Is Time an Anachronistic Concept in Scientific and Metaphysical Philosophy?

Dr B S Ramachandra Centre for Fundamental Research and Creative Education Bangalore, India Invited talk in Proc. A Dialog across Traditions: Modern science and ancient insights on reality. Eds. S. Roy, D. Gangopadhyay and R. Srikanth, (PPISR, Bangalore) Oct 25-27, 2016⇤ (Dated: October 25, 2016) The problem of time in natural philosophy and metaphysical philosophy is revisited from a fresh perspective to set the stage for a true dialogue between these, in principle, complementary and yet in practice, conflicting domains and fields. The idea that time could possibly not be a fundamental concept in either or both of these domains is proposed. The problem of time in the scientific context of fundamental physics in general, and candidate theories of quantum gravity in particular, is outlined. A distinction is made between physical and psychological time. It is also pointed out that the topological and geometric structures of the spaces corresponding to these could be drastically di↵erent and has been overlooked. To facilitate the dialogue and acquaint members of each domain to tap the founts of knowledge, wisdom and inspiration in the other, diverse sources have been alluded to and quoted at length in order to bring as much insight as is possible to bear on the issue.

I. INTRODUCTION primitive and intuitive and on the verge of being self- evident. But the organization of these questions into a “my own expectation is that the notion conceptual framework that truly defines and addresses of time is extremely natural to us, but only them are not necessarily so self-evident. It is at this in the same manner in which other intuitive point that the departure from the nave philosophical ideas are rooted in our intuition because they musings of everyday life to that of the philosophical are features of the small garden in which we framework[2] takes place. But this departure though are accustomed to living...Intuition is not a radical is, as exemplified by the unending debates being good guide for understanding natural regimes constantly carried out between practitioners of the two so distant from our daily experience. The best domains- is by no means complete. A tangled web guide is provided by the theories of the world of ill-defined concepts and systems of concepts make that have proven empirically e↵ective, and attempts at completeness dicult if not impossible to therefore summarize the knowledge we have attain. There is then no alternative than to seek an about Nature. In particular, general relativ- approach that is in itself as free of previous paradigms ity challenges strongly our intuitive notion of as possible. a universal flow of time. I think we must take its lesson seriously.” –Carlo Rovelli. The concept of time that constitutes an almost universal “When we look at existence in itself, Time backdrop of all philosophical debate and dialogue is and Space disappear. If there is any exten- perhaps the most involved and elusive of all concepts. sion, it is not spatial but a psychological ex- Nevertheless, it is a saving grace to keep in mind, as tension; if there is any duration, it is not Albert Einstein states most clearly in his “Meaning temporal but a psychological duration; and it of Relativity”[3], that “The only justification for our is easy to see that this extension and dura- concepts and system of concepts is that they serve to tion are only symbols which represent to the represent the complex of our experiences, beyond that mind something not translatable into intellec- they have no legitimacy”. In seeking, therefore, an tual terms” –Sri Aurobindo, The Life Divine. approach geared towards representing the complex of our experiences, we need to have no hesitation to discard All natural philosophy and all metaphysical any concepts and system of concepts that cannot be philosophy[1] begins with the need to address cer- so justified. One such concept we hold is that of time. tain questions. The questions themselves may be In many a case, both in natural and metaphysical philosophy, it lacks justification precisely in representing experiences that are primitive and intuitive and yet on which the very foundations of the domains have ⇤[email protected] been laid. In the former namely natural philosophy, 2 it lacks justification due to the circular nature of its discussion carried on by Einstein and Bohr. What is definition. In the latter namely metaphysical philosophy, striking to note is that their discussion, and as Bohm it lacks justification due to the non-existent nature of and Peat point out, -not dialogue, was in the very same its definition. And since any attempt at questioning domain of inquiry namely physics in particular and such a deep-rooted idea runs the risk of illuminating natural philosophy in general. Nevertheless, the two confusion rather than bringing clarity, it is wiser to physicists could not see eye to eye on the issue. What take an approach that is as direct as possible. We started out as a dialogue eventually broke down onto a propose that the scientific and philosophical problems discussion in which each peesisted in adhering to their associated with time are in themselves an outgrowth of own opinion and point of view. In the words of Bohm its definition and how in our view, this concept of time and Peat, itself is perhaps neither well-founded nor well-defined. “Both Einstein and Bohr emphasized particular notions of meaning in the informal language of physics. But while, for Bohr, the meaning of fundamental concepts II. THE DIALOGUE could be ambiguous, in Einstein’s view they had to be unambiguous. The two men engaged in a long series of Before we enter into considerations on natural and meta- discussions about these issues over the following years. physical philosophy, it is important to set the tone and However, in retrospect, it becomes clear that it was spirit of our inquiry. As the great french mathematician never possible to resolve the issues that stood between Henri Poincare warns, “to reject everything or to accept them because their di↵erent uses of informal language everything are two equally convenient propositions. Both implied conflicting notions about the nature of truth and dispense with the necessity of reflection”. Therefore, reality and about what is an acceptable type of scientific true inquiry ought to take its stand on a position of theory. Bohr began to feel that Einstein had turned in a dispassionate freedom and independence. What we mean reactionary way against his own original, revolutionary is simply that one must be prepared to drop all possible contributions to relativity and quantum theory. Einstein, bias and prejudgment in embarking on a quest that for his part, felt that Bohr had become caught in what seeks to draw parallels or even analogies between two he called a “tranquillizer philosophy” which avoided domains of philosophical discourse. In