now" for a person, didn't open the mechanism of manifestation of "now".
  They also did not take into account its fundamental nature for the functioning of all system of beingness, since the present time is formed by consciousness by copying information about the environment, that is, without changing the copied objects, without thereby destroying beingness, and all these objects, including living beings, take part in the energy material exchange only during subsequent mutual activity in the present.
  So, the considerations that the external time and the own time isn't present outside consciousness, aren't absurd at all if to proceed from existence in beingness of the material consciousness which only one is capable to select information from surrounding about its changes, to fix them, and to use for the own purposes. That is, it is consciousness that forms time by "passing" information flows through its own carrier.
  Eternity, actually, for consciousness, are an infinite discrete dips in finite existence where consciousness can form own time. I.e. there is no infinite smooth current of time for consciousness, and in this sense there is no eternity for consciousness as continuous current of time. Time for each living being is created by consciousness through its own carriers (living) in the finite, and it is its own.
  In other words, the concept of time is meaningless without the living beings, just as it is meaningless to imagine beingness which is existing in infinite change without consciousness in it, since changes are needed only for consciousness, more precisely, only it can initiate and perceive them.
  Changing material objects must have a place for themselves and for interactions with each other (space), and these changes cannot but have a certain duration.
  It turns out that material objects, space and time, more exact, the changes of the material objects coincide so as without each of them there can't be also others. Plato was right in this regard, when claimed that there is something the invariable, the constant, the identical to itself, on the one hand, and changing, flowable, on the other hand [14].
  More vastly Parmenides was expressed in this regard. He claimed, that there is nothing apart from of beingness; beingness by nobody and by nothingness is generated, and non-being doesn't exist; beingness has neither the past, nor the future, beingness is the pure present; it is fixed, uniform, perfect and limited [15].
  Thus, the integrity of beingness is divided on three components - the past, the present and the future - only in imagination, and imagination has only consciousness. Therefore, the division of beingness could arise only with consciousness and only for consciousness, more precisely, for his development. Otherwise, beingness in a division isn't present since there is no one to know about it: beingness for own existence in own division can't but include into itself consciousness as one of own material objects.
  Our approach to time, apparently, allows now with some approximation to truth to respond to a number of questions about the essence of time. The adequate responses are absent still on some of these questions raised thousands years ago, responses are available on other questions as, for example, at Aristotle or A. Bergson, but they follow from traditional understanding of time or they are based on the insufficient base and therefore need adjustment.
  1. The modern science supposes that information is transferred from the past to the future, assuming this consideration the principal.
  Time in the human consciousness, as it is supposed, is the conditional comparative measure of changes of the material objects. A person watches the periodic movements of the sun and stars in the sky on which he can't affect at all, digitizes on the periods, seen by him, conditional intervals - days, monthes, years, and supposes therefore that he lives in this time. It is manifested as the external time for him, and his life passes in it, flowing away irrevocably.
  However, he senses the periodic changes of planets, stars only through a prism of his presence, or the own present, assuming their existence in the future and the past only owing to recurrence of these periodic changes because he can't to get to the future and the past.
  He takes his idea of the external time upon the own time, supposing that before him exists, unlike the external repeating time (tomorrow the sun will ascend, and yesterday it ascended), still absolutely unknown, hidden time which he names the future, and also exists the events, clear for him, but which departed forever which can be only taken from memory or databases. A person characterizes these events upon the fact as the past, whither everything leaves, remains there, but is replenished every moment. I.e. a person as if objectifies the past and the future, refusing to understand that he really lives only in the present. In other words, his past is manifested only in his "now", and the future isn't manifested in any way or it is possible to say concerning it otherwise: the future is manifested, as Augustine spoke, in waiting. However, need to say, at some point it can no come.
  A person supposes that he can, knowing the past, extrapolate it into the future, for example, also as the movement of planets, having corrected it in his imagination. The science considers this process as transfer of information to the future.
