On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 10:09 AM Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 4:53 PM Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 9:38 AM Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 4:36 PM Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 9:33 AM Jason Resch <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 4:18 PM Bruce Kellett < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> From: Jason Resch <[email protected]> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 6:00 AM Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Of course they differ: in one case you have a purely local concept >>>>>>> of the present; in the other case you require some global notion of a >>>>>>> "present", which cannot even be uniquely defined. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> What exists? >>>>>> >>>>>> A: *naive presentism*: only a 3-dimensional space evolving in time >>>>>> (some particular "slice" of spacetime exists, which constantly changes) >>>>>> B: *local-presents*: Events, each in their position in space time, >>>>>> each in their own present time >>>>>> C: *block-time*: Events, each in their position in space time >>>>>> >>>>>> We both agree relativity rules out A. But I struggle to see the >>>>>> difference between B and C (ontologically speaking), unless you are >>>>>> proposing the view that the only thing that exists is a single event (I >>>>>> don't think you are though). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> There are of the order of 10^80 protons in the visible universe. One >>>>>> does not confuse this fact by imagining that there is only one >>>>>> proton...... >>>>>> >>>>>> I think your problem with the ontology of the strictly local >>>>>> "present" is that you still have in you mind some notion of an absolute, >>>>>> external time, in which all these "presents" exist. Your description of >>>>>> "block time" in C above makes precisely this mistake. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I am only asking what exists in your theory, given you reject the >>>>> notion of the present as a global space-like hyperplane. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The universe exists -- an infinity of present moments. Nothing exists >>>> timelessly because that is incoherent. >>>> >>>> >>> So what defines this the set of present moments? Does it include all >>> events in spacetime? Or only some of them? >>> >> >> Why would you leave any out? >> >> > If you include all events as as present moments, and say that they all > exist, then how is this different from the block-time view (which says only > that all points in time exist and are real)? > They differ in exactly the same was a 10^80 protons differs from one proton. The block-time view claims that all moments exist timelessly and simultaneously. As well as being inconsistent with the relativity of simultaneity, the notion is incoherent. Bruce -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
