Changism: Change and Time in a Presentist Universe
45 min read
·
Sep 22, 2024
Chapter 1: Rethinking Time
The past existed, but that does not mean it still exists.¹ There is a difference between having existed and existing now; otherwise, one could use money already spent in the past to pay for something else now.² While we have memories, records, and other evidence of the past, these are all present-day manifestations of past events and experiences; evidence of the past is a part of the present.³ Therefore, although the past existed, the past does not exist.
Similarly, although the future will exist, it is not true to say it exists now. The future is a potentiality or a range of possibilities that have not yet been realized.⁴ Therefore, because neither the past nor the future exist, only the present moment exists.⁵
We can remember past events or anticipate future events, but these are all mental constructions that take place in the present moment.⁶ Evidence of past events, such as photographs or historical records, exists in the present moment as physical or digital objects.⁷ Technology and science work not because the future exists, but because the present moment is constantly changing in predictable manners, according to logos (the laws of physics).⁸
Therefore, only the present moment exists. This present moment is eternal and constantly changing, and what we call time is a method to measure the rate of the present moment’s change.⁹ This is why we say that,
“according to the most accurate cesium atomic clock in the world, one second is equivalent to 9,192,631,770 cycles of the radiation produced by the transition between two energy levels of the cesium-133 atom.”¹⁰
Time exists, but it is not something mysterious. Rather, time is a method we humans have invented — and agreed to use — to rhythmically measure the pace of space’s change with discrete units in a way that is useful to us.¹¹ Time is to change what the metric system is to space: a tool that we have invented to organize our experiences, make sense of the world around us, and measure its rate of change.¹²
Therefore, the so-called “arrow of time” is just a misnomer.¹³ In reality, what happens is that the way the present moment changes follows an order; this order, or internal law, is known as the logos or laws of physics.¹⁴ Logos is the way changes unfold.¹⁵ It is not that “time only goes forward”; that’s meaningless.¹⁶ Time does not “flow” or go anywhere; time is a measuring system we have created to measure the rate of change and not a thing that moves — neither backward, nor forward, nor sideways.¹⁷ Time is to change what the metric system is to space, something we use to get an idea of the relative change of something with regard to us.
McTaggart, J.M.E., ‘The Unreality of Time’, Mind, vol. 17, no. 68, 1908, pp. 457–474.
Augustine, Confessions, Book XI, trans. H. Chadwick, Oxford University Press, 1991, pp. 230–235.
Prior, A.N., Past, Present and Future, Oxford University Press, 1967, pp. 12–15.
Craig, W.L., The Tensed Theory of Time: A Critical Examination, Springer, 2000, pp. 1–3.
Husserl, E., The Phenomenology of Internal Time-Consciousness, trans. J.S. Churchill, Indiana University Press, 1964, pp. 47–50.
Heidegger, M., Being and Time, trans. J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson, Harper & Row, 1962, pp. 374–377.
Barbour, J., The End of Time: The Next Revolution in Physics, Oxford University Press, 1999, pp. 180–185.
Bergson, H., Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness, trans. F.L. Pogson, George Allen & Unwin, 1910, pp. 98–102.
BIPM, The International System of Units (SI), 9th edn, 2019, pp. 130–131.
Whitrow, G.J., Time in History: Views of Time from Prehistory to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 17–22.
Alder, K., The Measure of All Things: The Seven-Year Odyssey and Hidden Error That Transformed the World, Free Press, 2002, pp. 50–55.
Eddington, A.S., The Nature of the Physical World, Macmillan, 1928, pp. 66–70.
Heraclitus, as referenced in Kahn, C.H., The Art and Thought of Heraclitus, Cambridge University Press, 1979, pp. 45–50.
Stoeger, W.R., ‘Contemporary Physics and the Ontological Status of the Laws of Nature’, in Quantum Cosmology and the Laws of Nature, eds. R.J. Russell et al., University of Notre Dame Press, 1993, pp. 209–234.
Rovelli, C., ‘The Order of Time’, Penguin Books, 2018, pp. 50–55.
Callender, C., ‘Is Time an Illusion?’, Scientific American, vol. 302, no. 6, 2010, pp. 58–65.
Chapter 2: Cyclical Change
Change in the universe is predominantly cyclical, and perhaps entirely so.¹ We have been able to devise measurement systems like “time” precisely because of the cyclical nature of change.² For instance, one second is defined as 9,192,631,770 cycles of radiation corresponding to the transition between two energy levels of a cesium-133 atom.³ These regular, repetitive cycles of radiation serve as a reliable and consistent reference for measuring the rate of change. By observing these repetitive events, we have established various units and standards to quantify and comprehend the ever-changing world around us.⁴
Many living organisms exhibit daily cycles known as circadian rhythms.⁵ These internal clocks regulate sleep-wake patterns, hormone secretion, and other physiological processes.⁶ From birth to growth, reproduction, and death, the life cycles of plants and animals follow orderly patterns that contribute to the overall balance of ecosystems.⁷
The concept of a day is derived from Earth’s rotation on its axis.⁸ One day represents the time it takes for Earth to complete one full rotation, resulting in the cycle of day and night.⁹ The changing seasons, driven by Earth’s axial tilt and orbit around the Sun, bring about variations in temperature, weather conditions, and the behavior of flora and fauna.¹⁰ Plants follow specific flowering and fruiting cycles influenced by factors such as day length and temperature, allowing us to cultivate and harvest crops and vintages.¹¹ The grape harvest season, for example, signals the beginning of wine production, which itself follows cyclical processes.¹²
The gravitational pull of the Moon and the Sun causes ocean tides, with predictable high and low cycles occurring throughout the day.¹³ The Sun undergoes various cyclical changes, such as the 11-year solar cycle, during which solar activity, sunspots, and solar flares follow a recurring pattern.¹⁴ Astronomical phenomena like pulsars and binary stars exhibit incredibly precise and regular cycles, akin to the ticking of a cosmic clock.¹⁵
Just as the metric system provides a framework to organize and comprehend measurements in space, our time measurement system serves as a tool to understand and navigate the cyclical nature of the ever-changing present moment.¹⁶ Units of time — seconds, minutes, hours, days, months, and years — allow us to quantify and make sense of the rhythms and patterns in nature, including the changing of seasons, lunar phases, solar cycles, and the life cycles of organisms.¹⁷
By inventing the concept of time, we can synchronize our actions with the cyclic behavior of the universe, optimize our lives, and predict celestial events.¹⁸ Tracking the motion of planets, anticipating the rising and setting of the Sun and Moon, and planning our activities accordingly are all made possible through time measurement.¹⁹ This system enables precise and accurate observations and experiments, granting us the power of prediction.²⁰ By informing ourselves of the precise ways in which the present moment changes, we have advanced in fields like technology, astronomy, physics, biology, and climatology.²¹
This regularity showcases the beauty and elegance of the cosmos, enabling us to study and understand it with scientific rigor and predictability, which we harness for technological advancement.²³ Our ability to measure change using the time system, and to predict celestial, planetary, and biological changes, is founded on the consistency of these natural cycles.²⁴
Barbour, J., The End of Time: The Next Revolution in Physics, Oxford University Press, 1999, pp. 1–5.
Whitrow, G.J., Time in History: Views of Time from Prehistory to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 17–22.
BIPM, The International System of Units (SI), 9th edn, 2019, pp. 130–131.
Alder, K., The Measure of All Things: The Seven-Year Odyssey and Hidden Error That Transformed the World, Free Press, 2002, pp. 50–55.
Moore-Ede, M.C., Sulzman, F.M., and Fuller, C.A., The Clocks That Time Us: Physiology of the Circadian Timing System, Harvard University Press, 1982, pp. 3–10.
Kumar, V., ‘Biological Rhythms’, Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, vol. 68, no. 17, 2011, pp. 2711–2725.
Levinton, J.S., Marine Biology: Function, Biodiversity, Ecology, 4th edn, Oxford University Press, 2017, pp. 550–555.
Seeds, M.A., and Backman, D., Foundations of Astronomy, 12th edn, Cengage Learning, 2013, pp. 24–26.
Ridpath, I., Astronomy, 3rd edn, Dorling Kindersley, 2018, pp. 42–43.
Ahrens, C.D., Meteorology Today: An Introduction to Weather, Climate, and the Environment, 11th edn, Cengage Learning, 2016, pp. 42–45.
Taiz, L., Zeiger, E., Møller, I.M., and Murphy, A., Plant Physiology and Development, 6th edn, Sinauer Associates, 2015, pp. 647–650.
Jackson, R.S., Wine Science: Principles and Applications, 4th edn, Academic Press, 2014, pp. 29–32.
Pugh, D.T., Tides, Surges and Mean Sea-Level, John Wiley & Sons, 1987, pp. 1–5.
Hathaway, D.H., ‘The Solar Cycle’, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, vol. 12, no. 4, 2015, pp. 1–87.
Lorimer, D.R., and Kramer, M., Handbook of Pulsar Astronomy, Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp. 1–3.
Duncan, D.E., Calendar: Humanity’s Epic Struggle to Determine a True and Accurate Year, Avon Books, 1998, pp. 10–15.
Kelley, D.H., Milone, E.F., and Aveni, A.F., Exploring Ancient Skies: A Survey of Ancient and Cultural Astronomy, 2nd edn, Springer, 2011, pp. 1–5.
Hawking, S.W., A Brief History of Time, Bantam Books, 1988, pp. 15–20.
Greene, B., The Fabric of the Cosmos: Space, Time, and the Texture of Reality, Alfred A. Knopf, 2004, pp. 49–55.
Kuhn, T.S., ‘The Function of Measurement in Modern Physical Science’, Isis, vol. 52, no. 2, 1961, pp. 161–193.
Eddington, A.S., The Nature of the Physical World, Macmillan, 1928, pp. 200–205.
Chapter 3: The Essence of Change
Change is the fundamental reality upon which the cosmos is built. It is not merely an occurrence within time but the very fabric of existence, the continuous process through which potential becomes actuality. This ever-unfolding transformation happens entirely within the present moment, the eternal “now,” where all possibilities reside and manifest. The cosmos operates as an indivisible whole, an interconnected web where change is the expression of the intrinsic nature of entities guided by the rational order of the universe.
At the core of existence lies the principle that all things are in a constant state of becoming, continuously actualizing their inherent potential within the present moment¹. This perspective rejects the notion of time as a linear progression and instead embraces the present as the only reality where change occurs. The present is not a fleeting instant sandwiched between past and future but an ever-present field where all transformations take place². Change is not driven by external forces or a timeline but emerges organically from the intrinsic properties of entities and their interactions within the cosmos³.
Every entity possesses within itself a set of potentialities — latent possibilities that reflect its inherent nature⁴. These potentials are enfolded within the entity, existing implicitly until conditions allow them to unfold into explicit reality⁵. This process of unfolding is the movement from potentiality to actuality, a continuous transition that occurs entirely within the present⁶.
The universe operates through an underlying order where all potentials are interconnected in an implicit state⁷. This implicit order contains the infinite possibilities of existence, an undivided wholeness where all potentials coexist⁸. When an entity actualizes a potential, it is not creating something new but revealing what was already present in implicit form⁹. Change, therefore, is the manifestation of the implicit becoming explicit, the unfolding of inherent possibilities into observable reality¹⁰.
For example, a seed contains the potential to become a tree. This potential is not a future event but an implicit reality within the seed¹¹. As the seed interacts with its environment — soil, water, sunlight — it unfolds this potential, actualizing it as growth within the present moment¹². The seed does not move through time to become a tree; it simply actualizes its inherent nature through change in the eternal now¹³.
The present moment is the eternal and dynamic field where all change occurs¹⁴. It is an ever-unfolding continuum, not a static point in time¹⁵. Within this field, all potentialities exist implicitly, ready to be actualized when conditions align¹⁶. Change is the actualization of these potentials, a continuous process that requires no passage of time, only the unfolding within the present¹⁷.
A rock falls not because it moves along a temporal axis but because its inherent properties and present conditions — mass, gravity, position — compel it to move towards the Earth¹⁸. This movement is an immediate actualization of potential within the present moment¹⁹. The change is not stretched over time but occurs entirely in the eternal now, reflecting the natural unfolding of the rock’s potential to fall²⁰.
The analogy of the rose captures this essence beautifully:
“The rose is without ‘why’; it blooms because it blooms.”²¹
The rose does not require an external reason or a future moment to bloom; it actualizes its potential to bloom simply because that is its intrinsic nature²². Change, in this sense, is the pure expression of an entity’s essence within the present²³.
Change is not random or chaotic; it is guided by the rational order inherent in the cosmos²⁴. This rational structure ensures that the unfolding of potentialities follows coherent and consistent patterns²⁵. The laws of physics are manifestations of this rational order, providing the framework within which entities interact and change occurs²⁶.
This order is not imposed externally but arises from the intrinsic properties of entities and their relationships²⁷. It governs how potentials are actualized, ensuring that change is harmonious and aligned with the overall coherence of the universe²⁸. The falling rock adheres to gravitational principles not because of an external timeline but because gravity is an inherent aspect of the rational order guiding its change within the present²⁹.
Potentialities are not distant possibilities but are enfolded within entities, existing in an implicit state ready for actualization³⁰. This enfolded nature means that all potentials are present and accessible within the eternal now³¹. Change unfolds these potentials into actuality, transforming the implicit into the explicit without the need for temporal progression³².
When conditions are suitable, what is implicit becomes explicit through change³³. This transformation is immediate and occurs entirely within the present moment³⁴. A match ignites not because it waits for a future moment but because the conditions — friction, oxygen, combustible material — are present, allowing its potential to produce fire to be actualized instantly³⁵.
The universe is an undivided whole where all entities and potentials are interconnected³⁶. Change in one part of the cosmos resonates throughout the whole, reflecting the intrinsic unity of existence³⁷. This interconnectedness means that change is not isolated but part of a continuous and holistic process³⁸.
Entities do not exist in separation but are aspects of the universal wholeness, their changes influencing and being influenced by the whole³⁹. This unity eliminates the need for external causation across space and time; instead, change occurs as a natural expression of the interconnected cosmos within the present⁴⁰.
Reality is a continuous process of becoming, where change is the constant actualization of potentialities within the eternal present⁴¹. There is no static state of being; all entities are in perpetual transformation, unfolding their inherent potentials⁴². This ongoing process reflects the dynamic nature of the cosmos, a harmonious dance of change guided by rational order⁴³.
Time is not a dimension through which entities move but a measurement of the rate at which change occurs⁴⁴. It is a tool created to quantify and organize experiences, not a fundamental aspect of reality⁴⁵. The essence of existence lies in the continuous unfolding of potential within the present moment⁴⁶.
Change is the fundamental essence of existence, the continuous unfolding of potentialities into actuality within the eternal present⁴⁷. Entities evolve and transform not through time but through the inherent drive to actualize their intrinsic nature⁴⁸. The cosmos operates as a unified whole, guided by rational order, where change is the natural expression of being⁴⁹.
This perspective reveals a universe in constant bloom, like the rose that “blooms because it blooms”⁵⁰. There is no need for external reasons or temporal progression; change is the pure manifestation of potentialities realized within the ever-present now⁵¹. The essence of change is the essence of existence itself — a continuous, harmonious unfolding of the infinite possibilities inherent in the cosmos⁵².
Aristotle, Metaphysics, trans. W.D. Ross (Oxford: Clarendon Press), Book IX.
Escohotado, A. (1992) Realidad y Substancia. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, pp. 85–87.
Bohm, D. (1980) Wholeness and the Implicate Order. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 149–150.
Aristotle, Physics, trans. R.P. Hardie and R.K. Gaye, in The Complete Works of Aristotle, ed. J. Barnes (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), Book III.
Angelus Silesius, The Cherubinic Wanderer, trans. M. Shrady (New York: Paulist Press, 1986), Poem №289.
Chapter 4: The Perception of Change
Our perception of change is shaped by the continuous flow of consciousness, which is not divided into distinct moments but forms an unbroken stream.¹ This flow is guided by memory, immediate experience, and expectation.² Memory allows us to retain past moments, connecting them to our present awareness — much like hearing a melody as a seamless whole rather than as separate notes.³ The immediate experience, or primal impression, is our direct contact with the present moment; as you read these words, you are immersed in this immediate awareness.⁴ Expectation, or protention, enables us to anticipate future moments, such as when listening to a melody and predicting the next note based on the pattern we’ve already heard.⁵
Together, these aspects — memory, immediate experience, and expectation — form a coherent experience of change, helping us perceive changes as a flowing sequence rather than a series of disconnected instants.⁶ This is complemented by our sense of duration, which refers to the subjective, qualitative experience of change.⁷ Unlike the quantitative rate of change measured by clocks (with our so called “time” measuring system), duration is how changes feels to us as we live them.⁸ When we are deeply engaged in something we love, changes seem to fly; conversely, when we are bored or waiting, appear to happen much more slowly.⁹ This inner experience of change isn’t divided into minutes or seconds but flows in a way that reflects the quality and intensity of our engagement.¹⁰
Our experience of duration is indivisible, just as a melody cannot be broken into separate notes without losing its essence.¹¹ It’s a continuous flow that carries us through life, and this indivisibility is key to understanding how we experience the flow of change.¹² By combining the structured flow of consciousness with the concept of duration, we gain a fuller understanding of how we experience change.¹³
Through this interplay, we connect the past, present, and future, integrating memories, current actions, and expectations into a seamless continuum.¹⁴ This allows us to make sense of the world and navigate it more effectively.¹⁵ Simultaneously, our sense of duration emphasizes the quality of our experience — our subjective experience of change feels richer and more meaningful when we are fully engaged in life.¹⁶ Conversely, when we are disengaged or distracted, our subjective flow of change can feel empty or slow.¹⁷
Recognizing these aspects of our experience of change has practical implications. It helps us better understand human behavior, such as why people might feel anxious about the future or nostalgic about the past.¹⁸ It also shows how being fully present in the moment can enhance our sense of time, making life more fulfilling.¹⁹ By appreciating the flow of consciousness and the qualitative nature of duration, we can balance our relationship with memory, immediate experience, and expectation, leading to a more harmonious way of navigating life.²⁰
In summary, our experience of change is a complex blend of the structured flow of consciousness and the qualitative sense of duration.²¹ This dual perspective helps us grasp how we perceive the ongoing present, creating a fuller, more meaningful understanding of the ever-changing reality we live in.²²
James, W., The Principles of Psychology, Vol. 1, Henry Holt and Company, 1890, pp. 233–234.
Husserl, E., The Phenomenology of Internal Time-Consciousness, trans. J.S. Churchill, Indiana University Press, 1964, pp. 47–50.
Merleau-Ponty, M., Phenomenology of Perception, trans. D.A. Landes, Routledge, 2012, pp. 483–485.
Bergson, H., Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness, trans. F.L. Pogson, George Allen & Unwin, 1910, pp. 100–105.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, Harper & Row, 1990, pp. 66–67.
Heidegger, M., Being and Time, trans. J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson, Harper & Row, 1962, pp. 374–377.
Gadamer, H.-G., Truth and Method, 2nd edn, trans. J. Weinsheimer and D.G. Marshall, Continuum, 2004, pp. 269–272.