  However, even with the formal position is impossible to transfer what has not, in fact, in that has not happened yet. Actually, any information undertakes from the available database during moments of the present sequentially because only during these moments it really exists to use it not in the mythical future, and for formation of subsequent moments of the present time. It is impossible to get something from the past which is digitized out of the present backward by the external time, but really is absent as well as it is impossible to transfer something to the future - neither that, nor another isn't present, more precisely, they exist within the framework of the external time only in imagination of a person . However, all that out of the past that remained in databases, being manifested in some moments of "now", it is valid, capable to be reflected in the subsequent moments of "now", since can influence the process of the conscious selection of information that happens only in the present. Thus, it would be an error to name this effect as the transfer of information from the past into the future. This effect is manifested only in the present, i.e. in a concrete moment of life which compose all together irreversible sequence in which each of moments, having manifested, right there leaves us, but they are not manifested, anyway, in the sequence of moments simultaneously.
  Difference of view of the ordinary person about the past in comparison with its representations about the future consists, in particular, in the fact that the future is absent for him in any form, except imaginations, assumptions, whereas the past seems to a person existing really. In the past, on his representation, should be gathered, as in a moneybox, all that passes through a person into the present, though, actually, all accumulated information is in the databases available to the person only in his sliding present.
  The permanent existence of the present doesn't mean at all absence of changes as far every moment the present has a certain duration, during which from memory, as from computer databases, this or that information can be requested and received. This information is being added to arriving again almost changing continuously that allows projecting the further course of events with skill. However, all this too happens in the present, but not in the future. The confusion in these concepts occurs as a result of representation of each present instant as the ephemeral boundary between the past and the future, whereas the present is a certain duration during which occurs a receiving and processing not only the information from the external sources surrounding the carrier of consciousness, but also already accumulated information which is available to consciousness currently. This process goes sequentially - from one instant to the following - without stopping for consciousness, since the organs of the carrier of consciousness do not have time to fix the pauses between instants technically because these pauses are below the threshold of sensations, and therefore do not fall into consciousness.
  It is probable therefore people divide it in the representation upon the past, the present and the future.
  Thereby, information appears not from the past and not from the future which aren't present in reality, but is formed by the separate portions in the present arriving for processing by consciousness, that occupies a certain part of every instant in their sequence. This process goes every moment and has specific duration.
  The general information packet for every moment passes to brain neurons from different human organs in the form of the sequences of nervous pulses, in each of which the relevant information is included. The speed of distribution of the nervous pulses fluctuates in the range from 1 m/s to 120 m/s. Frequency and character of the pulse sequence, bearing, in particular, the visual information, depend on intensity and spectral content of light, and value and duration of each separate pulse does not depend by nature and powers of irritation.
  Directly after the pulse generation, the nervous fiber is in, a so-called, the refractory state and can't be excited again during 1-2 milliseconds, i.e. the nervous fiber is able to conduct nervous pulses with a frequency not higher than 500 Hz. The duration of the pulse which is passing along a nervous fiber makes shares of millisecond in every moment, and, in principle, there can't be more than a lag time, i.e. than the duration of restoration of a nervous fiber (a refractory state).
  The pause between the nervous pulses, containing information, means that they don't go continuously. However, this pause together with shorter interval of processing of a signal in every moment is below a threshold of sensations and therefore doesn't get to consciousness: in particular, the moving picture for consciousness of a person is provided with an interval between the running consecutive shots about 0.04 seconds, which makes the specified threshold. Its duration, as can be seen, more than an order of the magnitude greater than the duration of a pause. Therefore, the forming the discrete sequential moments of the own time of a person, which include in its sequence all patterns and all events of life for a person, merge in the continuous, indivisible flow in his consciousness.
  Here, in this process the own time of a person arises. It is a condition for modification of the surrounding in case of which he, partially instinctively, automatically, partially consciously selects from the environment, which can be infinitely various only those data which give in to decryption by his sensations, or information. It is possible to name this condition as the own time of a person because in it arise sequentially the moments, formed by him alone, in the form of a moving picture of the surrounding in which the events occur, and he can be involved in them directly, that makes up his life.
  As for the external time, it is reflection of fixing by a person of changes of the material objects in the present. The changes are independent of him, unavailable to him, i.e. it is an external border of his life. The own time of a person, or his "now", unlike the external time, is formed by him, but - as if within external time, receiving from it certain duration, through information impact on the environment the result of which are the changes - conscious or no, which the person brings by the actions into the environment on the basis of the information received by him.
