Claude girardin

User Page Claude girardin

Bonjour Claude Je m'intéresse à la perception du temps et j'ai été amené à en faire une approche très particulière.

Je souhaiterais en discuter et soumettre mes idées pour commentaires et critiques. Je suis malheureusement très mauvais en anglais, j'ai juste fait l'abstract suivant (si intérêt, il me faudra du temps pour traduire mon développment en français):

We base on the fact that man is a being of language to infer that the basic features of the language must structure the way we understand the time.

1 / Lévi-Strauss indicates in his ethnological studies, that universally, human structures representations by contrary pairs (light / heavy, white / black etc.). We show that this difference can only be done if, at a more integrated stage of the representation, the competing elements are part of the same family or group.
In other words, dichotomous operation between elements, implies a differentiation between the Group and the elements which are parts of this group.
This is the opposition that linguists distinguish between action synchronic and diachronic.

2 / Freud, has defined what he calls the repetition automatism. This automatism interested a group of signifiers in a determined semantic field (and therefore synchronic). This results from the analysis that Freud made of the game "fort da" of his grandson. The question is to understand how, starting from a series of synchronic repeats, the child comes to diachronic structuring of his imagination. Question posed by Chomsky in terms of acquisition of a competence from series of performances.

3 / We assume that, as the child built his imagination (diachronic structuring) from (synchronic) repeats, he acquires the concept of time. For that purpose, it should be a stable imaginary base, where progressively the “Me” of the subject is structured, to become aware of a succession of repetitions. Time is in essence a diachronic movement, while space is on a synchronic plan.

4 / We show that a movement can be represented by a succession of return between two imaginary levels (one is a meta language of the another). For example, we take a notebook and on each sheet of it, we spot a dot. By quickly scrolling sheets one on the other, we have the impression of movement. Each leave is a synchronic identification of the observed dot, the scrolling of sheets is a diachronic action.

5 / We show that with this type of representation, the tracking of position and evaluation of time do not switch over, which is the essence of the principle of Heisenberg. Our demonstration is not related to quantum mechanics.

6 / In physics, a potential is by definition the global action of a set of elements on one of them. This simply allows us to show that there is the same difference between kinetic energy and potential energy than between space and time. Finally this refers to the synchronic / diachronic difference. Mechanics equations just characterize how a kind of energy is transformed in the other.

Conclusion:

In this time representation, there is no difference between "quantic" and "macro" aspect of te reality.

Voilà, mon but n'est pas à proprement parlé limité à la perception du temps, mais je souhaiterais recueillir l'avis de spécialistes de la question. Question subsidiaire: de quelle façon conforter cette approche par des expéreinces ou des observations cliniques ?

Très cordialement