time hijack from the mind + 4D-spacetime = the experience of the unfolding of the events moment by moment in the actual moment by an observer

[dimreepr]

43 minutes ago, michel123456 said:

🙂 Sure. Educated disagreement is fine.

Yes, it follows an uninterrupted path through spacetime.

The word "persist" is disturbing me.

It looks like you are accepting that objects "move" into time along a path & also accept that the object persits in time.

I am afraid you have to choose the one or the other, these are incompatible statements.

Yes, the path is history carved into stone. You cannot change it. I do not disagree on that. But it remains a path. Julius Caesar & Napoleon are dead, they are not "persisting" in time, in another dimension. They are gone.

Oh sorry, maybe are you using the word "persist" to say that the object does not vanish in present time?

I had the wrong understanding that you believe that objects are persisting in the past.

I am confused.

And I'm confused as to what exactly you're arguing:

The path through time is different for each spacial coordinate? 

The path through time is different for each observer?

The path through time is different for time?

52 minutes ago, michel123456 said:

The word "persist" is disturbing me.

No one has argued that that anything persits.

Edited February 27, 2020 by dimreepr

[Eise]

1 hour ago, michel123456 said:

Yes, it follows an uninterrupted path through spacetime.

OK. Except that I must also be careful with my words. 'To follow' suggests a little bit too much a footpath you can follow. It might be better to say that the 4D-Bird sees an uninterrupted line through spacetime. From every point on the line he can read the coordinates, i.e. knows exactly where you are at what moment, even for events that you will be involved in in the future. You do not see see that, that is the advantage of being a 4D bird with a 4D bird's view.

1 hour ago, michel123456 said:

Julius Caesar & Napoleon are dead, they are not "persisting" in time, in another dimension. They are gone.

Of course. The persistence is only between their births and deaths. That is what I mean with persistence: there is a continuity between e.g Caesar at one bank of the Rubycon, and a few minutes later on the other bank. He did not magically disappear on the north bank, and a few minutes later appeared at the south bank.

1 hour ago, michel123456 said:

Oh sorry, maybe are you using the word "persist" to say that the object does not vanish in present time?

Yes. As explained above. Single events do not persist (you are not at the mall anymore), but you, as an object, persist, only you are home now. And you existed all the time, from the time you were at the mall, to the moment you are home now. 

 

Edited February 27, 2020 by Eise
Trying to remove an ambiguity

[michel123456]

11 minutes ago, Eise said:

OK. Except that I must also be careful with my words

And sometimes I read what I want to read instead of reading what is written.

34 minutes ago, Eise said:

1 hour ago, michel123456 said:

Julius Caesar & Napoleon are dead, they are not "persisting" in time, in another dimension. They are gone.

Of course.

If you agree that they are gone, doesn't that mean that their spacetime coordinates are vacant? How else would you translate the "they are gone".?

[MigL]

Being gone from the SPACE co-ordinate, at THIS time co-ordinate, does not mean that they are gone from previous time co-ordinates when they were  at that space co-ordinate.

Forget 'flying' , 'moving' and 'footpaths' through time.
Think of events ( people, balls, whatever ) describing a worldline through spacetime.
This worldline persists, or is a line with all points along its length occupied, as long as the event persists.
If I talk about Michel and say that he is 2 feet tall, that makes no sense, yet saying Michel was two feet tall when he was 2 years old does. Saying a ball is a molten piece of plastic does not make sense, but saying it was a molten piece of plastic before it was formed, does. Events, like people and balls, need 4 dimensions to locate them in space-time, and you can't argue we are 3dimensional, simply because that is all you see, as that is an incomplete description, and ambiguous.

Further, each event has a specific 'now' which is not common to any other event.
This 'now' is a light-cone, a window of causality if you will, that moves forward through the time dimension, and does so according to certain constraints imposed by relative differences in space-time curvature, or relative motion through space
This 'now' or window of causality is what actually 'moves'.
Us people, the ball, or any other event, does not 'move' at all; events already occupy all points along their worldline, past, present and future, as long as they persist.

[dimreepr]

2 hours ago, michel123456 said:

If you agree that they are gone, doesn't that mean that their spacetime coordinates are vacant? 

Jesus Christ... No, why would they.

2 hours ago, michel123456 said:

How else would you translate the "they are gone".?

They were there, now their not.

Why do you persist; with an argument you don't seem to understand?

