Conception

Concepts are complex associations of simpler ideas. Regarding the ideas of physical objects, one of the most fundamental world conceptions that we make from the elements of perception, is to create a spatio-temporal picture of the world.

The notions of time, objects and space
Nature is transcendent, in the sense that it is not an object of experience on which we can have a direct knowledge. Instead, we know Nature indirectly by perceiving the physical world and interpreting its behaviour.
From perception we form mental representations of the physical world coming through our senses. On a naïve interpretation of the world we would take this representations to be real. But as we have seen, these representations are not faithful reflections of the physical world. And they were never meant to be. Our mind evolved to form useful constructions to serve practical purposes rather than truthful ones.
The form that our mental representation takes is of a spatio-temporal world full of objects. In this world, objects are taken as finite and individual elements in-themselves; and objects, space and time are considered to be three distinct entities.
In the following we are going to propose that in the physical world objects, time and space are not distinct but physically united. On our ordinary concepts of objects, time and space we find that we cannot define any one of them without including the notion of the others. The concepts of objects, time and space cannot be thought independently. They are related to one another in such a way that the definition of anyone of them depends on the definition of the others. We are going to propose that this dependence goes beyond a linguistic problem or an abstract relation. Space, time and objects are actually physically integrated. As a result of how our mind evolved to perceive the world, on our most naïve and intuitive interpretations, objects, space and time are seen as distinct entities. But although this is how we think of the world, for however useful these constructions might be, they don’t represent their physical reality. The concept of time-space for example, is little intuitive, but its a step forward towards a closer insight onto the world’s reality, for it contemplates the physical union between time and space. Nevertheless, it falls short of contemplating their union in turn with physical elements. Our representations then, are characterised by mentally dissociating object, time and space when they are actually physically united.

Imagine, for example, if we could take time out of the world. Then we would be left without variation. Without time, we would have a world of space and objects without change.
Imagine now, that if after taking time out of the world we would take the objects. Then all that remains would be an empty space. So space, in principle, could exist independently form objects and time.
But what would happen if after taking time we would try to take space rather than objects. We shall find that it is impossible. We cannot take space out of the world for objects cannot exist without space. This leads to the impression that space is a fundamental mental construction of the world. We can conceive a world without time and objects, but we cannot conceive a world without space.
This was only an imaginary exercise with a vague resemblance to the physical world. But it serves to illustrate, first the possibility of an independent space, and then the importance of the construction of space in our thought. We cannot make any mental construction without space.
But what happens in the physical world if time, objects and space are mentally dissociated but physically united? If time and objects have a physical dependence and objects are not in-themselves then time cannot be in-itself either. And bearing in mind that the only intelligible elements are those ones which can be thought as being in-themselves, then if objects and time are not in-themselves, of course, they cannot form objects of thought since they don’t have an identity of their own. And if they are not objects of thought then it would appear to be no possible thought at all. It would appear to be no possible description of the behaviour of things. And this holds some truth; the world cannot be understood in terms of what is not in-itself. But what appears to be a dead road towards unintelligibility shall be found wide opened by saving the omission that in a world where objects and time are not in-themselves, Space still exists; and Physical Space can be in-itself.  So this shall be our starting point for the study of the world: from our sole object of thought left: Space.

Advertisements

%d bloggers like this: