Hi Stephen, My point is that time as a pointer that points to what exists and what not (anymore or yet), cannot exist. You can indeed map the set of all such pointers to the real line. I agree that relativity is inconsistent with such an idea of time.
Saibal > Hi Saibal > > Are you defining time as isomorphic to the Real number line? Could it > be > that all of these "proofs of the nonexistence of time" are really just > proofs that time is *not* that but something else entirely? It seems to me > that we are thinking of the way that we can chronometrize events in our > past > with real number values and concluding that this labeling scheme extends > into the future in a unique way, the problem is that if we take General > Relativity seriously this is a non-started of an idea. The relativity of > simultaneity coupled with general covariance does not permit any form of > unique labeling events. We really need to stop assuming a Newtonian > Absolute > chronometrization of events. Time is a local measure of change, nothing > more. > > Onward! > > Stephen > > *** > > -----Original Message----- > From: smi...@zonnet.nl > Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2011 8:27 PM > To: everything-list@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: QTI is trivially false > > I think we are now making hidden assumptions about the nature of time, > namely that it "really exists", and then we are trying to argue that > you can still have immortality (in different senses). However, it is > far more natural to assume that time does not exist and then you get > immortality (in the sense of my conscious states that have a finite > memory always existing) in a far more straightforward way. > > That time does not exist is a quite natural assumption. To see this, > assume that it does exist. But then, since time evolution is given by a > unitary transform, the past still exists in a scrambled way in the > present (when taking into account parallel universes). E.g. your past > brain state of ten years ago can still be described in terms of the > physical variables as they exist today. Of course such a description is > extremely complicated involving the physical state of today's > multiverse within a sphere of ten lightyears. > > Then assuming that the details of implementation does not affect > consciousness (as long as the right program is being run), one has to > conclude that your past state of coinsciousess exists also today. You > could therefore just as well assume that time does not exist, as the > two possibilities are operationally equivalent. > > > Saibal > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
