(November 28, 2017 at 2:52 pm)LostLocke Wrote: To use space instead of time as an example....
I'm in Chicago. I get in my car, point it west, and start driving. If I drive "straight" from my frame of reference, (ignoring obstacles of course), I will eventually return to Chicago. I don't have to drive backwards in space to return, I'll still be moving forward.
That's because we are driving along a 2 dimensional surface, but don't actually perceive this surface curving around a higher spatial dimension that warps it back in to itself. The same could apply to time.
And again, there is nothing in our current understanding of physics that prevents time from doing the same.
Oh I see, you think the science of the experience of time is relevant to the philosophy or logic of time itself. Yeah a lot of people think that.
Sorry but, perspectives, frame of reference, and evidence isn't relevant when we're talking about the logic of a concept that is supposed to transcend empiricism. We can't address phenomena and pretend we're addressing noumena.