Flaherty, M.G., A Watched Pot: How We Experience Time, New York University Press, 1999, pp. 15–20.
Zimbardo, P.G., and Boyd, J.N., The Time Paradox: The New Psychology of Time That Will Change Your Life, Free Press, 2008, pp. 77–82.
Kabat-Zinn, J., Wherever You Go, There You Are: Mindfulness Meditation in Everyday Life, Hyperion, 1994, pp. 25–30.
Bishop, S.R., et al., ‘Mindfulness: A Proposed Operational Definition’, Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, vol. 11, no. 3, 2004, pp. 230–241.
Chapter 5: Causality in a Changist Universe
In the changist model of the universe, causality is redefined as a process occurring entirely within the present moment, eliminating the need to reference past or future events. This perspective posits that reality is a continuous flow of change, where the present is the only temporal reality. The foundational elements of this model are:
Mass/Energy (Matter): The substrate of reality, encompassing all physical entities and their potential for transformation.
Logos (Rational Order or Form): The inherent rational structure governing the cosmos, guiding the process of change.
Change (Dynamis): The driving force of transformation, actualizing potentialities within matter.
These elements are interconnected and coexist within the present moment. Logos directs how change unfolds, while mass/energy provides the medium through which change manifests.
1. Causality as a Unified Process in the Present
Causality is understood as a structural connection between simultaneous states within the present. Instead of viewing cause and effect as sequential events spread across time, they are seen as coexisting facets of a single, unified process of change¹. For example, the striking of a match and its ignition are simultaneous aspects of one transformation occurring in the present. This approach eliminates the necessity of invoking past events causing future effects, embedding the entire causal process within the dynamics of the present moment.
2. The Present Moment as the Nexus of Potentialities
The present moment contains all the potentialities for transformation. Each entity possesses inherent possibilities (potentiality) and their realization (actuality)². Change is the actualization of these potentials within entities. When a glass falls and shatters, the conditions enabling its breaking — gravitational force, structural fragility, kinetic energy — are all present simultaneously. The shattering is an immediate actualization of present potentials³. Thus, causality becomes the unfolding of potential within the present, without reliance on past or future events.
3. Causality as Intrinsic Tension and Becoming
The driving force of causality is the intrinsic tension within the present between what exists and what can potentially arise. This tension reflects a constant state of becoming, where entities are perpetually actualizing their potentials⁴. Change is fundamental and always aligned with the rational order of the universe. The transition from one state to another is guided by logos, ensuring order and consistency in the process of becoming. Mass/energy, logos, and change interact within this intrinsic tension to bring about transformation.
4. The Role of Logos and Law-like Regularities
Logos represents the rational structure of the cosmos, imposing order on change and resulting in consistent, observable patterns⁵. These law-like regularities allow for the prediction of outcomes based on present conditions. For instance, understanding that fire causes combustion is based on recognizing immediate transformations governed by the structure of the universe, not on metaphysical links between past and future⁶. Logos ensures that all change happens within the framework of the cosmic rational order, maintaining coherence in the continuous flux.
5. Reconceiving Time, Memory, and Anticipation
In this model, time is reconceived as a measure of change rather than a dimension through which events progress. The concepts of past and future are considered mental constructs existing within the present consciousness⁷. Memory allows for the retention of patterns of change, while anticipation enables the projection of potential outcomes based on current conditions⁸. Thus, causality is experienced as the continuous actualization of these patterns within the present, grounded in the immediate “now.”
6. Continuous Becoming in a Changist Universe
The universe is viewed as a process of continuous becoming, where reality is not composed of static entities but is an ever-changing flow⁹. Each present moment contains the seeds of its own transformation, allowing for a seamless flow of existence. The river analogy illustrates this concept: the river’s identity lies not in the individual water molecules but in the flow itself, symbolizing how the universe operates as a constant process of change¹⁰.
7. Causality as the Unity of Process
Causality is understood as a unified process occurring within the present moment. The interplay between mass/energy, logos, and change ensures coherent transformation and maintains the rational order of the cosmos¹¹. This holistic view rejects the fragmentation of events into discrete causes and effects spread across time. Instead, it embraces a perspective where reality is a singular, dynamic process, and causality is the constant becoming of existence itself.
Escohotado, A. (1992) Realidad y Substancia. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, pp. 85–87.
Aristotle, Metaphysics, trans. W.D. Ross. Oxford: Clarendon Press, Book IX.
Heidegger, M. (1962) Being and Time, trans. J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson. New York: Harper & Row, pp. 377–379.
Whitehead, A.N. (1929) Process and Reality. New York: Macmillan, pp. 23–24.
Escohotado, A. (1992) Realidad y Substancia. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, pp. 89–91.
Hume, D. (1748) An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. London: A. Millar, Section VII.
Husserl, E. (1991) On the Phenomenology of the Consciousness of Internal Time (1893–1917), trans. J.B. Brough. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 76–78.
Bergson, H. (1910) Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness, trans. F.L. Pogson. London: George Allen & Unwin, pp. 125–128.
Escohotado, A. (1992) Realidad y Substancia. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, pp. 93–95.
Heraclitus, Fragments, in Early Greek Philosophy, ed. and trans. J. Barnes. London: Penguin Books, 1987.
Aristotle, Physics, trans. R.P. Hardie and R.K. Gaye, in The Complete Works of Aristotle, ed. J. Barnes. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984.
Chapter 6: Form and the Dynamics of the Cosmos
In Aristotle’s philosophy, form provides structure, shape, and intelligibility to matter.¹ In this presentist model, logos, representing the laws of physics, serves as the form of the cosmos.² Logos, embodied in principles like thermodynamics, relativity, and quantum mechanics, dictates how the universe behaves and evolves, much as form determines the structure and function of natural objects.³
Mass and energy, analogous to Aristotle’s concept of matter, are the substrate that logos shapes.⁴ Einstein’s equation E=mc² illustrates the deep interchangeability of mass and energy, showing that they are two aspects of the same underlying reality.⁵ Mass is a concentrated form of energy, and energy can manifest as motion, light, heat, and other dynamic processes.⁶ In this sense, matter in Aristotelian terms aligns with the mass-energy of the cosmos.⁷ The laws of physics, as logos, guide how this mass-energy transforms into the diverse structures we observe — from subatomic particles to planets, stars, and living organisms.⁸
In Aristotle’s framework, change is the movement from potentiality to actuality.⁹ In this presentist model, change becomes the dynamism that allows mass-energy to transition from one state to another under the direction of logos.¹⁰ The relationship between mass and energy plays a crucial role in determining dynamism, or how readily an object can undergo change.¹¹ For instance, pure light, or pure energy, contains more potential for motion and transformation than an inert rock, which has significant mass but little immediate potential for change.¹² In modern physics, this corresponds to the idea that energy drives change: a photon, with no rest mass and constant motion, exemplifies pure energy in action, while a massive rock, though rich in energy due to its mass, is relatively static unless acted upon by external forces.¹³
This introduces a critical relationship: the more energy with less mass an entity has, the more dynamic it is, and the more mass with less energy it has, the less dynamic.¹⁴ Thus, the balance between mass and energy directly governs the potential for change or dynamism of an object or system.¹⁵ Highly energetic, low-mass entities — like photons — are constantly in motion, exemplifying high dynamism.¹⁶ On the other hand, highly massive, low-energy objects exhibit greater inertia and resist change, embodying lower dynamism.¹⁷
Ultimately, this model of the universe describes a cosmos where logos (form) gives order to mass-energy (matter), and change (dynamis) drives the transition from potential to reality.¹⁸ The universe is in a constant state of becoming, shaped by the continuous interaction of these forces in the eternal present.¹⁹ Through this process, the cosmos evolves according to the laws of physics, which act as the form that shapes the unfolding of change, ensuring that each moment follows logically from the last, all within the dynamic flow of the present moment.²⁰
Aristotle, Metaphysics, trans. W.D. Ross, in The Complete Works of Aristotle, ed. J. Barnes, Princeton University Press, 1984, Book VII.
Heraclitus, as referenced in Kahn, C.H., The Art and Thought of Heraclitus, Cambridge University Press, 1979, pp. 45–50.
Stoeger, W.R., ‘Contemporary Physics and the Ontological Status of the Laws of Nature’, in Quantum Cosmology and the Laws of Nature, eds. R.J. Russell et al., University of Notre Dame Press, 1993, pp. 209–234.
Aristotle, Physics, trans. R.P. Hardie and R.K. Gaye, in The Complete Works of Aristotle, ed. J. Barnes, Princeton University Press, 1984, Book II.
Einstein, A., ‘Does the Inertia of a Body Depend Upon Its Energy Content?’, Annalen der Physik, vol. 18, 1905, pp. 639–641.
Feynman, R.P., The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Vol. 1, Addison-Wesley, 1964, Ch. 4.
Cohen, S.M., ‘Aristotle’s Metaphysics’, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. E.N. Zalta, 2016.
Weinberg, S., The First Three Minutes: A Modern View of the Origin of the Universe, Basic Books, 1977, pp. 44–50.
Smolin, L., The Life of the Cosmos, Oxford University Press, 1997, pp. 81–85.
Hawking, S., A Brief History of Time, Bantam Books, 1988, pp. 62–66.
Tipler, P.A., and Mosca, G., Physics for Scientists and Engineers, 6th edn, W.H. Freeman, 2008, pp. 1214–1215.
Penrose, R., The Road to Reality, Jonathan Cape, 2004, pp. 446–450.
Davies, P., The Cosmic Blueprint: New Discoveries in Nature’s Creative Ability to Order the Universe, Simon & Schuster, 1988, pp. 34–36.
Griffiths, D.J., Introduction to Electrodynamics, 3rd edn, Prentice Hall, 1999, pp. 353–355.
Misner, C.W., Thorne, K.S., and Wheeler, J.A., Gravitation, W.H. Freeman, 1973, pp. 83–86.
Whitehead, A.N., Process and Reality, Macmillan, 1929, pp. 77–80.
Heraclitus, as interpreted in Wheelwright, P., Heraclitus, Princeton University Press, 1959, pp. 70–75.
Greene, B., The Fabric of the Cosmos, Alfred A. Knopf, 2004, pp. 49–55.
Chapter 7: Mathematics as the Language of the Cosmos
Mathematics, in the Stoic framework, can be understood as a profound dialogue between the rational order of the universe, or logos, and human reason.¹ The cosmos operates under an inherent structure, and this logos manifests in natural phenomena, from planetary orbits to the symmetry in crystals.² These patterns exist independently of our perception, embodying the rational order that ensures the universe’s consistency.³ Humans, with their unique capacity for reason, are able to recognize, interpret, and mirror these cosmic patterns through the creation of mathematical concepts.⁴ This ability allows us to model and capture the essence of natural laws, revealing how deeply mathematics is intertwined with the rational structure of the cosmos.⁵
Mathematical truths are not inventions but discoveries that reflect the rational order inherent in the universe.⁶ When we observe natural phenomena, like the motion of planets following precise geometric paths, we uncover relationships that align with the logos.⁷ Systems like algebra and calculus, while human-made frameworks, align with deeper cosmic principles, allowing us to describe, analyze, and predict the behavior of the natural world.⁸ For instance, ancient astronomers observed the predictable paths of planets, leading to Kepler’s laws, and later, Newton’s development of mechanics and calculus to explain these motions.⁹ This shows how human reason, through mathematics, engages with the rational structure of the cosmos, enabling us to move from observation to deeper understanding and prediction.¹⁰
In this sense, mathematics is not solely a human invention nor merely the passive discovery of external truths.¹¹ It represents a continuing interaction between cosmic logos and human intellect.¹² As we uncover the mathematical truths embedded in the universe, we reveal the rationality that governs all things.¹³ Our mathematical systems, while creative expressions of human thought, are grounded in the cosmic order.¹⁴ This ongoing process of mathematical discovery exemplifies the profound connection between human intellect and the structure of the cosmos, showing that we participate in logos whenever we engage with mathematics.¹⁵
Mathematics, as the expression of logos, becomes the means by which we articulate and explore the rational structure of the cosmos.¹⁶ It allows us to describe the order that governs everything from subatomic particles to the movement of galaxies.¹⁷ As rational beings, our capacity for mathematics reflects our participation in this logos-driven order.¹⁸ Every mathematical discovery uncovers deeper aspects of the universe’s structure, advancing our understanding of its rational principles.¹⁹ Each breakthrough in mathematics reveals new layers of logos, showing that our intellectual endeavors are part of the cosmos’s unfolding rationality.²⁰
Through mathematics, we not only discover truths about the cosmos but also contribute to the realization of its logos, aligning ourselves with the ongoing evolution of the universe’s rational order.²¹
Long, A.A., Hellenistic Philosophy: Stoics, Epicureans, Sceptics, 2nd edn, University of California Press, 1986, pp. 134–135.
Cicero, On the Nature of the Gods, trans. P.G. Walsh, Oxford University Press, 1998, Book II.
Plato, Timaeus, trans. D.J. Zeyl, Hackett Publishing, 2000, pp. 29–47.
Russell, B., Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy, George Allen & Unwin, 1919, pp. 3–5.
Kline, M., Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty, Oxford University Press, 1980, pp. 1–10.
Wigner, E.P., ‘The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences’, Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 13, no. 1, 1960, pp. 1–14.
Kepler, J., New Astronomy, trans. W.H. Donahue, Cambridge University Press, 1992.
Courant, R., and Robbins, H., What Is Mathematics?, 2nd edn, Oxford University Press, 1996, pp. 1–15.
Newton, I., Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, 1687; trans. The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, University of California Press, 1999.
Hawking, S., A Brief History of Time, Bantam Books, 1988, pp. 15–25.
Kant, I., Critique of Pure Reason, trans. N.K. Smith, Macmillan, 1929, pp. 20–30.
Heidegger, M., ‘Modern Science, Metaphysics, and Mathematics’, in Basic Writings, ed. D.F. Krell, HarperCollins, 1993, pp. 267–305.
Tegmark, M., ‘The Mathematical Universe’, Foundations of Physics, vol. 38, no. 2, 2008, pp. 101–150.
Galileo, G., The Assayer, trans. S. Drake, in Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo, Anchor Books, 1957, pp. 237–238.
Proclus, A Commentary on the First Book of Euclid’s Elements, trans. G.R. Morrow, Princeton University Press, 1992, pp. 38–40.
Pythagoras, as referenced in Heath, T.L., A History of Greek Mathematics, Vol. 1, Oxford University Press, 1921, pp. 72–73.
Einstein, A., Ideas and Opinions, trans. S. Bargmann, Crown Publishers, 1954, pp. 274–275.
Penrose, R., The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe, Jonathan Cape, 2004, pp. 3–5.
Dirac, P.A.M., The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, 4th edn, Oxford University Press, 1958, pp. 3–4.
Chandrasekhar, S., Truth and Beauty: Aesthetics and Motivations in Science, University of Chicago Press, 1987, pp. 57–60.
Davies, P., The Mind of God: The Scientific Basis for a Rational World, Simon & Schuster, 1992, pp. 169–172.
Chapter 8: Relativity and the Ever-Present Now
Time dilation demonstrates how motion and gravity influence our experience of change.¹ Just as time can seem to fly when you’re engrossed in a captivating book or drag when you’re waiting impatiently, motion affects how quickly change unfolds.² For instance, an astronaut traveling near the speed of light ages more slowly than someone on Earth because their biological processes — their experience of change — occur at a reduced rate.³ Similarly, gravitational fields impact change: a clock closer to Earth’s surface, where gravity is stronger, ticks more slowly than one placed in orbit.⁴ These effects reveal that the rate of change is relative — it depends on factors like motion and gravity — but all change still transpires within the present moment.
To better understand this concept, we can envision the universe not as a timeline stretching from past to future but as a Space-Change Continuum.⁵ Space is defined by dimensions — length, width, and height — but instead of time being the fourth dimension, the fundamental process that drives reality is change.⁶ Imagine reality as a film projected onto a screen, where the projector’s light always shines on the present frame.⁷ The previous frames are stored as memories, and the future frames are possibilities yet to be actualized. The action — the unfolding story — always happens now.
Interpreting Einstein’s theory of relativity through this lens suggests that at high velocities or in strong gravitational fields, it’s not time itself that stretches but the rate at which change occurs that decreases.⁸ A fast-moving spaceship’s clock ticks more slowly than one on Earth because the processes causing the clock to tick are changing more slowly.⁹ Likewise, change unfolds slightly slower on Earth’s surface than it does for GPS satellites in orbit due to gravitational differences.¹⁰ Yet, regardless of these variations, everything still happens in the present.¹¹ Whether clocks tick slower in space or astronauts age differently, all change unfolds now, reinforcing the idea that only the present exists.
This perspective also offers a fresh interpretation of causality. Drawing from Aristotelian philosophy, every object or system possesses potentialities — inherent possibilities — and change is the actualization of these potentials.¹² Consider a ball rolling down a hill. The ball moves because of gravity and inertia, but it’s not moving through time; it’s changing its position in space at this moment.¹³ Its potential energy at the top transforms into kinetic energy as it rolls, all occurring now.¹⁴ Causality, then, is the structured unfolding of change in the present, not a chain of events stretched over time.
By embracing the Space-Change Continuum, we address paradoxes associated with the block universe model, which posits that past, present, and future all coexist simultaneously, like slices of a loaf of bread.¹⁵ Such a model raises challenging questions: If all moments are equally real, how do we experience change?¹⁶ How can cause and effect make sense if everything is fixed?¹⁷ In contrast, viewing change as fundamental to reality allows us to understand cause and effect as structured transformations unfolding in the present according to the laws governing each entity.
Remarkably, Einstein’s equations remain valid within this framework.¹⁸ The same mathematical descriptions apply because they accurately capture how different observers experience varying rates of change due to motion and gravity.¹⁹ There’s no need to conceptualize time as a separate dimension; we can interpret these effects as variations in the rate of change, maintaining the predictive power of relativity without conflicting with a presentist viewpoint.²⁰
By integrating Radical Presentism with modern physics, we validate both our lived experience of an ever-changing present and the scientific observations that describe the universe.²¹ Philosophical insights from thinkers like Aristotle find their place in this model, offering a coherent understanding that reconciles how we perceive reality with how it behaves under scientific scrutiny.²²
So, what does this mean for our understanding of the universe? It suggests that we exist entirely in the now. Only the present is real — constantly unfolding and changing — and time is merely a tool we use to measure that change, not a dimension we traverse.²³ Our universe is dynamic, with objects and systems evolving according to their intrinsic nature and the laws that govern them, all within the present moment.²⁴
By reimagining time as change and adopting the Space-Change Continuum, we gain a new perspective on the universe — one that is dynamic, coherent, and deeply connected to both our experience and the laws of physics.²⁵ It’s fascinating to consider that each moment is a fresh creation, a new configuration of the universe happening right now. This perspective invites us to fully engage with each unfolding moment, enhancing our appreciation of reality itself.²⁶
Einstein, A., ‘On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies’, Annalen der Physik, vol. 17, 1905, pp. 891–921.
