Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

A Atemporal Universe

  1. Nov 7, 2017 #21

    Fra

    User Avatar

    I dont think the what some think nonsense part is that details in that paper. Most critics i have seen circle around the resistance against abandoning the old thinking of timeless law. Most people have hard to wrap their heads around this, and see how to get a practical grip on these ideas without examples. But this psychological mechanism is universal, you cant blame anyone for this. If you want opposing views, just goto Lubos blog and you can read pages of it.

    (shortly my idea conceptually is in the direction of principle of prescedence, but where QM will be replaced by a reconstruction in terms of a subjective bayesian approch, based on a set of discrete probability spaces related by transformations. Transformations and set structure are the "dna" and are subject to evolution, to be understood as selecting effective coders)

    I would just say, dont dismiss the general idea just due to early, incomplete or even wrong toy ideas.
    It seems that the parameters of current standard models, has not to a significant extent changed from big band to present, as that would probably have been seen in cosmological observations, this is the reason that IF laws evolve, this evolution would pretty much be at the birth of the universe, or at least above the GUT energy, and probably planck energy.

    However this does imo at least not contradict that that laws can "in principle" be changed in a lab. I think they could - but only at extreme energies, not practically attainable.

    I have a very strong confidence in this direction though. It seems like all the things has the potential to fall into places, but the puzzle is tricky.

    If you dont see the vision yourself, and dont like the toy examples, my advice is to thinkg for a second about how LAW evolves in social systems. There is most probably not a coincidence that the coauthor to smolins evolution of law book is roberto unger, which is into social theory. Here LAW is a matter of NEGOTIATION, and you can view evolution ni the same way - as a negotiation with your environment. Also mix this with rational theory of economy - and note that there exists not observer indepdenent "rationality measure". Then you might get closer to how i think is the best way to see this.

    /Fredrik
     
  2. Nov 7, 2017 #22
    You mean there is no time but stuff just happens anyway?
    I disagree. Time is a dimension
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2017
  3. Nov 8, 2017 #23

    Fra

    User Avatar

    First time has to be relational. Time has its basis in distinguishable change only - just like relational space. No observer to distinguish change - no time. There is no absolute newtonian time reference in this view. There is no other clocks or evolutions beyond relations relative to prior states which is then of course evolution.

    Second as with GR one has to distinguish between local parameterisation of change and cosmological change.

    Smolin seems to have has and idea of a globally preferred but still relational time. But i think there are som different routes.

    For me the observer view is central. This is not as clear in smolins view.m So once you agree with the general idea there is plenty of room for disagreement abouy the best implementation.

    So for thes reason i think the notion of lorentz symmetry does not exist at lowest level for exsmple. Its an emegent symmetry in my view at lower energy.

    /Fredrik
     
  4. Nov 11, 2017 #24
    Here is another type of "evolution of "laws" model that Smolin was playing with where he takes some constants and makes them dynamical:-

    Dynamics of the cosmological and Newton's constant
    L Smolin
    https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.01229
    Abstract:
    A modification of general relativity is presented in which Newton's constant and the cosmological constant become a conjugate pair of dynamical variables.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Atemporal Universe
  1. Hologram Universe (Replies: 11)

  2. Is the Universe a sim? (Replies: 5)

  3. Bouncing universe (Replies: 4)

Loading...