Do you belive in eternal recurrence?

[Nitish]

Eternal return (also known as "eternal recurrence") is a concept which posits that the universe has been recurring, and will continue to recur in the exact same self-similar form an number of incomprehensible and unfathomable number of times. The concept has roots in ancient Egypt, and was subsequently taken up by the Pythagoreans and Stoics. With the decline of antiquity and the spread of Christianity, the concept fell into disuse, though Friedrich Nietzsche briefly resurrected it.
In addition, the philosophical concept of eternal recurrence was addressed by Arthur Schopenhaeur. It is a purely physical concept, involving no "reincarnation" but the return of beings in the same bodies. Time is viewed as being not linear but cyclical.
The basic premise is that the universe is limited in extent and contains a finite amount of matter, while time is viewed as being infinite. The universe has no starting or ending state, while the matter comprising it is constantly changing its state. The number of possible changes is finite, and so sooner or later the same state will recur.
Physicists such as Stephen Hawking and J. Richard Gott have proposed models by which the (or a) universe could undergo time travel, provided the balance between mass and energy created the appropriate cosmological geometry. More philosophical concepts from physics, such as Hawking's "arrow of time," for example, discuss cosmology as proceeding up to a certain point, whereafter it undergoes a time reversal (which, as a consequence of T-symmetry, is thought to bring about a chaotic state due to thermodynamic entropy).
The Oscillatory universe model in physics could be provided as an example of how the universe cycles through the same events infinitely.



It happened to me one night.i had a dream.the dream was i won a football match and i scored five goals in it.i woke up and thought that this dream had no sense.in the next two weeks the dream came true,with the exact way it had happened in the dream.that is,the way i scored the goals i could see in the dream.i scored the goals the way it came in the dream.I think i was predicting the future.i asked my friends,they said they had dreams where they saw the future.only small incidents,like this one.they did not see incidents like 9/11.HAVE YOU HAD SIMILAR EXPERIENCES?i think all the events of the universe had already happened once and it is repeating.this has nothing to do with reincarnation.

Nietzsche calls the idea "horrifying and paralyzing," and says that its burden is the "heaviest weight" imaginable. The wish for the eternal return of all events would mark the ultimate affirmation of life:

What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: 'This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more' ... Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or have you once experienced a tremendous moment when you would have answered him: 'You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine.'- The Gay Science

Walter Kaufmann suggests that Nietzsche may have encountered this idea in the works of Heinrich Heine, who once wrote:

[T]ime is infinite, but the things in time, the concrete bodies, are finite. They may indeed disperse into the smallest particles; but these particles, the atoms, have their determinate numbers, and the numbers of the configurations which, all of themselves, are formed out of them is also determinate. Now, however long a time may pass, according to the eternal laws governing the combinations of this eternal play of repetition, all configurations which have previously existed on this earth must yet meet, attract, repulse, kiss, and corrupt each other again...

Proofs against eternal return

Nietzsche scholar Walter Kaufmann has described a proof originally put forward by Georg Simmel, which refutes the claim that a finite number of states must repeat within an infinite amount of time:

Even if there were exceedingly few things in a finite space in an infinite time, they would not have to repeat in the same configurations. Suppose there were three wheels of equal size, rotating on the same axis, one point marked on the circumference of each wheel, and these three points lined up in one straight line. If the second wheel rotated twice as fast as the first, and if the speed of the third wheel was 1/π of the speed of the first, the initial line-up would never recur.

It can be argued that this proof is flawed. Even if a system contains an infinite number of states as considered from the perspective of classical mechanics, applying quantum mechanics reveals that the system will repeat after an arbitrarily long time due to discretizaton(Classical mechanics is only a rough approximation to the physics that goes on at the atomic scale.) However, not all quantum-mechanical operators have discrete spectra.

[Pythagorean]

Nitish,

I think it comes down to whether or not we are to realistically accept the concept of eternity. If we accept it then it seems we're bound to accept also the concept of eternal recurrence in one form or another. Science must accept the fact that time is limitless and matter is finite, whereas Christians on the other hand must believe that Christ will come one day and end time. So on this point I will have to say that I am with the scientists.

I would further say that it seems that the ultimate physical exhaustion of the universe is a necessary feature of its very existence. The universe is finite in nature and all of the material of which the universe is made up of is finite in nature. So that if either all of the matter in the universe or any fraction of the matter in the universe be arranged in any way whatsoever, I would say that such arranging will come eventually to a point of exhaustion.