  This process distinguishes all lowest alive from the highest alive so as only a person is capable to comprehend own "now" and even to imagine the past and the future. And, for example, animals can imagine nothing in particular, there is neither past, nor the future for them, and they only sense own present, but no more.
  Thereby, the lifetime of a person, if to associate it with the information process, is the present time for him that, apparently, he intuitively understood long ago, having designated it so, but not differently. This fact doesn't denial of the processes of change of the material objects, including a person and the world in general. On the contrary, it leads to awareness of that beingness is infinite in the changes, but being manifested in finite human life through consciousness, beingness is being provided him only as those fragments which the consciousness via the apparatus of sensations, which it has, is capable to recognize. Consciousness recognizes them as if by means of the point sequential poking via the own carrier in surrounding him and further it is capable to accumulate the selecting information, to carry out the theoretical and pilot researches on its basis, i.e. to learn available to him the surrounding by the means which it has.
  The worm in apple lives only in one measurement of space having the ability to move only progressively: the material objects for the worm - only fruit flesh and seed. He senses "now" as own time in essence upon the change of the flavoring sensations and by the own digestion, but the external time for the worm generally doesn't exist as far it can't sense the external time at all, without seeing the moon, the sun - nothing.
  Such limitation of the lowest consciousness in alive is determined only by its instinctive information impact on environment with the receipt of sensation products from it without their awareness. The human consciousness, having higher level, can get from beingness somewhat larger in our "now". We in case of contact with environment are able to comprehend own actions. However, who guarantees absence of consciousness of higher level? Beingness opens for this consciousness absolutely other fragments in "now", corresponding already to another set of feelings and to other opportunities of this consciousness.
  With this finite life of the carrier of consciousness in its own time is being connected the infinity of consciousness, which is expressed in it. In this present time, consciousness can, through its own carrier, both live and develop itself in countless lives, largely independently constructing its own existence from the suitable fragments of beingness in competition with similar forms of the consciousness.
  The fact that the manifestation of time as a reflection of changes in beingness is possible only in the presence of consciousness is also illustrated by the fact that in its subsequent final incarnations, the consciousness of a person, or his soul, cannot fall into some future or past, which do not exist, since everything in beingness "located" in the present, but it can fall where it aspires: in our understanding, it can be, for example, a civilization on the planet of one or another universe, which is at suitable level of development.
  In an infinity (otherworldly), from where the consciousness (soul), seems, to appear, time is absent. Therefore, the consciousness itself seeks what it needs at the moment of death of the next human-carrier for change and possible development, corresponding to the level of its understanding of itself, and merges into the flow of life in what it has found, creating there its "present" within the framework of the existing external time.
  2. Aristotle naming the present as "now", has formulated the question so: "Is "now" by part of the time?"
  His response is as follows: "Now" - not part of time because by part of time is measured integer, which is composed out of parts, "now" doesn't measure time and time is not composed out of "now". "Now" is an extreme limit of the past beyond which there is no the future still, and a limit of the future beyond which there is no the past ... "Now" is indivisible. If it was divisible, then in case of mobility of boundary the future would come into the past, the past - into the future" [1].
  We have shown above that the Aristotelian "now", or the instant of the present is composed of several parts which can be measured the integer (whole) according to the logic of Aristotle. If these parts make up the present, then it is time but not the limit of the past or the future which, if only the present is time, do not apply to time. Thus, if the present is integer (whole), it is not part of time, but it is true time of a person as well as any living being.
  This argument gives the answer and to Aristotle's question about divisibility of "now". He considered it by indivisible, but "now" turns out as the process of receiving, processing and comprehension of information, i.e. it consists from the different stages and is by sequence of information packets which are processed the same fashion.
  The same proof shows that "now" isn't the boundary between the past and the future as Aristotle considered so as there is only "now" really for the human consciousness; at this, if all moments of life, which have turned out in the past anyway in the form of information are accumulated in memory and can be manifested in the present, since they, being replenished, don't disappear from the present anywhere, being there in every instant in the form of stored the databases, then the future remains by unknown for consciousness. A person, of course, can expect this or that, make different assumptions, create projects. However, in the next moment, everything expected may not appear or acquire completely unexpected appearance, a person oneself can change the mind, go crazy, also as well as all mankind.
