On 1 February 2014 01:40, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Friday, January 31, 2014 2:22:12 AM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: > >> On 31 January 2014 17:19, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Thursday, January 30, 2014 10:24:48 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: >>>> >>>> Why do some people have such a problem with "how change can emerge from >>>> something static" ? It's as simple as F = ma - a static equation describing >>>> something changing. Change is by definition things being different at >>>> different times. If you map out all the times involved as a dimension, you >>>> will naturally get a "static" universe, just as putting together all the >>>> moments making up a movie gives you a reel of film - but only from a "God's >>>> eye perspective". This is the perspective science gives us, the perspective >>>> given by using equations and models and maps to describe reality; it isn't >>>> the world of everyday experience, which (at best) views those equations and >>>> so on from within (assuming for a moment they are so accurate as to be >>>> isomorphic to reality). >>>> >>>> Obtaining change from the static view used by science is a non-problem, >>>> and has been since Newton published his Principia. >>>> >>> >>> Is a description the same as emergence though? We can read a film strip >>> as a moving picture because of the nature of our sensory capacities, not >>> because the moving picture emerges from the God's Eye view of the frames. >>> F=ma begins with acceleration already assumed, so it is an equation that we >>> interpret as referring to motion, nut the equation itself doesn't refer to >>> anything. It's neither static nor dynamic, its just conceptual. >>> >>> I am illustrating where the idea of a block universe comes from, and the >> context in which it makes sense. If you mean ontological emergence, the >> origin of physics, that can't be answered within the framework of >> explaining how a block universe works. It's a separate question. If you >> mean emergence within a block universe, clearly that can occur, as it >> happened in the past, and the past is a block universe according to the >> normal definition. >> > > I thought that the whole point of a block universe is that nothing can or > needs to "emerge". It is all there in the block. > It emerges along the time axis. Evolution, for example, can operate in a block universe. All the phenomena we experience can occur in a block universe, otherwise no one would entertain the possibility that we live in one. The fact that it is "all there" from the god's (physicist's) perspective doesn't stop things changing and emerging within the block. Things changed and emerged in the past. They're there, embedded in the past - no one expects them to change (modulo quantum theory and block multiverses, of course). We don't expect to wake up and discover that the Norman conquest didn't happen after all, even though at the time that caused radical change, and was partly responsible for the emergence of the modern English (i.e. Anglo-Saxon/Danish/French/Latin/etc/etc!) language. > > >> Or maybe you're just talking nonsense. F=ma refers to a mass accelerating >> under a force. It is a static equation describing a dynamic process, >> something that could be useful in visualising how a block universe works, >> which is why I mentioned it. It's quite straightforward. It isn't rocket >> science. >> > > But F=ma can only be epiphenomenal in a block universe. There can't be an > true acceleration because acceleration requires time, and a block universe > would have only coordinates within a static temporal axis, wouldn't it? > Acceleration would be a statistical derivative only, it seems to me. > But there *is* time in a block universe. It's a 4D manifold, and time is a particular axis within it. You seem to want an extra time above and beyond the existing one. -- 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.
