Hi Bruno, Patric has already explained Barbour's position (I didn't read his book). Separating space from time is not very natural...
Perhaps one can use a similar method as presented here: http://arxiv.org/abs/math-ph/0008018 to derive the notion of space-time as a first person phenomena. Saibal ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruno Marchal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Saibal Mitra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Norman Samish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <everything-list@eskimo.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 03:24 PM Subject: Re: objections to QTI Le 01-juin-05, à 15:00, Saibal Mitra a écrit : > Hi Norman, > > I entirely agree with Julian Barbour. A fundamental notion of time > would act as a pointer indicating what is real (things that are > happening now) and what was real and what will be real. Most of us > here on the everything list believe that in a certain sense > 'everything exists', so the notion of a fundamental time would be > contrary to this idea. I think that that most here on the list would > consider time as a first person phenomena Indeed. (SGrz pour those who knows). I would like to know if Norman and Saibal and others agree that there is nothing special with time. Why does not Julian Barbour talk about space-time capsule? (Or does he?) I think space is also a first person phenomena. OK? Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
