1 Published in: The Nature of Time: Geometry, Physics and Perception. R. Buccheri, M. Saniga and W. M. Stuckey, eds. NATO Science Series II. Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry - Vol. 95, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Published in Netherlands, 383-392, 2003. THE DYNAMICS OF TIME AND TIMELESSNESS: PHILOSOPHY, PHYSICS AND PROSPECTS FOR OUR LIFE ATTILA GRANDPIERRE Konkoly Observatory H-1525 Budapest, P. O. Box 67, Hungary Keywords: endo-physics - ontological levels - integrated ontology - ultimate time 1. The Ultimate Nature of the Universe 1. 1. ENDO-PHYSICAL, EXO-PHYSICAL AND ULTIMATE TIME The concept of endo-physics was introduced [1-2] in the context of self-reference in quantum physics and artificial intelligence (AI) research. Now, regarding quantum physics, it implicitly relies on something existing outer to itself, namely, the existence of an observer related to consciousness. In order to evaluate the relation of consciousness to (quantum) physics, it is necessary to recognise the fact that physical behaviour follows the principle of least action (action principle) which requires the behaviour to be directed towards the physical equilibrium. Now since biology follows a principle which acts against the physical principle, attempting to preserve the distance from physical equilibrium, and consciousness allegedly develops only in biological organism (at least in the observer concept of quantum physics), the observer lives on an ontologically different level from the physical realm [3-5]. Therefore, the epistemological structure of the observer-observed relation contains a two-levelled ontological structure. Regarding AI, it relies to “creators” of hardware and software, therefore its epistemology is that of the deistic materialism [6], i.e. another ontologically two-levelled structure. Now self-modification, the concept closely related to endophysics [7], is characteristic on a biological and/or psychological level of ontology [4-5]. Therefore, it is an important recognition that self-governing systems follow developmental paths different from physical entities. Therefore endo-physics, putting the observer into a physical context compresses the two-levelled ontological structure into a monistic ontology and therefore creates epistemic paradoxes with Klein-bottle structures. Nevertheless, when we are aware that there is an at least two-levelled ontology behind the concept of endophysics, it is easy to remove certain types of paradox epistemic structures like Klein-bottles since self-reference becomes simply reference of one existential level to another. It was shown already by Aristotle [8] that the psyche appears to be responsible for the “measuring” and “the counting” of (physical) motions and thus, for the coming into being and the genesis of chronos at the human level as a psychological phenomenon with ontological pretensions. This notion is close to the one expressed in Boltzmann’s H- theorem that entropy is generated only in measurements (see also Eakins, this workshop). Recognising the two(or three)-levelled ontology (physical-biological-noetic) behind the