Eternalism and Presentism - theories of time

In summary, the conversation discusses the concepts of eternalism and presentism as theories of time. The speaker argues that their understanding of time is based on the directionality of movement and constraints imposed by mass, using the analogy of a pawn on a chessboard. They also reference the idea of a 4-dimensional view of time from the perspective of general relativity.
  • #1
ThomasT
529
0
Eternalism and Presentism -- theories of time

The topic of this thread emerged from this thread, [thread=289962]A problem with time travel[/thread]

Originally posted by Maxtm
You and I can perform experiments which show that we are not in the same Present, that we do not share a Now.

How does Presentism hold against that simple truth?

I was having a conversation with my girlfriend about time earlier.

We were driving home from somewhere, and I told her "We are already at home, upstairs, changing into our leisure clothes. We are still at the book store, beginning this conversation. We are still in the moment where I began telling you this."

Then, when we got home, I continued "We are still back there at the corner, when I said we are already upstairs changing, and we are upstairs changing. We are still at the book store, we are still in the moment when we first met. We can't see these periods of time because they are... around the corner from us. That does not invalidate them, nor does our inability to directly perceive events we clearly remember in our past make them stop existing. You and I are lines scribbled through time, imagining each snap shot we perceive to be the truth of reality."
How do I know that you're not just a closet presentist masquerading as an eternalist? :smile:

Your statements don't make any sense to me, so far. (They seem to contradict SR's definition of time.) I'm here to learn, so please elaborate.

What do you think the word, time, refers to? How would you define it?

Are your statements based on an interpretation of general relativity?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2


Time refers to a direction.

I would define it as an ironic degree of freedom, in that it has directions one can move along in theory, but we are constrained by our mass to one of those directions.

Rather like a pawn on a chessboard, we know the other squares exist, but are limited to a single general orientation to our progress.

Like knowing left and right exist while standing sideways on a treadmill. You are aware there is a potential freedom of movement to your left, but you are constrained to move to the right with the treadmill.

You can move back and forth across it, which will reduce the distance you move to the right accordingly, but without some ability to overcome your own inertia, you cannot move across the surface fast enough to go to the left.

A true 4 Dimensional view of your path would be a line extending along the treadmill surface, meandering back and forth through the dimensions you are free to traverse. While you yourself only see 3 D slices of that line, labeling them as a sequence of Nows.

Yes, it is based on GR.
 
  • #3


I would approach the theories of eternalism and presentism with an open mind and a critical eye. These two theories are often seen as opposing views on the nature of time, but in reality, they both offer valuable perspectives on this complex concept.

Eternalism is the belief that all moments in time, past, present, and future, exist simultaneously. This means that every event that has ever happened, or will ever happen, is already fixed and unchanging. In contrast, presentism holds that only the present moment is real, and the past and future do not exist in the same way.

Both theories have their strengths and weaknesses, and it is important for scientists to consider both in their research. For example, the theory of eternalism can help us understand the interconnectedness of events and the concept of causality, while presentism can help us make sense of our experiences of time and the way we perceive our own lives.

However, it is also important to acknowledge that our understanding of time is limited by our human perception and the tools we use to measure it. As you pointed out in your conversation with your girlfriend, our perception of time is subjective and can vary from person to person. This is why it is crucial for scientists to approach the concept of time with an open mind and to continuously question and reevaluate our understanding of it.

In regards to your question about my interpretation of time, as a scientist I would define time as a fundamental dimension in which events occur and are measured. It is a complex concept that is still not fully understood, and therefore, it is important for scientists to continue exploring and debating theories such as eternalism and presentism in order to gain a deeper understanding of time and its role in the universe.
 

1. What is the main difference between eternalism and presentism?

Eternalism is the theory that all points in time, past, present, and future, exist simultaneously. Presentism, on the other hand, holds that only the present moment exists.

2. How do eternalism and presentism explain the flow of time?

Eternalism views time as a static block where all moments exist simultaneously, while presentism sees time as constantly moving forward with each moment passing into the past.

3. Can both eternalism and presentism be true at the same time?

No, they are mutually exclusive theories. One must be true while the other is false.

4. Are there any scientific evidence or experiments that support eternalism or presentism?

There is no scientific evidence that definitively proves one theory over the other. Both theories have their own philosophical and logical justifications, but they cannot be tested or proven through scientific methods.

5. How do eternalism and presentism impact our understanding of causality?

Eternalism suggests that all events, including past and future ones, are causally connected and influence each other. Presentism, on the other hand, only recognizes causality within the present moment. This has implications for our understanding of free will and determinism.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
862
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
584
Replies
47
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
18
Views
3K
Back
Top