Lived Time VS Clock Time
Have you ever noticed how time seems to fly by when you're having fun, but drags on when you're bored out of your mind in an empty room with nothing but a ticking clock to keep you company? I often experience it as one hour of fun last 10 minutes while one hour of boredom lasts two hours. Does this make sense to you? This fascinating paradox of time perception has been a topic of debate for centuries, with two prominent thinkers, Henri Bergson and Albert Einstein, offering conflicting views on the nature of time and its measurement.
On the evening of 6 April 1922, Paris bore witness to a clash of titans as philosopher Henri Bergson and physicist Albert Einstein engaged in a heated debate over the nature of time. Einstein's groundbreaking theory of relativity had upended the traditional concept of time as an absolute, leading to a frenzy of curiosity and controversy around the globe. His assertion that time was relative to the observer, rather than a universal constant, had thrust him into the spotlight and earned him a legion of followers.
As Einstein shared his theory during a lecture at the French Society of Philosophy, the crowded hall buzzed with excitement. Among the audience was Bergson, a respected thinker known for his groundbreaking ideas about time and consciousness. While he recognised the importance of Einstein's work in physics, Bergson strongly disagreed with the idea that time could simply be measured by a clock. To him, time was a personal experience, an intuitive sense of 'duration' that went beyond just ticking seconds. The clash between these two intellectual giants, both celebrated in their fields, fascinated the audience and sparked a heated debate that would have lasting implications. In that moment, Paris became the backdrop for a battle of ideas that would influence 20th-century philosophy and science.
Their debate began almost unexpectedly. The event held in April was meant to discuss relativity, bringing together physicists and philosophers. Bergson had planned to be just an observer but soon found himself drawn into the discussion. When the room fell silent, he reluctantly stood up and shared insights from his upcoming book, Duration and Simultaneity (1922). Little did anyone know that in the following half hour, his thoughts would ignite a debate that would resonate for decades! This conversation would explore age-old questions about the nature of time, the conflict between physics and philosophy, and the intersection of science with human experience.
Bergson began by acknowledging the brilliance of Einstein’s work and clarified that he didn’t fundamentally disagree with his theories. However, he raised concerns about the philosophical implications of Einstein's views on time. Bergson argued that our personal experiences of time are crucial to understanding it, a perspective he felt was overlooked in Einstein's relativity theory. In response, Einstein, despite his struggles with the French language, quickly brushed off Bergson’s points as irrelevant to physics. He insisted that science is the ultimate authority on objective time, leaving no space for philosophical debates. Einstein famously stated, "There is no time of the philosopher; there is only a psychological time, different from the time of the physicist."
However, contrary to what many believe, Einstein was later shown to be mistaken in this debate. It became clear that there is indeed a third type of time, the time of the philosopher. Bergson’s publication, Duration and Simultaneity, sparked a broader conversation between physicists and philosophers. Many began to question whether Bergson accurately understood Einstein's theory of special relativity, particularly regarding time dilation. This misunderstanding led to a perception of Bergson as outdated in the face of modern science, especially as Einstein's theories gained more empirical support, while Bergson's ideas seemed to fade away. Some suggested that Bergson struggled because he lacked a deep understanding of the mathematical and physical concepts involved. Despite criticism from prominent figures like Nobel laureate Ilya Prigogine and philosopher Isabelle Stengers, Henri Bergson's understanding of time and relativity theory should not be dismissed. While he may have misunderstood certain technical details, Bergson was not ignorant of science and mathematics. In fact, he was skilled in mathematics and had a deep understanding of the concept of time as more than just a measurement on a clock. Bergson's emphasis on the experiential aspect of time challenges traditional scientific viewpoints and highlights the importance of considering different perspectives in our understanding of the universe.
