Originally posted by Sparko
View Post
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
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
B Theory Of Time...
Collapse
X
-
Last edited by JimL; 06-02-2020, 09:27 AM.
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostIn our experience the future doesn't yet exist, the Universe, space, would be expanding into the future. In other words the ruler/the universe exists and moves/expands in time. Time, whatever it is, would not be a dimension in space in A-theory. B-theory says that perspective is an illusion. In B-theory the universe of space is not expanding, all of space and all of time is all there, every point in time and every location in space is real. The markings on the ruler don't come and go, they are coextant with the whole of the ruler. And so, like the markings on a ruler, and like locations in space, the points in time don't come and go in B-theory, they are coextant with the whole of time. And if that is the case, if B-theory is the reality, then every event in every point in time, in all of time, is real and unchanging. The future "you" already exists, and has always existed.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostThe Michealson-Morley experiment proved that there is no aether. And yes, relativity has been proven. You use it every time you use your GPS.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostWell, if God didn't KNOW the future and he didn't manipulate people, then prophesy can be wrong. God can be wrong. All it takes is for a person to choose to do something that God didn't know he would do. What you are describing is open theism. A God who is not omniscient. Just really smart.
But you've yet to demonstrate that God knowing the future without manipulating people is impossible under A-theory. You would have to show that there couldn't possibly be a single way for God's knowledge about the future and man's free will to exist simultaneously under any sort of version of A-theory, which is quite the tall order.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostSo you believe a whole new universe, albeit slightly larger, is created all the time as the future becomes the present, and the old universe just ceases to exist? By what mechanism or power source does this creation take place?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostSo you believe a whole new universe, albeit slightly larger, is created all the time as the future becomes the present, and the old universe just ceases to exist? By what mechanism or power source does this creation take place?Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostGPSes would work even under a Lorentz interpretation of relativity. And the Michealson-Morley experiment just couldn't detect an aether, it did not disprove it's existence. The issue is not which interpretation has the most empirical support, the issue is on a philosophical level. You cannot differentiate between a Lorentzian interpretation of relativity and SR, because they are empirically identical.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostYes, I agree. IF God didn't know the future and didn't manipulate people, prophesy can be wrong and open theism is correct.
But you've yet to demonstrate that God knowing the future without manipulating people is impossible under A-theory. You would have to show that there couldn't possibly be a single way for God's knowledge about the future and man's free will to exist simultaneously under any sort of version of A-theory, which is quite the tall order.
If you want to claim there is free will and God knows the future in A-theory, then it is your burden to prove, not mine.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostI didn't say I believed in A-theory,
and a whole new universe isn't created in A-theory. In A-theory, like an inflating balloon, the existing universe simply expands and its entropy increases. It's just that in A-theory time would not be a dimension in which all events in all of the time dimension would be coextant and real. In B-theory the balloon isn't expanding, it's fully inflated and time is a static dimension in which all things within it are real and have always been real. It doesn't change, even though we experience change as though it were A-theory. According to B-theory the future "you" is experiencing what you would consider to be your future coextantly with your experience of the present. In other words the future "you" is just as real as the present "you." Not to mention the past "you."
T1=Present - Universe exists!
T0=Past - doesn't exist
T2=Future - doesn't exist
Therefore when T1 becomes T2 and the present, then everything exists at T2! An entire universe was created out of nothing, and the old one ceased to exist!
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostSparko, you seem to be all over the map. Let me ask you, I had a friend who died recently - is he still alive and conscious somewhere in the universe? And I'm not speaking of heaven or the afterlife.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostWas he alive a year ago? Then he was alive and conscious in 2019. This is a true statement in both A and B theory.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostUm, you have been arguing for it the entire thread.
nope. you just don't see it.
T1=Present - Universe exists!
T0=Past - doesn't exist
T2=Future - doesn't exist
Therefore when T1 becomes T2 and the present, then everything exists at T2! An entire universe was created out of nothing, and the old one ceased to exist!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostNo, it showed that there was no aether.
Originally posted by Sparko View PostI already did. You just said, "nuh-uh" and provided no evidence or even theory how it could be otherwise.
If you want to claim there is free will and God knows the future in A-theory, then it is your burden to prove, not mine.
And I disagree with you that it's my burden to prove. You're the one who made the claim that God's foreknowledge and free will cannot co-exist in A-theory, I'm simply saying that until I see a valid argument supporting that claim I'm under no obligation accept that claim. I'm not telling you to start believing foreknowledge and free-will can co-exist in A-theory, I'm saying nothing that you've written in this thread (that I've read so far) demonstrates the falsity of that belief.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostIs he still alive and conscious in 2019 somewhere in the universe?
If you could build a time machine and go back to 2019, you would see your friend alive and conscious.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostIt showed that certain conceptions about the aether were wrong. It did not disprove the existence of an aether in general. It did not disprove the kind of aether described in the Lorentz Ether Theory. The reason (or at least a reason) SR is preferred over LET is not because the aether has been disproved, but because SR is able to make the same mathematical predictions that LET does, but without the need for the kind of, as of yet, undetectable aether that LET postulates.
I must have missed where you made the actual argument. What I've seen you do is make the claim that God's foreknowledge and human free will cannot co-exist under A-theory, but if you made an argument supporting that claim I must have overlooked it.
And I disagree with you that it's my burden to prove. You're the one who made the claim that God's foreknowledge and free will cannot co-exist in A-theory, I'm simply saying that until I see a valid argument supporting that claim I'm under no obligation accept that claim. I'm not telling you to start believing foreknowledge and free-will can co-exist in A-theory, I'm saying nothing that you've written in this thread (that I've read so far) demonstrates the falsity of that belief.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
|
172 responses
611 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
04-15-2024, 11:55 AM
|
Comment