Does the Block Universe Theory Suggest Time and Motion Are Illusions?

AI Thread Summary
The block universe theory raises questions about whether time and motion are mere illusions, suggesting our universe could be seen as a collection of static "time capsules." However, there is no experimental evidence to distinguish this theory from one where time and motion are real, leading to a sterile debate without definitive conclusions. The theory does not produce falsifiable predictions, which disqualifies it from being considered scientific. Discussions on the block universe are often shut down by moderators due to their speculative nature and lack of relevance to well-researched physics models. Ultimately, the topic is deemed unproductive, akin to asking a subjective question like "what is your favorite color?"
enquirealways
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Does block universe mean that time and motion are illusions?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Uh ... I'll bet you moved between the time you started that sentence and the time you finished it, now didn't you.
 
phinds said:
Uh ... I'll bet you moved between the time you started that sentence and the time you finished it, now didn't you.

Well, can't all the activity be an illusion. Our universe could be a huge pile of time capsules.
 
enquirealways said:
Well, can't all the activity be an illusion. Our universe could be a huge pile of time capsules.

Yes, but no experiment can even in principle distinguish between that model of the universe and one in which time and motion are not illusions. Thus, the discussion tends to be sterile: it might be so, it might not be, we can't tell which it is and it doesn't make any difference either way.

It doesn't yield falsifiable predictions so it's not science, and the moderators generally shut down discussions of block universe if they don't stop at this point on their own.
 
Nugatory said:
Yes, but no experiment can even in principle distinguish between that model of the universe and one in which time and motion are not illusions. Thus, the discussion tends to be sterile: it might be so, it might not be, we can't tell which it is and it doesn't make any difference either way.

It doesn't yield falsifiable predictions so it's not science, and the moderators generally shut down discussions of block universe if they don't stop at this point on their own.


Why not send it to beyond the standard model.
 
enquirealways said:
Why not send it to beyond the standard model.

That's for "discussion of the scientific content of well-researched models of physics beyond the Standard Model [of elementary particle physics]", to quote the forum stickies. Block universe speculation fails on the grounds of not being well-researched, not being a model of physics, and not being about particle physics.
 
"Block universe" is just another description of exactly the same thing. This is not a physics question, it's more like "what is your favorite color?" - it is pointless to discuss that, so I closed the thread.
 

Similar threads

I Is the Minkowksi/Einstein Block Universe theory science?
Replies
8
Views
5K
Is Time an Illusion? A 13-Year-Old's Take on the Block Universe Concept
Replies
4
Views
2K
B Does an infinite universe contradict a Big Bang origin?
2
Replies
65
Views
6K
I Which theory of time is the most evidence-based?
Replies
32
Views
2K
I Is Superdeterminism the Key to Understanding Our Universe?
Replies
1
Views
2K
Help me understand why “Block Universe” is not scientifically proven
Replies
34
Views
3K
I Universe re-collapse and time reversal
Replies
14
Views
2K
I What does it mean that symmetries do not hold globally?
Replies
1
Views
2K
Insights Does the Block Universe of Physics Mean Time is an Illusion?
2
Replies
56
Views
6K
Is Time an Objective Measurement or an Illusion?
Replies
10
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top