[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 1Z wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > > The key point I think is that both the A-theorists and the B-theorists > > > are partially right. > > > > The B-series is easily compatible with the A-series. The point > > about a block universe is that there is no A-series, > > not that there is a B-series. This asymmetry makes the > > situation unlike W/P duality. > > My point was that the philosophers could be wrong ;) i.e a block > universe does *not* have to mean that there is no A-series.
A block universe is *defined* as a B series without an A series. > I'm > pointing out the possibility that that there could be *both* a block > universe *and* an A-Block. ] There *can* be a B series and an A series. You get the B series for free with the A series. You don't get the a series for free with the B series. > I pointed out that this could be possible > if time had several different components or dimensions associated with > it. Heard of Dunne? > If both a block universe and an A-series is possible, then the > philosophy debate over whether time flows or not would be exactly like > the debate over whether light is particles or waves. No, because the situation is not symmetrical. > Every-one thought > it had to be one or the other, but it turned out to be both. > Analogously, every-one thinks time is *either* an A-series *or* a > B-series, but I'm saying it *can* be both. Everyone knows it can be both. A block universe is B only, a dynamic universe is A+B. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---