My point is that time as a pointer that points to what exists and what not
(anymore or yet), cannot exist. You can indeed map the set of all such
pointers to the real line. I agree that relativity is inconsistent with
such an idea of time.
> Hi Saibal
> Are you defining time as isomorphic to the Real number line? Could it
> that all of these "proofs of the nonexistence of time" are really just
> proofs that time is *not* that but something else entirely? It seems to me
> that we are thinking of the way that we can chronometrize events in our
> with real number values and concluding that this labeling scheme extends
> into the future in a unique way, the problem is that if we take General
> Relativity seriously this is a non-started of an idea. The relativity of
> simultaneity coupled with general covariance does not permit any form of
> unique labeling events. We really need to stop assuming a Newtonian
> chronometrization of events. Time is a local measure of change, nothing
> -----Original Message-----
> From: smi...@zonnet.nl
> Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2011 8:27 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: QTI is trivially false
> I think we are now making hidden assumptions about the nature of time,
> namely that it "really exists", and then we are trying to argue that
> you can still have immortality (in different senses). However, it is
> far more natural to assume that time does not exist and then you get
> immortality (in the sense of my conscious states that have a finite
> memory always existing) in a far more straightforward way.
> That time does not exist is a quite natural assumption. To see this,
> assume that it does exist. But then, since time evolution is given by a
> unitary transform, the past still exists in a scrambled way in the
> present (when taking into account parallel universes). E.g. your past
> brain state of ten years ago can still be described in terms of the
> physical variables as they exist today. Of course such a description is
> extremely complicated involving the physical state of today's
> multiverse within a sphere of ten lightyears.
> Then assuming that the details of implementation does not affect
> consciousness (as long as the right program is being run), one has to
> conclude that your past state of coinsciousess exists also today. You
> could therefore just as well assume that time does not exist, as the
> two possibilities are operationally equivalent.
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> For more options, visit this group at
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at