There is, I believe, a definitive limit to the arrangement of matter in the universe, no matter how small or large or various we make the arrangements. And that beyond all of these arrangements one will eventually reach a point where one has run out of possible future arrangements. To put it another way, the number of physical models that are possible to actually build within the universe is limited.

In other words, there will be a limit of physical arrangements or compositions that are possible in the universe beyond which there will be only a duplication of our previous arrangements (this duplication we can call "the eternal return"). So there exists a finite non-duplicative number of possible physical arrangments in the universe.

Also, the types of feeling, emotions, states of soul, ideas, or experiences, etc., that any being in the universe can have are likewise limited.

This point here is the same as that of the physical states of the universe. The composition of subjective experiences or objective expressions that a living being in the universe can possibly posess are also limited in nature. There is no creation of "new" emotions and we will some day reach a point where all feelings and ideas are recorded and categorized by convenience for the external use of communication between people. By this I mean that 'ideas' will eventually prove to exist externally in relation to the human mind which uses them, or will eventually use them, as objects. This will be the advent of artificial intelligence!

--Pyth

[<daleader>]

yes and no. Yes since our body well come back after so many years when it is fully being disintegrated into the earth soil as various things! No as it well not be me since it can really only ONE ME!

[VideCorSpoon]

I believe in eternal recurrance… I call it indigestion. Tums seems to works best, but Pepto Bismol works just as well.


So if we believe in eternal recurrence, we believe that there is repetition in existence, right?


This shows that existence is a circle, right?


The problem is that people who subscribe to the theory look at the circle and think, existence will go full circle and start again.


I say it does not matter that existence is neither circular nor linear… and here’s why.


Xeno’s paradox….


Say I draw a line from A to B.
A----------------------------------------------------------B
In order to get from A to B, I have to pass through C
A----------------------------C------------------------------B
In order to go from A to C, I have to pass through D
A-------------D---------------C------------------------------B
In order to go from A to D, I have to pass through E
A-----E--------D---------------C------------------------------B
In order to go from A to E, I have to pass through F
A--F---E--------D---------------C------------------------------B


As you see, the linearity of time compresses (eventually… but then again not really) further yet does not reach even a modicum of its distance it set to achieve. It seems as though existence could be circular, but it is in motion/non-motion, because it has yet to travel its prescribed distance because it has not possible it could not reach even half its way.


But perhaps we can justify your theory.


Suppose that that infinite compression of existence demonstrated in Xeno’s paradox happens in a not-second (because a second would denote linearity) and thus fulfilled its circular trajectory in not-time.

[<daleader>]

Originally Posted by VideCorSpoon

I believe in eternal recurrance… I call it indigestion. Tums seems to works best, but Pepto Bismol works just as well.


So if we believe in eternal recurrence, we believe that there is repetition in existence, right?


This shows that existence is a circle, right?


The problem is that people who subscribe to the theory look at the circle and think, existence will go full circle and start again.


I say it does not matter that existence is neither circular nor linear… and here’s why.


Xeno’s paradox….


Say I draw a line from A to B.
A----------------------------------------------------------B
In order to get from A to B, I have to pass through C
A----------------------------C------------------------------B
In order to go from A to C, I have to pass through D
A-------------D---------------C------------------------------B
In order to go from A to D, I have to pass through E
A-----E--------D---------------C------------------------------B
In order to go from A to E, I have to pass through F
A--F---E--------D---------------C------------------------------B


As you see, the linearity of time compresses (eventually… but then again not really) further yet does not reach even a modicum of its distance it set to achieve. It seems as though existence could be circular, but it is in motion/non-motion, because it has yet to travel its prescribed distance because it has not possible it could not reach even half its way.


But perhaps we can justify your theory.


Suppose that that infinite compression of existence demonstrated in Xeno’s paradox happens in a not-second (because a second would denote linearity) and thus fulfilled its circular trajectory in not-time.

I dont get this! Can you please explain in a manner that thus of us that dont have such knowledge can learn from it. I saw many post by you in such manner and it kind of anoys me since I know it is something good in it but the way it is worded I can never learn from it! So yea can you please explain in a manner that thus of us who doesnt understand logic or much about philosophy can also learn from it ? With many thx in advance

[VideCorSpoon]

Sure, I’ll break it down.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
First.