Rovelli, C., The Order of Time, Penguin Books, 2018, pp. 10–15.
Thorne, K.S., Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein’s Outrageous Legacy, W.W. Norton, 1994, pp. 166–170.
Ashby, N., ‘Relativity and the Global Positioning System’, Physics Today, vol. 55, no. 5, 2002, pp. 41–47.
Price, H., Time’s Arrow and Archimedes’ Point, Oxford University Press, 1996, pp. 20–25.
Barbour, J., The End of Time: The Next Revolution in Physics, Oxford University Press, 1999, pp. 1–5.
Augustine, Confessions, Book XI, trans. H. Chadwick, Oxford University Press, 1991.
Einstein, A., Relativity: The Special and the General Theory, trans. R.W. Lawson, 1920.
Misner, C.W., Thorne, K.S., and Wheeler, J.A., Gravitation, W.H. Freeman, 1973, pp. 168–175.
Aristotle, Physics, trans. R.P. Hardie and R.K. Gaye, in The Complete Works of Aristotle, ed. J. Barnes, Princeton University Press, 1984.
Halliday, D., Resnick, R., and Walker, J., Fundamentals of Physics, 10th edn, Wiley, 2013, pp. 144–150.
Minkowski, H., ‘Space and Time’, in The Principle of Relativity, Dover Publications, 1952, pp. 75–91.
McTaggart, J.M.E., ‘The Unreality of Time’, Mind, vol. 17, no. 68, 1908, pp. 457–474.
Prior, A.N., Past, Present and Future, Oxford University Press, 1967.
Dieks, D., ‘Time in Special Relativity and Its Philosophical Significance’, Philosophy of Science, vol. 55, no. 3, 1988, pp. 456–460.
Craig, W.L., Time and the Metaphysics of Relativity, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.
Lowe, E.J., A Survey of Metaphysics, Oxford University Press, 2002, pp. 100–105.
Callender, C., ‘Is Time an Illusion?’, Scientific American, vol. 302, no. 6, 2010, pp. 58–65.
Aristotle, Metaphysics, trans. W.D. Ross, in The Complete Works of Aristotle, ed. J. Barnes, Princeton University Press, 1984.
Eckhart, M., The Essential Sermons, Commentaries, Treatises, and Defense, trans. E. Colledge and B. McGinn, Paulist Press, 1981.
Chapter 9: Expanding the Space-Change Continuum to Quantum Phenomena
In quantum mechanics, the concept of the Space-Change Continuum (SCC) can be extended, where change — rather than time — acts as the fundamental dimension. At the quantum level, we encounter phenomena that seem strange or counterintuitive, but when viewed through the SCC, they become clearer.
For instance, quantum superposition describes how particles can exist in multiple states at once.¹ In this framework, these multiple states are potentialities contained within the present moment. The actualization of one state, or the collapse of the wavefunction, occurs through measurement — a change that happens in the now.² Rather than imagining the evolution of these quantum states over time, the SCC focuses on the present moment, where potentialities become actualities without the need for a past or future. Take the double-slit experiment as an example: before detection, an electron has the potential to pass through both slits, but the moment it’s observed, its position is determined.³ The electron’s transition from possibility to reality happens entirely in the present, reflecting a change in the system without invoking a timeline.
Entanglement, where two particles remain connected such that a change in one instantly affects the other, fits naturally within this presentist view.⁴ In traditional physics, entanglement raises questions about faster-than-light communication, but in the SCC, entangled particles exist as a unified system within the present. Changes happen across both particles simultaneously, without the need for signals traveling between them.⁵ There’s no paradox because these changes occur within the continuous present, not across time, eliminating any conflicts with causality or the speed of light. If two entangled photons are sent to distant locations, measuring one immediately influences the other’s state — not through the transmission of information, but as an instantaneous change within the unified present system.⁶
This approach aligns well with David Bohm’s interpretation of quantum mechanics, particularly his idea of the quantum potential, a guiding field that influences how particles behave.⁷ In Bohmian mechanics, particles always have definite positions but are influenced by a deeper, underlying order that connects all parts of the system.⁸ This quantum potential can be seen as the form guiding how potentialities are actualized through change, consistent with Aristotle’s notion of form shaping matter.⁹ In the SCC, the quantum potential represents the form that governs the present changes in particles, focusing on how these changes occur without invoking a temporal dimension.
For example, when an electron moves, it does so under the guidance of the quantum potential.¹⁰ The potentialities inherent in the system are actualized in the present moment, meaning that the electron’s movement isn’t a process of evolving over time but a present shift in position, shaped by the quantum potential.
The SCC framework also offers a new way to think about quantum uncertainty. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle tells us that we cannot simultaneously know both the exact position and momentum of a particle.¹¹ In the SCC, these uncertainties are not due to any temporal constraints but reflect the range of potentialities within the present moment. Measurement actualizes one of these possibilities, representing a change in the present.¹² There’s no need for a timeline to explain this uncertainty — it’s simply the present potential of the system being actualized.
When applied to quantum field theory, the SCC takes quantum fields, which describe particles as excitations in underlying fields, and interprets these fields as the forms that govern change.¹³ These fields, much like Aristotelian forms, dictate how particles behave and interact. Changes in these fields occur entirely within the present moment, without requiring the fields to evolve over time. For example, the creation or annihilation of particles through interactions in quantum field theory is a change in the present state of the field, actualizing potentialities in real-time.¹⁴
The SCC provides a unified way of understanding quantum phenomena that also resolves paradoxes. By focusing on change rather than time, we avoid issues related to time travel or retrocausality in quantum mechanics. Causality is preserved because it is understood as the actualization of potentialities in the present, maintaining a logical and coherent structure across both classical and quantum physics.¹⁵
For instance, the measurement problem in quantum mechanics, which raises questions about when and how a quantum system transitions from a superposition to a definite state, is resolved in the SCC.¹⁶ Rather than imagining the wavefunction evolving over time, the measurement is seen as a change happening in the present. There’s no ambiguity about when the wavefunction collapses; it happens now, when the system interacts with the measuring device, actualizing a specific potentiality.
This reinterpretation also tackles the issue of non-locality in quantum mechanics. Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) famously highlighted this puzzle in 1935, dubbing it “spooky action at a distance.”¹⁷ They argued that if quantum mechanics were a complete theory, it would imply non-local interactions that violate the principle of locality in relativity, which insists that nothing can influence something else faster than the speed of light. The SCC resolves this by recognizing that, in a unified present, changes do not need to be transmitted across distances or time. When two entangled particles are observed, the change happens simultaneously in the present, without the need for faster-than-light communication.¹⁸
Quantum entanglement describes a phenomenon where two or more particles become intertwined, so that the state of one instantaneously affects the state of the other(s), regardless of the distance separating them.¹⁹ This means that when a measurement is made on one particle, the outcome influences the measurement on the other, suggesting a deep connection that transcends spatial distance. These non-local correlations between entangled particles defy classical explanations, as they cannot be accounted for by local hidden variables.²⁰ The effect appears to be instantaneous, challenging the notion that physical interactions are limited by spatial separation.
The conflict arises when considering how entanglement appears to allow for instantaneous correlations between distant particles, seemingly defying the principle of locality and causality.²¹ Causality, as understood in relativity, maintains that an effect cannot occur before its cause, and that influences cannot propagate faster than light.²² However, while entanglement suggests immediate effects over any distance, it cannot be used to transmit information faster than light, thus preserving causality in a practical sense.²³
The SCC offers a new way to view this puzzling phenomenon. In the SCC, entangled particles are not distinct entities acting across vast distances, but parts of a single, unified system that exists entirely in the present moment. When a measurement is made on one particle, the state of the entire entangled system changes instantaneously, eliminating the need for information to travel between particles.²⁴ Since the entangled system evolves as a whole in the present, there is no need for superluminal communication, and causality remains intact without violating the speed of light limitations.
This view is supported by Bell’s theorem, which demonstrates that no local hidden variable theory can replicate the predictions of quantum mechanics.²⁵ Bell’s inequalities, tested experimentally, confirm that entangled particles are connected in a way that defies classical explanations of locality.²⁶ Experiments like Alain Aspect’s tests in 1982 and more recent studies that have closed loopholes in the detection process have provided overwhelming evidence for the non-local nature of quantum entanglement.²⁷ These experiments reveal violations of Bell’s inequalities, strengthening the case for quantum non-locality, where entanglement reflects deeper connections across the universe, unaccounted for by traditional local theories.
Quantum field theory also aligns with this non-locality, treating particles as excitations of quantum fields that permeate space.²⁸ Entanglement, in this context, can be seen as correlations within these fields, inherently non-local by nature. Importantly, while entanglement exhibits non-local correlations, it does not violate relativity since no usable information is transmitted faster than light, maintaining compatibility with the theory.²⁹
The SCC introduces a philosophical perspective of relational holism. In this view, the universe is fundamentally interconnected, and the relations between parts are as significant as the parts themselves.³⁰ The properties of entangled systems are not reducible to individual particles but are defined by the relationships within the present moment. Rather than thinking of entangled particles as separate, distant entities, the SCC suggests they are components of a single quantum system, evolving together as part of a unified present reality.
An analogy that helps clarify this concept is to imagine a pair of gloves, one left-handed and one right-handed, placed in separate boxes and sent to different locations.³¹ Upon opening one box and finding the left glove, you immediately know the other box contains the right glove. No information has traveled between the boxes — your knowledge arises from the initial correlation between the gloves. In the case of quantum particles, however, the analogy is more complex: unlike gloves, quantum particles do not have predetermined states. The act of measurement changes the state of the entire system in the present moment, not just the observed particle.³²
Mathematically, this is represented by the quantum state of entangled particles. For instance, in a singlet state, two particles might exist in a superposition where their spins are opposite but undefined until measured.³³ Upon measuring the spin of one particle, the state of the entire system is altered, resulting in a definite state for both particles. This change happens in the present moment, without any conflict with causality, as no information transfer between the particles occurs faster than light.
Experimental evidence continues to support this presentist view. Entanglement swapping experiments, where the entangled state is transferred or swapped between particles, occur without detectable delay, suggesting simultaneous changes in the present.³⁴ Wheeler’s delayed-choice experiments further reinforce this by showing that measurement choices seem to retroactively determine a particle’s state, but from the SCC perspective, these changes happen in the present moment, bypassing any paradoxes about retrocausality.³⁵
Recent satellite-based experiments, where entanglement was tested over distances exceeding 1,200 kilometers, also support the notion of instantaneous change within the present.³⁶ The success of these experiments across such vast distances, without measurable time delays, aligns with the idea that entangled systems change as unified entities within the present continuum.
This view might seem like a reintroduction of non-locality, but within the SCC, non-locality is not problematic. Since space and change are the primary dimensions in the SCC, and the present moment encompasses the entire system, no signal or information is transmitted during these instantaneous changes.³⁷ Quantum mechanics’ no-signaling theorem remains intact because no information is being transmitted faster than light; the change simply reflects the natural evolution of the entangled system in the present.³⁸
Philosophically, this idea resonates with relational quantum mechanics, which holds that the properties of quantum systems are relative to other systems, and there are no absolute states.³⁹ The SCC reinforces this by emphasizing the relational aspect of entangled systems, existing only in the present. This aligns with Bohmian mechanics, where the quantum potential guides particles in a non-local manner, and the SCC provides a framework where this potential acts as the form guiding present change, resulting in instantaneous state updates without violating causality.⁴⁰
The SCC offers a compelling interpretation of quantum entanglement, one that eliminates conflicts with causality and preserves the speed of light limitations. Changes occur within the unified present moment, ensuring that entanglement remains a reflection of the universe’s interconnectedness rather than a challenge to physical laws. This framework not only addresses longstanding paradoxes but also encourages a more holistic view of reality, where quantum mechanics and relativity can be unified under the principle that change in the present is the fundamental process driving the evolution of systems.
In sum, by expanding the Space-Change Continuum to encompass quantum phenomena, we provide a coherent framework that integrates both classical and quantum physics. Whether dealing with superposition, entanglement, or quantum fields, the SCC shows that change in the present moment is the fundamental process driving reality. Quantum mechanics and the SCC align seamlessly, demonstrating that potentialities and their actualization through change govern the behavior of the universe, both at the smallest and largest scales.
Griffiths, D.J., Introduction to Quantum Mechanics, 2nd edn, Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005, pp. 160–161.
Dirac, P.A.M., The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, 4th edn, Oxford University Press, 1958, pp. 46–47.
Feynman, R.P., Leighton, R.B., and Sands, M., The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Vol. 3, Addison-Wesley, 1965, Ch. 1.
Schrödinger, E., ‘Discussion of Probability Relations between Separated Systems’, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, vol. 31, 1935, pp. 555–563.
Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., and Rosen, N., ‘Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?’, Physical Review, vol. 47, 1935, pp. 777–780.
Aspect, A., Grangier, P., and Roger, G., ‘Experimental Tests of Realistic Local Theories via Bell’s Theorem’, Physical Review Letters, vol. 47, 1981, pp. 460–463.
Bohm, D., Quantum Theory, Dover Publications, 1989, pp. 167–177.
Bohm, D., and Hiley, B.J., The Undivided Universe: An Ontological Interpretation of Quantum Theory, Routledge, 1993, Ch. 6.
Aristotle, Metaphysics, trans. W.D. Ross, in The Complete Works of Aristotle, ed. J. Barnes, Princeton University Press, 1984.
Holland, P.R., The Quantum Theory of Motion: An Account of the de Broglie-Bohm Causal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, Cambridge University Press, 1993, pp. 214–216.
Heisenberg, W., ‘Über den anschaulichen Inhalt der quantentheoretischen Kinematik und Mechanik’, Zeitschrift für Physik, vol. 43, 1927, pp. 172–198.
Jammer, M., The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics, John Wiley & Sons, 1974, pp. 66–70.
Peskin, M.E., and Schroeder, D.V., An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory, Addison-Wesley, 1995, Ch. 2.
Weinberg, S., The Quantum Theory of Fields, Vol. 1, Cambridge University Press, 1995, pp. 54–58.
Maudlin, T., Quantum Non-Locality and Relativity, 3rd edn, Wiley-Blackwell, 2011, pp. 21–24.
Schlosshauer, M., Decoherence and the Quantum-to-Classical Transition, Springer, 2007, Ch. 2.
Bell, J.S., ‘On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox’, Physics Physique Fizika, vol. 1, 1964, pp. 195–200.
Horodecki, R., Horodecki, P., Horodecki, M., and Horodecki, K., ‘Quantum entanglement’, Reviews of Modern Physics, vol. 81, 2009, pp. 865–942.
Einstein, A., Relativity: The Special and the General Theory, trans. R.W. Lawson, Crown Publishers, 1961.
Ghirardi, G., ‘Nonlocality and Locality in the Quantum Theory’, in Compendium of Quantum Physics, eds. F. Weinert et al., Springer, 2009, pp. 404–408.
Healey, R., The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: An Interactive Interpretation, Cambridge University Press, 1989, Ch. 5.
Clauser, J.F., and Shimony, A., ‘Bell’s theorem: experimental tests and implications’, Reports on Progress in Physics, vol. 41, 1978, pp. 1881–1927.
Aspect, A., Dalibard, J., and Roger, G., ‘Experimental test of Bell’s inequalities using time-varying analyzers’, Physical Review Letters, vol. 49, 1982, pp. 1804–1807.
Zee, A., Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell, 2nd edn, Princeton University Press, 2010, Ch. III.
Shalm, L.K., et al., ‘Strong Loophole-Free Test of Local Realism’, Physical Review Letters, vol. 115, 2015, 250402.
Esfeld, M., ‘Quantum entanglement and a metaphysics of relations’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, vol. 35, 2004, pp. 601–617.
d’Espagnat, B., Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, 2nd edn, Addison-Wesley, 1976, pp. 160–162.
Mermin, N.D., ‘Is the moon there when nobody looks? Reality and the quantum theory’, Physics Today, vol. 38, 1985, pp. 38–47.
Sakurai, J.J., and Napolitano, J., Modern Quantum Mechanics, 2nd edn, Addison-Wesley, 2011, pp. 362–364.
Pan, J.-W., et al., ‘Experimental Entanglement Swapping: Entangling Photons That Never Interacted’, Physical Review Letters, vol. 80, 1998, pp. 3891–3894.
Wheeler, J.A., ‘The “Past” and the “Delayed-Choice” Double-Slit Experiment’, in Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Theory, ed. A.R. Marlow, Academic Press, 1978, pp. 9–48.
Yin, J., et al., ‘Satellite-based entanglement distribution over 1200 kilometers’, Science, vol. 356, 2017, pp. 1140–1144.
Gisin, N., ‘Non-realism: Deep Thought or a Soft Option?’, Foundations of Physics, vol. 42, 2012, pp. 80–85.
Scarani, V., ‘The security of practical quantum key distribution’, Reviews of Modern Physics, vol. 81, 2009, pp. 1301–1350.
Rovelli, C., ‘Relational Quantum Mechanics’, International Journal of Theoretical Physics, vol. 35, 1996, pp. 1637–1678.
Chapter 10: David Bohm and the Infinite Potential of the Timeless Present
Bohm posits that the implicate order represents a hidden, underlying layer of reality where all possibilities and potential states are enfolded into an undivided wholeness containing the infinite potential for all that exists.¹ In contrast, the explicate order is the manifest world we observe, where entities appear as separate and distinct.²
In the Changist model, the implicate order corresponds to potential and then explicate order corresponds to actuality. The change from implicate to explicate always occurs in the present moment, reflecting the process by which entities unfold from potentiality to actuality. Bohm’s notion of unfolding from the implicate to the explicate order mirrors the Changist view that change is the mechanism through which an entity’s potential is actualized in the present.³ The present is not merely a point on a timeline but a boundless nexus where potentialities become real, where the implicit order of possibilities transitions into explicit reality.
Both Bohm’s theory and the Changist model suggest a continuous, dynamic flow between potentiality and actuality, all occurring within the eternal present. The present moment is where latent potentials from the implicate order manifest as explicate order, with change driving this unfolding process. Bohm’s concept of the implicate order, with its infinite potential, supports the Changist assertion that reality is in a constant state of becoming, propelled by the unfolding of potential into actual form.⁴
The Eternal Present: Wholeness and the Holomovement
Bohm introduces the concept of the holomovement, the fundamental and undivided movement underlying both the implicate and explicate orders.⁵ This notion aligns with the Changist model’s concept of the eternal present. For Bohm, the holomovement is a continuous process that drives the unfolding of the implicate order into the explicate order, embodying the flow of becoming.⁶ Reality is thus not static but perpetually in flux.
Similarly, the Changist model describes the present moment as a dynamic space-change continuum, where change is constant and entities continuously actualize their potential. Bohm’s holomovement reinforces this idea by suggesting that the present moment contains all the potential for future states, actualized through structured change.⁷ There is no need for the past or future as separate dimensions; instead, everything unfolds within the ever-changing present, propelled by the intrinsic potential of entities and guided by the rational order of the universe, or logos.