particular, neither fundamental questions. Although the two men had begun is one to loosely take over strict scientific or natural as good friends, indeed Einstein said that he had initially philosophical concepts onto metaphysical philosophy nor felt a real love for Bohr, they eventually drifted apart to force necessarily subjective elements of metaphysical after many years of fruitless argument and exchanges of philosophy to a rigor mortis of scientific thought. Most challenge and response.” often this entails a war of words in the cloudland of theoretical speculation rather than a dialogue. In view of this it would appear that only one endowed with a pure scientific intellect could address issues of What really then is a dialogue and how does it di↵er natural and metaphysical philosophy in an unbiased from a discussion? Suppose two individuals come manner, free of prejudgment. However, the pure sci- together to have a dialogue. When one says something, entific intellect is in itself an ideal easier stated than the other does not in general respond with exactly the realized. In real life, one rarely develpos the capacity same meaning as the first. When the second individual for “suspension,” that according to Francisco Varela, does respond the first sees perhaps an imperceptible involves removing oneself from the habitual stream of di↵erence between what he meant and what the other thought. Suspension does not entail destroying existing understood. This di↵erence allows for the possibility of mental models of reality but rather, as David Bohm something new. And as the dialogue proceeds, these im- calls, ”hanging our assumptions in front of us,” By perceptible di↵erences could spontaneously self-organize doing so, one can begin to notice one’s thoughts and into a new emergent meaning that is the birth of a new mental models as the workings of one’s own mind. And insight or a radical and novel perspective on the topic of as one becomes aware of one’s thoughts, they begin dialogue. In this sense, a dialogue allows for and thrives to have less influence on what one sees. Suspension on the di↵erences. A discussion, on the contrary, cuts allows one to “see one’s seeing.” Alfred Korzybski’s down on and seeks to minimize the di↵erences thereby [2][4] insightful work also draws attention to the fact that, merely settling on one or the other’s point of view. In a discussion, when one wins the argument the other loses. “philosophers, psychologists, logicians and mathemati- In a dialogue both win and arrive at an entirely new cians don’t realize that their works are the products of perspective or a third alternative. the workings of their own nervous systems”.

This has been pointed out very clearly by David Bohm This key observation has to be kept in mind when and David Peat in their book,“Science, Order and addressing something so common and yet profound an Creativity”. In it they draw attention to the famous issue as that of time in the hope that it may bring much 3 needed awareness to hone as pure a scientific intellect that after all they are after ultimate realities or “vidya,” as possible, for oneself. It is pertinent to elaborate on the knowledge of the unity of things that promises a this a little more because in dealing with this issue, it summom bonum whereas those in the other domain are is possible that one’s thoughts could be predisposed after merely physical sense-based truths or “avidya,” the towards working out deep-seated beliefs and convictions knowledge of the multiplicity of things. This is forgetting rather than in allowing new insights to emerge. Indeed, the fact that the only way to acquire correct usage of as the entrepreneur-neuroscientist, Je↵Hawkins[5] scientific terminology is to grasp the terms technically points out, by sucient exposure to scientific methodology and practice. By ignoring this and interpreting terms conve- “Your neocortex is a complex biological auto-associative niently they are likely to discredit their own domain and memory. During each waking moment, each functional liable to be not taken seriously or even ignored, by practi- region is essentially waiting vigilantly for familiar tioners of science, as experience constantly demonstrates. patterns or pattern fragments to come in...Thoughts and memories are associatively linked, and again, random Here it is good to keep in mind Swami Vivekananda’s[28] thoughts never really occur. Inputs to the brain auto- comment on Yoga, not the unduly popularized version associatively link to themselves, filling in the present, of Hatha Yoga, (that in itself is nevertheless as profound and auto- associatively link to what normally follows as any other) that goes simply by the name of Yoga but next. We call this chain of memories thought, and the deeper Yoga as spoken of in the Yogic traditions, although its path is not deterministic, we are not fully in control of it either”. “Anything that is secret and mysterious in these systems of Yoga should be at once rejected. The best guide in life Because of this it most often happens that, “We like to is strength. In religion, as in all other matters, discard say that seeing is believing. Yet we see what we expect everything that weakens you, have nothing to do with to see as often as we see what we really see”[5]. it. Mystery-mongering weakens the human brain. It has well-nigh destroyed Yoga - one of the grandest of The scientific method partially overcomes this limitation sciences. From the time it was discovered, more than by seeking order in the midst of apparent chaos. In the four thousand years ago, Yoga was perfectly delineated, language of Neuroscience, what the scientific method ac- formulated, and preached in India. It is a striking fact tually does is to seek invariant representations (not to be that the more modern the commentator the greater the confused with invariant representations in mathematics mistakes he makes, while the more ancient the writer in general and Group theory in particular) and invariant the more rational he is... memories on which to base the theoretical structures. In the first place, there is no mystery in what I teach. But as Neuroscience[5] itself informs us, What little I know I will tell you. So far as I can reason it out I will do so, but as to what I do not know “The world as seen by your senses is never the same; I will simply tell you what the books say. It is wrong like the arrival and departure time of the train, it is to believe blindly. You must exercise your own reason always di↵erent. The way you understand the world is and judgment; you must practice, and see whether these by finding invariant structure in the constantly changing things happen or not. Just as you would take up any stream of input. However, this invariant structure alone other science, exactly in the same manner you should is not sucient to use as a basis for making specific take up this science for study. There is neither mystery predictions”. nor danger in it.”

