A question about the block universe

[IWantGod]

Have you ever seen a timeline. At 0 the universe is created, at 1776 the American colonies secede from the British Empire, in 1893 Chicago hosts a world fair. Is such a thing dynamic or static? Is time irrelevant to it?

You are describing a procession of events, an actualisation of potential. You are describing occurrences, none of which make sense without change. Time is only a concept because of change, so i would say time is intrinsically relevant, and no, it is not static.

 

[STT]

Unless the universe moves through time with you.

So the question is that how the universe can possibly move in block universe in which all instances of the universe are real?

 

[Dovekin]

And if I describe a sequence along the time axis of the block universe, it is just as you describe. What look like static events on a timeline are experienced as change.

 

[Dovekin]

So the question is that how the universe can possibly move in block universe in which all instances of the universe are real?

The Universe moves along the time axis by changing. Or staying the same. Each moment is a universe continuous with the previous moment. That is the nature of a time axis.

 

[STT]

The Universe moves along the time axis by changing.

Time cannot simply change in the block universe. It is a variable though.

 

[IWantGod]

And if I describe a sequence along the time axis of the block universe

What is time in a block universe. What is a block universe.

it is just as you describe

Accept they all involve an actualisation of potential. These things occurred, they involve cause and effect relationships. They are not simply static objects that arbitrarily stand in conjunction with one-another and at the same time are eternally actual.

What look like static events on a timeline are experienced as change.

But they never were static events, they are events that have already been actualised. If stood-out side of the temporal order, all of time would exist at once, but that is only because you are viewing the universe from a point outside of time; it doesn’t actually mean that the past present and future all exist at once.

If calling the universe a block universe is just a matter of perspective, then i hardly see the point of calling it a block universe at all.

 

[Dovekin]

Time cannot simply change in the block universe. It is a variable though.

Any point in a 4d block universe can be described by 4 variables, (x,y,z,t). If the universe moves along the time axis, t changes. If you move along the z axis, you get higher or lower. Time is another variable, though with some restrictions not placed on the other variables.

 

[Dovekin]

If you stand outside of time, the events of history appear as static objects. That is all that is being said by talking about a 4d perspective. There is no negation of causality; something at time A can still cause something at time B. Moments are static in the way that Revere’s midnight ride is a static moment to us looking back at it.

If we are outside of time, then past, present and future all exist at once to us. That is what outside of time means, isn’t it?

 

[Vico]

According to the block universe theory, the universe is a giant block of all the things that ever happen at any time and at any place. The problem which I have is that how an agent can experience things temporally. That is a valid problem since the block universe is static.

Perception of time can be conceived of as an illusion created from relations obtaining between mistaken perceptions but with correct ordering of some events in a real series.

 

[STT]

Perception of time can be conceived of as an illusion created from relations obtaining between mistaken perceptions but with correct ordering of some events in a real series.

I cannot understand how we can have the perception of time which is a dynamic entity from a static series.

 

[IWantGod]

If we are outside of time, then past, present and future all exist at once to us. That is what outside of time means, isn’t it?

Yes, standing outside of time you will see that all states is actualised, they all exist all at once. But what i reject is the idea that there is no change at all regardless of whether you are in time or not, that all states (past, present and future) are all actual all at once irrespective of perspective. If that is not what a block universe is then i have no rational problem with it.

 

[lelinator]

I’m busy, so I don’t have “time” to debate this topic at length, but I thought that perhaps I could contribute my two cents worth.

Imagine yourself in a sci-fi movie where time is suspended for everyone but you. Everything, and everyone else is frozen in place. You can move around and view things from differing perspectives, but the only thing changing is your perspective. You would perceive your movement as time, although the only one experiencing this time is you.

In this scenario you are in essence moving around in one slice of 3D space, and you’re perceiving this motion as time. But now let’s imagine that you’re not restricted to moving in just these three dimensions of space, but now you can move through four.