Potentiality and Actuality: Infinite Potential and Enfoldment
Bohm’s theory posits that the implicate order contains infinite potential, with the universe in its enfolded form holding all possible configurations and states.⁸ This concept parallels the Changist model’s emphasis on potentiality and actuality, echoing Aristotle’s notions where entities exist in the present with inherent potentialities — the range of possibilities they can actualize based on their nature and external conditions.⁹
Change is the mechanism that drives the actualization of these potentialities, akin to the unfolding from the implicate to the explicate order in Bohm’s framework. In both models, change is not a linear progression through time but a continuous unfolding of potential within the present moment. Every entity contains multiple potential states, and through interactions with the environment and according to their intrinsic nature, these states are actualized. Bohm’s idea of enfoldment clarifies how potentialities in the present moment become manifest without invoking past or future; they unfold continuously in the eternal present through change.¹⁰
Logos and the Holomovement: Rational Order in Change
In the Changist model, logos represents the rational order or form that governs how entities change and actualize their potential. This concept aligns with Bohm’s holomovement, which ensures the wholeness and coherence of the universe.¹¹ The holomovement is not random but structured, guiding the unfolding of potentialities in an orderly and consistent manner.¹² This structured wholeness ensures that the transition from the implicate to the explicate order follows rational patterns.
Similarly, in the Changist model, logos embodies the laws of physics and the inherent structure of the universe that governs change. The interaction between mass/energy and logos ensures that change follows predictable patterns, even in complex systems. Just as Bohm’s holomovement provides structure and order to the unfolding of the implicate order, logos in the Changist model offers the framework within which potentiality is actualized, ensuring that change happens coherently in the present moment.¹³
Simultaneity and Nonlocality: Causality in the Present
The Changist model redefines causality as a process occurring entirely within the present moment, eliminating the need for past events to cause future outcomes. This view is reinforced by Bohm’s interpretation of quantum nonlocality, which reveals the interconnectedness of all events.¹⁴ In Bohm’s interpretation of quantum mechanics, nonlocality suggests that distant particles or events can influence each other instantaneously, without temporal mediation.¹⁵ This points to a deeper wholeness where all events are interconnected within the implicate order.
In the Changist model, cause and effect are understood as simultaneous aspects of the same process, rather than sequential events spread across time. For example, the striking of a match and its ignition are coexistent facets of one transformation occurring in the present. Bohm’s concept of nonlocality strengthens the idea that causality is an immediate, interconnected process, not a series of distinct events unfolding over time.¹⁶ Both models assert that the present is the only reality, with all causal relationships being part of a unified whole, unfolding through change.
Causality as a Continuous Flow of Becoming
Both Bohm’s theory and the Changist model depict reality as a continuous process of becoming. Bohm’s holomovement sustains all existence, with the explicate order continuously arising from and returning to the implicate order.¹⁷ In the Changist model, reality is a constant process of change, where entities perpetually actualize their potential. The present moment holds the seeds of future changes, and the universe is in a state of continuous transformation.
This shared view of continuous becoming underscores the dynamic nature of both models, where the holomovement and the process of change drive the evolution of entities in a structured, coherent manner. The present is the point of actualization, where both potentiality and causality converge in the flow of becoming.
Time as a Measurement of Change, Not a Dimension
In both Bohm’s framework and the Changist model, time is not a fundamental dimension of reality but rather a tool for tracking the rate of change. Bohm suggests that time emerges as a secondary phenomenon from the unfolding of the implicate order into the explicate order.¹⁸ It is not intrinsic to the underlying reality but a way to describe how processes unfold.
Similarly, the Changist model views time as a measurement system designed to track the rate at which changes occur. Time does not represent a dimension through which events flow but is a human construct that helps us quantify and structure change. Both models emphasize that reality is driven by change, with time serving as a secondary tool for measuring and organizing these changes, rather than as an independent, fundamental aspect of the universe.¹⁹
Bohm’s Theories Supporting the Changist Model
David Bohm’s concepts of the implicate and explicate orders, infinite potential, and the holomovement provide a profound foundation supporting the Changist model. Both frameworks emphasize that change is the fundamental driver of reality, with time serving only as a secondary tool for measuring change. The present moment is where potentialities are actualized, and the deeper implicate order unfolds into actuality. This shared view of a continuous process of becoming, where causality is immediate and interconnected, aligns with the Changist assertion that the universe operates as a dynamic continuum of change.
In both Bohm’s philosophy and the Changist model, logos, representing the rational order of the universe, ensures that change follows structured patterns. Reality unfolds within the eternal present, driven not by time but by the dynamic interplay of potentiality and actualization. This philosophical and scientific alignment between Bohm’s theories and the Changist model strengthens the metaphysical framework that positions change — not time — as the core of the universe’s operation.²⁰
D. Bohm, Wholeness and the Implicate Order (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980).
Aristotle, Metaphysics, trans. W.D. Ross (Oxford: Clarendon Press), Book IX.
Changism 2: The Bewitchment of Language in Physics
Time as a Measure of Change
44 min read
·
Oct 12, 2024
Thermodynamics and Classical Mechanics: Measuring Motion and Entropy
Linguistic Entrapment: How Language Shapes Scientific Understanding
Apendix B: The Space-Change Continuum: Replacing Time with Change
Apendix C: The Goddesses of Change: Kali and Persephone as Embodiments of Entropy and Self-Organization
The concept of time has long been a cornerstone in physics, intricately woven into theories that aim to unravel the fabric of reality. Traditionally conceived as the elusive “fourth dimension,” time is often treated as a tangible entity that flows uniformly, akin to the three spatial dimensions (Barbour 1999). This perception has been profoundly influenced by historical developments and the language used to describe them, potentially conflating metaphor with reality.
However, a closer examination of how time is utilized in science, particularly in physics, reveals a different picture. Time, as employed by scientists, is fundamentally a system of measurement based on cyclical processes. Units of time such as seconds and days are defined by counting repetitions of periodic phenomena. For instance, a second is defined by a specific number of oscillations of radiation corresponding to the transition between energy levels in a cesium-133 atom:
1
second=9,192,631,770 cycles of radiation of the cesium-133 atom
(BIPM 2019).
Similarly, a day is determined by one complete rotation of the Earth on its axis. In essence, these units are derived from counting cycles of recurring events. When physicists incorporate time into their equations, they are comparing rates of change in processes to these standard cycles, effectively measuring how one process unfolds relative to another (Rovelli 2018). This practice underscores that time, in scientific terms, is a tool for quantifying change rather than an independent entity.
Time as a Parameter of Change Across Physics
Across all branches of physics — from classical mechanics to relativity and quantum mechanics — time consistently appears in equations as a parameter for quantifying rates of change. In classical mechanics, time measures how positions and velocities of objects change, as seen in Newton’s laws of motion (Newton 1687). In quantum mechanics, time acts as an external parameter governing the evolution of quantum states (Sakurai and Napolitano 2017). Even in Einstein’s theory of relativity, where time and space are supposed to be intertwined, time functions to describe how processes vary relative to different frames of reference, not as a traversable dimension (Einstein 1916).
The Absence of Time as a Traversable Dimension
Notably, there is no experimental evidence supporting the notion of time as a traversable dimension. Experiments demonstrating time dilation — such as those involving particle accelerators or precise atomic clocks on GPS satellites — measure variations in the rate at which processes occur under different conditions like velocity or gravitational strength (Hafele and Keating 1972; Ashby 2003). These observations reflect changes in processes, not movement through a temporal dimension. The so-called “time dilation” is better understood as a discrepancy in the rate of change between two systems due to relative motion or gravitational potential, aligning with the view that time measures change.
The Changist Model: Redefining Time
The Changist model of the cosmos challenges the entrenched notion of time as an independent dimension by positing that time is a system invented to measure and compare rates of change in the universe. This perspective resonates with Ludwig Wittgenstein’s assertion that philosophical problems often arise from the “bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language” (Wittgenstein 1953, §109). In physics, language shapes our understanding to such an extent that metaphors become mistaken for literal truths, obscuring the dynamic nature of reality.
In the Changist model, the universe is conceived as a space-change continuum, where change is the fundamental process driving all phenomena. Time becomes a numerical system devised to measure the rate at which changes occur, akin to how units like meters measure spatial dimensions. This aligns with operational definitions in physics, where time units are based on counting cycles of repetitive processes, such as atomic vibrations or planetary rotations (BIPM 2019).
The Space-Change Continuum offers a way to reconcile relativity with the idea that only the present moment exists. Relativistic effects like time dilation can be reinterpreted as changes occurring at different rates due to motion and gravity, all within a dynamic, ever-changing present (Rovelli 2018). This perspective maintains the predictive power of relativity while eliminating the need to treat time as a physical dimension, aligning with the empirical role of time in scientific practice.
The Power of Language in Shaping Scientific Concepts
Language is a double-edged sword in scientific discourse: it is essential for articulating complex ideas but can impose limitations through ingrained metaphors and colloquialisms (Lakoff and Johnson 1980). Phrases like “time flows” or “passage of time” permeate everyday language and scientific literature, reinforcing the notion of time as a flowing medium (Fraser 2007). Such linguistic constructs can lead to conceptual misunderstandings, where time is reified into a physical entity rather than recognized as a measurement tool.
In physics, terms like “time dilation” and “spacetime continuum” further entrench the dimensional view of time (Einstein 1916). While these terms are mathematically convenient and empirically predictive, they may inadvertently suggest that time is a dimension through which objects move, similar to spatial dimensions. This linguistic framing can hinder the exploration of alternative models that might offer deeper insights into the nature of reality.
Philosophical and Linguistic Foundations
The Changist perspective draws from both philosophical insights and linguistic analysis. Henri Bergson critiqued the spatialization of time, advocating for an understanding of time in terms of duration and immediate experience rather than as a dimension (Bergson 1910). Wittgenstein highlighted how linguistic confusion leads to philosophical quandaries, directly applicable to the interpretation of time in physics (Wittgenstein 1953). By examining the language used in scientific theories, Changism identifies how metaphors and linguistic habits have solidified certain concepts, potentially hindering the development of more accurate models.
Purpose and Structure of the Article
This article aims to dissect the linguistic and conceptual underpinnings of time in physics, demonstrating how language has influenced our perception and interpretation of temporal concepts. By tracing the historical evolution from Newtonian mechanics to modern theories, we will illustrate how the notion of time as a dimension became entrenched.
We will critically examine key areas:
Historical Context: The development of the concept of absolute time in Newtonian mechanics and its reformulation in Einstein’s relativity.
Time as a Parameter of Change: How time functions in quantum mechanics, classical mechanics, and thermodynamics, consistently serving as a measure of change rather than a dimension.
Experimental Evidence: Highlighting the lack of empirical support for time as a traversable dimension, emphasizing that observed relativistic effects reflect changes in rates of processes.
Linguistic Influence: Exploring how language shapes and potentially distorts scientific concepts, drawing from philosophical critiques.
Redefining Temporal Terminology: Proposing a redefinition of temporal terminology to enhance linguistic precision and conceptual clarity.
Changism as a Cohesive Framework: Presenting the Changist model as a paradigm that emphasizes change over time, aligning with scientific observations and logical reasoning.
By addressing these areas, the article seeks to foster a more accurate understanding of time, free from linguistic bewitchment, and promote a conceptual shift with significant implications for physics and philosophy alike. Ultimately, we aim to answer the question: What exactly is time according to how the concept is used in science, especially physics? By revealing time as a measure of change based on cyclical processes, we align our understanding with both scientific practice and the dynamic nature of reality.
References:
Ashby, N. (2003). “Relativity in the Global Positioning System.” Living Reviews in Relativity, 6(1). DOI: 10.12942/lrr-2003–1.
Barbour, J. (1999). The End of Time: The Next Revolution in Physics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bergson, H. (1910). Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness. Translated by F. L. Pogson. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM). (2019). The International System of Units (SI). 9th edn. Sèvres: BIPM.
Einstein, A. (1916). “The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity.” Annalen der Physik, 49(7), 769–822.
Fraser, J. T. (2007). Time and Time Again: Reports from a Boundary of the Universe. Leiden: Brill.
Hafele, J. C., and Keating, R. E. (1972). “Around-the-World Atomic Clocks: Observed Relativistic Time Gains.” Science, 177(4044), 168–170.
Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Newton, I. (1687). Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica. London: Royal Society.
Rovelli, C. (2018). The Order of Time. Translated by E. Segre and S. Carnell. New York: Riverhead Books.
Sakurai, J. J., and Napolitano, J. (2017). Modern Quantum Mechanics. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Blackwell.
Chapter 2: Newton’s Equations
In the framework of classical mechanics established by Sir Isaac Newton, time is conceived as absolute, true, and mathematical, flowing uniformly regardless of the external universe (Newton 1687). Newton articulates this in his Principia Mathematica:
“Absolute, true, and mathematical time, of itself, and from its own nature, flows equably without relation to anything external…” (Newton 1687, p. 6).
This conception positions time as an independent backdrop against which all physical events occur, separate from the spatial dimensions and unaffected by the material contents of the universe.
The Characteristics of Newtonian Time
Uniform Flow: Time progresses at a constant rate, identical for all observers, regardless of their state of motion or position in space.
Independence from Matter: Time exists independently of the physical processes happening within it; it is not influenced by matter or energy.
Universal Synchronization: Clocks everywhere in the universe can, in principle, be synchronized to this absolute time, reflecting a shared temporal reality.
However, The Actual Equations Tell a Different Story:
Newton’s Second Law of Motion:
Newton’s equation describes how the rate of change of velocity (acceleration) responds to an applied force. The term time t, as used in the equation, is understood operationally — it represents the tool by which we measure the rate at which changes in position occur, not a fundamental dimension in which objects exist or move.
Acceleration is the rate of change of velocity, which itself is the rate of change of position. Time t is the scale we use to track these changes.
t does not need to be interpreted as a flowing background through which the object moves, but simply as the yardstick for quantifying the sequence of changes in the system’s state (Occam’s Razor).
In other words, in the equation time is not viewed as a dimension that objects move through. Instead, it’s a parameter that describes the rate at which changes happen in response to forces.
Velocity:
Velocity describes how quickly the position of an object is changing. Here, t represents the measurement tool used to quantify this change in position. The operational time t tracks the rate of change in the system, but it’s not considered a dimension or a separate entity flowing alongside space.
Velocity is the ratio of change in position x compared to a standard process (tracked by the operational time t).
Time is just the parameter we use to compare how fast different things are changing. In practical terms, this means that different objects or systems have different rates of change, and time is used as the scale to express those differences.
Acceleration:
Acceleration represents how the rate of change of velocity is itself changing. Time t, again, is just a parameter that we use to keep track of this rate of change. Time does not flow; rather, the velocity of the object changes in relation to some other process, which we measure using operational time t.
Acceleration is explained as a second-order change: the velocity changes in relation to a standard measuring process, and time t is that standard for comparison.
There’s no need to invoke time as an independent, flowing dimension; instead, the focus is entirely on how changes evolve relative to some reference process.
Equations of Motion (Constant Acceleration)
The classical equations of motion, such as:
This equation describes how an object’s position changes as a result of its initial velocity and constant acceleration. The variable time t here represents the measurement tool we use to track how quickly the object’s position changes due to acceleration. The term t² appears because we’re describing how acceleration (a second-order change) affects the position.
t is understood operationally: we compare the change in position and velocity to a reference process (such as an oscillating clock), and that’s what t represents.
This equation accurately describes how the rates of change in position and velocity combine under constant acceleration. The difference is that time isn’t seen as a dimension through which the object moves, but as the scale we use to measure these changes.
Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation
In this equation, time does not appear explicitly. However, to apply this law to dynamic systems (such as planets orbiting a star), we would use time to track the motion of the objects as they respond to gravitational forces. In this context, time t is a measurement tool that tracks how the positions of the masses change due to gravitational attraction. The process of motion (e.g., a planet moving in orbit) is what’s fundamental, and time t is the reference we use to compare that motion.
Time t is understood as a practical measure of change rather than a fundamental entity or dimension. The key difference from standard interpretations lies in how physicists interpret the role of time. In this model:
Newton’s laws treat time purely as a rate-tracking tool. It’s used to measure how quickly systems evolve, not as something that flows or exists independently of change.
The operational definition of time (as the measure of the rate of change) provides a consistent way to understand time’s role in Newtonian mechanics while maintaining the predictive power of the equations.
Even though the equations clearly show that time is a parameter to measure change, the language of Newtonian mechanics pushes the notion of time as a flowing river, an ever-present stage on which the drama of physics unfolds. Terms like “time intervals,” “duration,” and “temporal progression” permeate the discourse, embedding the concept of absolute time deeply into the scientific mindset.
Newton’s absolute time exemplifies how linguistic and conceptual frameworks can solidify into accepted so called “truths”, veiling more acurate alternative interpretations. By treating time as an independent entity, Newtonian mechanics downplay the role of change as the fundamental process.
References
Newton, I. (1687). Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica. London: Royal Society.
Rovelli, C. (2018). The Order of Time. Translated by E. Segre and S. Carnell. New York: Riverhead Books.
3. Thermodynamics and Classical Mechanics: Measuring Motion and Entropy
In thermodynamics, time often doesn’t explicitly appear in the equations themselves, but it’s implied in the way we discuss processes like heat flow, work, and entropy increase. These quantities change and use time as an operational tool to measure these rates of change, rather than treating time as an independent, flowing entity.
The First Law of Thermodynamics
The first law of thermodynamics is a statement of energy conservation:
The first law as describing how the internal energy of a system changes as a result of heat transfer and work done. Time doesn’t explicitly appear here, but if we want to describe rates of change, we introduce time operationally:
This equation describes how the rate of change of internal energy depends on the rates at which heat is added and work is done. The time variable ttt is merely a scaling parameter that helps us quantify how fast the changes in energy, heat, and work are happening relative to one another.
The fundamental reality is the changes in energy, heat, and work.
Time is the tool we use to measure and compare these changes. It doesn’t flow or exist independently but helps us express the rate at which the changes occur.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics
The second law of thermodynamics can be expressed in terms of the change in entropy:
Where S is the entropy of a system, and the inequality reflects the fact that entropy tends to increase in isolated systems.
This law reflects how entropy (disorder or randomness) changes in a system as processes unfold. Time is not flowing here, but we can use it to describe how quickly these changes occur:
This expression describes how the rate of change of entropy is always non-negative. Time t is simply a measure of how quickly entropy increases in the system — it is not a dimension or an independent aspect of the universe, but the tool we use to quantify and compare rates of change.
Time is the measure we use to track how quickly that change happens, but it isn’t itself an entity that flows or affects the process. It’s simply a tool for comparing rates of change.
The Carnot Cycle and Efficiency
The efficiency of a Carnot engine (a theoretical thermodynamic engine) is given by:
where TC is the temperature of the cold reservoir, and TH is the temperature of the hot reservoir.
This equation describes the efficiency of a process that moves energy between two reservoirs at different temperatures. The temperature difference drives changes in the system. Time would enter if we described how quickly these processes unfold, for instance, by introducing the rate of heat transfer:
Here, time t is a parameter used to compare the rates of heat transfer between the reservoirs. The process of heat transfer is what’s fundamental, and time helps us describe the rate at which the heat moves between the reservoirs.
