Essay 22-Space and Time

Opening

Throughout most of my essays, I have discussed mostly ontological concepts and the concept of objects. There is one particular metaphysical concept which is yet to be properly explained by the virtue of having been partially explained and being not as important as ontology, change, and objects in general. It is the concept of space and time. Time has been explained rather thoroughly from the concept of change, but admittedly space isn’t explained that much, as such this essay will attempt to explore such concepts.

Space

It is true that I personally find difficulties in forming any good definition of space. We can try explain it from its key properties. It is also important to differentiate philosophical space from physical or mathematical space. Mathematical space is actually still related to philosophical space but physical space not so much. Space in philosophy is simply the understanding of all space in its most abstract forms, without involving the mathematics of space.

Space can be described as a medium for objects to interact with each other, in other words it is a medium of change and also a medium of difference. It has the consequence towards consciousness of differentiating between different objects and also focusing on individual relative objects. Unlike Kant’s idea that space is a mental construct, space in this system is a completely real and independent object from our conscious mind as all objects are. This is guaranteed by the law of conscious experience.

Space like all other objects is uncreated, and cannot be said to be designed by any particular creator to suit the interests of consciousness. However, we identify that it has such consequences for our consciousness. The region that we consider to be “space” is a region of concrete nothingness, it is not true nothingness, but a reflection of it on the region, as such we can “experience” nothingness.

When 2 objects are separated by space, it is simply separated by nothingness, a region of nothingness which has dimensions and thus acting as its own object with minimalistic properties in comparison to the more maximalist properties of the 2 objects separated by the region of nothingness. As such it is arguable that space is the phenomenon of the separation of a presence and an absence, for something cannot be there and not there at the same time, as such they become separate, resulting in the phenomenon of space.

It is arguable whether space is realistic or not. For sure not all absolute objects contain space, as we can imagine an object which does not contain space. Yet as we are used to a spatial environment, the objects we imagine are often spatially oriented, with spatial properties such as dimensions. The question of whether there exists space between the absolute objects is difficult to answer or perhaps impossible to answer. There is for sure some logical space which exists, but physical space might not exist.

As such we cannot say that all worlds exist in a single point, rather they exist everywhere without necessarily any space dividing them. They are not stacked upon another, nor are they arranged in any spatial manner as such arrangements would imply some space among the absolute objects. I would say then that the truth of space at the level of absolute objects is a matter of reasonable faith. It can be supported by reasoning, but not justified at the absolute level.

I personally believe that space does not exist at the highest level of objects. My reasoning initially stems from the idea that absolute objects have as minimal relationships with each other, with the only necessary relationship being the dynamic relationship. Otherwise, there is no relationship. Let us say the object of nothingness, it cannot possibly have any spatial relationship with other objects, as such it can be said that at such level of reality, there is no space, otherwise it violates the idea of nothingness.

Time

Time has actually been thoroughly discussed in the ideas of change. We can for sure label points of time and reason that objects at different points of time are necessarily different objects. Philosophical time must also be differentiated with physical time, as philosophical time is time in its most abstract forms. Time, as opposed to space, is realistic and applies to all of reality as proven by the concept of extrinsic property.

Therefore, there is such a thing as realistic time or absolute time, where there is no absolute space. The notion of time might possibly be a consequence of change. Imagine a potential reality where there is absolutely no change, then how can we differentiate between different points of time? Time is then another way of separating different objects but not at a single time. As opposed to space where we can see different objects at the same time, in time we see different objects once at a time.

A single point of time is then simply the time at which an object stops changing before it changes again. That point of time has passed when the entirety of reality has made the smallest objective change. In this physical universe, we identify that point to be the Planck time, which is the time taken by light travelling the Planck length. As the Planck length is the smallest meaningful distance while lightspeed is the universal speed limit, or the highest speed possible in this universe.

As discussed before, time never repeats and is such comparable to such analogy. Time is either a boat which travels an infinite stream of river without ever returning to the same spot, or a gate, where the future passes through the gate and then leaves the gate becoming the past, while the gate is the present. Meanwhile everything passes the gate only once in its entire existence and once it passes it will never pass again.

Several Syntheses

Space and time are equal in the sense that they are both obtained not through the deduction of ontology but through the conscious experience. They are experienced objects and that is how they are known. Both space and time also facilitate the separation of different objects or plurality, space is the separation of difference such that consciousness can experience all objects at once, and time is the separation of difference such that consciousness experiences objects with a beginning or end, with relative creation and destruction.

The reasoning of space and time may be based on the idea that no 2 objects can be each other at once. A car cannot be both a car and an airplane at once, possessing the exact same space and time without causing some form of interaction which destroys or damages both objects and radically alters it. Unfortunately, that is a physical centric example, though it is still valid as I see it. An object cannot be both itself and be nothing at the same point, as such surely it must be separated. This is an example of primitive or primal space, separation between existence and nothingness.

The idea of non-duality is applicable to time as well, as an object cannot be an object and be nothing at the same time, as such the separation exists. We cannot experience nothingness and something at the same time, as such there is a temporal separation. This might be the reason of time. As such space and time becomes the solution towards the problem of contradiction between existences and duality of existences. It is not that they are designed to be such, but that they have such consequences.

I believe time to be more fundamental than space by the virtue of its abstract nature. Space is highly concrete, but time can be applied to even abstract objects having no place in space. Space is also more complex than the simple linear time. Space can also be said to be found in the idea of time, as time observed in totality is a line separating different objects. If God were to observe the totality of history and time, it would appear as a line and as such as some sort of primal space.

Some sort of logical space does and must exist between different absolute objects, in the sense that an object is itself and is not any other object. They cannot be one at the same space or time. Our universe cannot be both our universe and the universe of Star Trek if proven that our universe is only our universe and not the universe of Star Trek. As such there must be logical separation between our universe and the universe of Star Trek. Though I doubt the presence of any physical like or 3-dimensional space between the absolute objects.

Closing

We may summarize that both space and time are a medium of difference which causes a consequence for consciousness to observe objects in such light. Space and time are both real and independent of consciousness and as such is not a mental construct or a phenomenal construct, as opposed to some other ideas. They differ in some ways, but are highly connected and share many similarities still. With that, this essay is declared to be done.