If, therefore, our object be the setting up of a dialogue, Likewise, those taking their stand on rigorous scientific it is absolutely necessary to cast away preferences to practice read their own meaning into metaphysical or either domains namely natural philosophy or science on mystical concepts and equally loosely interpret terms like one hand and metaphysical philosophy or if we may put dhyana, chitta, manas, buddhi, chakras, samadhi and it for the present purpose, all disciplines that aim at nirvana. It is possible they feel a di↵erent sense of intel- self-realization and self-transcendence or what Aldous lectual superiority with perhaps the idea that after all Huxley calls “The Perennial Philosophy”[42], on the they are after concrete physical realities the knowledge of other hand. Especially is this important because too which is measurable and falsifiable whereas those in the often one reads wrongly into the other domain when other domain are after speculatory truths that have no taking a stand on one. To illustrate, valid basis in experience nor even falsifiable. No doubt this may be the case in certain metaphysical philoso- Many authors taking their stand on metaphysical phi- phies. But this in no way precludes genuine philosophies losophy use scientific terms like space-time, vibration, grounded on subjective experiential realities, as science waves, quantum or quantum theory or the quantum is on the objective reality. This misconception stems field, quite loosely. It is possible that often they feel a from the collateral claims made by the very practitioners sense of intellectual superiority with perhaps the idea of metaphysical philosophy. Collateral in the sense that 4 so-called practitioners are not wanting who base their too rigid to change its structure on a large scale. But the claims more on the purported violation of scientific laws discovery of competitive plasticity suggests there is more or ”miracles,” than on real subjective experience. A to it. As we age, the more we use our native language, true metaphysical philosophy and practice, as in Swami the more it comes to dominate our linguistic map space. Vivekananda[28] warning already quoted above, need Thus it is also because our brain is plastic and because have nothing to do with such violations but rather in plasticity is competitive - that it is so hard to learn a the observation-based experience of subjective realities, new language and end the tyranny of the mother tongue.” methods for which exist that are equally experiential and objective in the sense that they not restricted to a Having now set the stage for a fruitful dialogue, in what “chosen” few but rather all who embark on it may learn follows, we shall outline possible directions one could and verify it. As Sri Aurobindo[54] points out, take in dealing with the issue of time.

“Behind the traditional way of Knowledge, justifying its Not only is time as physical time possibly not well- thought-process of elimination and withdrawal, stands founded and not well-defined but also time as psycho- an overmastering spiritual experience. Deep, intense, logical time. In fact psychological time is even less well- convincing, common to all who have overstepped a defined than physical or chronological time. To see this certain limit of the active mind-belt into horizonless we deal with chronological and psychological time sepa- inner space, this is the great experience of liberation, the rately. consciousness of something within us that is behind and outside of the universe and all its forms, interests, aims, events and happenings, calm, untouched, unconcerned, III. PHYSICAL TIME illimitable, immobile, free, the uplook to something above us indescribable and unseizable into which by abolition “The arrow most dicult to comprehend of our personality we can enter, the presence of an is, ironically, that which is most immediate to omnipresent eternal witness Purusha, the sense of an our experiences, namely the feeling of relent- Infinity or a Timelessness that looks down on us from an less forward temporal progression, according august negation of all our existence and is alone the one to which potentialities seem to transformed thing Real. This experience is the highest sublimation into actualities. But since the advent of spe- of spiritualised mind looking resolutely beyond its own cial relativity has become clear that at least in existence.” some respects this feeling is illusory.” - Roger Penrose. Alfred Korzybski in Science and Sanity[2] makes a per- Time is a concept that is formulated from the percept tinent observation that the practitioner of a particular of change. The raw data that conveyed through the domain tends to more and more narrow one’s doors senses is formed into a percept by the brain. It is of perception onto that domain and while developing mind that turns this into a concept that is given the extraordinary expertise and mastery in that, gradually name of time. Time is not a percept because one never begins to lose sight of the connection of that domain with perceives[14] time, only change. More precisely, time is other equally significant domains thereby losing sight of a name given to a percept constituting change. Having the forest for the trees. That this is no mere metaphor given it a name one has invested it with a technical is demonstrated by neuroplasticity. As Norman Doidge, status in the sense of measurability. However, this one of the pioneers of neuroplasticity writes in his measurement itself depends on a certain condition, that insightful book, “The Brain that Changes Itself”[62], of periodicity. Periodicity is a certain kind of uniformity. It is because of this that the mind can grasp duration at “The competitive nature of plasticity a↵ects us all. all. If there were no periodicity, there would be no way There is an endless war of nerves going on inside each to measure duration. In other words, the mind can grasp of our brains. If we stop exercising our mental skills, we only change in its first order. Second order change or do not just forget them: the brain map space for those change of change it never can unless further conditions skills is turned over to the skills we practice instead. of uniformity are met. To see this more clearly, consider If you ever ask yourself, “How often must I practice the way one sets about measuring time. French, or guitar, or math to keep on top of it?” you are asking a question about competitive plasticity. You 1. One first takes a “periodic motion”. are asking how frequently you must practice one activity 2. One defines time as the completion of one cycle of to make sure its brain map space is not lost to another. the periodic motion. Competitive plasticity in adults even explains some of 3. One takes a particular periodic motion and posits our limitations. Think of the diculty most adults have it as a clock, a standard clock. in learning a second language. The conventional view now is that the diculty arises because the critical period Now, in doing the above, one has made an innocent for language learning has ended, leaving us with a brain though crucial assumption, that one knows what periodic 5 motion is, rather one knows what motion is. But this in time is therefore Newtonian in essence and in operation. itself depends on the measurement of a certain distance Quantum mechanics inherits all the problems associated divided by time which in turn is undefined. Thus one is with Newtonian absolute time. Attempts to reconcile merely tracing out a circular argument in defining time. quantum mechanics with special relativity via so-called Neither in principle nor in practice one has ever defined relativistic quantum mechanics or quantum field theory time in a fundamental sense, unless there exists an abso- are not really resolutions but only compromises. The lute periodic motion. And even if there did exist such an problem of time persists through all these attempts. absolute periodic motion, it would not be amenable to measurement thus rendering itself non-existent. There- fore it would seem that the very basis of time namely its C. Global Lorentzian Time operational measure via a clock is ill-founded. This in its simplest level is the problem of time in natural philos- Special Relativity shatters the idea of absolute time. ophy. The same propagates onto subtler levels through Time is henceforth observer-dependent and relative. the theoretical structures one builds upon it. There is however, the idea of a global inertial frame and global inertial observer. Be it noted, however, that it in no way addresses what the concept of time really is or A. Newtonian Time whether it is fundamental. It merely makes it relative.

