I was out trying to slow the passage of time today -- to put the brakes on this loaded train barrelling straight for the next year. I composed a new theory based on this article I've been picking away at for, oh, 3 weeks or so, the gist of which is pretty straightforward but with lots of interesting research. I'm a fan of empirical evidence -- it's not necessary, but it has its appeal. It goes something like this: A new experience takes longer for the brain to encode and interpret therefore the duration of the experience seems longer, while familiar experiences require less brain activity and therefore may seem to pass more quickly. Think about the last time you were driving -- navigating to a place you had not been to before, and then consider the return trip, and each subsequent trip. The initial trip seems to take the longest time, and each trip thereafter takes less time, until finally, the distance and time passes relatively unnoticed. The perception is that time passes more quickly, while in reality, the elapsed time is actually the same for all trips.
So to test the theory, I set myself today with the task of estranging the familiar and attempting to pay particular attention to all that might otherwise pass unnoticed. Would this slow time? Alas, I am a poor scientist and, while I like empirical evidence, my own experiments lack all of the necessary controls that might yield such evidence. For instance, when I finally thought to look at the time, it was, of course, later than I thought.
But I have another theory that I am also working on based on my research with the kitchen waste can; the theory that time is a big stretchy bag and it's my job to test the capacity. I will push it every time.
No comments:
Post a Comment