  The following question raised by Aristotle, is as follows: "Is "now" identical always? Or is "now" miscellaneous every time?"
  He answers this question so: "Since "now" connects, it is identical to itself always but since it separates, it is not identical, but - a miscellaneous".
  This response of Aristotle is based again on the recognition by him of the real existence of the past and the future. Therefore, this response isn't correct. From shown by us above follows that "now", or every instant of the present time is formed on the basis of the information packet which the contents depend from the environment, which changes practically always. So, filling of each information packet, as a rule, is different.
  "Whether is motion in "now"? Or "now" is calmness?", Aristotle asks, and responds: "There is neither motion, nor calmness in "now" because there are no parts in it."
  As far "now", or each instant of present is information process in which information arrives from the information source to consciousness where this information is manifested, replenished with data from memory, and processed in the appropriate centers producing in consciousness images of the reality, thoughts about them and about itself as well as emotions so far as "now" isn't in calmness.
  Where does "now" disappear? Aristotle asks the following question. He, as we saw higher, doesn't refer "now" as time, and considers it by the limit both the past, and the future [1].
  Actually, as far neither the past, nor the future in reality isn't present, "now" cannot go away from a human anywhere, and, being by the true time of a person in which is his consciousness, "now" exists always during life of a person in the form of each of the sequential instants.
  3. What is "now", or the present?
  Presumably that "now" of a person is the information process representing the changes of the material objects through the irreversible sequence of the discrete instants merging in consciousness in the continuous flow.
  4. Have or have no universes the beginning in time?
  Beingness as whole can't exist outside consciousness, since it can't be manifested without consciousness, what is possible only in time, which to a certain extent is the consequence of fixing by each individual consciousness of the changes of beingness. Therefore, consciousness takes beingness over time for own development in infinity through the finite. No beginning or the end for such development can be because an infinity is not restricted to anything.
  Only the process of the realization of the infinite is carried out in the finite universes following each other in the external (common) time being updated by a single consciousness.
  5. Why does time flows? Why does time flows always in the same direction?
  The single reason of current of time and its one-directivity, or irreversibility, is consciousness.
  Beingness can exist only together with consciousness. If to admit absence of consciousness in beingness, beingness becomes senseless, more precisely, it can be imagined as nothingness, zero, potentially comprising everything into itself. Nevertheless, there is nothing to do the active (consciousness) in this nothingness: consciousness can't exist without development - without development it simply isn't present. So, beingness together with consciousness can't but be as changing without any restrictions since in the presence of such development of consciousness stops. Therefore, consciousness in beingness develops infinitely. On the other hand, in infinity isn't present the end and the beginning. Hence that consciousness for own determination and development should "cut out" from infinity the intervals of beingness, i.e. the finite corresponding to own level of development,
  This finite can't be anything or to be simply shapeless as for changes are required for development of consciousness in beingness, i.e. something in what these changes could happen, a place for placement of this something, a place for its changes and fixing of these changes in order to consciousness could accept the fact of these changes.
  In other words, in order to the development of consciousness could take place, beingness should be manifested in the form of the material objects which need a place that is reflected in space, and which can't be stiffened that is reflected in their changes, flowability of everything, or in time. And the space and time are only conditions for the changes of the material objects including consciousnesses - quite material object of beingness, themselves neither the space, nor time don't exist. Therefore, it is senseless to look for the quanta of time as the measures of motion of a matter - time in itself is only in the mind, reflecting changes of the material objects. It is possible only to designate conditionally every instant of the sequences of own time of the person as time quantum having specific duration about several milliseconds.
  The space also has no independent value so as it is being created in time by the material objects themselves: it is illustrated well by the extending Universe, the objects of which according to its extension borrow more and more a place. When the Universe starts collapsing, then and the space will curdle together with the objects of the Universe.
  You will tell, here a person died, but houses stand, the sky is still blue still there for us, but for the dead, apparently, everything disappeared. Really, all so: for us everything remains as before because we are still living and we are in the own time ("now"), but also for the consciousness of the dead everything doesn't disappear: instead of former "slice" of beingness it falls into a different reality, in which there is no time. Therefore, each individual consciousness immediately flows into a new finite for its subsequent self - realization.