Let us now turn to Newtonian time. Newtonian time is absolute. This has been so much delved upon in D. Local Lorentzian Time scientific and philosophical discourse that we merely point out its key aspects. General Relativity takes over special relativistic time and localizes it. However there are no global inertial 1. There are an infinity of inertial frames and inertial frames anymore and no global inertial observers as a re- observers. quirement for consistency of the theory. Only local iner- 2. All inertial observers experience the same duration. tial frames and observers are possible. Here too, there is 3. There exists a signal of propagation that is infinite no question of examining the meaning of time itself. in speed. Action at a distance is its consequence.

Carl Neumann[16] was the first to point out a key E. Quantum Gravitational No-Time requirement for Newtons first law to make sense. He saw that a single object could never be considered to be Canonical or Loop Quantum Gravity is an attempt to obeying the first law. It was necessary to consider at reconcile Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity. least two objects and define what is called an inertial As pointed out clearly by Unruh and Wald[6], this clock. One object could be considered to be free of all leads to serious problems. They show that in trying to forces and therefore equal intervals of its motion could place time on an equal footing as space, as is required be considered to be defining equal intervals of time. by the Einstein principle of relativity, it is necessary The other object could then be compared with the first that time also be endowed with an eigenvalue spectrum and the meaning of uniformity be made clear. But this that is not necessarily continuous. This allows for a in no way answers the objections that Julian Barbour finite probability that a clock could run backwards! perspicuously points out: This is the origin of the infamous “problem of time in quantum gravity.” The analogue of the Schrodinger “But what enables us to talk so confidently of seconds, equation for Quantum Gravity or the Wheeler-De Witt minutes, hours? What justification is there for saying implies that time becomes redundant. Most candidate that a minute today has the same length as a minute to- theories of quantum gravity, and in particular, Loop morrow? What do astronomers mean when they say the Quantum Gravity incorporate this by abolishing time. universe began fifteen billion years ago? Conditions soon Shape Dynamics pioneered by Julian Barbour on the after the Big Bang were utterly unlike the conditions we other hand is built on timeless principles. As Barbour experience now. How can hours then be compared with states[14], hours now?” “I believe the precise manner in which time emerges from the dynamical structure of general relativity has B. Quantum Mechanical Time been poorly understood. This applies especially to the notion of a clock. I think it is wrong to attempt to Quantum Mechanics simply takes over Newtonian ab- identify certain degrees of freedom as a clock and use solute time into its framework. In this sense, Quan- them to describe the behaviour of the remainder. Any tum Mechanics is not as radical a departure from clas- satisfactory operational definition of time must involve sical physics as Special Relativity. Quantum mechanical all the degrees of freedom of the universe on an equal 6 footing, so any such division into clock and residual cannot decline, as they are presented by its own nature, measured system is misleadingly artificial”. but which it cannot answer, as they transcend every faculty of the mind.” Several authors have demonstrated that this is com- pletely consistent structurally and mathematically. In a In a very general sense, one of the key failings of the previous work[21][22][23] we have given a presymplectic human intellect when it proceeds to reason is when it formulation of the problem of time in quantum gravity. imports naively, notions that have their validity only on We have shown that a coherent mathematical approach the ground of physical experience. There is no instance is possible that allows us to deal with quantum gravity in which this happens than in the case of time. In the in a completely timeless manner. physical domain, granted that physical time is defined, the intellect fails to grasp that in measuring time, it is Both the no-time and the timeless approaches thus merely inducing a spatial metric onto an abstract set of do away with the concept of time altogether. This in events or memories constituting a memory space. There another way is perhaps the restoration of consistency is no apriori metric on this space. It is not even clear by resolving contradictions. It is as if Nature restores whether this memory space could be given a topology. harmony by abolishing an ill-defined concept stemming And even if a topology be given, there is the further from an equally ill-defined percept. Again, as Barbour requirement of paracompactness needed to define a dif- observes, ferentiable structure that alone could guarantee a metric. Therefore, the purported mapping from physical space “My position is that instants exist but time does not. By to psychological space is not even a homeomorphism this I mean that the entire content of classical dynam- not to speak of a di↵eomorphism. To really ensure any ics (prerelativistic and specially and generally relativis- isomorphism, the nature of the two spaces are to be tic) can be built up using only relative configurational first examined to discover those elements that could be instants and the intrinsic di↵erences between their con- mapped meaningfully. Ignoring these desiderata, one crete contents. Physics does not need a time dimension; naively assumes that the “time-line” has a natural real in particular, the a priori notion of duration is redun- number line structure. The real number structure is dant...Indeed, time as pure duration is most elusive. We inherited from the spatial intuition and correspondingly never see it; all we ever see are things, and our notion the reasoning and logical conclusions. The intuition re- of time should be derived from the phenomena of change sponsible for the real line is the same as that responsible and motion, which come first. Time must be reduced to for the time-line. If at all there is a geometrical structure change, to di↵erences. It will then be concrete and real. for the psychological time-space it could be projective, This can be done”. rather than metric, in nature. In this regard the math- ematician would be on safer grounds than the natural philosopher or physicist as the mathematician does not F. Emergent Time assume the existence of structures suggested by intuition.