[Eise]

28 minutes ago, michel123456 said:

If you agree that they are gone, doesn't that mean that their spacetime coordinates are vacant? How else would you translate the "they are gone".?

The event of their death has a time coordinate that is 'lower' than that of my birth: so there is no chance that I will meet Caesar. I can go to space coordinates where he was, but I'll miss the time coordinate by about 2000 years.

[swansont]

3 hours ago, michel123456 said:

 If you agree that they are gone, doesn't that mean that their spacetime coordinates are vacant? How else would you translate the "they are gone".?

That's not consistent with being unable to erase history. How can you advocate both positions?

Eise already gave an example of this. Napoleon was in Paris on a certain date. That doesn't change because it's later.

[michel123456]

2 hours ago, MigL said:

Being gone from the SPACE co-ordinate, at THIS time co-ordinate, does not mean that they are gone from previous time co-ordinates when they were  at that space co-ordinate.

Forget 'flying' , 'moving' and 'footpaths' through time.
Think of events ( people, balls, whatever ) describing a worldline through spacetime.
This worldline persists, or is a line with all points along its length occupied, as long as the event persists.
If I talk about Michel and say that he is 2 feet tall, that makes no sense, yet saying Michel was two feet tall when he was 2 years old does. Saying a ball is a molten piece of plastic does not make sense, but saying it was a molten piece of plastic before it was formed, does. Events, like people and balls, need 4 dimensions to locate them in space-time, and you can't argue we are 3dimensional, simply because that is all you see, as that is an incomplete description, and ambiguous.

Further, each event has a specific 'now' which is not common to any other event.
This 'now' is a light-cone, a window of causality if you will, that moves forward through the time dimension, and does so according to certain constraints imposed by relative differences in space-time curvature, or relative motion through space
This 'now' or window of causality is what actually 'moves'.
Us people, the ball, or any other event, does not 'move' at all; events already occupy all points along their worldline, past, present and future, as long as they persist.

You realize that it is not what Eise was describing, do you?

you are describing what is presented in the video, where what is moving is this "now", the slot as I call it. At least you admit that "something' is moving in time, I hope you realize that. You don't have solely a Block Universe, you have "something" (the slot, the "window of causality") that moves. It means that you are accepting some kind of change in time, and not only a frozen 4D entity in which nothing happens.

Well, because everything is relative, instead of a slot that is scanning a frozen 4D Block Universe, try to imagine a slot that is still & objects that slide in time. Doesn't that give the same apparent result?

[MigL]

What I am describing is the Block Universe as I understand it.
Not what Eise was describing.
Not what the video is describing.
And not what you tell me I'm describing.

I have defined an 'event' as a co-ordinate ( x,y,z,t) in the block universe.
Why don't you do the same with what you call an 'object', 'slide', 'fly', and all the other terminology you use to confuse yourself.

[dimreepr]

lol +1

[michel123456]

On 2/26/2020 at 4:45 PM, Eise said:

'Moving' means (continuous?) change of coordinates. So if an object changes its space coordinates, we classically say it moves: movement is movement in space.

But the time coordinate also changes: at the beginning of the movement it was 13:00h, when it stopped it was 13:05h. So the object does indeed move in time. The only way that this does not fit the conventional meaning of 'movement' is that even if we do not change our space coordinates, we still move in time (even more so, according to SR). E.g. if I sit still in my chair from 13:00h to 13:05h, I 'moved' in time, but not in space.

So what is wrong is the kind of expressions as 'time flies like an arrow': no, we fly through time.

I am asking everybody here to digest what Eise wrote here above.

And to get firmly in mind what motion is. It is a displacement in space and in time. A displacement. And not a copy.

If you digest the displacement, well, drive your conclusions by yourself.

You may get a glimpse of the universe.

Edited February 28, 2020 by michel123456

[dimreepr]

12 minutes ago, michel123456 said:

You may get a glimpse of the universe

I can only hope...

17 minutes ago, michel123456 said:

And to get firmly in mind what motion is. It is a displacement in space and in time. A displacement. And not a copy.

If you digest the displacement, well, drive your conclusions by yourself.

I did...

[swansont]

18 minutes ago, michel123456 said:

I am asking everybody here to digest what Eise wrote here above.

And to get firmly in mind what motion is. It is a displacement in space and in time. A displacement. And not a copy.

Is there an interpretation where it is claimed that an item is "copied"?