“I believe in eternal recurrance… I call it indigestion. Tums seems to works best, but Pepto Bismol works just as well.” (VideCorspoon)


This was an incredibly bad and corny joke… Not funny Ha HA funny, but funny, what the… oh yeah… but that was still a lame joke funny.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Now for eternal recurrence…
First, let’s look at the definition of Eternal return (i.e. eternal recurrence.)

DEFINITION
“Eternal return … is a concept which posits that the universe has been recurring, and will continue to recur in the exact same self-similar form an number of incomprehensible and unfathomable number of times.”(Nitish)


So, basically…
Eternal return is a concept which states that the universe has been repeating, and will continue to repeat in the exact same self-silmiliar form a number of “times.”
It is here that we can break down the concept…

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

LINEAR TIME
When it is said that “the universe is repeating and will continue to repeat,” it is meant that the universe is non linear. What is meant by non linear. If you picture existence as a line for example, with a point (which is you) on it, that line will continue onwards from the beginning of time to the end of time. IMPORTANT – A SINGLE LINE CANNOT INTERSECT ITSELF… so it could not repeat itself since it is not connected in that way.


|Beginning of time|---------- (you) --------------------->|end of time|


It is important to note that this is a hypothetical assumption for our inquiry, so don’t assume this is the real way the fabric of time and space are. THIS IS NOT HOW THE UNIVERSE IS ACCORDING TO ETERNAL RECURRANCE.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

ETERNAL RECURRANCE AND NON- LINEAR TIME
In eternal recurrence, time is non-linear, which means that it is circular. Of course it does not have to be circular like the shape we know and love, it can be any shape off by a fraction of a degree that eventually intersects itself. But this is where it gets interesting, and I quote again from Nittish.

“Eternal return … is a concept which posits that the universe has been recurring, and will continue to recur in the exact same self-similar form an number of incomprehensible and unfathomable number of times.”(Nitish)


Now look carefully at the words, “… in the exact same self similar form…” as though we are examining Aristotelian text very carefully.

REMEMBER - In order for time to continue, there must be some connectivity… the “line” of time must intersect itself.


SO…“… in the exact same self similar form…” means that time repeats itself in a homeomorphic way, that is, in a similar shape. Why in the heck do I say homeomorphic?

Obviously, and this is very important, TIME DOES NOT EXACTLY REPEAT ITSELF. How do I know this… I can give you an explanation, but then I would be writing a book and not a comment. Read Spinoza and the bundle theory of self to get more of an idea of this topic.


Time is connected with itself, for the purpose of this theory, but it must change shapes… If I go any further, this will become a discussion in astrophysics which is tedious and boring. But even if it changes shapes, for the purposes of this theory, it is Circular in its repetition.

So, the last few paragraphs boil down to this… time is circular… thats it. That’s the connotation of saying existence is round instead of flat.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SO WHY IS ETERNAL RECURRANCE DEFUNCT… or really, why is this theory problematic.

We have an image of what eternal recurrence might actually look like. Take a piece of paper and draw a circle really fast ten times. The circle is not a perfect circle, it has deviations when you draw it from going so fast. But it is still connected because you did not take the pencil up when you drew all ten circles. You could say… if you wanted to argue it this way, that time has many points of intersection within the same circle of existence. But that’s not what we want.


We want to say that ETERNAL RECURRANCE IS DEFUNCT because Circular time could never be (at this point) because of XENO’S PARADOX.

Fist, let me explain Xeno’s paradox.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

In Xeno’s paradox… say I shoot an arrow at a target 20 feet away. That arrow must travel that 20 feet in order to hit the target. But here is the rub. In order for that arrow to travel that twenty feet, it has to travel ten feet (half the distance) to get to its destination FIRST. BUT!!!! Here’s where it starts getting complicated. In order for it to travel that half distance (10 feet), it has to travel five feet FIRST. In order for it to travel the five feet, it has to travel the half distance of 2.5 feet FIRST.
Every time you cut the distance in half, look at the problem from a fresh perspective, as though the twenty feet did not exist, only the ten.
The way we measure things will quickly reduce and we eventually come to zero. BUT!!! Here’s where it gets abstract… We recognize that the arrow was shot, and that it traveled twenty feet. However, we also realize that in order for it to have traveled that twenty feet, it had to make it half way, and half of that way, and half of that way, etc. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THAT HALF WAY WILL CONTINUE TO REDUCE LOGICALLY BUT IT STILL TRAVELS THE DISTANCE.

