Announcement

Collapse

Philosophy 201 Guidelines

Cogito ergo sum

Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Is time physical?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stoic
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    Whether the early universe was the size of a human or golf ball, it doesn't matter - all mater and energy was contained in it. So where was your block universe when all matter was contained in that early size?
    As I've said, that would be one end of the Block Universe (unless it extends further back than that, of course).

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Stoic View Post

    The first thing you need to keep in mind is that we haven't been talking about what I believe, but rather about the Block Universe theory.

    Second, I've never heard anyone claim that the early universe contained "all of time". I don't even know what that would mean.

    Third, as to the physical size of the early universe, it was apparently never as small as a golf ball:

    And finally, what I'm saying about the Block Universe theory, is that what we call "the early universe" was a slice of the Block Universe (with the thickness of the slice determined by how long a duration of time you want to consider).
    Whether the early universe was the size of a human or golf ball, it doesn't matter - all mater and energy was contained in it. So where was your block universe when all matter was contained in that early size?

    About 13.75 billion years ago, all of the contents and energy in the universe was contained in a singularity with infinite density and temperature. It began to expand rapidly and this expansion is known as the Big Bang. The laws of physics as we know them did not apply during the early seconds of the universe and scientists can only speculate about what the early universe was like.

    https://lco.global/spacebook/cosmology/early-universe/

    Leave a comment:


  • Stoic
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    So you don't believe that at one point the entire universe, all of space and time, was contained in something about the size of a golf ball, then expanded? That is Big Bang Cosmology. You seem to be saying that our universe (the only one we have evidence of) was somehow nested in a larger block universe. Is that correct?
    The first thing you need to keep in mind is that we haven't been talking about what I believe, but rather about the Block Universe theory.

    Second, I've never heard anyone claim that the early universe contained "all of time". I don't even know what that would mean.

    Third, as to the physical size of the early universe, it was apparently never as small as a golf ball:

    Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2021/08/25/how-small-was-the-universe-at-the-start-of-the-big-bang/?sh=dc576835f799


    Today, we can say that the Universe got no hotter, at the hottest part of the hot Big Bang, than about ~1015 GeV in terms of energy. That places a cutoff on how far you can extrapolate the hot Big Bang backwards: to a time of ~10-35 seconds and a distance scale of ~1.5 meters. The Universe, at the earliest stages we can ascribe a “size” to it, could have been no smaller than roughly the size of a human being. This is a tremendous and recent improvement by about a factor of ten over a decade ago, when we would have said “no smaller than a soccer ball” instead.

    © Copyright Original Source


    And finally, what I'm saying about the Block Universe theory, is that what we call "the early universe" was a slice of the Block Universe (with the thickness of the slice determined by how long a duration of time you want to consider).

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    [QUOTE=Stoic;n1418549]


    No, I don't believe the Block Universe grew from small to large. There is a distinction to be made between the Block Universe and "the universe".

    Typically, when we discuss "the universe" as we do in the big bang theory, we are talking about the spatial extent of the universe, and the material enclosed within that extent. That is just one time slice of the Block Universe.
    So you don't believe that at one point the entire universe, all of space and time, was contained in something about the size of a golf ball, then expanded? That is Big Bang Cosmology. You seem to be saying that our universe (the only one we have evidence of) was somehow nested in a larger block universe. Is that correct?

    The Big Bang hypothesis states that all of the current and past matter in the Universe came into existence at the same time, roughly 13.8 billion years ago. At this time, all matter was compacted into a very small ball with infinite density and intense heat called a Singularity. Suddenly, the Singularity began expanding, and the universe as we know it began.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stoic
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    You are being pretty crafty with your wording Stoic. You don't really believe that Block universe grew from small to large. Any more than I grew from small to large.
    No, I don't believe the Block Universe grew from small to large. There is a distinction to be made between the Block Universe and "the universe".

    Typically, when we discuss "the universe" as we do in the big bang theory, we are talking about the spatial extent of the universe, and the material enclosed within that extent. That is just one time slice of the Block Universe.

    Just as when we speak of "you", we are (usually) talking about a particular time slice of "you", whether it is you at a time when you were a baby, or you now. In B series language, you were smaller at the time you were a baby than at later times. In A series language, you were smaller in the past than you are in the present.