Bergson's Argument - Duration Proper Cannot be Quantified
To understand the French philosopher's idea of time, we need to look back at his early academic career in the late 19th century. It was during this period that he wrote his influential doctoral thesis, which later became his first book, Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness, published when he was only 30 years old. At the heart of this work is a groundbreaking idea: that time is fundamentally different from space. While we often think of time as a straight line or a circle, similar to how we view space, the philosopher challenges this view. He argues that time isn’t just a series of fixed, unchanging moments like points on a line or ticks on a clock. Instead, he introduces the idea of "lived time," which is a dynamic and constantly changing experience. This "lived time" emphasises the idea of "becoming" rather than simply "being," highlighting that change and growth are essential parts of how we experience time.
To illustrate this, he compares time to music, where each note has its own unique quality but also connects with the notes before and after it, creating a rich and flowing composition. He argues that real duration cannot be measured like other things, such as length or weight. Traditional measurements rely on fixed standards, but he believes that time is different as it's an intangible force that can't be neatly captured within set limits. Unlike a measurement of length, which directly represents what it quantifies, time remains elusive and cannot be fully defined or contained.
In Time and Free Will, Bergson passionately argued that the traditional way of measuring time with clocks doesn't truly capture the essence of duration. He believed that for a clock to genuinely measure duration, it would need to experience duration itself. To make his point, he looked at the swinging of a pendulum, highlighting that each moment in time is unique, just like different points on a line or the hands on a clock. While clocks can mark these distinct moments, it's our own experience of time that allows us to connect them into a meaningful flow. Bergson stressed that it's not the physical clock that measures time; instead, it's our personal experience of duration that matters. He acknowledged that precise timekeeping is crucial for scientific activities, like tracking objects in space, but he strongly rejected the idea of replacing our deeper understanding of time with just clock time in philosophy. His main argument was that while we can measure time, the true experience of duration goes beyond any measurement we can make.
In 1905, Einstein transformed how we think about time with his paper "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies." In it, he defined key concepts like "time," "synchronous," and "simultaneous" in new and clear ways. He introduced the idea that the timing of an event is determined by a stationary clock at that event's location, which is synchronised with another stationary clock. However, these definitions aren't entirely objective. They depend on the experience of a conscious observer to decide if an event and a clock are happening at the same time. The philosopher Henri Bergson pointed out that our perception of simultaneity is always influenced by the observer's viewpoint, suggesting that Einstein's definitions may not be as objective as they seem. In the end, Einstein's revolutionary thoughts on time reveal the intricate relationship between objective measurements and personal perception in understanding what time really is.
Einstein's True Oversight - The Absence of Duration in the Special Theory of Relativity
Bergson acknowledged that in order for physicists to accurately measure specific moments in time, they must simplify the continuous flow of time and move away from the idea of duration. He didn't oppose these simplifications; instead, his concern was that the concept of the "instant", an infinitesimally small moment that passes so quickly it seems to happen at once, was being mistakenly used as a replacement for the broader idea of duration in discussions about the nature of time. Bergson felt that Einstein overlooked the fact that the instant is only a useful abstraction derived from our actual experience of time passing. He wanted Einstein to recognise that the intuitive understanding of simultaneity, which comes from our lived experience of duration, was hidden within the definitions that underpin the theory of relativity. In essence, Bergson was highlighting a neglect of real experience in mathematical physics.
However, Bergson's criticisms had little effect on Einstein, both in 1922 and in the years that followed. For Einstein, the ultimate measure of a theory's value was its practical effectiveness. He believed that understanding the lived experience of time was irrelevant to his work, and he saw no issue with dismissing the concept of duration. His main error was not simply omitting duration from his theory of special relativity; it was his belief that physical time, defined by clock measurements, was more fundamental than lived time.
You might wonder if duration is merely a construct of our minds, suggesting that our perception of time passing is just a cognitive illusion shaped by measurable activities in our brains. For instance, whether we perceive two lights as occurring simultaneously or in sequence depends not only on the time between them but also on how they interact with our brain's processing. So why not consider our experience of duration as just our brains smoothing out the fine details, making time feel as if it flows? This brings us to Einstein's key point from that evening in 1922: "There is no time of the philosopher; there is only a psychological time that differs from the time of the physicist." By "psychological time," Einstein meant that our internal experience of time could align with external clock time, allowing experts to accurately describe our perceptions. However, this concept of psychological time does not fully address the deeper philosophical issue that Bergson raised: duration cannot be equated with psychological time.
