Time and Existence.

 

There are many arguments that need to be taken into account when we think about time, and the issues that relate to it. The major question of whether time really exists has baffled philosophers around the world for centuries. There is little doubt however, that whether or not we can come to a conclusion over it's existence, the aspects of how we percieve time, will always be upper most in our lives, all living things have a routine, and naturally, we are able to measure the physical changes that take place over a period. 

But what actually is it?  And, why is it so difficult to explain?

The perception of a physical present tense reaches beyond human capability. 

The human brain is constantly engaged with processing visuals and predicting the immiediate future, taking for granted that what is seen, is actually only a reflection of what has already occured.

It is through a series of physical events that the future become present and
present become past. Yet, one can never truly say that they are in the present, because, by the time the realisation of that tense is fulfilled, the moment in question has already lapsed. (see fig.1)

Consequently, the time frame of 'has been' and what is 'to become', in a psychological sense, seem considerably more substantial than that of 'being'.
 

Another aspect of time, is of course change. One thing we can be certain of, is that all physical objects will change over a period of time- the adaptations to which, depend solely upon the sustainability of that object.

More generally, change is something that can be measured over a period; but the underlying questions are: is change a symptom of time; or is time in fact is a symptom of change?

We can say, with some degree of certainty, that 'change' and 'time' are proportionate.

 

 

Existence

In the first part of this chapter, we mentioned time- which is used synonymously with that of being; in the sense that, to exist, is to have an existence in time.

In a main focus on the issue, we will attempt to establish the ins and the outs of the whole concept.

One of the most mind boggling experiences thus far, has been to try to explain the actuality of existence.  The problem is; that the concept is such a simple one... very often it is taken for granted.  We are all aware of the general meaning of what it is to exist, but existence is not based merely upon our perception of it, rather, it is a continuance of actuality.

The word "existence" is derived from the Latin, meaning existere, basically it means "to be"  or "to become." 

Many things can exist which require not an awareness of it, nor to even be alive.

But how true is the first part of that statement?

To say that many things can exist, is equal to say that there are others which cannot, and, since there is no such thing as a thing that does not exist, this is where the problem arises.

Also, to say that some things cannot exist where others can, would be equal to say that: all things exist, therefore, the term non- existant would only apply if used seperately from that of an existence.

That does not mean however that just because something cannot be seen macroscopically or otherwise- it does not exist.