    As an aside, there is a distinction between B theory and the Block Universe. To learn more about A series and B series, it's best to go to the source:

    Source: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d670/27ba277b9c9bcf8c5ba1b4fd848a4ec06730.pdf?_ga=2.26085114.694474817.1664731647-1091155247.1664731647


    Positions in time, as time appears to us prima' facie, are distinguished in two ways. Each position is Earlier than some, and Later than some, of the other positions. And each position is either Past, Present, or Future. The distinctions of the former class are permanent, while those of the latter are not. If M is ever earlier than N, it is always earlier. But an event, which is now present, was future and will be past.

    Since distinctions of the first class are permanent, they might be held to be more objective, and to be more essential to the nature of time. I believe, however, that this would be a mistake, and that the distinction of past, present and future is as essential to time as the distinction of earlier and later, while in a certain sense, as we shall see, it may be regarded as more fundamental than the distinction of earlier and later. And it is because the distinctions of past, present and future seem to me to be essential for time, that I regard time as unreal.

    For the sake of brevity I shall speak of the series of positions running from the far past through the near past to the present, and then from the present to the near future and the far future, as the A series. The series of positions which runs from earlier to later I shall call the B series. The contents of a position in time are called events. The contents of a single position are admitted to be properly called a plurality of events. (I believe, however, that they can as truly, though not more truly, be called a single event. This view is not universally accepted, and it is not necessary for my argument.) A position in time is called a moment.

    The first question which we must consider is whether it is essential to the reality of time that its events should form an A series as well as a B series. And it is clear, to begin with, that we never observe time except as forming both these series. We perceive events in time as being present, and those are the only events which we perceive directly. And all other events in time which, by memory or inference, we believe to be real, are regarded as past or future--those earlier than the present being past, and those later than the present being future. Thus the events' of time, as observed by us, form an A series as well as a B series.

    It is possible, however, that this is merely subjective. It may be the case that the distinction introduced among positions in time by the A series the distinction of past, present and future is simply a constant illusion of our minds, and that the real nature of time only contains the distinction of the B series--the distinction of earlier and later. In that case we could not perceive time as it really is, but we might be able to think of it as it really is.

    This is not a very common view, but it has found able supporters.

    © Copyright Original Source



    I have always been both large and small in B theory.
    In the Block Universe, the 4-dimensional "you" is just one size and shape, smaller at one end than over most of its duration.

    The universe didn't actually expand (that would clearly require the flow of time) but all states, more dense, less dense, etc... have always existed together. Correct?
    The Block Universe doesn't change.

    The states of "the universe" do not all exist at the same time.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post

    There is no actual frames or discrete moments in the block universe. Time is a continuum. There are no "frozen moments" - that was an analogy when I was talking about films. You can divide time up the same way in A-theory. Just take a photo. That is a frozen moment, a recording of light rays at a split second of time. Kinetic energy is stored in the object at any point in it's path. Just like kinetic energy is stored in a spring when it is compressed. The same with measuring any moving object at a specific moment in either A or B theories. There is no difference.
    No Sparko, if you have successive events you have A theory, one event follows another. And the flow of time is related to movement. How do you have successive events when every event, past, preset and future already exist? Like I keep saying - I did not grow (motion) from a child to an adult. I have always been a child and an adult, and dead. And again, there is no 'becoming' (motion/change) in B Theory.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    Doesn't work, because EVERY moment is just a static picture. Like your film frames, different locations of frozen moments.. And no motion is not the same in both theories. Like I have been discussing wit Stoic - an expanding universe, motion, requires A theory, static time does not allow for that. There would have been no kinetic energy from the rapid expansion of the universe to get motion going in the first place.
    There is no actual frames or discrete moments in the block universe. Time is a continuum. There are no "frozen moments" - that was an analogy when I was talking about films. You can divide time up the same way in A-theory. Just take a photo. That is a frozen moment, a recording of light rays at a split second of time. Kinetic energy is stored in the object at any point in it's path. Just like kinetic energy is stored in a spring when it is compressed. The same with measuring any moving object at a specific moment in either A or B theories. There is no difference.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post

    again, no it isn't an illusion. Time is real to us 3D folk living inside the universe.
    But us 3D folks are wrong... According to B theory. Even Einstein said that... And B theory is the fact of the matter, not our illusions.

