Liz, This is NOT an argument for block time. Not in the least. It implies just the opposite that events are actually happening...
Edgar On Monday, February 3, 2014 10:55:37 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: > > By the way, I just came across this rather amusing illustration of how SR > leads to block space-time: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rietdijk-Putnam_argument > > [image: Inline images 1] > > > On 4 February 2014 16:34, Jesse Mazer <[email protected] <javascript:>>wrote: > >> >> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]<javascript:> >> > wrote: >> >>> Jesse, >>> >>> That's possible but it's only one quote and considering the >>> circumstances it could have just been an attempt to provide comfort to the >>> grieving family. Also Einstein is known to have spoken metaphorically at >>> times and even to seemingly contradict himself on occasion (eg. on >>> religious belief), so I think one would need to have more than just that >>> one quote to make a convincing case. >>> >> >> All of his statements on religion I've seen seem completely consistent >> with a Spinoza-esque pantheism, where do you think he contradicted himself >> on religion? As for block time, that wasn't his only comment in support of >> the idea, for example at http://everythingforever.com/einstein.htm we >> find the following even more explicit endorsement of the block time view: >> >> 'Since there exists in this four dimensional structure [space-time] no >> longer any sections which represent "now" objectively, the concepts of >> happening and becoming are indeed not completely suspended, but yet >> complicated. It appears therefore more natural to think of physical reality >> as a four dimensional existence, instead of, as hitherto, the evolution of >> a three dimensional existence.' >> >> >> >>> >>> On the other hand I suspect one can find very many Einstein quotes in >>> which he mentions the PRESENT which would stand in direct contradiction to >>> a belief in a block universe. >>> >>> >> Did he use it in the context of talking about the nature of time in >> physics or philosophy, or was he just using it in the ordinary everyday >> way, like talking about the "present political situation" or something? If >> the latter, I think eternalists talk that way all the time, simultaneity >> issues make no practical difference when you're just talking about events >> confined to the Earth. And aside from simultaneity issues, talking about >> the "present" doesn't preclude the possibility that other times are equally >> real, it's just an indexical term like "here". >> >> Jesse >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, February 3, 2014 7:37:44 PM UTC-5, jessem wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 6:44 PM, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Liz, >>>>> >>>>> You keep repeating your UNSUBSTANTIATED claim that both Newton and >>>>> Einstein believed in block time. >>>>> >>>>> I've repeatedly asked you to substantiate this claim with some actual >>>>> quotes from them but you have been unable to do so. >>>>> >>>>> Please provide quotes substantiating this or withdraw the claim. >>>>> That's only fair... >>>>> >>>> >>>> In Einstein's case this does definitely seem to be his own belief, for >>>> example when his lifelong friend Michael Besso died in 1955, he sent his >>>> family a letter in which he wrote: >>>> >>>> "Now he has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That >>>> means nothing. People like us, who believe in physics, know that the >>>> distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly >>>> persistent illusion." >>>> >>>> I think the serious context of this letter likely precludes the >>>> possibility that he was joking, or that he was just speaking in an offhand >>>> way about how relativity models the world as opposed to expressing a >>>> belief >>>> about the way the world really is. >>>> >>>> Jesse >>>> >>> -- >>> 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] <javascript:>. >>> To post to this group, send email to >>> [email protected]<javascript:> >>> . >>> 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 [email protected] <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:> >> . >> 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 [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.
