rajnz00 wrote:1. Whatever is real in our universe is real in a moment of time, which is one of a succession of moments.
rajnz00 wrote:2. The past was real but is no longer real. We interpret and analyse the past, from evidence in the present.
rajnz00 wrote:3. The future does not yet exist and is open. We can infer some predictions, but we cannot predict the future completely and the future can produce phenomena that are novel, no knowledge of the past could have anticipated them.
rajnz00 wrote:4. Nothing transcends time, not even the laws of nature. Laws are not timeless. Like everything else, they are features of the present, and they can evolve over time.
"laws" are purely a cultural-historical construct drawn from (and actually historically used to support) a specific political ideology and the idea of "laws" are therefore perhaps better termed linguistic (semantic) tricks (metaphors, heuristics, etc.) used to describe regularities in what we see around us. (I actually am equivocal about whether the concept of "laws" is useful or valuable - sometimes it is useful to make things easier to work with but sometimes it can also hide what should be under investigation.)
rajnz00 wrote:The "laws" I have referred to are "natural Laws", in other words, the laws of physics, which include those "governing", (describing), gravity and energy.
rajnz00 wrote:PS If you say that "There really aren't any "moments" except as a purely arbitrary dissection of the flow of time (by the way a metaphor based on specific culture-history perceptions and/or heuristics of a river) compunded by assumptions, etc., of human perceptions and decisons of what is real or significant." this is contradicted by the first part of your statement "..the flow of time is real and I would definitely say unidirectional"
The flow of time from the present into the past can only be real if the present moments are real. Your "NOWS" are real. For example, YOUR NOW is the moment you read these words, which immediately slips into the past. You can re-read these words and those will be different NOWS. Heraclitus said something like, We never step into the same river twice, because it is not the same river, and we are not the same person. The same applies to moments of time. We travel in different times and different spaces.
Time along with space is being continuously created, which enables us to act in the present, the only thing that is (briefly) real.
rajnz00 wrote:Forest_Dump, thanks for the information on the origins of the word "laws". The flow of time may seem obvious to you, but in mainstream physics, it is so unacceptable at the moment, that I cannot discuss it on a Physics thread.
All the equations of physics fail to show to show the direction of time. The present moment, to most physicists, is nothing special and the past present and future exist for all time, in space-time. I think they are mistaken, just as surely they think I am. As an archeologist, you could confirm that Hitler and his cohorts are no longer alive, and thus real, not so mainstream physicists.
Forest_Dump: language does structure thought
rajnz00 » January 3rd, 2017, 2:15 pm wrote:Now – The moment/instant of a new interaction, creating new information.
rajnz00 » January 3rd, 2017, 2:15 pm wrote:Past – The decay of this information, in a linear fashion, which is what we measure in our clocks.
Wiki wrote:One application of this is special relativity, as it can be considered to operate in a four-dimensional space, spacetime, spanned by three space dimensions and one of time. In special relativity this space is linear and the four-dimensional rotations, called Lorentz transformations, have practical physical interpretations. The Minkowski space is not a metric space, and the term isometry is inapplicable to Lorentz transformation.
If a rotation is only in the three space dimensions, i.e. in a plane that is entirely in space, then this rotation is the same as a spatial rotation in three dimensions. But a rotation in a plane spanned by a space dimension and a time dimension is a hyperbolic rotation, a transformation between two different reference frames, which is sometimes called a "Lorentz boost". These transformations demonstrate the pseudo-Euclidean nature of the Minkowski space. They are sometimes described as squeeze mappings and frequently appear on Minkowski diagrams which visualize (1 + 1)-dimensional pseudo-Euclidean geometry on planar drawings. The study of relativity is concerned with the Lorentz group generated by the space rotations and hyperbolic rotations.
Whereas SO(3) rotations, in physics and astronomy, correspond to rotations of celestial sphere as a 2-sphere in the Euclidean 3-space, Lorentz transformations from SO(3;1)+ induce conformal transformations of the celestial sphere. It is a broader class of the sphere transformations known as Möbius transformations.
rajnz00 wrote: My date also seems to have cognitive dissonance. I told her he I'd meet her in town at 10 kms. She didn't understand.
Forest_Dump wrote: given the movement of her fist over less than a metre, I now know why they call it getting clocked.
rajnz00 » January 3rd, 2017, 9:10 pm wrote:Hi Scott,
Time is related to space. It cant otherwise be if it is the 4th dimension of space. But it cannot be the same thing as length, except in as we measure it along the axis of the Space-time diagram.
Einstein said time is the order of events. That is not what space is. Space is what tells matter how to move. It curves and flexes with matter.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests