B Block universe theory question

[Ken G]

I know that but I still think if our nows are off by a bit it must? Like I can't get my head round it. Again, I know this is probs throwing the vibe off a physics Forum so I don't want to take the micky, but I really am concerned by this... I

I would say that instead of thinking differently about consciousness itself, think differently about the connection between consciousness and time. We tend to imagine that consciousness exists in a "now", so the only consciousness that matters is yours and mine "right now", but of course the human brain is not capable of generating conscious experience (whatever that is) in an instant-- it requires an interval of some kind, involving many processes, and our own consciousness is probably more of a concept of ourselves than a "real thing" like an event in space and time. How much time does it take to have a conscious thought? Probably depends on the thought! But if it's not an instant, then there has to be overlaps between these conscious experiences we are having. It's probably not a series of pictures like a movie, but more like the movie itself. If that helps avoid getting bothered by relativity issues.

 

[Ken G]

Another concept from relativity that might help you here is called "proper time." This does not mean correct time, it comes from the French propre, meaning owned time. So in a sense, you own your own time, and I own my own time. You might think of it like two people having a glass of wine-- the wine comes from the same bottle, like time, but each person has their own glass of it.

 

[Ken G]

As you will remember, you started a thread in the relativity forum fairly recently about this. Here is my post in that thread referring you to a relevant Insights article on the topic:

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/andromeda-paradox-confused.1049304/post-6846001

That's another nice "Insights." Personally I just don't understand the argument for the "block universe" at all, it just sounds to me like "if I choose to think of the universe in way A, then I am led to also think of it in way B." Fine, a logical syllogism, but it only has value if way A is somehow more reasonable to expect than way B. In this case, I don't see that it is-- in particular, you cite the required assumption "events to the past of an observer’s 3D world at a given event are fixed and certain," so in this case that is "way A." At that point I'm already in disagreement with the block universe argument (not your critique of it) because I really see no reason whatsoever to adopt that as a true statement about the world. So I'm not surprised, nor bothered, that it has strange consequences like a "block universe!"

 

[EclogiteFacies]

So do you really think like, we can think of people around us exactly the same way as before like I guess the discrepancies are tiny. So, our reference frames differ, honestly I think I really am over interpreting things like hypersurfaces of simultaneously. But I still can't help but be shook!

 

[EclogiteFacies]

That's another nice "Insights." Personally I just don't understand the argument for the "block universe" at all, it just sounds to me like "if I choose to think of the universe in way A, then I am led to also think of it in way B." Fine, a logical syllogism, but it only has value if way A is somehow more reasonable to expect than way B. In this case, I don't see that it is-- in particular, you cite the required assumption "events to the past of an observer’s 3D world at a given event are fixed and certain," so in this case that is "way A." I really see no reason whatsoever to adopt that as a true statement about the world, so I'm not surprised it has strange consequences like a "block universe!"

Thing is I see the block universe as the like worst case scenario, most Conservative and if I can make peace with this I can make peace with anything. I just wanna know what it all means for all my mates relative to me

 

[PeterDonis]

I still think if our nows are off by a bit it must?

Since "nows" aren't even a viable physics concept in relativity, they certainly aren't a viable concept to think about with respect to other people. The correct message from relativity is to not even think about "nows". Think instead about causal relationships, which in spacetime are delimited by light cones.

 

[Ken G]

So do you really think like, we can think of people around us exactly the same way as before like I guess the discrepancies are tiny. So, our reference frames differ, honestly I think I really am over interpreting things like hypersurfaces of simultaneously. But I still can't help but be shook!

I would definitely say you are overinterpreting things like hypersurfaces of simultaneity. As far as I'm concerned, I see no difference between such a surface and any coordinate system, like the address where I live. It's a language for ordering events, or in the case of addresses, ordering houses. So what? It conveys no physical importance, outside of the broad causality constraints that we have already discussed. Stick to what can affect what, and how it can affect it, that's the only meaning that time ever needed to have. All the rest is just overinterpretation of an arbitrary coordinate system.

 

[EclogiteFacies]

Since "nows" aren't even a viable physics concept in relativity, they certainly aren't a viable concept to think about with respect to other people. The correct message from relativity is to not even think about "nows". Think instead about causal relationships, which in spacetime are delimited by light cones.

That's how I think, everyone is conscious as normal and we interact between our moments through signals, but now is distingued by a light cone. I read carlo rovellis book he seems to have a similar stance on the unknowavility of separated events

 

[Ken G]

Thing is I see the block universe as the like worst case scenario, most Conservative and if I can make peace with this I can make peace with anything. I just wanna know what it all means for all my mates relative to me

If you object to the block universe, there are many places in its inception that you can find escape. @PeterDonis shows a few in his Insights article, but the bottom line is, there are no assumptions on the path to the block universe that are unassailable. I already cited one that just looks like complete nonsense to me.

 

[PeterDonis]

That's how I think, everyone is conscious as normal and we interact between our moments through signals, but now is distingued by a light cone

Yes, that's a good way to think about it.

 

[EclogiteFacies]

Well, can we still think of other people have conscious experiences as normal in the relative velocities here on Earth if the block universe it true. Even if the velocities were bigger would we ever reasonable think my mates were not having experience Basically, is there anything here I actually should be worrying about.

I find it weird as no one else online seems to be talking about this ahaha

I feel like there's definitely a reason for that

 

[PeterDonis]

can we still think of other people have conscious experiences as normal in the relative velocities here on Earth if the block universe it true.

Of course.

Even if the velocities were bigger would we ever reasonable think my mates were not having experience

No.

Basically, is there anything here I actually should be worrying about.

No.

 

[Ken G]

Well, can we still think of other people have conscious experiences as normal in the relative velocities here on Earth if the block universe it true.

The very statement "if the block universe is true" has no meaning in my mind, the "block universe" is nothing but a subjective, nonunique, and entirely untestable approach for organizing one's thinking. It makes no predictions at all, so how could it be called "true" or "false"? It's a set of internally consistent subjective choices, nothing about that could follow the phrase "if it's true."

Even if the velocities were bigger would we ever reasonable think my mates were not having experience Basically, is there anything here I actually should be worrying about.

No, nothing there.

I find it weird as no one else online seems to be talking about this ahaha

I feel like there's definitely a reason for that

It's a bit too philosophical, this forum is not really for that. But there can be a conversation about the true inputs of relativity, because those involve testable assertions, so fall under science.

 

[EclogiteFacies]

OK then I don't wanna be any more annoying so, as experts here who really know relativity. I'm ending it with this question

If I move relative to you or whatever at whatever speed. Does your experience exist for me, regardless of what my graphical representation of my reference frame suggests. Is there definitely nothing here that I'm dissecting rationally?

 

[PeterDonis]

If I move relative to you or whatever at whatever speed. Does your experience exist for me

What does "your experience exist for me" mean?

If it just means, can I communicate my experience to you, of course I can. I can send light signals to you even if we are moving relative to each other.

If it means something else, you'll need to explain what.

 

[EclogiteFacies]

OK so wd

What does "your experience exist for me" mean?

If it just means, can I communicate my experience to you, of course I can. I can send light signals to you even if we are moving relative to each other.

If it means something else, you'll need to explain what

OK so do we communicate to each other through our own notions of now

 

[PeterDonis]

do we communicate to each other through our own notions of now

No. We communicate with each other by light signals, which have nothing to do with "now". They travel along light cones.

 

[EclogiteFacies]

No. We communicate with each other by light signals, which have nothing to do with "now". They travel along light cones.

So I can think of you being conscious regardless of my reference frame. In exactly the same way as before relativity

 

[PeterDonis]

So I can think of you being conscious regardless of my reference frame. In exactly the same way as before relativity

Yes.

 

[EclogiteFacies]

Thank you, so contrasting frames of reference and different ideas of now does not influence how I think of you, here on Earth being conscious. The physical processes the give rise to your consciousness are happening regardless of which coordinates I use to define spacetime.

 

[Ken G]

Yes. And I know that is true, because I am quite literally experiencing those physical processes.

 

[PeterDonis]

The physical processes the give rise to your consciousness are happening regardless of which coordinates I use to define spacetime.

Yes, since any physical processes are happening regardless of which coordinates you use.

 

[EclogiteFacies]

Thanks for everything all, again I do appreciate all of you and I get its against the forum intentions.

 

[PeterDonis]

Moderator's note: This thread is closed as the open questions have been addressed. Thanks to all who participated.

The thread is also moved to the relativity forum due to the subject matter.