Classical Mechanics
In classical mechanics, time often appears explicitly in equations describing motion and dynamics. These equations are descriptions of how processes evolve, with time serving as the measure of the rate of change.
Kinetic Energy and Potential Energy
The kinetic energy K of an object is given by:
where v is the velocity of the object. Velocity, in turn, is the rate of change of position:
kinetic energy describes how the velocity (rate of change of position) of an object contributes to its energy. The variable t, representing time, is the measuring tool that allows us to track how position changes and thus how kinetic energy evolves.
Time is the measure of how fast the object’s position is changing, and thus how fast its kinetic energy is changing. It’s not a fundamental aspect of the universe but simply a parameter to describe the rate at which motion occurs.
Similarly, potential energy U, such as in a gravitational or elastic system, describes the capacity for future changes in motion. The system’s evolution (e.g., how it falls under gravity) can be described using time as a measure for how quickly the object moves through the gravitational field.
Conservation of Mechanical Energy
The conservation of mechanical energy states that the total mechanical energy E (sum of kinetic and potential energy) remains constant in a closed system:
This principle describes how energy is transferred between kinetic and potential forms. The rate of change of the energy in each form can be tracked over time:
Time is not fundamental here but serves as a measure for how quickly energy transitions between kinetic and potential forms. The focus remains on the energy transitions (the changes), with time used as a tool to express the rate at which these changes occur.
The Principle of Least Action
In classical mechanics, the principle of least action states that the path taken by a system between two states is the one that minimizes the action S, defined as the integral of the Lagrangian L (difference between kinetic and potential energy) over time:
According to this equation, the time parameter t is not a dimension in which the system moves — it’s the measuring tool for comparing the rates at which kinetic and potential energy exchange over different paths.
The action S represents how the system changes from one state to another, and the integral reflects how this change is measured with respect to time. Time simply helps quantify the rate of change in the system’s energy dynamics over the path, but it isn’t fundamental.
In thermodynamics, time is a tool for measuring the rate of change rather than a fundamental dimension of reality. It allows us to describe how quantities like heat, work, and entropy change and how fast these changes occur. Time is not an independent flowing entity but a measure we use to track the evolution of systems.
According to classical mechanics’ equations, time is used to describe how positions, velocities, and energies change. Time is understood as an operational parameter for measuring and comparing rates of change, not as a separate dimension that governs the flow of events.
It is evident that time serves as a parameter measuring motion and entropy, rather than as a physical dimension. Recognizing time’s role as a measure of change allows for a more coherent interpretation of physical laws, aligning linguistic and conceptual frameworks with empirical observations.
References:
Arnold, V. I. (1989). Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics. 2nd edn. New York: Springer.
Boltzmann, L. (1872). “Weitere Studien über das Wärmegleichgewicht unter Gasmolekülen.” Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, 66(2), 275–370.
Callen, H. B. (1985). Thermodynamics and an Introduction to Thermostatistics. 2nd edn. New York: Wiley.
Clausius, R. (1854). “Über eine veränderte Form des zweiten Hauptsatzes der mechanischen Wärmetheorie.” Annalen der Physik und Chemie, 93(12), 481–506.
Eddington, A. S. (1928). The Nature of the Physical World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Galilei, G. (1638). Discorsi e Dimostrazioni Matematiche Intorno a Due Nuove Scienze. Leiden: Elsevier.
Newton, I. (1687). Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica. London: Royal Society.
Prigogine, I. (1980). From Being to Becoming: Time and Complexity in the Physical Sciences. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Reif, F. (1965). Fundamentals of Statistical and Thermal Physics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Chapter 4: Relativity
The advent of Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity in the early 20th century revolutionized the understanding of time and space, uniting them into a single four-dimensional continuum known as spacetime (Einstein 1905; Einstein 1916). This fusion marked a departure from Newtonian absolute time, introducing concepts that would reshape physics profoundly.
Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity (1905) demonstrates that measurements of time and space are relative to the motion of the observer. One of the key revelations is the relativity of simultaneity — the idea that events perceived as simultaneous in one frame of reference may not be so in another moving at a different velocity (Einstein 1905).
The Lorentz Transformation
The Lorentz transformation describes how coordinates (including time) change for observers moving at constant velocity relative to each other. The transformation for time is:
This equation shows how rates of change (as measured by the operational time t) differ for observers in relative motion. It doesn’t imply that time itself flows differently, but rather that processes — like the ticking of clocks or the movement of objects — are measured differently depending on the observer’s velocity. The rate at which things change is affected by relative motion, and time simply provides a way of comparing how quickly or slowly these changes are happening for different observers.
Time Dilation
Time dilation describes how a clock moving at velocity vvv relative to a stationary observer ticks more slowly:
This equation shows that the rate of change of processes in the moving frame is slower compared to the stationary frame. For example, the processes governing the movement of a clock or the biological processes in a person will occur at a slower rate when observed from a frame of reference in relative motion. Here, time acts as a tool for tracking how quickly or slowly these processes unfold relative to a standard (stationary) reference frame. Time is not something that stretches or flows differently; it is a measure of the changing rate of processes due to relative velocity.
The Spacetime Interval
The spacetime interval between two events is:
where ds is the spacetime separation, dt is the time difference, and dx,dy,dz are the spatial differences.
This equation describes how spatial and temporal changes relate to each other. The term dtdtdt represents the operational time — how we measure the interval between events in terms of processes such as clock ticks. The spacetime interval ds helps us describe the relationship between changes in position and changes in what we call time. Time here doesn’t flow as a fundamental dimension; instead, it serves as a way to measure the rate at which spatial relations change between events.
Gravitational Time Dilation
This equation shows how the rate of change of processes (like the ticking of clocks or biological aging) slows down in stronger gravitational fields. Time here measures how the presence of a massive object affects the rate at which processes unfold. Clocks near the massive object tick more slowly because the processes driving the clock are happening at a slower rate due to the influence of gravity. Time doesn’t flow differently; it merely tracks how the rate of changes in the system varies in different gravitational environments.
The Energy-Momentum Relation
In special relativity, the relation between energy, momentum, and mass is:
This equation connects the changes in momentum (which represents motion) and rest energy (which represents the potential for change) in a system. The equation shows how energy is distributed between the motion of an object and its intrinsic mass. Time serves as a reference to describe how fast processes related to momentum (like motion) and mass unfold, but it’s not fundamental to the equation itself. Instead, time helps us track how the distribution of energy across these components evolves over time.
In all these equations, time serves as a measure of the rate of change of physical processes rather than as a dimension in which things move or flow. The equations describe how different rates of change (like the ticking of clocks, the movement of objects, or the unfolding of energy) vary under different conditions of motion and gravity. Time is simply a tool to measure and compare how these changes occur, not a fundamental aspect of reality.
References
Einstein, A. (1905). “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies.” Annalen der Physik, 17(10), 891–921.
Einstein, A. (1916). “The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity.” Annalen der Physik, 49(7), 769–822.
Hafele, J. C., and Keating, R. E. (1972). “Around-the-World Atomic Clocks: Observed Relativistic Time Gains.” Science, 177(4044), 168–170.
Minkowski, H. (1908). “Space and Time.” In The Principle of Relativity (1923), translated by W. Perrett and G. B. Jeffery. New York: Dover Publications.
Chapter 5: Time in Quantum Mechanics: A Parameter of Change
Unlike classical mechanics and relativity, where time often intertwines with spatial dimensions or acts as a backdrop for events, quantum mechanics treats time distinctly — as an external parameter governing the evolution of systems.
The Schrödinger Equation
The time-dependent Schrödinger equation is the cornerstone of non-relativistic quantum mechanic:
In this equation, time represents the rate of change of the system’s wave function, which evolves according to the system’s energy. Time is not an inherent dimension flowing forward; instead, it’s the parameter we use to track how the probabilities of finding the system in certain states evolve. The wave function ψ(r,t) changes over time, and the time variable t helps us measure how fast this change occurs.
Energy drives the evolution of the system, and time simply tracks the rate at which the wave function changes in response to that energy.
Time is not a fundamental feature of reality; it’s a tool for understanding how the quantum state changes as the system evolves.
The Time-Independent Schrödinger Equation
The time-independent Schrödinger equation is used when the system’s Hamiltonian does not explicitly depend on time:
In this case, time doesn’t appear explicitly because the system is in a stationary state — its energy does not change. The wave function ψ(r) describes the spatial distribution of the system’s quantum state. Here, time is implicit in the sense that we’re dealing with a system that isn’t evolving dynamically over time.
Time would enter if we were tracking how the system evolves from one energy state to another, but in this specific equation, we’re looking at an energy eigenstate where nothing changes in time.
The absence of time here indicates that we are not concerned with the rate of change in this scenario; the system is stable in a specific energy state.
Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle
One of the most famous results in quantum mechanics is Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle:
The Probability Interpretation: Born Rule
The Born rule tells us how to interpret the wave function ψ\psiψ in terms of probabilities:
In this equation, time represents the moment at which we’re measuring the probability of finding a particle in a particular location. Time isn’t a dimension in which the particle exists or flows; it’s simply the moment when the measurement occurs. The wave function evolves in time, and the probability distribution changes accordingly.
The probability of finding a particle at a given position changes over time, and time ttt is the parameter we use to track how that probability changes.
Time is a measuring stick for tracking how the system’s probabilities evolve, not a physical dimension in which the particle exists.
Feynman’s Path Integral Formulation
In the path integral formulation of quantum mechanics (developed by Richard Feynman), the probability amplitude for a particle to go from point A to point B is the sum over all possible paths:
Time in this framework enters as part of the action S, which is the quantity that dictates how the system changes. The paths represent possible ways the system could evolve between two points, and time helps us compare how the system changes along each possible path.
Time is used to measure how the action S accumulates as the particle moves through space, but it is not treated as a flowing entity.
The action describes the evolution of the system, and time serves as a parameter that helps describe the rate of change along different paths.
The Commutation Relation
In quantum mechanics, observables like position and momentum do not commute, meaning:
This commutation relation is fundamental to the quantum nature of particles, indicating that position and momentum cannot be simultaneously known with infinite precision.
Interpretation:
This equation describes the inherent quantum uncertainty in measuring position and momentum, and time indirectly influences this through the dynamics of the system. Time doesn’t appear explicitly here, but it’s implied in how these quantities change in time during the evolution of the system.
Time would be used to track how changes in position and momentum occur during measurements.
The commutation relation reflects how changes in one observable affect the other, and time is the scale we use to measure those changes when we observe the system’s dynamics.
Quantum Harmonic Oscillator
The quantum harmonic oscillator is described by the solution to the time-independent Schrödinger equation for a harmonic potential:
Here, the energy levels E are quantized, and the wave function describes the state of the system in a potential well. Time would enter if we were describing how the state evolves dynamically, but in this time-independent case, we are only concerned with the energy levels and spatial wave functions.
If we wanted to describe how the wave function evolves, we would use time as a parameter to track how the probability distribution changes.
Time is not fundamental here; it would be used as a tool for measuring the rate at which the system evolves from one state to another.
In the quantum mechanical framework, time consistently appears as a parameter used to track how quantum states, observables, and probabilities change. The fundamental entities are the wave function, energy, and observables, while time provides a way to measure how these evolve.
Time doesn’t flow independently; it’s a tool we use to describe how the quantum state or the system’s properties evolve over different processes.
In all cases, the equations describe the rate of change in the system, with time acting as the operational parameter that allows us to compare how fast or slowly these changes occur.
References:
Busch, P. (1990). “The Time-Energy Uncertainty Relation.” In Time in Quantum Mechanics, edited by J. G. Muga, R. Sala Mayato, and Í. L. Egusquiza. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Dirac, P. A. M. (1930). The Principles of Quantum Mechanics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heisenberg, W. (1958). Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science. New York: Harper & Row.
Kuchař, K. V. (1992). “Time and Interpretations of Quantum Gravity.” In Proceedings of the 4th Canadian Conference on General Relativity and Relativistic Astrophysics, edited by G. Kunstatter, D. E. Vincent, and J. G. Williams. Singapore: World Scientific.
Pauli, W. (1933). “General Principles of Quantum Mechanics.” In Handbuch der Physik, Vol. 24, Part 1. Berlin: Springer.
Sakurai, J. J., and Napolitano, J. (2017). Modern Quantum Mechanics. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chapter 5: Linguistic Entrapment: How Language Shapes Scientific Understanding
The exploration of time in physics is both a scientific and a linguistic-philosophical endeavor, as the language we use significantly influences our understanding of time. Metaphors rooted in everyday experience can clarify or distort scientific concepts. This chapter examines how linguistic constructs have shaped scientific thought about time, often leading to misconceptions that the Changist model seeks to address.
In science, metaphors help explain abstract concepts but can also mislead when taken literally. Terms like “time flows,” “fabric of spacetime,” and “arrow of time” create images that shape how we understand time as a tangible entity or dimension. For instance, the metaphor of time “flowing” suggests it moves uniformly, carrying events from future to past. However, from a Changist perspective, this is a linguistic construct that misrepresents reality — what we perceive as time’s flow is merely the continuous occurrence of changes in the present. Similarly, describing spacetime as a “fabric” can mislead by implying physical properties, reinforcing the misconception that time is a physical dimension akin to space. The “arrow of time” metaphor, while useful in thermodynamics, can also suggest that time itself moves, rather than simply marking the progression of change, as Changism argues.
Metaphors can reify abstract concepts, making time appear as a physical entity. This obscures the central role of change in physical phenomena, limiting the development of models like Changism, which focuses on time as a measure of change rather than a dimension. The Changist model critiques how metaphors have trapped scientific understanding, and advocates disentangling these constructs from scientific language.
Everyday language, filled with temporal expressions, also shapes how we intuitively understand time, often leading to misconceptions in physics. Common phrases like “saving time” or “running out of time” personify time, suggesting it is a commodity or resource. These biases can influence scientific thought, leading to intuitive but flawed theories, such as time travel, which extrapolate from everyday language. These linguistic habits also create resistance to new models, such as Changism, that challenge entrenched ideas.
According to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, language shapes cognition, implying that the way scientists describe time influences their understanding of it. The persistent use of temporal metaphors can reinforce outdated concepts, necessitating a reform in the language of physics to better reflect empirical realities, as Changism advocates.
Examples from physics, such as “time dilation,” which implies time itself stretches, show how misleading terminology can be. In reality, it is processes that occur at varying rates. Similarly, terms like “space-time continuum” can mislead by suggesting time is equivalent to spatial dimensions, while Changism encourages reframing these terms to emphasize change.
Changism calls for linguistic precision in physics, advocating for terms that reflect change rather than temporal progression. Eliminating misleading metaphors and aligning language with empirical evidence can reduce confusion and foster clearer scientific understanding.
Language plays a powerful role in shaping scientific thought. Metaphors and everyday expressions have led to entrenched misconceptions about time, influencing how physical theories are developed and interpreted. The Changist model urges a critical reassessment of the language used in physics, promoting linguistic precision and focusing on change as the fundamental process to achieve a clearer understanding of the universe.
References:
Eddington, A. S. (1928). The Nature of the Physical World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Einstein, A. (1916). “The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity.” Annalen der Physik, 49(7), 769–822.
Fraser, J. T. (2007). Time and Time Again: Reports from a Boundary of the Universe. Leiden: Brill.
Hafele, J. C., and Keating, R. E. (1972). “Around-the-World Atomic Clocks: Observed Relativistic Time Gains.” Science, 177(4044), 168–170.
Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Newton, I. (1687). Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica. London: Royal Society.
Rovelli, C. (2018). The Order of Time. Translated by E. Segre and S. Carnell. New York: Riverhead Books.
Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Edited by J. B. Carroll. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Blackwell.
Chapter 6: Redefining Temporal Concepts: Towards Linguistic Precision
The exploration of time within physics has revealed significant conceptual and linguistic challenges. As the previous chapters have demonstrated, time is consistently utilized as a parameter measuring change rather than an independent dimension. The persistent use of language that treats time as a physical entity has led to misunderstandings and hindered the development of more accurate models of reality. This chapter proposes a redefinition of temporal terminology to enhance linguistic precision, aligning scientific language with the Changist model. By refining the terminology used in physics, we aim to foster clearer communication and promote conceptual clarity that could lead to advancements in scientific theories and models.
7.1 Proposing New Terminology in Physics
The language of physics is a powerful tool that shapes our understanding of complex phenomena. However, when metaphors and colloquialisms become entrenched, they can obscure the true nature of the concepts they describe. To align with the Changist model and emphasize the fundamental role of change, we propose redefining and refining the terminology related to time in physics.
7.1.1 Eliminating Temporal Metaphors
Metaphorical expressions such as “time flows,” “passage of time,” and “traveling through time” anthropomorphize time and suggest that it is a substance or dimension that can be traversed. To avoid these misconceptions, we propose:
Using “Rate of Change” Instead of “Flow of Time”: This emphasizes that what is observed is the progression of changes, not the movement through a temporal medium.
Example: Replace “As time flows, the system evolves” with “As the system changes, its state evolves.”
Avoiding “Time Travel” Terminology: Since time is not a dimension to move through, references to “time travel” should be reframed in terms of causality or hypothetical alterations in rates of change.
Example: Instead of “Traveling back in time,” use “Altering the sequence of events” or “Reversing processes.”
Several key terms in physics could be redefined to reflect the Changist emphasis on change:
Time Dilation: This term suggests that time itself is stretching or contracting. We propose the term “Rate of Change Variation” to indicate that what varies is the rate at which processes occur under different conditions.
Example: “Rate of Change Variation occurs due to relative velocity differences between observers.”
Spacetime Continuum: This term fuses space and time into a single entity, reinforcing the dimensional view of time. We suggest using “Space-Change Framework” to highlight that space provides the arena for change, which is the fundamental process.
Example: “In the Space-Change Framework, the geometry of space influences the dynamics of change.”
Temporal Dimension: Referring to time as a dimension equates it with spatial dimensions. We propose using “Change Parameter” or “Temporal Parameter” to indicate that time is a variable measuring change.
Example: “The Temporal Parameter tracks the progression of processes within the system.”
7.1.3 Clarifying Concepts in Relativity
In the context of relativity, certain terms and concepts could be rearticulated:
Proper Time: Instead of viewing proper time as the time measured along an object’s worldline in spacetime, we can define it as the “Accumulated Change Along a Trajectory.”
Example: “The accumulated change along the object’s trajectory differs due to its relative motion.”
Worldlines: Traditionally representing an object’s path through spacetime, worldlines can be reframed as “Change Trajectories” to emphasize the sequence of changes an object undergoes.
Example: “The particle’s change trajectory illustrates its dynamic evolution.”
7.1.4 Emphasizing Operational Definitions
Physics often relies on operational definitions, where concepts are defined by the operations used to measure them (Bridgman 1927). By emphasizing operational definitions, we ground terms in measurable processes:
Second: Defined by a specific number of oscillations of a cesium atom, highlighting that time units are based on counting cycles of change.
Example: “A second is the duration of 9,192,631,770 cycles of radiation corresponding to cesium-133 transitions (BIPM 2019).”