Now all of the sudden things don’t appear to be frozen anymore. And it’s not just you that’s changing, but everything is changing. The truth be told though, everything else may be just as frozen in 4D space as they were in 3D space, and once again the only thing changing is your perspective. And the same could be said for everything else in this 4D space, it’s perceiving change where the only thing changing is its perspective.

So if you’re living in a block universe then the only thing that’s changing is your perspective, and what you need to explain is why and how.

 

[Vico]

…
I cannot understand how we can have the perception of time which is a dynamic entity from a static series.

Dynamic means changing. McTaggart’s A series is dynamic meaning that things or events being goes from future to present to past.

In the B series events are located in time based on the relations of earlier simultaneous later each other.

The A series doesn’t exist he reasoned and the B series presupposes time so is also unreal.

McTaggart’s static C series is non-temporal, not be confused with the B series. Now (the present) has a duration which is, or can be, different for different people, so it is not objective time.

 

[lelinator]

Now I’m going to suggest some things that will sound really odd.

Consider that relativity may be evidence that you’re not moving through a 3D space, but rather a four dimensional space, such that the faster you move through space, the slower you move through time, because they are in fact four equal dimensions.

And think of your consciousness like electricity flowing through a wire. The wire being your life, and the four dimensional reality through which it’s flowing. The question is…is that path fixed, or can you affect its course?

 

[Dovekin]

Yes, standing outside of time you will see that all states is actualised, they all exist all at once. But what i reject is the idea that there is no change at all regardless of whether you are in time or not, that all states (past, present and future) are all actual all at once irrespective of perspective.

So what you see if you are outside of time is wrong? How does that make sense?

We always have a 3d perspective, and can barely imagine a 4d perspective. In our 4d perspectivr, we have another time dimension because that is how we normally speak. That could be a fifth dimension, or a relic of 3d thinking. I suspect that is where most ofthe confusion comes in.

Both perspectives are legitimate and accurate, though the 4d sees the world as static and the 3d as dynamic.

 

[IWantGod]

So what you see if you are outside of time is wrong?

No, what you see outside of time, for lack of a better word, is the completion of time. All states really are actualized from that point of view. But that is only possible because you are viewing space-time from outside it’s temporal order, and so you are not limited to any particular point of actualization. But from our point of view the future hasn’t been realized yet, it is not yet an actual thing and is only something that is becoming actual or is potentially real. If the future was really actual even from our perspective in the timeline, then it wouldn’t be potentially actual and thus there wouldn’t be any change or realization of it because change is the realization of that which is potentially real; but the future in this case would just exist.

This view of the universe, where the future is already a real thing, clearly leads to an incoherent view of time or change.

 

[STT]

No, what you see outside of time, for lack of a better word, is the completion of time. All states really are actualized from that point of view. But that is only possible because you are viewing space-time from outside it’s temporal order, and so you are not limited to any particular point of actualization. But from our point of view the future hasn’t been realized yet, it is not yet an actual thing and is only something that is becoming actual or is potentially real. If the future was really actual even from our perspective in the timeline, then it wouldn’t be potentially actual and thus there wouldn’t be any change or realization of it because change is the realization of that which is potentially real; but the future in this case would just exist.

This view of the universe clearly leads to an incoherent view of time.

In simple word, future cannot be potential and actual at the same time.

 

[Dovekin]

In simple word, future cannot be potential and actual at the same time.

what you see outside of time, for lack of a better word, is the completion of time. All states really are actualized from that point of view.

IOW, the description of what is seen outside of time is wrong.

(leaving aside the obscure “at the same time”)

 

[IWantGod]

IOW, the description of what is seen outside of time is wrong.

(leaving aside the obscure “at the same time”)

That doesn’t give me any information other than the point that you think i’m wrong. But thanks for taking the time to express your opinion.

 

[Dovekin]

It is your answer to the question I asked in my last post; though your answer was no in the body, the interpretation by STT says yes.

I’m not sure we disagree. With a 4d perspective, outside time, it is static. With a 3d perspective, it is dynamic. Incoherent could describe that.