On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net> wrote:
> Hi Jason, > > The STc Principle conclusively falsifies block time, since the fact that > everything continually travels through spacetime all the time requires > everything to be at one particular position in spacetime all the time. > Things can have a "world tube" that grows one light-year in length per year. You seem to be envisioning things as single points. > This is confirmed by direct experience, that we are always at a single > point in spacetime. > Direct experience is a rather shaky foundation on which to build a theory. Remember how it worked out for the geocentrists. > How could it be otherwise? > Can direct experience rule out the theory that there are two moving presents that exist, one-day apart, such that you experience every moment of your life twice? > The notion of block time is based on a misunderstanding of SR. > > Believers in block time need to offer an alternative explanation (than the > one I give above) for the self-evident fact that we all experience our > existence in a common present moment which they are unable to do. > All observers believe the time they inhabit is the present, it is as true for the fighters in World War I who believe 1914 is the present, as it is for you and me who think 2013 is nearly over, as it is for our descendants who believe 2500 is the present. Think of it like this: If the past doesn't exist, then they are wholly unnecessary to explain your current experience of the present. In other words, the present moment is entirely sufficient, on its own, to explain your experience of "now". But then, if the present moment alone is entirely sufficient to explain your experience of "right now", then whether past moments in time exist or not should have no impact on your experience of "right now" in this present moment. Presentism thus rules out its own justification for presuming that past moment's must no longer exist in order to justify our experience of "right now". > > Again in your subsequent discussion about Bob and Alice you are discussing > well known effects of SR with regards to CLOCK time. > It isn't just times on their clocks, it is what they can infer is happening at different points in time based on their assumption of the constancy of the speed of light. When Bob does the calculations assuming the speed of light = c, he finds event B had to happen before A, and when Alice does the calculations, she finds event A had to happen before B. How is this compatible with a single objective present? > But the point I keep hammering home is that all these SR effects occur to > every observer only in the present moment. > You seem to assume there is "the" present moment, rather than "their" present moments, but this seems to be an unnecessary complication of the theory. > And when any observers meet up they always share that same present moment, > therefore it must be common and universal. > > What is your definition of "present moment"? What do you think about the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rietdijk–Putnam_argument ? > Of course Bob and Alice have different relativistic views of clock time, > but everyone of these views occurs always in their present moment, and > these present moments are always exactly the same whenever any observers > meet up anywhere in the universe, therefore it is clear that present moment > must be common to all observers. > You are extrapolating from the idea that when two observers share a where they share a when, to get to the idea that whether or not observers share a where, they share a when. The first assumption doesn't even seem true, however, in the context of the Rietdijk-Putnam argument. Even two observers at the same place, if they are walking past each other, exist in "when's" that contain different content. Jason > > Edgar > > > > On Wednesday, December 25, 2013 11:52:10 AM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> All, >> >> ST=spacetime, c=speed of light, thus STc Principle. >> >> To answer some of Jason's questions. Block time is wrong. Only the common >> present moment exists. All the comments Jason makes refer only to >> differences in clock times which are well known, but the important point is >> that all those differences in clock time occur in the SAME common present >> moment.. I find it difficult to understand why so many people can't get >> their minds around the difference which proves there are two distinct kinds >> of time. >> >> The past exists only as inferences from the present as to what states >> would have resulted in the present according to the currently known laws of >> physics. Therefore the past is actually determined by the present state of >> reality from the perspective of the present which is the only valid >> perspective. Therefore the logical network of past and present is absolute >> 100% exact and could not have been different in even the slightest detail. >> The actual currently state of the universe falsifies the very possibility >> of other pasts. This is another difficult concept for many. >> >> Only the future is probabilistic because it does not yet exist and has >> never been computed. But the past - present logical state has been actually >> computed and thus is completely deterministic now that it exists and it >> could not have been different in any minute detail at all. >> >> This solves the problem of the original fine tuning. Given the current >> state of reality which is all that exists, all other conceivable fine >> tunings are impossible. This is what I call the 'Super Anthropic >> Principle', and it negates the necessity and probably the actuality of >> postulating any multiverses and strongly implies our observable universe is >> most probably the only one that exists. >> >> Edgar >> >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.