{"id":186,"date":"2020-03-04T13:47:22","date_gmt":"2020-03-04T08:17:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ckraju.net\/blog\/?p=186"},"modified":"2020-03-04T13:47:22","modified_gmt":"2020-03-04T08:17:22","slug":"the-eleven-pictures-of-time-the-physics-philosophy-and-politics-of-time-beliefs","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ckraju.net\/wordpress_F\/?p=186","title":{"rendered":"The Eleven Pictures of Time: the Physics, Philosophy, and Politics of time beliefs"},"content":{"rendered":"

(elaborated and simplified)<\/span><\/p>\n

An interactive workshop at the Berlin festival for time issues 24, 25 March 2020<\/a>, 1500-1800 Berlin time. Facebook live stream: http:\/\/facebook.com\/MaerzMusik
\n<\/a> will be only of the conference talk<\/a> on the 21st March 1430 to 1600 Berlin time (1900 to 2030 IST).<\/p>\n

The <\/span>workshop will cover the <\/span>following 12 topics <\/span>related to the book. Each topic<\/span> will be covered in <\/span>an average of <\/span>approximately <\/span>20 min<\/span>utes<\/span>. <\/span>After each hour <\/span>there will be <\/span>questions for around half an hour. <\/span><\/p>\n

The book begins <\/span>and ends <\/span>with the Fisherman’s story: <\/span>to marry a mermaid <\/span>the Fisherman<\/span> <\/span>wants<\/span> to lose his soul, <\/span>but<\/span> <\/span>does not <\/span>know how to do so. <\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Life after death<\/strong>Many ancient cultures \tbelieved in the soul and life after death, as in the stories of \tNachiketa, Socrates, Chuang Tzu (butterfly\u2019s dream), or sufi poems \tlike those of Rumi<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. Sceptics <\/strong>Equally, however, many \tancient and modern sceptics rejected the belief in life after death. \tAn ancient sceptic, Payasi, performed a variety of experiments with \tdying persons to test and reject the belief in life after death. <\/span><\/li>\n
  3. Cosmic recurrence or \u201ccyclic\u201d time<\/strong>However, Payasi\u2019s \texperiments refute only a simplistic belief in life after death. The \tcorrect understanding of the ancient belief in life after death is \tin the context of cosmic recurrence<\/strong> (as in Bhagvad Gita), or \tas in the Nietzsche\u2019s attempted reconstruction. Ancient symbols \tof cyclic time include the Egyptian Ouroboros, the Buddhist \tKalachakra, the Maya\/Aztec calendar stones, and the Nataraja \t(dancing Shiva). With cosmic recurrence, not only are people reborn, \teverything in the cosmos repeats. Roughly, this corresponds to \tcyclic time. This notion of life after death with \u201ccyclic\u201d time \tmeets all the objections raised by sceptics, both ancient and \tmodern. But is it science? <\/span><\/li>\n
  4. Cosmic recurrence in physics<\/strong>Cosmic recurrence or \t\u201ccyclic\u201d time is scientifically possible. In Newtonian physics, \ton the Poincare recurrence theorem, the cosmos must<\/em> recur if \tit is closed. That is, every microstate of a closed cosmos must \trepeat to an arbitrary degree of precision, infinitely often. The \ttheorem can be extended to general relativity (case of geodesic \tflow), and a similar theorem holds in quantum mechanics. I point out \tthe flaws in the text-book resolution of the recurrence paradox of \tthermodynamics.<\/span><\/li>\n
  5. The curse on cyclic time<\/strong>Apart from physics we need \tto understand also the politics of time beliefs. The church, after \tit married the Roman state, cursed this belief in life after death \tin the context of cosmic recurrence. Early Christianity derived from \tEgyptian mystery religion (\u201cpaganism\u201d). As elaborated by Origen, \tit accepted cosmic recurrence; it also accepted equity. But the \tlater-day post-Nicene church misrepresented cosmic recurrence as the \tcollapse of morality. The real political reason was to promote \tinequity: the state-church wanted to project exclusive benefits for \tconverting to Christianity, to be able to sell Christianity. <\/span><\/li>\n
  6. Nietzsche and eternal recurrence<\/strong>Nietzsche advocated \teternal recurrence as a case of science against Christianity, \tresulting in the collapse of church morality. Ironically, he not \tonly overlooked (a) early Christianity, but also (b) the later-day \tchurch anathemas and bulls against equity, and (c) the centuries of \tpersistent church support for racism and slavery, manifest in his \ttime. Instead, he thought the church stood for equity. To \tsubstantiate eternal recurrence as science, he used defective \tgeneral arguments. These arguments can be corrected to fit a model \tof probabilistic evolution called the Markovian model: resulting in \tMarkovian recurrence. But Nietzsche fell into Augustine\u2019s trap, of \ta binary of linear vs cyclic time, and failed to understand the \tchurch misrepresentation of cyclic time.<\/span><\/li>\n
  7. Augustine\u2019s trap and its victims<\/strong>Augustine set up a simple \tbinary of linear vs cyclic time to reject \u201ccyclic\u201d time. This \tbinary enabled him to confound two distinct types of cyclic time<\/strong>: \the misrepresented quasi recurrence (recurrence with deliverance) as \texact recurrence (recurrence without deliverance). This enabled him \tto reject \u201ccyclic\u201d time and propose instead \u201clinear\u201d \tapocalyptic time. Because of church hegemony, this binary has \tpersisted in Western thought down to the present day, and its \tvictims included Nietzsche, T. S. Eliot and Mircea Eliade. \tHowever, there isn\u2019t any one \tkind of \u201ccyclic\u201d time.<\/strong><\/span> One must distinguish different \ttypes of cyclic time, such as quasi cyclic time and supercyclic \ttime. In ancient models of life after death, deliverance (moksha<\/em>, \tnirvana<\/em>) was always possible and was the ultimate goal. For \tlife after death plus deliverance we need quasi-cyclic time as \tdistinct from eternal recurrence.
    \n<\/span><\/li>\n
  8. The eleven pictures of time<\/strong>The binary of linear vs \tcyclic time has also resulted in confounding distinct and \tincompatible kinds of linear time, as in conflating between linear \tmundane time and the superlinear time of physics, a confusion common \tin Western theology\/philosophy of \u201cfree will\u201d. To resolve this \tconfusion, I destroy the Augustinian binary: using 1 and 1 to make \t11 instead of 2 pictures of time. But, is quasi-cyclic time \tscientifically possible? Yes. This requires not so much a change in \tphysics as a change<\/strong>d<\/strong> understanding of existing \tphysics<\/strong>. This naturally extends to the question of what are the \ttime beliefs in different religions? How far are they compatible \twith science? To re-examine this issue of science and religion in a \tpolitically neutral way, a new science is needed, a science free \tfrom the political pressure of Western religious prejudices.<\/span><\/li>\n
  9. The physics of quasi-cyclic time<\/strong>\n
      \n
    1. History dependence\n