  Herewith, the new finite for consciousness can't be the future in our understanding, since the local consciousness can choose for oneself an interval of an infinite beingness anywhere, but only in accordance with the level of its development, that is, without running ahead - into what will happen to it in our understanding.
  For example, for us it can be the past, if the consciousness wants to take part in the past events again, correcting what did not work out here. And it can prove oneself on another planet with an epoch close to the desired events (even in another universe), while the future any individual consciousness can only project. Otherwise, the development process loses its meaning.
  This happens because the individual consciousness is not in the flow of time independent of it, but forms its own present (own time) within of the framework of the external (common) time formed by a single consciousness of the holographic projection of an infinity out of time, in which there are any epochs of the development of the material objects at this level the development of a single consciousness [16].
  That is, consciousness doesn't disappear and doesn't appear, and it changes "the dislocation" for own reasons which depend on its level, interests, individuality as well as from interests and directivity of integer (whole) the conditional particle of which is the individual consciousness.
  The past for the highest consciousness, or the consciousness, which is aware of itself, - only memory. Memory is manifested in its "now", creating real pictures of the past in imagination of consciousness, unlike the lowest, instinctive consciousness which the its present is only sensing, but doesn't understand that it is in own "now", and simply lives in it.
  Paradoxically, but the lowest consciousness is closer to truth here as far there is only one present in reality for usual alive here without any fantasies and aware enterprises. Whereas the local highest consciousness is capable to imagine much for oneself and about oneself. This - the flip side of that it is aware oneself, i.e. is capable to be mistaken. However, on the other hand, it is quite good for the highest consciousness because forces it to look for and find way out of, apparently, desperate situations which the consciousness itself, as a rule, creates.
  The irreversibility of time is required for development of consciousness in the finite. Otherwise, consciousness instead of development would receive simply some changes, that is, his activity would be meaningless in this, in fact, chaos. The irreversibility of time for consciousness, or copying of data about surrounding it without energetic and/or material changes of this surrounding, allows not to "disturb" the world, not bring any changes during the information impact that, actually, makes life possible. In other words, in case of interaction, as a rule, the objects are changed, without saving initial (before the interaction) state including change also bodies living beings, but consciousness doesn't participate directly in this "natural" exchange, it only makes copies objects, without destroying them, saving thereby the natural course of the observed processes.
  But, absorbing information from the objects, consciousness changes itself. As a result, it doesn't introduce instability to the world and doesn't destruct itself, nevertheless changing. I.e. the life is possible only in the conditions of originally one-sided information impact of one object on another without destruction last with acquisition of data by the first from the second or during a mutual interchange of data without own destruction. Sequential making by consciousness of copies of data on changing material objects changes also consciousness, cutting off the road to a return into a former status in the ratio with a former state of the material objects.
  Only the living objects are capable to such action, in addition to usual energetic and/or material exchange. The hopelessness of irreversible changes also doesn't allow to relax to consciousness, doesn't turn the life into game in which it is possible to correct everything. Irreversibility of occurring events leading to death, impossibility to correct a lot of things out of deeds, makes the life by the tragic and creates for consciousness so necessary to it for development the resistance of the environment, in the absence of which - the continuous happiness - the consciousness would fall into stagnation, or, on the contrary, - in continuous chaos - the consciousness would be lost. Therefore, instants of "now" appear sequentially, but don't congeal at blissful calmness and don't lose the sequence.
  Thus, time is manifested in the form of the external time for each individual consciousness fixing for this consciousness the external changes on which consciousness at this stage of development isn't capable to interfere. These changes are manifested for human consciousness in the current cyclic movement of planets, stars, oscillations of atoms etc. In comparison with these changes the consciousness of a person determines duration of the events happening with him as well as - with other material objects which are within reach of its sensations and comprehension.
  Thereby, time is reflection of changes of beingness in our consciousness - consciousness fixes for itself through it these changes, and time flows in consciousness according to these external changes, which are independent of consciousness, in particular, within change of day at night, spring in the summer with annual repetitions, etc. Time would for the person flowed on the other in another coordinate system, having changed according to change of coordinate system.
