Modern Quantum Physics and Buddhist perspective of time

[ex-muslim Ahmed]

[FONT=Arial, Arial, Helvetica]in my recent article, "The R-Theory of time, or Replacement Presentism: The Buddhist Theory of Time," Published in The Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies, I show how reality is composed of irreducible, unconnected and unattached, indistinguishable, non-physical atoms of energy that are momentary and instantaneous (flashing in and out of existence) (these points have been argued for by Buddhists before me, but in my article there are novel and contemporary descriptions and arguments given for abstract Buddhist atomism). I discuss in the aforementioned article how this view of reality is astonishingly similar to the model of the universe and reality discovered by physicists. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Arial, Helvetica] Also, I discuss that early Indian Buddhists, who maintain that all of reality is perpetually changing, it is by this changing that reality is vibrating (flashing in and out of existence), due to the vibrating of the atoms of energy. But both quantum theorists and Indian Buddhists both have not shown precisely why reality is composed of atoms of energy that flash in and out of existence. Why do they flash in and out of existence? Could it not have instead been the case that they just exist eternally, or that they exist through a perduring set of temporal parts? Also, reality could be composed of no-change, just as philosophers of Brahman have argued, as Parmenides argued, and just as a few physicists have suggested. In "The R-Theory of time, or Replacement Presentism: The Buddhist Theory of Time"I show precisely why the irreducible particles that compose reality must be momentary (i.e., exist for only a durationless instant, before being replaced).[/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]I argue that the Indian Buddhist theory of time should be called the R-theory of time, and I show that the Indian Buddhist philosophy of time may be a better philosophy of time than any of the non-Buddhist accounts of time. It is a common assumption among non-Buddhist philosophers, such as Western analytic metaphysicians, that there can be relations between times. I however show that there cannot be any temporal relations. This does not harm the R-theory of time, since it does not involve relations between times, and thus it avoids problems I will point out to do with the temporal relations of many non-Buddhist theories of time. The R-theory of time also avoids.... [/FONT]

http://www.abstractatom.com/the_r_theory_of_time_by_jeff_grupp.htm

 

[AncientGlory]

A very good article.

However I'm not sure what the author refers to as non-Buddhist theories of time.

As the writer states the R-Theory of time is of course the best philosophy of time since it simply offer the truth.

But non-Buddhist theories of time like Einsteins special theory of relativity also suggests the same concepts in my opinion, although they do not represent or talk about replacement of present.

Simply speaking if the time is relative(according to relativity), then there can be no real existence of time hence its an illusion. R-theory also says the same. According to philosophy of time in buddhism(R-theory) In fact there is nothing called time, but only change.

 

[Mononoke]

A very good article.

You actually read that wibble fest!

 

[AncientGlory]

Well I read some parts of it, not the whole thing...