      The \t\tfirst step is to understand that current physics is \t\thistory-dependent. This destroys the hypotheses of the recurrence \t\ttheorems (whether Poincare\u2019s or Markovian). That is, recurrence \t\tcan no longer be exact or eternal (even granting that exact \t\trecurrence is conceptually meaningful).<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    2. The tilt in the arrow of timeThe second step is to \t\treject the metaphysics of causality, and accept tiny departures \t\tfrom it or history dependence plus a tilt in the arrow of time as \t\tthe most general form of current physics. If a tilt in the arrow of \t\ttime increases with time, the cosmos will be quasi recurrent, but \t\tnot eternally or exactly recurrent; i.e., repeated rebirth with \t\tdeliverance (moksha<\/em>, nirvana<\/em>) is physically possible.<\/span><\/li>\n
    3. The tilt and creativity vs time machinesA tilt allows interaction \t\twith the future and past, but <\/span>this<\/span> <\/span>cannot<\/em><\/span> be done mechanistically <\/span>as \t\tin fictional or hypothetical<\/span> time machines. It can happen only spontaneously <\/span>and \t\tcreatively.<\/span> Physics \t\twith a tilt <\/span>in the \t\tarrow of time<\/span> is \t\tnon-mechanistic, we no longer have a clockwork cosmos <\/span>controlled \t\tby God.<\/span> <\/span>With \t\ta tilt <\/span>creativity is \t\tpossible:<\/span> there is \t\tcontinuous creation <\/span>or \t\ta creative cosmos. <\/span>No \t\trelation to the<\/span> weak <\/span>and crude <\/span>theories \t\tof continuous creation like those of Hoyle and Narlikar. <\/span>But \t\tit is easily possible to relate this <\/span>also <\/span>to, say, the creative \t\tcosmos in Egyptian thought\/Neoplatonism, or to conditioned \t\tco-origination in Buddhist thought, or continuous creation in \t\tIslamic thought.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n
    4. Creationism from Philoponus to Stephen Hawking to Ben \tCarson<\/strong>But we have again to \tcontend with the politics of time beliefs. Continuous creation is \tcontested by the church which has always wanted people to believe in \tone-time creation whether Biblical or Big Bang or singularity \ttheory. The politics began long ago: Philoponus (6th<\/sup> c.) contested Proclus on the explicit grounds that an eternal world \twould contradict the account of creation in the scripture. This \tpolitics is persistent, as clear from the Scopes (Monkey) trial to \tpresent-day US Presidential elections and Ben Carson (Presidential \tcandidate, and now Secretary in Trump\u2019s administration). But few \tare aware of how this politics creeps into science, as in the \tcreationism of Stephen Hawking, via singularity theory, a \tcreationism which mimics the fiats, arguments, and conclusions of \tAugustine, while masquerading as \u201cobjective\u201d science.
      \n<\/span><\/li>\n
    5. The politics of reason and superlinear time<\/strong>Briefly, the problem is \tthat <\/span>present-day \tscience, as in Hawking\u2019s singularity theory, etc. <\/span>sometimes <\/span>uses formal \tmathematics, <\/span>instead \tof<\/span> normal mathematics.<\/span> <\/span>Formal mathematics \tbrought by colonial education, badly needs to be decolonised, \tbecause <\/span>this tool of \tscience is infected with politics<\/span>, <\/span>How?<\/span> <\/span>T<\/span>he \tchurch hijacked <\/span>math<\/span> during the Crusades to suit its politics and theology of reason. <\/span>The \tchurch (not Greeks) invented faith-based reasoning or axiomatic <\/span>math<\/span>, <\/span>as a <\/span>convenient <\/span>way to accept reason \twhile avoiding facts.<\/span> <\/span>Formal <\/span>or \taxiomatic <\/span>math <\/span>today <\/span>brings in <\/span>also <\/span>the <\/span>church \tmetaphysics <\/span>of \teternity through axioms of infinity <\/span>which \tcannot be empirically checked.<\/span> <\/span> <\/span>U<\/span>sing \tit for science<\/span> <\/span>allows \tthis metaphysics to be smuggled into science, <\/span>as \tin the belief <\/span>that \tcalculus requires \u201creal\u201d numbers, so<\/span> that time must be superlinear <\/span>(like \tthe \u201creal\u201d line), <\/span>just \tto <\/span>be able to make \tsense of <\/span>the <\/span>differential <\/span>equations \tof physics. This metaphysics <\/span>of \tsuperlinear time<\/span> is \tfatal to creativity, <\/span>unless \twe <\/span>confound it with \tlinear mundane time. A <\/span>tilt <\/span>restores <\/span>true <\/span>creativity.<\/span><\/li>\n
    6. The creative cosmos<\/strong>A change in our scientific \tunderstanding of the cosmos does revalue all values. The creative \tcosmos <\/strong>replaces the created cosmos<\/strong>, and gives a new \tmeaning and purpose to life as concerned with the creation of order \tor harmony, and the constant striving to create a better world. Is \tman really God, though neither all-powerful nor all-knowing? As in \tthe story of Svetaketu, or Abu Yazid? This is also how the \tFisherman\u2019s story ends. <\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Recommended reading<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

