ppppppp
- 29
- 0
Hope this is not a redundant Q.
But this is ultimately a philosophical matter, a physical theory like relativity can't rule out the possibility that there is some metaphysical truth about simultaneity which has no empirical consequences, although relativity will make such a notion less appealing to anyone who favors razor[/url]Dmitry67 said:Yes, it is called a "Block Time", or Eternalism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternalism_(philosophy_of_time)
Relativity just says the laws of physics should be Lorentz-symmetric, it doesn't say they couldn't be stochastic (and I think physicists might still call a stochastic theory "classical" if it didn't have some of the other weird features of QM, like violations of Bell's theorem or the measurement problem).DaleSpam said:In all classical physics the future is completely and uniquely determined from the past. You have to be careful using phrases like "already exists" to describe the future, but in what sense would you say that the future does not "already exist" if it is completely and uniquely determined from the past? Remember, this is not about relativity, but about classical physics in general.