Another approach to define physical time is to treat Why then does the intellect persist in applying to it as an emergent phenomenon. In quantum gravity psychological time-space notions that are only valid in this has been proposed by Isham and Butterfield[7][8]. the physical time-space? Perhaps it is due to the very The other approach could be via complexity theory[93] nature of the organisation of memories in the brain. (see also[96][97][98][99][94] and for in a di↵erent context, The brain, as Je↵Hawkins[87] points our forcefully, see[95]). Time could be considered to be an emergent unlike a computer does not store memories as a strings phenomenon arising from the principle of spontaneous of bits but it stores patterns of invariant memories and self-organization. Time could then be treated as a macro- invariant representations. Both invariant memories and scopically meaningful though microscopically ill-defined invariant representations form a hierarchical structure. concept. It could also be taken to be part of an implicit In physical space, however, one is familiar with the or enfolded order at a certain level and explicit or un- computational model according to which memories folded at another level. This could possibly explain the are arranged in linear strings of bits of information. absence of a fundamental status to time. Indeed, even the cognitive scientific model of the brain has recently come under question by the psychologist Robert Epstein. According to him the instance of the IV. PSYCHOLOGICAL TIME prevailing cognitive model of the brain is similar to that of the hydraulic model proposed in a previous century. Turning to psychological time, one needs to proceed This implies that it is erroneous to take over physical with greater care and caution than in natural philosophy. representations onto the psychological domain without As Kant states in the very beginning of his“Critique due regard. of Pure Reason”,“Human reason, in one sphere of its cognition, is called upon to consider questions, which it Indeed, as one looks at it clearly, there could possibly be 7 no such thing as psychological time per se at all. As J when they turn the torchlight of their criticism on Krishnamurti[63] says, metaphysical philosophy. And as perhaps no one among metaphysical philosophers or Yogins have more “When one looks closely, non-sentimentally, logically, rigourously examined subjective experience than Sri is there psychological time at all? There is psychological Aurobindo[53][54][55][56][57][58][59], it is illuminating time only when one moves away from ”what is”. There to quote him at length here (see also[101] and Lama is psychological time when one realizes that one is violent Anagrika Govinda’s works[102][103][104]). and then proceeds to enquire how to be free of it; that movement away from “what is” is time. But if one is “You ask me whether you have to give up your predilec- totally and completely aware of “what is”, then there is tion for testing before accepting and to accept everything no such time.” in yoga a priori - and by testing you mean testing by the ordinary reason. The only answer I can give to that is This need in no way preclude psychological change. that the experiences of yoga belong to an inner domain But only that time as one treats it to be may not be a and go according to a law of their own, have their own legitimate concept. What one calls as such could merely method of perception, criteria and all the rest of it which be a representation or mapping of physical time onto the are neither those of the domain of the physical senses nor mind-space. And the mapping itself need not exist or of the domain of rational or scientific inquiry. Just as be well-posed. The following points amply illustrate this. scientific inquiry passes beyond that of the physical senses and enters the domain of the infinite and infinitesimal 1. Spatial and temporal perceptions are directly a↵ected about which the senses can say nothing and test nothing by the brain frequencies. Thus if the brain is in the beta, - for one cannot see and touch an electron or know by alpha,theta and delta states, its perception of physical the evidence of the sense-mind whether it exists or not space is progressively diminished until in the threshold or decide by that evidence whether the earth really turns of the delta brain frequency it loses connection with, round the sun and not rather the sun round the earth as and hold on, the physical space altogether. There is our senses and all our physical experience daily tell us - no canonical state which may be taken as the default so the spiritual search passes beyond the domain of scien- perceptual frame of reference. tific or rational inquiry and it is impossible by the aid of the ordinary positive reason to test the data of spiritual 2. Spatial and temporal perceptions are indirectly experience and decide whether those things exist or not a↵ected by the three brain-drives or brains namely the or what is their law and nature. As in Science, so here reptilian-survival, mammalian-socio-emotional and the you have to accumulate experience on experience, follow- human-self aware sectors of the human brain. There ing faithfully the methods laid down by the Guru or by is no canonical sector which may be taken as the the systems of the past, you have to develop an intuitive perceptual frame of reference. discrimination which compares the experiences, see what they mean, how far and in what field each is valid, what is Even from the philosophical-yogic point of view these the place of each in the whole, how it can be reconciled or two observations find justification. The four brain states related with others that at first might seem to contradict may be identified with the four states of consciousness it, etc., etc., until you can move with a secure knowledge or sthanas spoken of in the Mandukya Upanishad, in the