Eternalism and change

  • Thread starter name123
  • Start date
  • #1
444
3

Main Question or Discussion Point

As I understand it, there are many that take an Eternalist view on time. There are the spacetime coordinates and what exists at those coordinates.

That to me seems like a static universe. It could conceptually be represented in a static model, if one were to remove a space dimension and replace it with time.

So what I am not clear on is how believers in it think it is compatible with our experience of change.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
jambaugh
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
2,211
245
I think you have to resolve several, more pressing issues before you can try to argue about eternalism.
What is meant by the past and/or present and/or future being real?
What is meant by “the past” “the present” and “the future” (note how special and general relativity muddy the waters on this question)
and utimately you must resolve the epistemology by which such questions would be considered meaningful and the answers decidedly right or wrong.

Finally, note that in your argument you are infering something from the nature of a model. But ask yourself if it is even possible to adopt your contrary position in such a way that the model as a model can no longer be applied.
 
  • #3
1,589
934
There are indeed models/descriptions which are kind of 'static' since they really contains time as merely one parameter (some other models/descriptions are prefectly well even without time).

As science... Well, it is just that models/descriptions has no believers. Scientists are using them to get results, but why would they believe in them? Do you believe in screwdrivers?

As a philosophy, it's purely a bottomless swamp of subjective ideas.
 
  • #4
444
3
I think you have to resolve several, more pressing issues before you can try to argue about eternalism.
What is meant by the past and/or present and/or future being real?
What is meant by “the past” “the present” and “the future” (note how special and general relativity muddy the waters on this question)
and utimately you must resolve the epistemology by which such questions would be considered meaningful and the answers decidedly right or wrong.

Finally, note that in your argument you are infering something from the nature of a model. But ask yourself if it is even possible to adopt your contrary position in such a way that the model as a model can no longer be applied.
Well is the universe as envisaged in the Relativity interpretation not a block universe? Could we not discuss how believers in the Relativity interpretation think it is compatible with our experience of change? They presumably know what they believe.
 
  • #5
444
3
There are indeed models/descriptions which are kind of 'static' since they really contains time as merely one parameter (some other models/descriptions are prefectly well even without time).

As science... Well, it is just that models/descriptions has no believers. Scientists are using them to get results, but why would they believe in them? Do you believe in screwdrivers?

As a philosophy, it's purely a bottomless swamp of subjective ideas.
I assume many scientists have beliefs about reality. I thought the universe as envisaged in the Relativity interpretation was a block universe. It seems plausible to me that some scientists could believe that the Relativity interpretation best reflects reality. So could one not ask believers in that interpretation about how they think it is compatible with our experience of change?
 
  • #6
PeterDonis
Mentor
Insights Author
2019 Award
28,359
8,097
I thought the universe as envisaged in the Relativity interpretation was a block universe.
This is one interpretation of SR, but not the only possible one.

could one not ask believers in that interpretation about how they think it is compatible with our experience of change?
As a question of philosophy or metaphysics, sure. But that is off topic for this forum. (At least, it is in the physics subforums. Here in General Discussion, it might get by, but you probably won't get any useful answers, just various people's personal opinions.)

As a question of science, no, since there is no way of testing different interpretations of SR, or any physical theory, by experiment, because all interpretations of a given physical theory make the same experimental predictions.
 

Related Threads on Eternalism and change

  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
22
Views
11K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
142
Views
10K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
25
Views
3K
Top