[MigL]

OK, now you've defined motion.
How about the rest of the terms you use ?

Using Eise's example...
You sit in a chair at 13:00h and I take a photograph.
You still sit in the chair at 13:01 and I take another photograph.
You still sit in the chair at 13:02 and I take another photograph.
You still sit in the chair at 13:03 and I take another photograph.
You still sit in the chair at 13:04 and I take another photograph.

At 13:05 you get up and move away from the chair and I take a photograph of an empty chair.

You have moved, and according to you, vacated all pre-'now' time co-ordinates.
Do you disappear from the previous 5 photographs ???
( and for bonus marks, why not )

[michel123456]

12 minutes ago, MigL said:

OK, now you've defined motion.
How about the rest of the terms you use ?

Using Eise's example...
You sit in a chair at 13:00h and I take a photograph.
You still sit in the chair at 13:01 and I take another photograph.
You still sit in the chair at 13:02 and I take another photograph.
You still sit in the chair at 13:03 and I take another photograph.
You still sit in the chair at 13:04 and I take another photograph.

At 13:05 you get up and move away from the chair and I take a photograph of an empty chair.

You have moved, and according to you, vacated all pre-'now' time co-ordinates.
Do you disappear from the previous 5 photographs ???
( and for bonus marks, why not )

That is the wrong question. Think better.

1 minute ago, michel123456 said:

You have moved, and according to you, vacated all pre-'now' time co-ordinates.

Yes.

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, michel123456 said:

Think better.

That's, surprisingly, good advice. 

[michel123456]

1 minute ago, michel123456 said:

Do you disappear from the previous 5 photographs ???

No.

Where are the photographs? Are they in the past? or are they in your hands? Are the photographs the same thing as the event? Or are they a record?

[dimreepr]

When neg reps are the only way to go...

[swansont]

16 minutes ago, michel123456 said:

No.

Where are the photographs? Are they in the past? or are they in your hands? Are the photographs the same thing as the event? Or are they a record?

Earlier you were asked what it means for coordinates to be "empty." You didn't really answer, but you implied that an event happening meant that the coordinates were not "empty."

Now you seem to be implying the opposite.

The frustration I feel is not only with your lack of rigor, but also with your inconsistency.

 

 

[michel123456]

47 minutes ago, swansont said:

Earlier you were asked what it means for coordinates to be "empty." You didn't really answer, but you implied that an event happening meant that the coordinates were not "empty."

Now you seem to be implying the opposite.

The frustration I feel is not only with your lack of rigor, but also with your inconsistency.

 

 

Sorry if you feel that way.

I know that the common understanding is the Block Universe. The B.U. is a frozen thing in which nothing happens. There is no "motion in time" in the B.U. There is this "window" that slides all along.

But then there is the concept of motion: changing coordinates in space. If time has also  the effect of changing coordinates in a 4th dimension, then one should accept that there is change in time. (anyway the window sliding is a kind of change, isn't it?)  That means that time (maybe) allows change. It is a very different picture from that of the B.U. where the introduction of  time forbids change (everything is frozen).

Once the concept of change of time coordinates cross your mind, the consequences are inevitable (and I am surprised nobody else so far has taken the risk to evaluate this consequences).

 

 

Edited February 28, 2020 by michel123456

[swansont]

6 hours ago, michel123456 said:

Sorry if you feel that way.

I know that the common understanding is the Block Universe. The B.U. is a frozen thing in which nothing happens. There is no "motion in time" in the B.U. There is this "window" that slides all along.

But then there is the concept of motion: changing coordinates in space. If time has also  the effect of changing coordinates in a 4th dimension, then one should accept that there is change in time. (anyway the window sliding is a kind of change, isn't it?)  That means that time (maybe) allows change. It is a very different picture from that of the B.U. where the introduction of  time forbids change (everything is frozen).

Once the concept of change of time coordinates cross your mind, the consequences are inevitable (and I am surprised nobody else so far has taken the risk to evaluate this consequences).

 

 

Still no explanation  of what it means for a coordinate to be empty.

[Markus Hanke]

12 hours ago, michel123456 said:

and I am surprised nobody else so far has taken the risk to evaluate this consequences

There are at least four different notions of time (in this context) that I am aware of.
The block universe is an example of eternalism, which corresponds to John McTaggart’s “B-Time”. The obvious alternative to this is what is called presentism, i.e. the notion that only the present moment has ontological status, which corresponds to McTaggart’s “A-Time”. Then, there is the “growing block universe” interpretation, which essentially posits that past and present exist in the same way as in the standard BU model, but the future does not - so the block “grows”, in a manner of speaking. Lastly then, there is the idea that time is merely an emergent phenomenon in the statistical sense, and not at all fundamental to the universe.