Clock Time Measurement - A Reflection on Duration Lived in Physics & Psychology
When neuroscientists study how we perceive time, they use clock time to analyse brain activity, behaviours, and personal accounts of our experiences. This approach helps them understand how our brains interpret time and allows them to create descriptions that link our conscious experiences to the physical workings of the brain. However, these descriptions fall short of capturing the true nature of our personal experience of time, leaving a gap between the brain's processes and our conscious awareness. To bridge this gap, we need to consider the concept of "duration," which reflects how we experience time. Neuroscientists themselves rely on their own perceptions of time when conducting their research, whether they are reading clocks, measuring time intervals in their experiments, or reflecting on durations they can mentally grasp. Essentially, all their work happens within the context of lived time, yet they can never fully step outside this experience to explain it in detail. As a result, the concept of duration is often overlooked.
It's important to note that Henri Bergson's idea of duration cannot simply be equated with the psychological time that Einstein discussed. Clock time, whether in the realms of physics or psychology, always comes after our lived experience of duration. Einstein did not fully grasp this distinction. Bergson believed that a careful philosophical examination of relativity theory would reveal that measurable clock time is deeply intertwined with lived time. This was the goal he pursued in his work, "Duration and Simultaneity." Unfortunately, his message was overshadowed by a misinterpretation of special relativity, which contributed to the widespread belief that Einstein had "won" their debate. This misunderstanding is also a key reason why Bergson's theories struggled to gain traction throughout the 20th century.
Bergson's main misunderstanding stemmed from his difficulty in aligning his philosophical beliefs with the practical realities of Einstein's theory. In his work, Time and Free Will, Bergson proposed that there is a single, universal time that everyone experiences together. When faced with Einstein's ideas, he tried to reconcile his belief in this singular time with the multiple times suggested by special relativity. To do this, he argued that these multiple times should be seen as purely mathematical constructs rather than something physically real. He focused on the concept of time dilation, which is the difference in elapsed time measured by two clocks that are moving at different speeds. In this scenario, the clock that is stationary (not moving) ticks faster than the one that is in motion. However, in the sphere of relativity, there is no absolute state of rest; any observer can consider themselves at rest while seeing others as in motion. Bergson concluded that since there is no fixed frame of reference in special relativity and because the frames of reference do not experience acceleration, the situations of the observers are symmetrical and interchangeable. Therefore, he believed that the multiple times could be viewed as mere mathematical ideas instead of being physically real. If he could treat these many times as just mathematical, he thought he could align them with his notion of a single, real time. This is where Bergson's reasoning fell short.
Time Dilation - A Relative Phenomenon Observed from an External Reference Frame
He looked at the twin paradox, where one twin stays on Earth while his brother travels to space in a rocket near the speed of light and then returns. According to special relativity, when they check their clocks (which were set the same at the start), the Earth twin sees that more time has passed for him, meaning he has aged more than his travelling brother. Bergson disagreed with this idea. He believed that if both twins started in the same situation and there was no acceleration, the returning twin's clock wouldn’t show any time loss when he got back to Earth. To him, clock times weren’t real; they were just mathematical ideas.
However, Bergson was proven wrong. Time dilation, a concept from special relativity, was shown to be real in experiments in 1971. Bergson made two points: one was wrong and the other was right. He was wrong to say time dilation isn’t real, but he was correct in saying that each twin only experiences their own time. Time dilation only shows up when comparing it to another frame of reference and can only be seen from the outside. So, according to Bergson, each twin feels their own time. He argued that the travelling twin wouldn’t notice time slowing down. To see time dilation, he would need to compare his clock with his Earth-bound twin’s clock. Without that comparison, he wouldn’t feel any difference. Some might say Bergson didn’t consider that the travelling twin’s brain also slows down, which means his thoughts would seem to pass more slowly compared to his brother’s. But again, the traveller wouldn’t notice this. This slower feeling only exists in relation to the Earth twin. Therefore, it doesn’t make sense to say the travelling twin experiences a different time. They both feel time passing, but their experiences are personal to them.