    People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.

    Albert Einstein

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post

    Let's say you had a machine that could just stop time. So there you are in the A-theory universe, moving along. You see a pitcher throw a ball. You click your little machine and bam! Time is frozen and the ball stops in midair. You click it again and the ball moves on to the catcher.

    It is no different than you taking a photo of the event. The photo captures a single moment in time, frozen. It doesn't mean that the ball isn't moving, just that you are looking at a split second of that motion. Same with B-theory. The object is moving because it's location changes from one moment to the next, just like in A-theory. Motion is the same in either theory. The only difference is that past moments don't go poof and disappear in B-theory like it does in A-theory. The past remains. and so does the future. Motion doesn't change.
    Doesn't work, because EVERY moment is just a static picture. Like your film frames, different locations of frozen moments.. And no motion is not the same in both theories. Like I have been discussing with Stoic - an expanding universe, motion, requires A theory, static time does not allow for that. There would have been no kinetic energy from the rapid expansion of the universe to get motion going in the first place.
    Last edited by seer; Yesterday, 09:41 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    Right, but that view of time is based on an illusion. In any case baby seer did not grow (motion) up he is still frozen somewhere in static time in the Block universe. I had another interesting thought this weekend - we, you and I, existed as long as the universe existed.
    again, no it isn't an illusion. Time is real to us 3D folk living inside the universe. And "as long as the universe existed" doesn't really have any meaning when considering the block universe as a unit since time only exists inside the universe.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post

    There is a past. At any point in time, all time before that point is "the past" and any time after it is "the future" . To baby Seer, you are now in his "future" and he is in your "past"
    Right, but that view of time is based on an illusion. In any case baby seer did not grow (motion) up he is still frozen somewhere in static time in the Block universe. I had another interesting thought this weekend - we, you and I, existed as long as the universe existed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    If there is motion Stoic, then the A theory of time kicks in, flow is related to motion. So I will ask you again - did the universe begin small then expand as we see it today? There is no temporal passage or 'becoming' (motion) in B theory.
    Let's say you had a machine that could just stop time. So there you are in the A-theory universe, moving along. You see a pitcher throw a ball. You click your little machine and bam! Time is frozen and the ball stops in midair. You click it again and the ball moves on to the catcher.

    It is no different than you taking a photo of the event. The photo captures a single moment in time, frozen. It doesn't mean that the ball isn't moving, just that you are looking at a split second of that motion. Same with B-theory. The object is moving because it's location changes from one moment to the next, just like in A-theory. Motion is the same in either theory. The only difference is that past moments don't go poof and disappear in B-theory like it does in A-theory. The past remains. and so does the future. Motion doesn't change.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    But we are wrong, there really is no past in the Block universe, remember time is static.




    They have different locations, but not different times. Again, there is no 1953 when baby seer was born, those distinctions are based on our illusion of time. There may be different locations on the time line, but time does not change, it is static. And there is no "beginning" - baby seer did not begin to exist, baby seer always existed in the Block universe.
    There is a past. At any point in time, all time before that point is "the past" and any time after it is "the future" . To baby Seer, you are now in his "future" and he is in your "past"

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Stoic View Post

    It's pretty clear that the universe was more dense at earlier times than at later times, at least for the time periods for which we have evidence.

    If you prefer A theory language, that means that the universe started small and then expanded.
    You are being pretty crafty with your wording Stoic. You don't really believe that Block universe grew from small to large. Any more than I grew from small to large. I have always been both large and small in B theory. The universe didn't actually expand (that would clearly require the flow of time) but all states, more dense, less dense, etc... have always existed together. Correct?

    Leave a comment:


  • Stoic
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    Then answer me. Did the universe start small then expand?
    It's pretty clear that the universe was more dense at earlier times than at later times, at least for the time periods for which we have evidence.

    If you prefer A theory language, that means that the universe started small and then expanded.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by mattbballman31, 09-24-2022, 04:21 PM
31 responses
96 views
0 likes
Last Post shunyadragon  
Started by seer, 09-21-2022, 12:55 PM
24 responses
165 views
0 likes
Last Post seer
by seer
 
Started by seer, 08-03-2022, 11:33 AM
570 responses
2,369 views
0 likes
Last Post Stoic
by Stoic
 
Working...
X