All of these ideas have been debated (and continue to be debated) in depth from all angles, both in the philosophy and physics communities. All four of them have pros and cons associated with them, and all of them have certain problems that remain hitherto unsolved.

From a physics point of view though, B-Time appears to yield quite a successful model (GR) for the large-scale dynamics of gravity, so it is very useful in that regard. But I would be hesitant to give it any ontological status in itself.

[michel123456]

Time is a hugely complex subject. The Time of Relativity theory is undoubtedly akin to a negative spacial dimension (cf Weyl's analysis), recent experiments on quantum interference through time reinforce this view (see Lindner et al 2005). The time of Change is highly correlated with the dimensional time of Relativity but may not be exactly the same, for instance according to Multiverse theories two differing outcomes may coexist and be derived at the same location in a common spacetime. (...) 

Lindner, F., Schaetzel, F.G., Walther, H., Baltuska, A., Goulielmakis, E., Krausz, F., Milosevic, D.B., Bauer, D., Becker, W., and Paulus, G.G.. (2005) Attosecond double-slit experiment. Phys.Rev.Lett. 95,040401 (2005)     

quoted from this thread

 

18 hours ago, swansont said:

Still no explanation  of what it means for a coordinate to be empty.

Empty. Void. Like an empty post being deleted from this Forum. Gone.

Think of it as if each spacetime coordinate was an empty glass. You have a hundred empty glasses aligned on the floor. Then you put 1cl of water in the first glass. That is the event of being there. Then pour the water into the next glass. And then in the next glass, and so on. After 1 hour you have finished pouring the  1cl of water in the 100th glass.  The spacetime diagram will be presented as 1000cl of water in 1000 glasses spread over the time of one hour. Although you have used in reality only 1cl of water in one glass at a time.

Now, imagine a friend of yours, 10min after you, putting 10cl of wine, and doing exactly the same, pouring wine from one glass to the other. Will that change your spacetime diagram? If you are aware of your friend, yes. If you are not aware oh him, if you cannot see him for whatever reason, no that will not affect your spacetime diagram.

In Reality, we have no direct access to our past, and no access to our future. The reason is the Speed Of Light. If there are crossing paths behind us, or in front of us, we simply don't know. Common understanding consists in assuming that there exist only one inalienable path in the time dimension: ours. But that may not be the case.

Edited February 29, 2020 by michel123456

[Mordred]

Can you identify and prove any location in our universe is truly empty under the Heisenberg uncertainty principle ?

A coordinate is an assignment.

Edited February 29, 2020 by Mordred

[swansont]

1 hour ago, michel123456 said:

Time is a hugely complex subject. The Time of Relativity theory is undoubtedly akin to a negative spacial dimension (cf Weyl's analysis), recent experiments on quantum interference through time reinforce this view (see Lindner et al 2005). The time of Change is highly correlated with the dimensional time of Relativity but may not be exactly the same, for instance according to Multiverse theories two differing outcomes may coexist and be derived at the same location in a common spacetime. (...) 

Lindner, F., Schaetzel, F.G., Walther, H., Baltuska, A., Goulielmakis, E., Krausz, F., Milosevic, D.B., Bauer, D., Becker, W., and Paulus, G.G.. (2005) Attosecond double-slit experiment. Phys.Rev.Lett. 95,040401 (2005)     

quoted from this thread

 

Empty. Void. Like an empty post being deleted from this Forum. Gone.

Posting a synonym doesn’t answer the question.

1 hour ago, michel123456 said:

Think of it as if each spacetime coordinate was an empty glass. You have a hundred empty glasses aligned on the floor. Then you put 1cl of water in the first glass. That is the event of being there. Then pour the water into the next glass. And then in the next glass, and so on. After 1 hour you have finished pouring the  1cl of water in the 100th glass.  The spacetime diagram will be presented as 1000cl of water in 1000 glasses spread over the time of one hour. Although you have used in reality only 1cl of water in one glass at a time.

You are confusing the terrain for the map, I think. 

This analogy fails to capture what the spacetime coordinates represent.