      General reference:<\/span><\/p>\n

      The Eleven Pictures of Time: the physics, philosophy and politics of time beliefs<\/em><\/span>, Sage 2003. See a preview of the book (Kindle: look inside at https:\/\/www.amazon.in\/Eleven-Pictures-Time-Philosophy-Politics\/dp\/0761996249<\/a>. <\/span>See, also, webpage: http:\/\/ckraju.net\/11picsoftime\/<\/a>. <\/span><\/p>\n

      Also, <\/span><\/p>\n

      Time: towards a consistent theory<\/em><\/span>, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1994. Fundamental theories of physics, vol. 65. <\/span>See webpage: http:\/\/ckraju.net\/11picsoftime\/oldbook\/index.html<\/a>. <\/span><\/p>\n

      For <\/span>a later account of <\/span>how <\/strong><\/span>a changed picture of time changes values<\/strong><\/span> <\/span>see<\/span><\/p>\n

      \u201cThe Harmony Principle\u201d <\/span>Philosophy East and West<\/span><\/em>, <\/span>63<\/span><\/strong>(4) (2013) pp.\u00a0586\u2013604. http:\/\/www.ckraju.net\/papers\/Harmony-principle-pew.pdf<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

      F<\/span>or the <\/span>relation of a tilt to creativity and time travel <\/strong><\/span>see. <\/span><\/p>\n

      \u201cTime Travel and the Reality of Spontaneity\u201d <\/span>Found.\u00a0Phys.<\/span><\/em>, <\/span>36<\/span><\/strong>(7) 2006, pp.\u00a01099\u20131113. https:\/\/arxiv.org\/pdf\/0804.0830<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

      For an account of <\/span>how the church hijacked mathematics<\/strong><\/span>, see<\/span><\/p>\n

      Euclid and Jesus: how and why the church changed mathematics and Christianity across two religious wars<\/em><\/span>, Multiversity, Penang, 2012.<\/span><\/p>\n

      For an account of <\/span>how church dogmas of eternity penetrated into the formal mathematics of infinity<\/strong><\/span> see, <\/span><\/p>\n

      \u201cEternity and Infinity: the Western misunderstanding of Indian mathematics and its consequences for science today.\u201d <\/span>American Philosophical Association Newsletter on Asian and Asian American Philosophers and Philosophies<\/span><\/em> <\/span>14<\/span><\/strong>(2) (2015) pp. 27\u201333. <\/span>Posted<\/span> at http:\/\/ckraju.net\/papers\/Eternity-and-infinity-Pages-from-APA.pdf<\/a>. <\/span><\/p>\n

      F<\/span>or <\/span>the mathematically inclined, interested in <\/span>a general expository account of the <\/span>mathematical<\/span> <\/span>re<\/span>formulation of <\/span>physics with a tilt <\/strong><\/span>in the arrow of time<\/strong><\/span>, using mixed-type functional differential equations<\/strong><\/span>, see the following:<\/span><\/p>\n