  However, a person is capable of interfering directly or indirectly with his environment according to his understanding or desire, being a motive force or a brake for it and, accordingly, for himself. Thus, he creates his own derivative of the environmental changes and, therefore, his own time, which can accelerate or slow down depending on his actions or inaction, even without his knowledge due to the changes in the dynamics of his centers capable of processing the incoming information [17].
  Without one's own time, it would be pointless to talk about a person's life as well as, for example, about the life of a cobblestone. This process of forming a person's own time is carried out by his consciousness through the processing centers of the incoming information, although within the framework of the external time, but quite independently every moment.
  In other words, during the processing of data from the sensory organs, which arrive sequentially in the form of separate decrypted information packets, these packets are converted into objects of the changing environment surrounding a person, that is, as that form, which turns out available directly or indirectly to his sense organs.
  Subconsciously, a person divides these objects into those that are inaccessible to him, considering them to be located for him, as it were, in external time, and those that he considers available for actions with them, during which he is able to influence their changes and his own changes.
  But it is difficult for a person to realize this division, since all these objects are in the general information flow.
  Therefore, a person either does not notice the daily slowdown or acceleration of his own time, or considers these phenomena self-evident, or regards them as a miracle [17].
  This process of a person's formation of time as the present, or his "now" to a large extent turns out to be a conscious human life, because in its events a person can in many ways more or less freely participate as an acting subject with goals, which are being determined to a large extent by himself, and not just using the animal instincts, not to mention passive objects. That is why he feels the departure of every moment of life, that is, his own time.
  But every moment of life appears to his consciousness as a flow of time from the future into the past, although only the present exists for a human consciousness, in particular, because a person can feel, think and act only in it, but not in the past or in the future, moreover, the past does not remain somewhere behind, but always, that is, at any moment, is with him - in his or the general memory (databases) - and he can use it at any moment of his life if he will want and find or remember what he needs.
  
  Bibliography
  
  1. Aristotle. Metaphysics. Moscow, 1999.
  2. Newton I. Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. - Krylov A. N. Coll. works, vol. 7. L. 1934.
  3. Kant. On the form and causes of the sensible and the intelligible world. - The book. Works, Vol. 2. Moscow, 1964.
  4. Hegel. Philosophy of Nature. - In the book. Encyclopedia of Philosophy. T. 2. M., 1975.
  5. Fragments of Heraclitus. Materialists of ancient Greece. Collection of texts of Heraclitus, Democritus and Epicurus. Institute of Philosophy. Moscow, State Publishing House political literature. 1955.
  6. Anthology of medieval thought. St. Petersburg. Publisher Russian Christian Humanitarian Institute. 2001.
  7. The concept of fear. - M. Acad. Project. 2012.
  8. Bergson. A. Collected Works, vol. 1 - 5. St. Petersburg. 1913-14.
  9. A. Bergson. Creative Evolution. 2006, ch. 1. "On the evolution of life - the mechanism and the feasibility."
  10. Husserl E. Collected Works. M.: Gnosis. House of intellectual books. 2001.
  11. Heidegger M., Beingness and Time. M. Ad Marginem. 1997.
  12. Sartre J. P. Beingness and Nothingness. Experience of phenomenological ontology. M. Republic. 2000.
  13. Prigogine I., Stengers I. Time, chaos, quantum. The solution of the paradox of time. Moscow, 2003. 1975.
  14. Plato. Works. Moscow, 1994.
  15. A. V. Lebedev, Parmenides. New Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Institute of Philosophy. M., Thought. 2010. 978-5-244-1115-9.
  16. Nizovtsev Y. M. The person as the hologram. 2016. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru; Amazon.
  17. Nizovtsev Y. M. It's the other way around. Answers to tricky questions about interesting things (Collection). Part 2, ј 2. The explanation of the facts of acceleration and deceleration of time. 2018. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru; Amazon
  
  
  
  
 Ваша оценка:
Связаться с программистом сайта.

Новые книги авторов СИ, вышедшие из печати:
О.Болдырева "Крадуш. Чужие души" М.Николаев "Вторжение на Землю"

Как попасть в этoт список
Сайт - "Художники" .. || .. Доска об'явлений "Книги"