In Bergson’s view, a twin who experiences a different time is like a ‘phantom’ or a ‘mental image’ from the perspective of the Earth twin. He believed that if a measure of time loses its connection to real duration, it isn’t truly measuring time. He thought this was what happened in Einstein’s idea of time dilation. For Bergson, there was no real duration in the way Einstein described it. Time dilation only shows as a difference between clock readings or the paths of objects in space and time calculated by scientists. But no one actually feels a different rate of time. As soon as you imagine being in the frame where time dilation occurs, it disappears and comes back in your original frame. In this respect, Bergson was right.
In the hundred years since 1922, the gap between the ideas of a German physicist and a French philosopher seems to have lessened. It turns out that we can connect Bergson’s thoughts with the theory of special relativity, even if no one involved in the discussion has realised it. Philosopher Steven Savitt points out that we can think of duration as the flow of local or ‘proper time’, the time shown on a clock that moves with an object (like a twin travelling away from Earth at the speed of light). This means proper time is the clock time that reflects the experience of someone in a particular frame of reference. However, this connection suggests that there are many durations, not just one. Bergson wanted to keep duration as a single, universal idea. According to this new understanding, time is always experienced from a specific viewpoint in the Universe, never from an outside perspective. There are many durations because there are countless viewpoints and paths through time. Every person, insect, and rock has its own unique path, which shows a distinct experience of time. Each path captures a special flow of time, since a path is a mathematical idea, while experiencing time is something real. The Universe is full of different times and possible rhythms. This means there isn’t a single, all-seeing view of time in the Universe that can see all these different experiences as one.
While Measurable Times & Rhythmic Durations may Vary, the Experience of Time's Passage Remains Fundamentally Immeasurable
In these busy times, we can see that the block-universe theory, which comes from relativity theory, has some problems. This theory suggests that time is just an illusion because the past, present, and future all exist together in a single block of four-dimensional space-time. However, it's hard to imagine being able to see all events in this block universe at once without stepping outside of it, like looking at the world from above. When we combine the ideas of Bergson and Einstein, we realise that there’s no way to view the universe from this "bird’s-eye" perspective. We cannot look at the different paths through space-time and the various rhythms of time from above. Yet, even with all these different times, there is still a sense that time is also singular and universal, as Bergson suggested. Measured time always relies on the basic reality of duration, or the experience of time passing. While we can measure time in seconds, hours, and other units, the real experience of time cannot be fully explained just by these measures. The mathematician and philosopher Alfred North Whitehead pointed out that we can describe how time passes and relate it to other aspects of nature, but we cannot explain it by simply breaking it down into smaller units like clock time. When we measure time, we are measuring the time that has passed, which is based on our experience of duration. However, duration itself cannot be completely understood through these measurements.
Since clock time depends on our experience of duration, saying that duration and the present moment are illusions, as Einstein suggested, undermines the foundation of science. Exploring this foundation and understanding it is the job of philosophy, which goes beyond science. There is a time for physicists and a time for psychologists, but there is also a deeper philosophical time that Einstein missed. The debate that started on April 6, 1922, and continued throughout the 20th century was a missed chance to expand our scientific understanding. It showed a blind spot: the failure to realise that our lived experiences are the essential source of all science, including complex theories in physics. Looking back, it seems that this debate was a misunderstanding. Bergson’s and Einstein’s ideas are more similar than they realised while they were alive. By merging their insights, we can understand something fundamental: all things, including us, have different experiences of time as they move through the universe. There isn’t just one way to measure time. Bergson’s efforts to show Einstein the hidden world of duration beneath special relativity remind us of something important: our experiences are the essential foundation of physics.
''Tired of lying in the sunshine staying home to watch the rain. You are young and life is long and there is time to kill today. And then one day you find ten years have got behind you. No one told you when to run, you missed the starting gun.'' – Time, Lyrics by Roger Waters (Pink Floyd)