THERE WAS A REDUCTION IN DISTANCE IN THE SAME TIME THERE WAS EXTENSION OF DISTANCE!!!!!!! HENCE THE PARADOX.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NOW LOOK AT ETERNAL RECURRANCE…
How can circular time go its distance when logically (taking into consideration Xeno’s paradox) it never even reaches a fraction of a percent of the distance it must travel?????

I posit that perhaps that existence could be circular, or linear, or trapezoidal, or whatever. It doesn’t matter because time never progresses LOGICALLY to perform that shape for lack of a better word.
I also posit that there could be a possible rationalization to eternal recurrence. Suppose we encapsulate Xeno’s paradox as a constant and call it “not-time.” This is very abstract and possibly ridiculous. If we venture outside the box and say that the shape of time, its continuity, beginning and end, are all encapsulated in the circular shape (much like a symbol), the mere occurrence, no matter how small or reduced it is, has the map so to speak of the universe within it.

Daleader, I am glad that you express interest in abstract metaphysics. This is the first step in understanding “root” metaphysics, or the origin of being. If you have anymore questions or need more clarification, I'll be happy to provide it. Seeking knowledge for its own gain and not for any others is admirable.

[<daleader>]

thx really apperciate it. I get it someday. Dont mind your post it was perfect but I guess I am just stupid

[VideCorSpoon]

“thx really apperciate it. I get it someday. Dont mind your post it was perfect but I guess I am just stupid” (daleader)


Well you’re certainly not stupid… if anything, the fact that you express interest in the subject is that you uphold wisdom in its highest sense. “seek knowledge for its own gain and not for any others, for this alone is true science.” (Aristotle) You may not know it, but your statement encapsulates one of the hardest concepts to understand in Indian metaphysics, the concept of ignorance and non-ignorace, which Gautama Siddhartha (Buddha) struggled to come to grips with. Was my post perfect? Heck no… it’s just a random theory.

Here’s a pointer… and a point. The point. Stupid people use big words to make themselves sound smart. Embodied concepts like Linear Intersection, Circular Connectivity, Paradox, Egg McMuffin… which are all big words… especially the last one... make me the stupid one.

But here is a general critique. When students learn philosophy, they are expected to expand their vocabulary and paper length to say 10 pages to argue for a simple point. But, in the four years studying philosophy, they never teach you the hardest part of that requirement, which is breaking down that 10 page paper to an abstract, or a summery, of all the fluff that you were forced to inject into a paper to reveal the same point that could have been revealed in a few sentences. Many philosophy students fail to grip that concept and pay the price for it.

The pointer. The trick to understanding the most difficult and abstract writings is to break it down. If you see, when I wrote my second response, I divided the logical chain with a line. The concepts trapped within those lines in individual blocks can be translated into a simple sentence. That full page of hundreds of words translates to.


1.Sorry for the corny joke.
2.Here’s what I think eternal recurrence means
3.Lets examine at the opposition, linear time.
4.Lets examine eternal recurrence, and why it comes to be wrong.
5.This is why eternal recurrence is wrong
6.Xenos paradox
7.What I think time could be.



Its useful and will help you assimilate more information than the other guy.

[<daleader>]

thank you very much for your nice respond. It really made my day. I just begun studying philosophy. I mostly do it on my free time. I know one cannot learn philosophy via studying but yea i begun reading about various people not yet up to the stage that can understand theories. BUt once again appreciate your kind words. Really means a lot to me

[VideCorSpoon]

No prob. The task of learning philosophy is daunting because there exists so much material and so little time. Also, the ideas conflict so much with the other that it all ends up so confusing.

If I could suggest a book.

20 questions about philosophy by Bowie, Mitch, and Solomon.

It takes the 20 greatest issues in philosophy and divides it into those respective sections. In each section, the authors give you a three page summery of the issue and solutions. But whats nice about it is that following the authors summary, they give six or so three to four page excerpts of major texts, from Descartes, Nietzsche, etc. that further elaborate on the issue. Its like a comprehensive cheat sheet for philosophy that cuts out all the crud from long texts and gives you the relevant information.

Heres an example.

Chapter 12 - What is the meaning of death?

379-380 3 page synopsis of the issue
381-382 Plato, the death of scorates
383 Chuang-Tzu, A taoist view of death
384 -388 Nagel, Death
etc.