Dear LizR,
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 7:08 PM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: > On 26 January 2014 11:25, Stephen Paul King <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Dear Russell, >> >> I agree, this has been pointed out by many. The Schroedinger's >> equation uses the classical concept of time. The Wheeler-de Witt equation >> sums over all possible universes and leads to a vanishing of the >> classical concept of time. I have pointed to a very nice paper by Kitada >> and Fletcher <http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9408027> that discusses this in >> detail. >> >> I am trying to not get stuck on the classical notion of time and >> instead focus on what the concept is trying to denote: >> 1) a sequence of events >> 2) a transition from one event to another. >> > > From this I picture a series of "events" - Hoylean pigeon holes, say - > with something between them - a flashlight being moved, say - called > "transitions". This indicates time is made of two distinct things. A sort > of railway line of time, with "moments" clicking when you go over the joins > between the rails, and smooth rails - "transitions" - in between each > "event". > Is that (very roughly and metaphorically) your intention? > > No. I don't buy the idea that events or stuffed pigeon holes or what ever is "outthere" existing with no explanation and that our conscious experience involves some mysterious transitioning from one set to another. I think there we have taken the movie projector metaphor too literally... Most of my current metaphors come from the world of computers, real computers and from people that write code for them (genuflect toward Russell). > If we assume classical physics for a moment, there are no "transitions" in > a 4D manifold, just positions along worldlines, which form a continuum in > the classical limit. However, if we move to quantum theory, it's possible > to get transitions - quantum steps from one state to another, like an > electron jumping energy levels inside an atom. However, splitting time up > using quantum transitions seems arbitary, since there is no known > synchronisation tying them together. In between quantum transitions a free > electron will describe a classical path (or rather a whole bunch of them). > What it *doesn't* do, to the best of our knowledge, is describe a series > of events + transitions. The same is true of any quantum object, except > when it changes state. And we're made of quantum objects, so ... > > So why do you want to make time out to have this nature, when it's far > from obvious that it does? (Indeed the very idea doesn't make much sense if > you bring in Lorentz invariance and the order of these "events" and > "transitions" get all mixed up.) > A really smart guy that I respect has shown how to derive Lorentz group relations and invariance starting from a simple notion of observers and relations among them. There is not need to assume that there is something "out there" independent of them that has some particular set of attributes. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/TBc_y2MZV5c/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- Kindest Regards, Stephen Paul King Senior Researcher Mobile: (864) 567-3099 [email protected] http://www.provensecure.us/ “This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, notify sender immediately and delete this message immediately.” -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