Clocks: Instruments that count cycles of a consistent process, serving as tools to measure rates of change.
Example: “An atomic clock measures the rate of change by counting atomic oscillations.”
7.1.5 Reframing Theoretical Constructs
Theoretical constructs that rely on temporal dimensions can be revisited:
Four-Dimensional Spacetime: Instead of treating spacetime as a four-dimensional manifold, we can describe physical theories in terms of “Three-Dimensional Space with Dynamic Processes.”
Example: “Physical phenomena unfold in three-dimensional space through continuous dynamic processes influenced by energy and matter.”
7.2 Implications for Scientific Models and Theories
Redefining temporal terminology can significantly impact scientific models and theories. Aligning language with the Changist focus on change improves conceptual clarity and may lead to new approaches to persistent issues in physics. By adopting more precise language, misconceptions about time as a physical dimension can be reduced, better reflecting empirical observations and improving communication among scientists and educators.
A shift in terminology could also foster theoretical advances, offering fresh perspectives on unifying general relativity and quantum mechanics by centering the framework on change. It might inspire new models to address unresolved problems like gravity or dark energy. Revisiting fundamental equations from a Changist perspective would focus on how changes in physical systems relate to forces and energy, using time as a parameter that measures change. For instance, the Schrödinger equation could be interpreted as describing a system’s continuous evolution, rather than as a function of time. Similarly, relativistic equations would emphasize how relative motion affects the rate of change in processes, rather than altering time itself.
In education, adopting this revised terminology could improve curricula by fostering an accurate understanding of time, encouraging students to think critically about foundational concepts and inspiring innovation. This change could also extend beyond physics, prompting philosophers of science to reassess the metaphysical assumptions underlying scientific theories and facilitating interdisciplinary research between physics, philosophy, linguistics, and other fields.
However, this shift will face challenges. Established terminology is deeply ingrained, and changing it will require consensus and adaptation. Existing mathematical frameworks are based on the current language, so any revisions must maintain mathematical consistency and predictive accuracy. To implement these changes, new terminology should be introduced gradually in academic discourse, publications, and conferences. Collaboration with scientific organizations and educators will be essential to update standards and curricula, and ongoing refinement will ensure that the new language evolves with developments in the field.
This linguistic shift not only clarifies existing theories but also encourages the development of models that more accurately reflect the dynamic processes governing the universe. Embracing change as the cornerstone of physical reality, supported by precise and consistent language, holds the potential to resolve longstanding conceptual challenges and advance the frontiers of science.
References:
Barbour, J. (1999). The End of Time: The Next Revolution in Physics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM). (2019). The International System of Units (SI). 9th edn. Sèvres: BIPM.
Bridgman, P. W. (1927). The Logic of Modern Physics. New York: Macmillan.
Einstein, A. (1916). “The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity.” Annalen der Physik, 49(7), 769–822.
Fraser, J. T. (2007). Time and Time Again: Reports from a Boundary of the Universe. Leiden: Brill.
Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Maudlin, T. (2002). Quantum Non-Locality and Relativity: Metaphysical Intimations of Modern Physics. 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.
Newton, I. (1687). Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica. London: Royal Society.
Rovelli, C. (2018). The Order of Time. Translated by E. Segre and S. Carnell. New York: Riverhead Books.
Sakurai, J. J., and Napolitano, J. (2017). Modern Quantum Mechanics. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Blackwell.
Appendix A: Critical Review of the Block Universe
The block universe, or eternalism, presents time as a dimension like space, where past, present, and future coexist within a four-dimensional spacetime continuum. This view, drawn from a literal interpretation of Minkowski’s spacetime in relativity, suggests that the flow of time is an illusion and that all events are fixed. However, a key issue with this model is its failure to explain the dynamism of our lived experience. If all moments in time exist statically, the perception of change and time’s flow is illusory, leading to circular reasoning: the illusion of change itself needs an explanation. Since even the neural processes producing this illusion would be static, the model cannot account for how this illusion arises, resulting in an infinite regress. Without recognizing real change, the block universe cannot explain our experience of time.
Moreover, the block universe posits that we perceive time’s passage by moving through it, yet movement implies change. This introduces a paradox — movement within a static framework contradicts the block universe’s premise of fixed moments, leaving the experience of progression through time unexplainable. This issue may stem from linguistic and conceptual confusions, similar to those addressed by Changism, which argues that reifying time as a dimension conflates mathematical abstraction with reality. Terms like “spacetime continuum” may lead us to mistakenly interpret time as a physical entity instead of a parameter that measures change.
In contrast, process philosophy and presentism offer alternative views that emphasize change and the primacy of the present. Process philosophers like Alfred North Whitehead argue that reality is made up of events and processes in constant flux, with time as a measure of this progression. Presentism, meanwhile, holds that only the present exists, aligning with common-sense experience. In physics, presentism accommodates relativistic effects like time dilation by interpreting them as variations in the rate of change under different conditions, such as varying speeds or gravitational fields.
One common objection to presentism is its apparent conflict with relativity, which lacks a universal present moment due to the relativity of simultaneity. However, Changism reconciles this by distinguishing between time and change, suggesting that relativistic effects reflect differences in change rates rather than evidence of time as a dimension. This allows presentism to align with relativity’s empirical predictions without endorsing the block universe.
The block universe also struggles to account for emergent phenomena, which arise from dynamic processes and interactions, such as consciousness, ecosystems, or economic markets. Emergence requires genuine change and development over time, which a static model cannot represent. By contrast, Changism, rooted in presentism and process philosophy, embraces dynamism as central to reality, with time serving as a measure of continuous change. This approach aligns both with subjective experience and empirical observations, avoiding the contradictions of static models.
Einstein’s theory of relativity is often linked to the block universe, but his views on time were more nuanced. He acknowledged the difficulty of reconciling the subjective experience of time with the relativistic framework, famously calling the distinction between past, present, and future a “stubbornly persistent illusion.” However, this was more a philosophical reflection than an endorsement of a static model. Einstein also recognized the limitations of physical theories in capturing the entirety of reality.
In conclusion, the block universe’s static treatment of time faces significant challenges in explaining dynamism, emergent phenomena, and our subjective experience of time. Process philosophy and presentism, as embodied in Changism, offer a more coherent and empirically grounded model by focusing on change as fundamental. By redefining time as a measure of change, Changism preserves the predictive power of relativity while avoiding the contradictions of static models, promoting a more accurate and dynamic interpretation of the universe.
Bedau, M. A. (1997). “Weak Emergence.” Philosophical Perspectives, 11, 375–399.
Bigelow, J. (1996). “Presentism and Properties.” Philosophical Perspectives, 10, 35–52.
Craig, W. L. (2001). Time and the Metaphysics of Relativity. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Einstein, A. (1949). “Autobiographical Notes.” In Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist, edited by P. A. Schilpp, 1–95. La Salle: Open Court.
Einstein, A. (1955). Letter to the Besso family, quoted in Holton, G. (1973). Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Esfeld, M. (1999). “Quantum Holism and the Philosophy of Mind.” Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(11–12), 23–38.
Maudlin, T. (2002). Quantum Non-Locality and Relativity: Metaphysical Intimations of Modern Physics. 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.
McTaggart, J. M. E. (1908). “The Unreality of Time.” Mind, 17(68), 457–474.
Petkov, V. (2005). “Is There an Alternative to the Block Universe View?” Philosophy and Foundations of Physics, 1, 207–228.
Putnam, H. (1967). “Time and Physical Geometry.” Journal of Philosophy, 64(8), 240–247.
Rietdijk, C. W. (1966). “A Rigorous Proof of Determinism Derived from the Special Theory of Relativity.” Philosophy of Science, 33(4), 341–344.
Skow, B. (2012). “Why Does Time Pass?” Noûs, 46(2), 223–242.
Whitehead, A. N. (1929). Process and Reality. New York: Macmillan.
Appendix B: The Space-Change Continuum: Replacing Time with Change
B.1 Introduction
The Changist model emphasizes change as the fundamental process driving reality, with time serving as a parameter to measure this change. Building upon this perspective, the concept of the Space-Change Continuum (SCC) offers a coherent framework that further elucidates how replacing time with change resolves conceptual contradictions, particularly those associated with the block universe model. This appendix explores the Space-Change Continuum, integrating philosophical insights from Aristotle with modern physics, and demonstrates how this approach aligns with empirical observations while providing a more consistent metaphysical foundation.
B.2 The Semantic Shift: Change as a Fundamental Dimension
The key issue with the block universe model is its treatment of time as a fixed dimension in which past, present, and future coexist simultaneously (Rietdijk 1966; Putnam 1967). This perspective leads to paradoxes and contradictions, especially when accounting for dynamism and causality (McTaggart 1908). By shifting the focus from “time” to “change” as the primary dimension of reality, these contradictions dissolve. Instead of viewing time as a linear entity through which we “travel,” we recognize change as the core process driving reality (Heraclitus, as cited in Kirk et al. 1983).
B.3 The Space-Change Continuum Framework
In the Space-Change Continuum, the universe consists of:
Three Spatial Dimensions: Length, width, and height define where things are in space.
One Change Dimension: Change replaces time as the fundamental dimension, representing the evolution and transformation of entities according to their nature and physical laws.
This framework posits that objects and systems do not move along a temporal axis but evolve or change according to their intrinsic properties and the governing laws of physics (Barbour 1999).
B.4 Integration with Relativity
A.4.1 How Change Replaces Time in Relativity: Einstein’s theory of relativity traditionally describes events in a four-dimensional spacetime continuum, treating time as intertwined with space (Einstein 1905; Minkowski 1908). By reinterpreting time as change, relativistic effects can be understood as variations in the rate of change due to factors like velocity and gravitational fields.
Time Dilation as Rate of Change Variation: In special relativity, time dilation describes how moving clocks tick slower compared to stationary ones. By viewing this as a difference in the rate of change, we understand that high velocities affect the internal processes of objects, causing them to change more slowly relative to an observer at rest (Rovelli 2018).
where Δτ is the proper time (rate of change for the moving object), Δtis the coordinate time for the stationary observer, and γ is the Lorentz factor.
Gravitational Time Dilation: In general relativity, stronger gravitational fields slow down the rate of change in processes. Objects in intense gravitational fields experience slower rates of change due to the curvature of space affecting physical interactions (Einstein 1916; Misner et al. 1973).
By replacing “time” with “change,” these phenomena are understood as variations in how quickly systems evolve, not as movement through a temporal dimension.
B.5 Causality in the Space-Change Continuum
Causality is reframed as the transformation of potential into actuality through structured change (Aristotle, Metaphysics, translated by Ross 1924). Instead of ordering events in time, causality involves the sequential unfolding of changes, where each present state contains the potential for future transformations.
Physical Laws as Governing Forms: The laws of physics dictate the form of these transformations, describing how entities change based on their nature (Davies 1995).
Eliminating Temporal Paradoxes: By grounding causality in change, we avoid paradoxes associated with time travel and predestination inherent in the block universe model (Price 1996).
For example, a ball rolling down a hill is changing according to the laws of gravity and motion. Its potential energy is converted into kinetic energy through the process of change dictated by physical laws (Halliday et al. 2013).
B.6 Aristotle’s Concepts: Potentiality and Actuality
Aristotle’s philosophy provides a foundation for understanding change in the SCC:
Potentiality (dynamis) refers to the possible ways an entity or system can change based on its nature and conditions (Aristotle, Metaphysics).
Actuality (energeia) is the realization of these potentials through change.
The laws of physics describe how potential becomes actuality, governing the specific forms of change for different entities (Heisenberg 1958). This perspective aligns with quantum mechanics, where particles exist in superpositions of potential states that become actualized upon observation (Cohen-Tannoudji et al. 1977).
B.7 The Form of Change and the Nature of Objects
Different entities undergo change according to their inherent properties and governing laws:
Subatomic Particles: Change according to quantum mechanics, evolving through probabilistic interactions (Dirac 1930).
Celestial Bodies: Change according to gravitational laws, following trajectories determined by mass and spacetime curvature (Misner et al. 1973).
Biological Systems: Change through processes governed by genetics and environmental interactions, as described in evolutionary biology (Mayr 2001).
This interpretation ties change directly to the nature of the object, meaning that change follows the form embedded in the entity’s properties and interactions (Prigogine 1980).
B.8 Resolving Contradictions in the Block Universe
By adopting the SCC, we address key contradictions inherent in the block universe model:
Dynamic Change vs. Static Time: The block universe posits a static spacetime where all events are fixed, yet it invokes dynamic processes to explain the experience of change (Skow 2012). The SCC recognizes change as fundamental, eliminating the need for paradoxical explanations.
Causality without Determinism: In the block universe, causality is problematic due to the coexistence of past, present, and future. The SCC frames causality as the structured unfolding of change, preserving causal relationships without implying a predetermined sequence of events (Price 1996).
Avoiding Infinite Regress: The block universe’s reliance on illusions to explain change leads to infinite regress. By acknowledging change as the basis of reality, the SCC avoids this issue entirely (Esfeld 1999).
B.9 Conclusion: The Space-Change Continuum
The Space-Change Continuum offers a coherent and empirically grounded understanding of reality that aligns with modern physics and the Changist model. In this framework:
Change is Fundamental: Entities evolve and actualize potential according to their nature.
Physical Laws as Forms: The laws of physics represent the forms governing the transformation of potential into actuality.
Causality through Change: Causality is the structured unfolding of changes, grounded in the properties of entities and their interactions.
By replacing time with change as the fundamental dimension alongside space, we resolve conceptual paradoxes and align our understanding with both empirical observations and philosophical insights.
Aristotle. (1924). Metaphysics. Translated by W. D. Ross. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Barbour, J. (1999). The End of Time: The Next Revolution in Physics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cohen-Tannoudji, C., Diu, B., and Laloë, F. (1977). Quantum Mechanics. Vols. 1 and 2. New York: Wiley.
Davies, P. (1995). About Time: Einstein’s Unfinished Revolution. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Dirac, P. A. M. (1930). The Principles of Quantum Mechanics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Einstein, A. (1905). “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies.” Annalen der Physik, 17(10), 891–921.
Einstein, A. (1916). “The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity.” Annalen der Physik, 49(7), 769–822.
Esfeld, M. (1999). “Quantum Holism and the Philosophy of Mind.” Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(11–12), 23–38.
Halliday, D., Resnick, R., and Walker, J. (2013). Fundamentals of Physics. 10th edn. Hoboken: Wiley.
Heisenberg, W. (1958). Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science. New York: Harper & Row.
Heraclitus. (1983). The Presocratic Philosophers: A Critical History with a Selection of Texts. 2nd edn., edited by G. S. Kirk, J. E. Raven, and M. Schofield. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mayr, E. (2001). What Evolution Is. New York: Basic Books.
McTaggart, J. M. E. (1908). “The Unreality of Time.” Mind, 17(68), 457–474.
Misner, C. W., Thorne, K. S., and Wheeler, J. A. (1973). Gravitation. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Minkowski, H. (1908). “Space and Time.” In The Principle of Relativity (1923), translated by W. Perrett and G. B. Jeffery. New York: Dover Publications.
Price, H. (1996). Time’s Arrow and Archimedes’ Point: New Directions for the Physics of Time. New York: Oxford University Press.
Prigogine, I. (1980). From Being to Becoming: Time and Complexity in the Physical Sciences. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Putnam, H. (1967). “Time and Physical Geometry.” Journal of Philosophy, 64(8), 240–247.
Rietdijk, C. W. (1966). “A Rigorous Proof of Determinism Derived from the Special Theory of Relativity.” Philosophy of Science, 33(4), 341–344.
Rovelli, C. (2018). The Order of Time. Translated by E. Segre and S. Carnell. New York: Riverhead Books.
Skow, B. (2012). “Why Does Time Pass?” Noûs, 46(2), 223–242.
Appendix C:
The Goddesses of Change: Kali and Persephone as Embodiments of Entropy and Self-Organization
There is something primal in the way ancient cultures understood change, in how they gazed at the abyss and saw the dance of gods. In the chaotic heart of transformation, Kali and Persephone rise like the twin Goddesses of Change, each an embodiment of forces both destructive and creative. Kali, the dark goddess of the Indian pantheon, is entropy made flesh. Persephone, queen of the Greek underworld, is the cycle of death and rebirth incarnate. Together, these figures tear through the veil of order and reveal the unrelenting churn of the cosmos, much like the Changist model, where change alone is the eternal pulse driving everything. They are not symbols of comfort but mirrors to the truth — change is inevitable, and it cares not for the fragile notions of permanence that haunt men’s dreams.
Kali
Kali doesn’t arrive quietly. She crashes into the scene, a storm of limbs and laughter, her eyes gleaming with the inevitability of endings. Time itself quivers under her gaze, for Kali is the goddess of destruction, of entropy, of the decay that strips everything down to its bones. She is not merely a figure of fear — she is the recognition that destruction is the precursor to transformation.
Destruction is necessary, a dark grace that sweeps away what is stagnant. In the same way entropy, in its relentless advance, dismantles the old structures, Kali’s chaos is the mother of all renewal. Without her, there would be no space for creation. It is entropy’s work, this undoing of order, and Kali’s dance matches the rhythm of a universe that craves disorder to fuel its own rebirth. She is entropy personified, the decay that gives birth to new possibilities, the ruin that allows for the emergence of something unexpected.
But Kali is not only a devourer. Beneath the violence of her destruction lies the strange miracle of transformation. From chaos comes self-organization, from death comes life. Kali is not satisfied with mere endings — she clears the ground for something new to rise, something unanticipated. She is both the storm and the calm after, the shattered pieces that rearrange themselves into a new order. Her role in the universe is complex, balancing the chaotic and the organized, a reminder that even in the most terrifying destruction, there is the possibility of something greater being born from the ashes.
Persephone
Persephone, on the other hand, is more subtle in her manifestation, but no less powerful. She descends into the underworld, swallowed by darkness, her skin cold with the inevitability of death. Yet, she does not remain there forever. Her myth is cyclical — down she goes, only to rise again, bringing with her the spring, the rebirth of life, the reordering of the world.
Her journey into Hades is a descent into entropy itself. Life withers in her absence, winter tightening its grip on the world. This is decay, the slow crumbling of life into the silence of death. Like the increasing entropy in a closed system, Persephone’s descent marks the breakdown of all that once bloomed. But it’s necessary — without the rot of autumn and the freeze of winter, the world could not be reborn.
And yet, Persephone does rise. Spring follows winter as surely as day follows night, and her return is the reordering of life, the self-organization that emerges from entropy’s cold grasp. She is the reminder that chaos is never final, that the universe, no matter how dark, finds its way back to order. In her hands, death and rebirth are intertwined — each feeding into the other, each necessary for the continuous motion of the world.
Entropy and Self-Organization: The Two Sides of Change
Kali and Persephone do not simply represent ancient stories; they are the raw, unspoken truths of existence. They are entropy and self-organization made flesh, a divine reflection of the cosmic forces that shape everything, from stars to souls. In them, the Changist model finds mythic expression, a narrative thread that links modern physics with the primal, universal understanding of change.