vast field of spiritual phenomena. That is the only jagarita-sthana, swapna -sthana, sushupta-sthana,and way to test spiritual experience. I have myself tried the turiya-sthana. The brain sectors on the other hand other method and I have found it absolutely incapable and could correspond to what Sri Aurobindo calls as the inapplicable. On the other hand, if you are not prepared physical-mind, the vital-mind and the mind-proper. to go through all that yourself, - as few can do except those of extraordinary spiritual stature - you have to ac- cept the leading of a Master, as in Science you accept a What then could be the way to investigate time in teacher instead of going through the whole field of Science metaphysical philosophy? This raises another question and its experimentation all by yourself - at least until you in general namely, how much rigour could one bring have accumulated sucient experience and knowledge. If to bear in examining subjective experience? And how that is accepting things a priori, well, you have to accept much of it is mere speculation and belief-system based? a priori. For I am unable to see by what valid tests you The answer is, -as much rigour as one brings in the propose to make the ordinary reason the judge of what is case of natural philosophy. In a sense the methodology beyond it.” is strikingly similar though the methods not unoften diametrically opposite. Indeed, as one begins to proceed along the rigorous path of subjective experience, one begins to depart dramatically, as is the case in nat- V. CONCLUDING REMARKS ural philosophy, from the common-sense of everyday life to the common-sense of the exact sciences[100]. In the present paper we have endeavoured to set the stage This fact is often overlooked by natural philosophers for a fruitful dialogue between natural philosophers and 8 metaphysical philosophers by drawing attention to sev- would get saturated. Evidence suggests that unlearning eral factors that could hinder such a dialogue. As one existing memories is necessary to make room for new begins to become aware of these factors one’s awareness memories in our networks.” itself could empower one to transcend the hindrances. In natural philosophy, it is completely possible to deal Therefore, the oft heard phrase in Zen and the Martial with time being not fundamental technically, especially in Arts literature, “one must empty the cup in order to Quantum Gravity, by bypassing the concept altogether. make room for the new insight that is emerging,” is In metaphysical philosophy, it could be misleading to im- not merely metaphorical but a neurological necessity. port physical or chronological time onto the psychological We are acutely aware that we have merely outlined the domain especially when it comes to dealing with higher possibility that time could be an ill-founded concept in cognitive experiences. both natural and metaphysical philosophy. As to how It is possible that the concept of time has been overly exactly how this may be clarified, much learning and used to the point that it has seeped into the memes of unlearning remains to be done. The full implications human beings so much so that it is hard to see how it for metaphysical philosophy, of such a proposal is in could not exist. Change does exist and so also change progress and in the process of being worked out. of change. But the meaning attached to time could be reexamined with benefit to both natural and metaphys- Perhaps it is time for both natural philosophers and ical philosophy. Due to the neurological, neuroplastic metaphysical philosophers to empty their cups in time take-over of brain regions not dedicated to a particular in order to make room for possible new insights regard- activity, it is no easy task for the practitioners of one ing time! domain to learn, understand and appreciate the domain. There is a crucial reason for this that has nothing to do with cultivated good-will or even empathy. That reason is in main due to the neuroplasticitc di↵erence between Acknowledgments learning and unlearning. As Norman Doidge[62] points out, This inquiry is the result of an ongoing pursuit driven entirely by the quest for insight and perspectives, sup- “The science of unlearning is a very new one. Because ported neither by any funding agency nor by any grants. plasticity is competitive, when a person develops a neural It has been carried out in the wonderful and idyllic at- network, it becomes ecient and self-sustaining and, mosphere of untramalled freedom and independence at like a habit, hard to unlearn...Di↵erent chemistries are the Centre for Fundamental Research and Creative Ed- involved in learning than in unlearning. When we learn ucation (CFRCE), Bangalore, India. I warmly acknowl- something new, neurons fire together and wire together, edge the immense contribution of the CEO and Man- and a chemical process occurs at the neuronal level called aging Director -Pratiti B R, for co-founding and in- “long-term potentiation,” or LTP, which strengthens fusing such a great spirit of free scientific inquiry and the connections between the neurons. When the brain creativity and for empowering the revolution in learn- unlearns associations and disconnects neurons, another ing, research, education and self-actualization in full chemical process occurs, called “long-term depression,” swing there. I acknowledge also our COO and Faculty or LTD (which has nothing to do with a depressed Member,-Manogna H Sastry, Faculty Members -Arvind mood state). Unlearning and weakening connections Dudi, Kavan Ganapathy, Suraj Rao, Vishnupriya Hath- between neurons is just as plastic a process, and just as war, Kiran Aspari, Abhiram Harithas, Sachin S Bharad- important, as learning and strengthening them. If we waj and Varun Venkatraman,- and the research students only strengthened connections, our neuronal networks of CFRCE for adding to the same.

