[plase use the BACK key to return to your previous page]
time
(iconosphere entry)

Causality is a 


Causal Time

(a bit of handwaving will be used, but no overt "tricks")

     If time is causal. If A precedes B, and B preceeds C, 
                        then A must preceed C
           
        That is:  A-B and B-C implies  A-B-C
 
        but NOT:  A-B and B-c may imply  A-B
                                         B-C
                  A & C may have no relationship at all.

That is there are no such things as simultaneidty of linked
events. Note that we have not implied any causal realtionshiop
between, A, B, and C.

    if A causes B  
    and B causes C 

    Then if A, then both B and C (will) occur.

Note the intermixing problem. To separate them out, we get:
  
     if A causes B
    and B causes C
     if A (occurs or is SPECIFIED) then B and consquently C.
(not implying time).

More commonly:   if A causes B, and B causes C.
                 if A occurs, then B and C will occur.
                 And it may be that B and C occur concurrently,
                 BUt, C can NOT preceed B.

Well, that's about the best that i can do with it. 

Now, consider the case where time exists but is not necessarily
causal. 

     X occurs, followed by Y, and then Z.

     when Y occurs, A will be addressed (comes into play)
                   (we assume either A existed or did not, 
                    but might exist at any "time")

     If A exists, then it preceeds B.

     When Y occurs, A comes into existence but we do not
     necessarily know if B is addressed or comes into play.

     If we we observe B (independently of any other information),
     then we can conclude:

               A must already be in play; but,it may have come into
               play and then "disappeared" again -- that is, returned
               to existing in potentiality or no longer accessible at
               the present time (or for all future time).

               Y must have occured, and consequently X as well.
               Z may or may not have occured yet.

A few randome thoughts about this.

   The statment:  "The house is here."

   does not necessarily imply that the house was ever NOT there,
   or that it may not be there in the future, or that it was 
   constructed (caused to come into being).

   If time exists, then the house is here now. And either existed
   previouse to now, or has just now come into existence. It may
   continue to exist, or it may cease exising in the next "moment".

   If time does not exist, then the house (being observed) means that
   it has always and will always exist. The space where the house is
   may be emptied by either moving the house or destroying it. And
   by similar means, an empty space may have a house moved or created
   in it so that we may properly say "a house is here" (in this "new"
   space). 

   This means that if we see an empty space, we can say that there is
   no house there. THis is not to say that there may have "been" a 
   house there, but then it was moved or disassembled. Also, we can
   not say that there might not be a house there "later". THus, we
   should regard everything in terms of potentialities for change 
   or not. We take it as read that time is NOT entropy.

   If causality exists, then we have the problme "first" (or at least
   "subsequent") causes. 

   If there is no causality then any two events are independent although
   we may bring them into a relationship with each other, but all 
   relationships are arbitrary. (A swollen toe, a hammer next to the
   foot does NOT imply that the hammer caused the swollen toe, even
   if we observed the hammer falling and striking the toe). 

For the most part, most people assume (get by with) that causality and
time exist.


Please use the BACK key to return to your previous page;
we applogise for the in-convenience.

Otherwise, see also: Time.
--42--