In the cold logic of thermodynamics, entropy reigns supreme, driving systems toward disorder. But even in the midst of chaos, there are moments when order springs forth unbidden. Snowflakes form, life emerges — complexity arises from the very breakdown that entropy demands. It is a paradox, one that Kali and Persephone embody. In their myths, the universe whispers its secrets, showing how entropy and self-organization are not opposing forces but twin aspects of the same process.
The ancients might not have known the precise equations, but they understood. They felt the pull of entropy in Kali’s destruction, saw the emergence of new forms in Persephone’s return. These myths do not merely explain — they resonate. They reach into the human soul and reveal the truth of change in a way no formula ever could. They make the abstract visceral, tangible, undeniable.
The Eleusinian Mysteries
In the rites of Eleusis, where Persephone’s descent and return were enacted, the mysteries of life, death, and transformation were laid bare. The initiates, shrouded in darkness, were led through rituals that mirrored the cycle of decay and rebirth, glimpsing a truth deeper than words. This was not mere metaphor but an encounter with the eternal forces of change.
Through the symbolism of the harvest, the death and renewal of crops, the Eleusinian Mysteries brought home the truth that all life moves in cycles, that every death is merely a prelude to rebirth. This cyclical understanding of life mirrors the Changist view that change is constant, and through it, one finds the path to a higher understanding of existence itself.
Kali’s nature is the paradox of destruction birthing creation. Her chaotic dance brings about a balance in the cosmos, where entropy makes way for new possibilities, and self-organization rises from the very heart of disorder.
Persephone’s journey is not merely a seasonal tale but a revelation, an unveiling of the deepest truths, what the Greeks called *aletheia*. Her descent strips away the illusions of permanence, her return brings with it the clear light of understanding.
Through their stories, we glimpse the truth that destruction and creation are two faces of the same force, that change is the only constant. The myths are timeless, echoing modern scientific understanding, and in them, we find the strange comfort that nothing is permanent, not even the chaos.
Boltzmann, L. (1877). “Über die Beziehung zwischen dem zweiten Hauptsatze der mechanischen Wärmetheorie und der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung respektive den Sätzen über das Wärmegleichgewicht.” Wiener Berichte, 76, 373–435.
Burkert, W. (1985). Greek Religion. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Campbell, J. (1949). The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Haken, H. (1983). Synergetics: An Introduction. 3rd edn. Berlin: Springer.
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time. Translated by J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson. New York: Harper & Row.
Kinsley, D. R. (1986). Hindu Goddesses: Visions of the Divine Feminine in the Hindu Religious Tradition. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kernyi, K. (1960). Eleusis: Archetypal Image of Mother and Daughter. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Mayr, E. (2001). What Evolution Is. New York: Basic Books.
McDermott, R. F. (1975). Kali’s Child: The Mystical and the Erotic in the Life and Teachings of Ramakrishna. New York: State University of New York Press.
Mylonas, G. E. (1961). Eleusis and the Eleusinian Mysteries. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Nicolis, G., and Prigogine, I. (1989). Exploring Complexity: An Introduction. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Prigogine, I. (1980). From Being to Becoming: Time and Complexity in the Physical Sciences. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Prigogine, I., and Stengers, I. (1984). Order Out of Chaos: Man’s New Dialogue with Nature. New York: Bantam Books.
Sen Gupta, S. (1986). The Cult of the Goddess Kali. Delhi: Clarion Books.
Changism 3: Timeless Eternal Change
The Gift of the Present Moment
26 min read
·
Oct 13, 2024
Time
isn’t a river
we navigate, headlong
into the great
unknown.
It’s a clock whose hands tick away
on the wall of
the present,
counting the beats we own.
A
second isn’t a fragment
of some grand, elusive dimension —
it’s a vibration in the bones
of cesium stones,
a turning
Earth adrift,
a tool we use to track the pulse
of everything
that shifts.
Past
and future, myths we weave,
stories rippling in the now.
The
past is etched in memories,
but all that stays is this:
the
present, unfolding
like a petal’s kiss
brushing against the
sun.
The
future, too, remains a dream,
a dance not yet begun.
It is
potential, unseen,
untouched by ticking hands that run.
All
that is resides
within this breath we take,
this pause between
each cycle.
The present is the only stage
where change makes
its mark —
a constant becoming,
a flicker in the dark
that
vanishes before
we can embrace its spark.
So
let the river rage and roar.
But know it’s not time that flows —
it’s Earth beneath our feet.
Time is just the name we
give
to how things shift and sway,
how they rise and fall
away,
appear then fade somehow,
in the endless, eternal Now.
Table of Contents
Reality unfolds in the timeless present, a continuous flow where change is the only constant. The universe is not a static entity but a dynamic tapestry woven from the threads of perpetual transformation. Time, as commonly perceived, is merely a construct — a tool devised to measure and compare the rate of change. It is within this eternal now that life emerges, evolves, and ultimately returns, embodying the essence of Changism.
The present moment is the sole arena of true existence. The past and future are but shadows — echoes of what was and whispers of what may be — while the present is vibrant, alive with possibility and actuality. By embracing the immediacy of the now, one aligns with the fundamental rhythms of the cosmos, attuning to the seamless dance of change that defines all being.
Change transcends the confines of linear time, guiding us toward an intimate understanding of existence as an ever-unfolding process. Here, the wisdom of ages converges, not as distant echoes but as living truths immanent within each moment, illuminating the path toward a deeper resonance with the essence of all that is eternally becoming.
Chapter 2: The River of Change
Reality is a ceaseless flow, akin to a river where both the waters and the one who perceives them are in constant transformation¹. In this fluid continuum, permanence reveals itself as an illusion, and change emerges as the fundamental essence of existence². The present moment is not a fleeting point between past and future but the eternal backdrop against which all of life unfolds.
Existence is boundless — ungenerated, imperishable, whole, and complete³. It defies the notion of an absolute void or a definitive beginning and end. The present is the heartbeat of this boundlessness, the ever-pulsating core where potential converges into reality. Time, rather than an independent dimension, serves as a measure of movement, a numerical construct concerning ‘before’ and ‘after’⁴. Yet, upon closer contemplation, it becomes evident that past and future are abstractions; only the present holds the substance of reality⁵.
Change is the metamorphosis through which potentiality blossoms into actuality. It is the dynamic process by which the universe evolves, life emerges, and consciousness awakens. This actualization is not relegated to some distant realm but transpires in the immediacy of the present⁶. The ‘now’ is the crucible of creation, the nexus where the latent becomes manifest, and where the essence of being is continually renewed.
The universe is a tapestry of perpetual motion, an intricate dance where all elements are interwoven in a harmonious flux. Nothing stands still; all is in a state of becoming⁷. This unending flow is the fundamental nature of reality, revealing that stability is not found in rigidity but in the seamless continuity of change.
In this cosmic dance, every moment is both a culmination and a commencement — a convergence of all that has transformed and a springboard into all that will. The present is the living embodiment of this flow, the arena where existence expresses itself fully. By immersing oneself in the rhythm of change, one discerns the underlying unity that threads through the multiplicity of forms⁸.
The illusion of separateness dissolves when recognizing that all distinctions are transient. The self and the universe are not discrete entities but facets of a singular, ever-evolving reality. In embracing the ever-changing flow, one aligns with the inherent harmony of existence, transcending the confines of time and entering into a profound communion with the essence of all that is.
1. Heraclitus, Fragment 12: “No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man.”
2. Heraclitus, Fragment 19: “All is flux; nothing stays still.”
3. Parmenides, Fragment 8: “What is, is ungenerated and imperishable; whole, unique, steadfast, and complete.”
4. Aristotle, Physics IV.11, 219b1: “Time is the number of movement in respect of ‘before’ and ‘after’.”
5. Aristotle, Physics IV.10, 218a1: “Neither past nor future, but only the present really is, and it is this which we measure as time.”
6. Aristotle, Metaphysics IX.6, 1048a30: “For the actuality is the entelechy of what is in potentiality, qua such.”
7. Heraclitus, Fragment 91: “Everything flows and nothing abides; everything gives way and nothing stays fixed.”
8. Heraclitus, Fragment 50: “Listening not to me but to the Logos, it is wise to agree that all things are one.”
Chapter 3: Harmony with the Natural Order
There is a deep wisdom in aligning oneself with the inherent rationality of the universe¹. By embracing the abundance of the present moment and releasing the mind from preoccupations with what is lacking², one finds solace in the now — the only realm where life truly unfolds³.
The stream of events flows incessantly, each moment giving way to the next in an unending succession⁴. Recognizing the transience of all things, it becomes clear that clinging to impermanent circumstances only begets suffering⁵. True tranquility arises when one focuses on what is up to us— the judgments harbored and the choices undertaken — while accepting the unfolding of external events without resistance⁶.
Life reveals itself as a collection of complete moments, each bearing its own significance⁷. To live fully is to grasp the value of each day as a lifetime in miniature, seizing the opportunities of the present without deferral⁸. Time, often perceived as scarce, is in truth abundant when one immerses wholly in the now, avoiding the common folly of wasting the precious moments allotted⁹.
Freedom is found in the acceptance of what is beyond control and the mastery of what is within¹⁰. By adapting to the circumstances of one’s existence and engaging sincerely with those who share this journey¹¹, harmony with the natural order is achieved. Resistance to the inevitable changes of life breeds discontent; acceptance opens the path to inner peace¹².
In the present moment lies the power to shape character and destiny¹³. Attention shifts from external achievements to the integrity of the soul, recognizing that true wealth is found not in material accumulation but in the richness of a virtuous life¹⁴. By living in harmony with the rational principle that governs all, one aligns with a greater purpose, consciously participating in the unfolding of existence¹⁵.
The interconnectedness of all things becomes evident when understanding that harm to one is harm to the whole¹⁶. This realization fosters compassion and unity, dissolving the illusion of separateness. Embracing one’s role within the cosmos contributes to the common good, guiding actions with wisdom and benevolence¹⁷.
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations: “All things are parts of one single system, which is called Nature; the individual life is good when it is in harmony with Nature.”¹
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations: “Do not let your mind run on what you lack as much as on what you have already.”²
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations: “Confine yourself to the present.”³
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations: “Time is like a river made up of events which happen, and a violent stream; for as soon as a thing has been seen, it is carried away, and another comes in its place, and this will be carried away too.”⁴
Epictetus, Enchiridion: “Never say about anything, ‘I have lost it’; but only ‘I have given it back.’”⁵
Epictetus, Enchiridion: “Make the best use of what is in your power, and take the rest as it happens.”⁶
Seneca, Epistles: “Begin at once to live, and count each separate day as a separate life.”⁷
Seneca, Epistles: “Hold every hour in your grasp… Lay hold of today’s task, and you will not need to depend so much upon tomorrow’s.”⁸
Seneca, On the Shortness of Life: “It is not that we have a short time to live, but that we waste a lot of it.”⁹
Epictetus, Enchiridion: “There is only one way to happiness and that is to cease worrying about things which are beyond the power of our will.”¹⁰
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations: “Adapt yourself to the things among which your lot has been cast and love sincerely the fellow creatures with whom destiny has ordained that you shall live.”¹¹
Epictetus, Enchiridion: “Don’t demand that things happen as you wish, but wish that they happen as they do happen, and you will go on well.”¹²
Epictetus, Discourses: “We should always be asking ourselves: ‘Is this something that is, or is not, in my control?’”¹³
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations: “The more we value things outside our control, the less control we have.”¹⁴
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations: “The universe is change; our life is what our thoughts make it.”¹⁵
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations: “What injures the hive injures the bee.”¹⁶
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations: “Men exist for the sake of one another. Teach them then or bear with them.”¹⁷
Chapter 4: The Silent Wisdom of the East
Existence unfolds not in the corridors of past or future, but in the eternal now. By silencing the mind’s restless chatter and embracing simplicity, one transcends the illusions of time, perceiving reality in its purest form¹. Life is a continuous flow, like a river in constant motion, where each moment is unique yet inseparable from the whole².
Impermanence is recognized as the fundamental nature of all things, leading to the liberation from suffering that arises from attachment³. By accepting the transient beauty of existence, one releases the grasp on what cannot be held, finding freedom in the flow of change⁴. The realization dawns that the self and the universe are not separate entities but expressions of a single, harmonious reality⁵.
Through mindful awareness, the mind becomes clear and reflective, mirroring the essence of existence without distortion⁶. Letting go of preoccupations with what has been or what may come, one uncovers the depth and richness inherent in the present experience⁷. Each breath becomes a sacred connection, a bridge uniting the individual with the vastness of the cosmos⁸.
The journey inward reveals that enlightenment is not a distant destination but an intimate recognition of one’s true nature⁹. Aligning with the natural flow of the Tao, one moves effortlessly through life, guided by an inner harmony that transcends desire and fear¹⁰. Actions arise spontaneously from stillness, embodying the principle of effortless action¹¹.
Silence emerges as a profound teacher, offering wisdom beyond the limitations of words¹². In embracing emptiness, one discovers fullness; in letting go, one attains true freedom¹³. This paradox reflects the essence of the Tao, where opposites are seen as complementary facets of a unified whole¹⁴.
Compassion naturally arises from the understanding of interconnectedness, recognizing that the well-being of one is intertwined with the well-being of all¹⁵. Acting with kindness rooted in present awareness contributes to the harmony and balance of the world¹⁶. The present moment becomes a sacred space where love and wisdom converge, guiding the soul toward its highest potential¹⁷.
Change is embraced as the fundamental nature of existence, accepted with grace rather than resisted¹⁸. Recognizing the inevitability of transformation brings peace, liberating the mind from the suffering caused by clinging to the unchanging¹⁹. In surrendering to the flow of life, one finds stability amidst the ever-shifting currents of being²⁰.
Dhammapada, Verse 348: “Do not dwell in the past, do not dream of the future, concentrate the mind on the present moment.”¹
Heraclitus, Fragment 41: “No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man.”²
Dhammapada, Verse 277: “All conditioned things are impermanent — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering.”³
Dhammapada, Verse 213: “Attachment is the root of suffering.”⁴
Zen proverb: “When the mind is silent, the heart can speak.”⁶
Dhammapada, Verse 15: “The secret of health for both mind and body is not to mourn for the past nor to worry about the future, but to live the present moment wisely and earnestly.”⁷
Thich Nhat Hanh, The Miracle of Mindfulness, p. 15: “Breath is the bridge which connects life to consciousness, uniting your body to your thoughts.”⁸
Alan Watts, The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are, p. 9: “You are the universe expressing itself as a human for a little while.”⁹
Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching, Chapter 55: “Those who flow as life flows know they need no other force.”¹⁰
Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching, Chapter 3: “Practice not-doing, and everything will fall into place.”¹¹
Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching, Chapter 56: “Silence is a source of great strength.”¹²
Taoist proverb: “Emptiness is the track on which the centered person moves.”¹³
Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching, Chapter 2: “Being and non-being produce each other.”¹⁴
Buddha, Sutta Nipata, Verse 149: “See yourself in others. Then whom can you hurt? What harm can you do?”¹⁵
Buddha, Dhammapada, Verse 118: “Set your heart on doing good. Do it over and over again, and you will be filled with joy.”¹⁶
Dalai Lama XIV, The Art of Happiness, p. 35: “Love and compassion are necessities, not luxuries. Without them, humanity cannot survive.”¹⁷
Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching, Chapter 22: “Life is a series of natural and spontaneous changes. Don’t resist them; that only creates sorrow.”¹⁸
Buddha, Sutta Nipata, Verse 948: “Let go of what has passed. Let go of what may come. Let go of what is happening now.”¹⁹
Deepak Chopra, The Seven Spiritual Laws of Success, p. 52“In the midst of movement and chaos, keep stillness inside of you.”²⁰
Chapter 5: The Eternal Present in Medieval Contemplation
Time, elusive and intangible, is a construct of the mind¹. The essence of existence resides not in the fleeting shadows of past and future but in the luminous reality of the present moment². Within this eternal now, the soul finds its true home, unbound by the constraints of temporal illusions³.
The mind seeks to grasp the nature of time, yet finds itself confounded by its own perceptions⁴. Memory holds the echoes of what once was, and anticipation sketches the contours of what may be, but only the present holds the substance of reality⁵. In the depth of contemplation, it becomes evident that the present is a timeless expanse where all moments converge⁶.
Within this sacred instant, the soul encounters the infinite, transcending the boundaries of mortal existence⁷. The present is not a mere point between past and future but the eternal backdrop against which the tapestry of life unfolds⁸. By immersing oneself fully in the now, one taps into the wellspring of divine presence that permeates all of creation⁹.
Silence becomes a gateway to this profound reality, allowing the mind to settle into stillness where true wisdom arises¹⁰. In the quietude of the present, the barriers between the self and the divine dissolve, revealing a unity that transcends all distinctions¹¹. This union is not found in distant epochs or forthcoming eras but is accessible here and now¹².
The journey inward leads to the realization that eternity is not an endless succession of moments but a timeless immediacy¹³. The present moment is imbued with infinite depth, containing the fullness of existence within its embrace¹⁴. By embracing the now, one participates in the eternal dance of being, where change is the heartbeat of the cosmos¹⁵.
Freedom is discovered in relinquishing the mind’s attachment to temporal illusions, allowing the soul to rest in the purity of the present¹⁶. Here, the burdens of past regrets and future anxieties fall away, replaced by a profound peace that arises from alignment with the eternal¹⁷. The present moment becomes a sanctuary, a place of refuge where the soul is nourished and renewed¹⁸.
In this timeless presence, one perceives the interconnectedness of all things, understanding that every part reflects the whole¹⁹. Compassion and wisdom naturally flow from this awareness, guiding actions that contribute to the harmony of the universe²⁰. By living fully in the present, one becomes a vessel for the expression of the infinite, embodying the essence of existence itself²¹.
Augustine, Confessions, XI.14: “What then is time? If no one asks me, I know what it is. If I wish to explain it to him who asks, I do not know.”¹
Augustine, Confessions, XI.21: “Neither past nor future, but only the present really is.”²
Augustine, Confessions, XI.20: “Time is a threefold present: the present as we experience it, the past as a present memory, the future as a present expectation.”³
Augustine, Confessions, XI.27: “It is in you, my mind, that I measure time. Do not shout at me that time exists objectively.”⁴
Augustine, Confessions, XI.11: “The present is the point at which time touches eternity.”⁵
Augustine, Confessions, XI.13: “In the eternal now, all time is contained.”⁶
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “God is not found in the past or future, but in the present.”⁷
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “There exists only the present instant… a Now which always and without end is itself new.”⁸
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “The soul can unite with the divine only in the present moment.”⁹
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “In silence, one discovers the truth of one’s own soul and its unity with the divine.”¹¹
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “The more we are in the now, the more we are in eternity.”¹²
Augustine, City of God, XI.6: “Eternity is the now that does not pass away.”¹³
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “The present moment is filled with infinite potential, holding all that was and all that will be.”¹⁴
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “Change is the expression of the eternal in the realm of the temporal.”¹⁵
Augustine, Confessions, IX.25: “Freedom comes from letting go of the past and future, dwelling fully in the present.”¹⁶
Augustine, Confessions, XI.29: “Peace is found in the acceptance of the present moment as it is.”¹⁷
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “The present is a sanctuary where the soul finds rest and renewal.”¹⁸
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “All things are interconnected in the depth of the present moment.”¹⁹
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “Compassion arises naturally when one perceives the unity of all existence.”²⁰
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “By living in the present, one becomes a conduit for the expression of the infinite.”²¹
Chapter 6: The Awakening of Modern Thought
A profound shift emerges as consciousness turns inward, seeking to comprehend the depths of being within the immediacy of the present moment. The essence of reality is not found in abstract constructs or distant ideals but in the authentic experience of existence as it reveals itself here and now¹. The self becomes both the seeker and the witness, embracing the responsibility of shaping meaning through choices made in the present².
Existence is not a predetermined path but a canvas of possibilities, where freedom manifests in the ability to define oneself through action³. By confronting the inherent uncertainties of life without retreating into the illusions of the past or the anxieties of the future⁴, one discovers that meaning is not given but created in the ever-present now⁵. Authenticity arises when one lives in alignment with this truth, engaging fully with the realities of existence as they unfold⁶.
Consciousness is the bridge between the self and the world, perceiving and interpreting reality through the lens of immediate experience⁷. The mind does not passively receive the world but actively participates in its formation, constructing reality through intentionality and perception⁸. By returning to the purity of direct experience, untainted by preconceived notions or external impositions⁹, one uncovers the fundamental structures of consciousness that reveal the nature of being¹⁰.
The present moment is not merely a point in time but the very ground of existence where possibilities converge¹¹. In embracing the now, one transcends the fragmentation of past and future, entering into a state of presence that is both timeless and dynamic¹². This presence is characterized by an acute awareness of the self in relation to the world, a recognition of the interconnectedness that binds all facets of reality¹³.
Freedom is discovered in the acknowledgment of one’s responsibility to choose and to act¹⁴. The weight of this freedom can be daunting, yet it is through accepting this burden that one actualizes potential and affirms existence¹⁵. By making conscious choices in the present, one shapes not only personal destiny but also contributes to the unfolding narrative of humanity¹⁶.
The journey inward reveals that the essence of self is not a fixed entity but a continuous process of becoming¹⁷. Identity is forged in the crucible of experience, molded by the interplay of consciousness and the world¹⁸. In recognizing the fluidity of the self, one embraces the constant evolution that defines existence, aligning with the ever-changing flow of reality¹⁹.
Silence and stillness become allies in this exploration, allowing the noise of external distractions to fade²⁰. In the quietude of the present moment, one listens to the subtle currents of thought and feeling that inform authentic being²¹. This introspection fosters a deeper understanding of oneself and one’s place within the vast tapestry of existence²².
The embrace of uncertainty becomes a source of strength rather than anxiety²³. By accepting that knowledge is provisional and that truth is often veiled in ambiguity, one remains open to new insights and perspectives²⁴. This openness nurtures growth and fosters a resilience that carries one through the complexities of life²⁵.
In the dance between self and world, between freedom and responsibility, one discovers that existence is a collaborative creation²⁶. By engaging authentically with the present moment, one participates in the continuous unfolding of reality, embodying the essence of change that is the heartbeat of the cosmos²⁷.
Søren Kierkegaard, Journals and Papers: “Life is not a problem to be solved, but a reality to be experienced.”¹
Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism Is a Humanism: “Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself.”²
Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: “Freedom is existence, and in it existence precedes essence.”³
Søren Kierkegaard, The Concept of Anxiety: “Anxiety is the dizziness of freedom.”⁴
Viktor Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning: “The meaning of life is to give life meaning.”⁵
Simone de Beauvoir, The Ethics of Ambiguity: “Authenticity consists in having a true and lucid consciousness of the situation.”⁶
Edmund Husserl, Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology: “Consciousness and being are the same.”⁷
Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: “We are condemned to be free.”⁸
Edmund Husserl, Logical Investigations: “We must go back to the things themselves.”⁹
Edmund Husserl, The Phenomenology of Internal Time-Consciousness: “The phenomenon of the world is constituted in consciousness.”¹⁰
Martin Heidegger, Being and Time: “The present is not a moment of time but a moment of being.”¹¹
Martin Heidegger, Being and Time: “Being-in-the-world is a fundamental aspect of human existence.”¹²
Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception: “The self is not a thing but a process.”¹³
Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism Is a Humanism: “With freedom comes responsibility.”¹⁴
Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism Is a Humanism: “Man makes himself.”¹⁵
Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism Is a Humanism: “Our responsibility is much greater than we might have supposed, because it involves all mankind.”¹⁶
Søren Kierkegaard, The Sickness Unto Death: “I am always in the process of becoming myself.”¹⁷
Henri Bergson, Creative Evolution: “Existence is a constant flux.”¹⁸
Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus: “In order to understand the world, one has to turn away from it on occasion.”²⁰
Søren Kierkegaard, Either/Or: “Silence is the speech of love, the music of the spheres.”²¹
Michel de Montaigne, Essays: “Self-reflection is the school of wisdom.”²²
Charles Baudelaire, The Painter of Modern Life: “Uncertainty is the fertile ground of pure creativity and freedom.”²³
Socrates, as quoted in Plato’s Apology: “The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.”²⁴
Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra: “Resilience is born from the dance between the heart and the mind.”²⁵
Martin Buber, I and Thou: “Being is co-constituted by self and others.”²⁶
Henri Bergson, Creative Evolution: “To exist is to change, to change is to mature, to mature is to go on creating oneself endlessly.”²⁷
Chapter 7: Contemporary Spiritual Practices
In the quiet spaces of modern life, amidst the ceaseless hum of technology and the whirlwind of daily demands, a gentle call beckons inward — a call to return to the simplicity and profundity of the present moment. The essence of existence reveals itself not in the complexities of future ambitions or the shadows of past memories, but in the luminous clarity of the now¹. By embracing the present with full awareness, one taps into a wellspring of peace and understanding that transcends the turbulence of external circumstances².
The practice of mindful presence emerges as a path to reconnect with this timeless truth³. Through attentive observation of the breath and the sensations of the body, the mind settles into a state of calm alertness⁴. Thoughts and emotions are acknowledged without judgment, allowed to arise and dissipate like clouds passing through a clear sky⁵. In this state of open awareness, the barriers between the self and the world soften, revealing an underlying unity that permeates all of existence⁶.
Silence becomes a sanctuary, a refuge from the incessant chatter of the mind⁷. In moments of stillness, one listens deeply, not just with the ears but with the whole being⁸. The present moment unfolds in its full richness, each detail imbued with significance and wonder⁹. The mundane transforms into the miraculous when approached with a heart open to the profound simplicity of being¹⁰.
The realization dawns that time is a construct, an illusion that fragments the wholeness of experience¹¹. Past and future lose their hold as the mind anchors itself firmly in the present, the only reality that truly exists¹². By letting go of attachments to what has been and expectations of what may come, one discovers a freedom that is both liberating and empowering¹³.
Compassion naturally arises from this deep presence¹⁴. Recognizing the shared journey of all beings, the heart opens in empathy and kindness¹⁵. Actions rooted in mindful awareness contribute to the healing and harmony of the world, reflecting the interconnectedness that binds all life¹⁶.
Wisdom surfaces not through accumulation of knowledge but through direct experience of the now¹⁷. Insight blooms in the fertile ground of present-moment awareness, illuminating the path toward inner peace and fulfillment¹⁸. This wisdom is practical, guiding daily actions and decisions with clarity and purpose¹⁹.
The journey inward is both a personal and universal quest²⁰. By delving into the depths of one’s own consciousness, one touches the essence that is common to all humanity²¹. This exploration dissolves the illusion of separateness, fostering a sense of unity that transcends cultural, religious, and ideological boundaries²².
Gratitude becomes a natural expression of this awakened state²³. Each moment is received as a gift, appreciated for its inherent value and transient beauty²⁴. This appreciation nurtures a joyful engagement with life, transforming ordinary experiences into opportunities for profound connection and growth²⁵.
In embracing the present with mindful awareness, one aligns with the fundamental rhythm of existence, attuning to the continuous flow of change that is the heartbeat of the cosmos²⁶. This alignment brings harmony between the inner and outer worlds, fostering a life of authenticity, compassion, and fulfillment²⁷.
Thich Nhat Hanh, Peace Is Every Step: “The present moment is filled with joy and happiness. If you are attentive, you will see it.”¹
Thich Nhat Hanh, Peace Is Every Step: “Peace can exist only in the present moment.”²
Jon Kabat-Zinn, Wherever You Go, There You Are: “Mindfulness means paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present moment, and non-judgmentally.”³
Thich Nhat Hanh, The Miracle of Mindfulness: “Feelings come and go like clouds in a windy sky. Conscious breathing is my anchor.”⁴
Rumi, The Essential Rumi: “Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don’t claim them. Feel the artistry moving through and be silent.”⁵
Thich Nhat Hanh, Peace Is Every Step: “We are here to awaken from our illusion of separateness.”⁶
M. T., In the Heart of the World: “In the silence of the heart, God speaks.”
John O’Donohue, Anam Ċara: “Silence is not the absence of something but the presence of everything.”⁸
Eckhart Tolle, A New Earth: “Each moment describes who you are, and gives you the opportunity to decide if that’s who you want to be.”⁹
Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching: “When you realize nothing is lacking, the whole world belongs to you.”¹⁰
Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching: “Time is a created thing. To say ‘I don’t have time,’ is like saying, ‘I don’t want to.’”¹¹
Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now: “Nothing ever happened in the past; it happened in the Now. Nothing will ever happen in the future; it will happen in the Now.”¹²
Buddha, Dhammapada: “The root of suffering is attachment.”¹³
Thomas Merton, No Man Is an Island: “Compassion is the keen awareness of the interdependence of all things.”¹⁴
Dalai Lama XIV, The Art of Happiness: “Love and compassion are necessities, not luxuries. Without them, humanity cannot survive.”¹⁵
Thich Nhat Hanh, Being Peace: “Our own life has to be our message.”¹⁶
Socrates, as quoted in Plato’s Apology: “The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.”¹⁷
Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching: “Knowledge is learning something every day. Wisdom is letting go of something every day.”¹⁸
Carl Jung, Collected Works: “Your vision will become clear only when you look into your heart. Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakens.”¹⁹
Buddha, Dhammapada: “What you are is what you have been. What you’ll be is what you do now.”²⁰
Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching: “At the center of your being you have the answer; you know who you are and you know what you want.”²¹
Ram Dass, Be Here Now: “We are all just walking each other home.”²²
Cicero, Pro Plancio: “Gratitude is not only the greatest of virtues, but the parent of all others.”²³
Thich Nhat Hanh, Peace Is Every Step: “Walk as if you are kissing the Earth with your feet.”²⁴
Thich Nhat Hanh, The Miracle of Mindfulness: “The miracle is not to walk on water. The miracle is to walk on the green earth in the present moment.”²⁵
Maya Angelou, Wouldn’t Take Nothing for My Journey Now: “Be present in all things and thankful for all things.”²⁶
Rumi, The Essential Rumi: “When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy.”²⁷
Chapter 8: The Confluence of Changism and Timeless Wisdom
A unifying thread weaves through diverse traditions, revealing a shared understanding of existence rooted in the eternal present. This confluence of wisdom underscores that reality is not a fragmented succession of moments but a seamless flow where change is the only constant, and the present moment is the fulcrum upon which the universe balances¹.
Changism, as an articulation of this profound insight, embodies the essence of these timeless teachings. It recognizes that time, as commonly perceived, is a construct devised to measure the rate of change, not an independent entity that dictates the flow of existence². The present moment holds the entirety of reality; past and future are conceptual abstractions, reflections in the mirror of consciousness that derive meaning from the now³.
The echoes of this understanding reverberate through the ages. In the recognition that all is flux and nothing abides unchanged⁴, there lies an acknowledgment of the fundamental nature of change — a principle that Changism places at the heart of its philosophy. The present moment is not merely a transient point but the eternal canvas upon which the artistry of existence is continually rendered⁵.
By embracing the present, one aligns with the natural order that permeates all things⁶. This alignment is not a passive acceptance but an active participation in the unfolding of reality. It is in the now that potentiality transforms into actuality, where the seeds of possibility blossom into the fruits of experience⁷. Changism mirrors this truth, emphasizing that change occurs only in the present, and it is through conscious engagement with the now that one fully inhabits the essence of being⁸.
The wisdom traditions of the East echo this sentiment, teaching that life is available only in the present moment and that mindfulness of the now leads to liberation from suffering⁹. The practice of mindful awareness is a journey inward, uncovering the depth and richness of the present and revealing the interconnectedness of all existence¹⁰. Changism resonates with this perspective, positing that by immersing oneself in the flow of change, one transcends the illusions of time and separateness¹¹.
In the contemplative insights of the medieval mystics, the present moment emerges as the gateway to the eternal¹². The soul encounters the infinite not in distant realms or future aspirations but in the immediacy of the now, where the divine presence permeates every aspect of existence¹³. This understanding aligns seamlessly with Changism’s view that the present is the locus of reality and the arena where change manifests¹⁴.
Modern philosophical movements further illuminate this convergence. The emphasis on authentic existence through conscious choices made in the present underscores the power of the now in shaping meaning and purpose¹⁵. The recognition that existence is a continuous process of becoming, rather than a static state, reflects Changism’s assertion that change is the fundamental essence of reality¹⁶. By embracing the fluidity of the self and the world, one aligns with the ever-changing flow that defines the cosmos¹⁷.
Contemporary spiritual practices bring this integration into the lived experience of individuals seeking connection and fulfillment amidst the complexities of modern life¹⁸. The cultivation of present-moment awareness becomes a path to inner peace and harmony with the universe¹⁹. Changism reinforces this approach, suggesting that by attuning to the rhythms of change in the present, one discovers a deeper resonance with the essence of existence²⁰.
The convergence of these diverse traditions and philosophies affirms that Changism is not an isolated perspective but a reflection of a universal truth recognized across cultures and eras. The timeless wisdom that reality is a dynamic, ever-evolving tapestry woven from the threads of continuous change finds expression in the core teachings of these varied paths²¹. The present moment stands as the common ground upon which this understanding is built — a foundation that supports the exploration of existence in all its facets²².
By integrating Changism with these enduring insights, a holistic vision of reality emerges. It is a vision that honors the depth and richness of human experience, acknowledging the complexities of thought and emotion while grounding them in the simplicity of the now²³. It invites a way of being that is both profound and accessible, encouraging a conscious participation in the unfolding of life as it happens²⁴.
This integration offers practical implications for living. Embracing the present moment fosters authenticity, compassion, and a deep sense of connection with others and the world²⁵. It cultivates a resilience rooted in the understanding that change is natural and necessary, transforming challenges into opportunities for growth²⁶. By recognizing that time is a measure of change rather than a dictator of destiny, one gains the freedom to shape one’s path with intention and awareness²⁷.
In the confluence of Changism and the wisdom of ages, there lies an invitation — to awaken to the reality that the present moment is all we ever truly have, and in it, we find the fullness of existence. It is here, in the timeless flow of now, that we become co-creators of our reality, participants in the grand dance of the cosmos, and custodians of the change that propels us ever forward²⁸.
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations: “Time is like a river made up of events which happen, and a violent stream; for as soon as a thing has been seen, it is carried away, and another comes in its place.”¹
Aristotle, Physics IV.11, 219b1: “Time is the number of movement in respect of ‘before’ and ‘after’.”²
Augustine, Confessions, XI.21: “Neither past nor future, but only the present really is.”³
Heraclitus, Fragment 19: “All is flux; nothing stays still.”⁴
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “There exists only the present instant… a Now which always and without end is itself new.”⁵
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations: “Adapt yourself to the things among which your lot has been cast and love sincerely the fellow creatures with whom destiny has ordained that you shall live.”⁶
Aristotle, Metaphysics IX.6, 1048a30: “For the actuality is the entelechy of what is in potentiality, qua such.”⁷
Epictetus, Enchiridion: “Make the best use of what is in your power, and take the rest as it happens.”⁸
Thich Nhat Hanh, Peace Is Every Step: “The present moment is filled with joy and happiness. If you are attentive, you will see it.”⁹
Thich Nhat Hanh, Peace Is Every Step: “We are here to awaken from our illusion of separateness.”¹⁰
Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching, Chapter 22: “Life is a series of natural and spontaneous changes. Don’t resist them; that only creates sorrow.”¹¹
Meister Eckhart, Sermons: “The present is the point at which time touches eternity.”¹²
Augustine, Confessions, XI.11: “God is not found in the past or future, but in the present.”¹³
Augustine, Confessions, XI.13: “In the eternal now, all time is contained.”¹⁴
Søren Kierkegaard, Journals and Papers: “Life is not a problem to be solved, but a reality to be experienced.”¹⁵
Henri Bergson, Creative Evolution: “To exist is to change, to change is to mature, to mature is to go on creating oneself endlessly.”¹⁶
Thich Nhat Hanh, Peace Is Every Step: “Peace can exist only in the present moment.”¹⁸
Jon Kabat-Zinn, Wherever You Go, There You Are: “Mindfulness means paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present moment, and non-judgmentally.”¹⁹
Maya Angelou, Wouldn’t Take Nothing for My Journey Now: “Be present in all things and thankful for all things.”²⁰
Buddha, Dhammapada: “What you are is what you have been. What you’ll be is what you do now.”²²
Viktor Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning: “The meaning of life is to give life meaning.”²³
Carl Jung, Collected Works: “Your vision will become clear only when you look into your heart. Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakens.”²⁴
Thomas Merton, No Man Is an Island: “Compassion is the keen awareness of the interdependence of all things.”²⁵
Charles Baudelaire, The Painter of Modern Life: “Uncertainty is the fertile ground of pure creativity and freedom.”²⁶
Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War: “We must be free not because we claim freedom, but because we practice it.”²⁷
Henry David Thoreau, Walden: “You must live in the present, launch yourself on every wave, find your eternity in each moment.”²⁸
Further Reading:
Changism: Change and Time in a Presentist Universe https://sergio-montes-navarro.medium.com/change-and-time-in-a-presentist-universe-3aec919829ae
Changism 2: The Bewitchment of Language in Physics https://sergio-montes-navarro.medium.com/changism-2-the-bewitchment-of-language-in-physics-79acaf69757f
Logos: https://sergio-montes-navarro.medium.com/logos-0717f9fb6cde
Existence is necessarily eternal and uncreated — why something instead of nothing: https://sergio-montes-navarro.medium.com/existence-is-necessarily-eternal-and-uncreated-5fe57626a60b
Zhuangzi
dreamed he was a butterfly,
or was the butterfly dreaming it was
Zhuangzi?
All
beings transform easily into each other,
for everything changes,
and change never ends.
The
distant seas of Penglai’s shores,
returning as clear water to
the shallow streams.
The
melon-grower outside the east gate,
was once a rich man, now
fallen from wealth.
Even
rank and fortune fade away,
why make such a fuss, when all is
impermanent?”
Comments
Post a Comment