[1] Immanuel Kant, “The Critique of Pure Reason,” Dover cal Quantum Gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 40, 2598. Publications Inc.; New edition edition (1 January 2004). [7] Isham and Butterfield, “Spacetime and the Philosoph- [2] Alfred Korzybski, Science and Sanity, Institute of Gen- ical Challenge of Quantum Gravity, in Physics Meets eral Semantics. Philosophy at the Panck Scale. Cambridge University [3] Albert Einstein, “The Meaning of Relativity, Princeton Press (2001). University Press; Fifth edition with a New introduction [8] Isham and Butterfield, “The Emergence of Time in by Brian Greene edition (November 21, 2004). Quantum Gravity” in, The Arguments of Time. Pub- [4] Alfred Korzybski, “The Manhood of Humanity, Insti- lished for the British Academy by Oxford University tute of General Semantics. Press 111–168 (1999). [5] Je↵Hawkins, “On Intelligence, Times Books; Reprint [9] Carlo Rovelli, “Quantum Gravity,” Cambridge Mono- edition (1 April 2007). graphs on Mathematical Physics, Cambridge University [6] Unruh and Wald, “Time and Interpretation of Canoni- Press; 1 edition (December 17, 2007). 9

[10] Carlo Rovelli, “On Quantum Mechanics,” Ph. D Thesis. [39] Stanislav Grof, “Human Survival and Consciousness [11] Carlo Rovelli, “Loop Quantum Gravity and the Evolution,” State University of New York Press, 1988. Meaning of Di↵eomorphism Invariance,” arXiv:gr- [40] Malcolm Gladwell, “Blink,” Penguin UK; Reprint edi- qc/9910079. tion (1 August 2013). [12] Carlo Rovelli, “The Century of Incomplete Revolution,” [41] Aldous Huxley, “The Doors of Perception,” Harper- arXiv:hep-th/9910131. collins (July 1990). [13] Carlo Rovelli, “Forget Time”, Found Phys (2011) 41: [42] Aldous Huxley, “The Perennial Philosophy,” Harper 1475. Perennial Modern Classics (2009). [14] Julian Barbour, Classical and Quantum Gravity, Vol- [43] Daniel Goleman, “The Meditative Mind,” Penguin ume 11, Number 12 p 2853. USA; Subsequent edition (3 January 1996). [15] Julian Barbour, Classical and Quantum Gravity, Vol- [44] C G Jung, “Memories, Dreams and Reflections,” RHUS; ume 11, Number 12 p 2875. Reissue edition (23 April 1989). [16] Julian Barbour, “The End of Time,” Oxford University [45] C G Jung, “Man and his Symbols,” Picador; New edi- Press, 24-Sep-2001. tion edition (16 December 1993). [17] Julian Barbour, “The Nature of Time,” [46] Laurikainen, “Beyond the Atom,” Springer; Softcover arxiv.org/abs/0903.3489. reprint of the original 1st ed. 1988 edition (23 November [18] John Archibald Wheeler, “Geons, Black Holes and 1988). Quantum Foam,” W. W. Norton and Company; Re- [47] Suzanne Gieser, “The Innermost Kernel,” Depth Psy- vised ed. edition (18 June 2010). chology and Quantum Physics, Wolfgang Paulis Dia- [19] John Archibald Wheeler, “Geometrodynamics,” Aca- logue with C.G. Jung, Springer Science and Business demic Press, New York, 1962. Media, Feb 14, 2005. [20] Hawking and Israel, “General Relativity, An Einstein [48] I Ching or The Book of Changes, Bollingen Series, Centenary Survey, Cambridge University Press (2011). Princeton University Press; 3rd edition (October 21, [21] Vasudev Shyam and B S Ramachandra, “Presym- 1967). plectic Geometry and the Problem of Time Part-1” [49] Daniel C Dennett, “Consciousness Explained,” Back http://arxiv.org/abs/1209.5547. Bay Books; 1 edition (October 20, 1992). [22] Vasudev Shyam and B S Ramachandra, “Presym- [50] Susan Blackmore, “Consciousness,” Routledge; 2 edi- plectic Geometry and the Problem of Time Part-2” tion (June 25, 2010). http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.5619. [51] Susan Blackmore, “Zen and the Art of Consciousness,” [23] Vasudev Shyam and Madhavan Venkatesh, “The Oneworld Publications; Reprint edition (April 1, 2011). Canonical Lagrangian Approach To Three-Space Gen- [52] Stanislas Dehaene, “Consciousness and the Brain,” Pen- eral Relativity,” http://arxiv.org/abs/1209.5042. guin Books (December 30, 2014). [24] P C W Davies, “The Physics of Time Asymmetry,” Uni- [53] Sri Aurobindo, “The Life Divine,” Sri Aurobindo versity of California Press (1977). Ashram, Pondichery, India. [25] Rudy Rucker, “Infinity and the Mind,” Princeton Uni- [54] Sri Aurobindo, “The Synthesis of Yoga,” Sri Aurobindo versity Press; Revised edition (3 December 2004). Ashram, Pondichery, India. [26] Gurdjie↵, “Meetings with Remarkable Men,” Martino [55] Sri Aurobindo, “Essays on the Gita,” Sri Aurobindo Fine Books (22 January 2011). Ashram, Pondichery, India. [27] P D Ouspensky, “The Fourth Way,” Vintage; New edi- [56] Sri Aurobindo, “The Secret of the Veda,” Sri Aurobindo tion (February 12, 1971). Ashram, Pondichery, India. [28] Swami Vivekananda, Complete Works, Vol 1, Advaita [57] Sri Aurobindo, “The Upanishads,” Sri Aurobindo Ashrama (January 1, 1947). Ashram, Pondichery, India. [29] Edwin F Bryant, “The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali,” North [58] Sri Aurobindo, “The Hour of God,” Sri Aurobindo Point Press; 1 edition (1 July 2009). Ashram, Pondichery, India. [30] J H Woods, “The Yoga System of Patanjali,” Motilal [59] Sri Aurobindo, “Savitri,”Sri Aurobindo Ashram, Banarsidass, (1966). Pondichery, India. [31] I K Taimini, “The Ultimate Reality and Realization,” [60] Sri Aurobindo, “The Human Cycle,” Sri Aurobindo Theosophical Publishing; First edition (31 December Ashram, Pondichery, India. 