Hi Stephen,
My point is that time as a pointer that points to what exists and what not
(anymore or yet), cannot exist. You can indeed map the set of all such
pointers to the real line. I agree that relativity is inconsistent with
such an idea of time.
Saibal
> Hi Saibal
>
> Are you defining time as isomorphic to the Real number line? Could it
> be
> that all of these "proofs of the nonexistence of time" are really just
> proofs that time is *not* that but something else entirely? It seems to me
> that we are thinking of the way that we can chronometrize events in our
> past
> with real number values and concluding that this labeling scheme extends
> into the future in a unique way, the problem is that if we take General
> Relativity seriously this is a non-started of an idea. The relativity of
> simultaneity coupled with general covariance does not permit any form of
> unique labeling events. We really need to stop assuming a Newtonian
> Absolute
> chronometrization of events. Time is a local measure of change, nothing
> more.
>
> Onward!
>
> Stephen
>
> ***
>
> -Original Message-
> From: smi...@zonnet.nl
> Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2011 8:27 PM
> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: QTI is trivially false
>
> I think we are now making hidden assumptions about the nature of time,
> namely that it "really exists", and then we are trying to argue that
> you can still have immortality (in different senses). However, it is
> far more natural to assume that time does not exist and then you get
> immortality (in the sense of my conscious states that have a finite
> memory always existing) in a far more straightforward way.
>
> That time does not exist is a quite natural assumption. To see this,
> assume that it does exist. But then, since time evolution is given by a
> unitary transform, the past still exists in a scrambled way in the
> present (when taking into account parallel universes). E.g. your past
> brain state of ten years ago can still be described in terms of the
> physical variables as they exist today. Of course such a description is
> extremely complicated involving the physical state of today's
> multiverse within a sphere of ten lightyears.
>
> Then assuming that the details of implementation does not affect
> consciousness (as long as the right program is being run), one has to
> conclude that your past state of coinsciousess exists also today. You
> could therefore just as well assume that time does not exist, as the
> two possibilities are operationally equivalent.
>
>
> Saibal
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