2004). [61] Sri Aurobindo, “Collected Poems,” Sri Aurobindo [32] I K Taimini, “The Science of Yoga,” Theosophical Pub- Ashram, Pondichery, India. lishing House (1 January 2007). [62] Norman Doidge, “The Brain that Changes Itself,” Pen- [33] Ray Kurzweil, “How to Create a Mind,” Penguin Books guin Books, 2007. (27 August 2013). [63] J Krishnamurti, ”The Wholeness of Life,” KFI India [34] Ray Kurzweil, “The Singularity is Near,” Penguin USA Publications. (26 September 2006). [64] Krishnamurti and Bohm, “The Ending of Time,” KFI [35] Karl Pribram, “The Form Within, My Point of View,” India Publications. Prospecta Press (19 February 2013). [65] Rohit Mehta, “J Krishnamurti and the Nameless Expe- [36] Michael Talbot, “The Holographic Universe,” Harper rience,” Motilal Banarsidas, India. Perennial; Reprint edition (6 September 2011). [66] Krishnamurti and Bohm, “The Limits of Thought,” KFI [37] Stanislav Grof, “The Holotropic Breathwork,” State India Publications. University of New York Press (8 January 2010) [67] David Bohm, “Wholeness and the Implicate Order,” [38] Stanislav Grof, “The Ultimate Journey,” Multidisci- Routledge India; Edition edition (2012). plinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) (1 [68] David Bohm, “On Dialogue,”Routledge; 2 edition (1 October 2006). September 2004) 10

[69] David Bohm and David Peat, “Science, Order and Cre- [99] Stuart Kau↵man, “Reinventing the Sacred,” Basic ativity,”Bantam; Reissue edition (1 October 1987). Books (15 April 2008). [70] David Bohm, “Causality and Chance in Modern [100] William K Cli↵ord, “Common Sense of the Exact Sci- Physics,” Routledge; 2 edition (19 April 1984). ences,” Kessinger Publishing, LLC (July 9, 2006). [71] David Bohm, “Special Theory of Relativity,” Routledge [101] Akshay Kumar Bannerjea, “Philosophy of (4 September 2006). Gorakhnath,” Motilal Banarsidass; 5 edition (2016), [72] David Peat, “Infinite Potential,” A Biography of David India. Bohm, Basic Books (23 October 1997). [102] Lama Anagrika Govinda, “Foundations of Tibetan Mys- [73] V S Ramachandran, “The Tell Tale Brain,” RHI (1 ticism,” Martino Fine Books (31 October 2012). February 2012). [103] Lama Anagrika Govinda, “The Way of the White [74] V S Ramachandran, “Phantoms in the Brain,” Fourth Clouds,” RHUK (2 February 2006). Estate; (Reissue) edition (1 November 2006). [104] Lama Anagrika Govinda, “The Psychological Attitude [75] Hermann Hesse, “Siddhartha,” RHUS; Reissue edition of Early Buddhist Philosophy,” Motilal Banarsidass (1 December 1981). Pub; 2nd edition (August 1998). [76] Hermann Hesse, “The Glass Bead Game,” RHUK (6 [105] The Mandukya Upanishad, with Gaudapada’s Karikas July 2000). and Shankaras Commentary, Advaita Ashrama; First, [77] Csikszentmihalyi Mihaly, “Flow, the Psychology of Op- 8th printing edition (1 January 2006). timal Experience,”RHUK (1 August 2002). [78] Csikszentmihalyi Mihaly, “Finding Flow,” Basic Books; Reprint edition (16 March 1998). [79] Thomas Thiemann, “Modern Canonical Quantum Gen- eral Relativity,” Cambridge Monographs on Mathemat- ical Physics, Cambridge University Press; 1 edition (13 September 2007). [80] Roberto Mangabeira Unger and Lee Smolin, “The Sin- gular Universe and the Reality of Time,” Cambridge University Press (8 December 2014). [81] Lee Smolin, “Three Roads to Quantum Gravity,” Basic Books; Reprint edition (13 June 2002). [82] Fritjof Capra, “Uncommon Wisdom,” Fourth Estate (1 September 2011). [83] Drg-Drsya Viveka, Advitha Ashrama Publications, In- dia. [84] B L Atreya, “Philosophy of the Yoga Vasishta,” Theo- sophical Pub. House, 1936. [85] James H Austin, “Zen and the Brain,” MIT Press; Reprint edition (30 July 1999) [86] James H Austin, “Zen-Brain Reflections,” MIT Press; 1edition(28September2010). [87] Joe Hyams, “Zen in the Martial Arts,”Bantam Double- day Dell Publishing Group (22 October 1982). [88] Carlos Castaneda, “The Teachings of Don Juan,”Simon and Schuster; 30th edition (3 March 1985). [89] Carlos Castaneda, “The Art of Dreaming,”William Morrow Paperbacks; Reprint edition (26 August 2003). [90] Misner, Thorne and Wheeler, “Gravitation,” W. H. Freeman (1 January 1973). [91] Bruce I Kodish, “Drive Yourself Sane,” Extensional Publishing; 3rd edition (4 November 2010). [92] Steven Horgoltz, “Sync, The Emerging Science of Spon- taneous Order,” Penguin UK (29 April 2004). [93] Mitchell Waldrop, “Complexity,” Simon and Schuster (1 September 1993). [94] Steven Johnson, “Emergence,”Penguin UK (1 August 2002). [95] Eric Beinhocker, “The Origin of Wealth,” RHUK (5 April 2007). [96] Stuart Kau↵man, “The Origins of Order,” Oxford Uni- versity Press USA (1 April 1999) [97] Stuart Kau↵man, “Investigations,” Oxford University Press USA (9 January 2003) [98] Stuart Kau↵man, “At Home in the Universe,” Basic Books; First Trade Paper Edition edition (4 March 2010).