Refined Interpretation of Relativity of Simultaneity?

In summary: And our perception of time moving forward is just a result of our consciousness moving through this 4D structure. Is that accurate?In summary, the block universe is a popular image of the concept of time in which all points in time are seen as equally real and existing simultaneously. It suggests that our perception of time moving forward is a result of our consciousness moving through this 4D structure. However, this interpretation is not experimentally testable and there is no definitive way of saying whether it is right or wrong. While some may find this interpretation more comfortable, others may choose to
  • #1
Buckethead
Gold Member
560
38
I have an image of the block universe that is probably similar to how many people view it, as a 4D non dynamical construct where the "present" is a slice of this block and this slice moves forward from the past to the future. Furthermore, depending on your relative velocity, your slice may be at an angle relative to someone else's slice visually demonstrating relativity of simultaneity. Because one person can have a "present moment" that can be both before and/or after another persons present moment, we are left with the impression that we exist at each and every instant of time in this block. Not just as a ghostly image but as a conscious aware entity. This to me clearly cannot be the case otherwise I would be aware of every instant of time which I most certainly am not.

The other problem with the block universe is the implication that time travel into the past is possible and I also think that is a bit of a stretch (just my opinion)

Is there a more accurate or more refined interpretation of relativity of simultaneity that seems a little more logical or realistic? I recognize that the block universe is really only a semi useful interpretation, probably designed to be entertaining for science programs, but certainly relativity of simultaneity does demand some kind of interpretation and it just doesn't seem like the block universe picture is a very good one.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Your understanding is about as good as it gets.

Block universe is not experimentally testable, so there's no way of saying whether it's right or wrong. If using that model makes you more comfortable with relativity of simultaneity then you're free to use it; if not, you can ignore it.

Because we can't say whether it's right or wrong, and because we're tired of moderating threads that can never be settled, we generally discourage discussions of it:https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/pfs-policy-on-lorentz-ether-theory-and-block-universe/
 
  • #3
Buckethead said:
Not just as a ghostly image but as a conscious aware entity. This to me clearly cannot be the case otherwise I would be aware of every instant of time which I most certainly am not.
The point is that your conciousness now (or at least your brain now) is a slice through the 4d structure. The same is true of (for example) a ball. The ball now doesn't react to everything on its worldline. Its worldline is shaped by events in its causal past, and will be affected by events in other parts of spacetime. Why would your brain be any different? Please be aware of PF rules on speculative posts if you're going to posit some kind of non-physical nature to the mind.
Buckethead said:
The other problem with the block universe is the implication that time travel into the past is possible and I also think that is a bit of a stretch (just my opinion)
The block universe does not imply this. There are solutions to the equations of general relativity that allow crossing one's own worldline, yes, but those exist whether or not you interpret them as implying a block universe. And "I personally do not like the implications" is not a reason to reject a theory. Or not a good reason, anyway.
Buckethead said:
Is there a more accurate or more refined interpretation of relativity of simultaneity that seems a little more logical or realistic?
The problem you have is that any interpretation is based on the same maths. Any implications following from any interpretation are therefore either the same as the block universe or an add-on that is not part of the theory.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
  • #4
Buckethead said:
but certainly relativity of simultaneity does demand some kind of interpretation
Does it? The reason you're looking for an interpretation is that you have a hidden assumption: that "A's time coordinate is greater than B's time coordinate" implies that A happened after B in some physically reasonable sense. It doesn't - it tells us something about the coordinate system you're using. To get a physically meaningful statement, something that has observational consequences, we have to have a timelike worldline between A and B.
 
  • #5
Thanks for the reply. I read your link before I posted and at the time thought my question was quite different, but upon re-reading it, I see it is painfully close to violating this rule. My intention was to determine if behind closed doors while drinking wine if physicists ever discuss more interesting interpretations of relativity of simultaneity than the public is aware of (over and above LET or BU). Considering all the gazillions of interpretations in quantum mechanics I found it interesting that there have been no new interpretations of relativity of simultaneity. Again, thanks for your reply and my apologies.
 
  • #6
Nugatory said:
Does it? The reason you're looking for an interpretation is that you have a hidden assumption: that "A's time coordinate is greater than B's time coordinate" implies that A happened after B in some physically reasonable sense. It doesn't - it tells us something about the coordinate system you're using. To get a physically meaningful statement, something that has observational consequences, we have to have a timelike worldline between A and B.
That makes sense. I did seem to forget that we are not talking about one thing actually happening before another but how things occur depending on our coordinate. I wish I could visualize this better. The popular BU image does not help with this.
 
  • #7
Buckethead said:
I see it is painfully close to violating this rule.
It's close but not over the line. But it's time to close the thread now, I think.
 
  • #8
Ibix said:
The block universe does not imply this. There are solutions to the equations of general relativity that allow crossing one's own worldline, yes, but those exist whether or not you interpret them as implying a block universe. And "I personally do not like the implications" is not a reason to reject a theory. Or not a good reason, anyway.

I think I'm getting a better picture now. So the block universe isn't really suggesting all of time existing simultaneously, but rather its just a useful imaginary grid that allows you to picture how world lines (or slices if you like) cross each other and it's only these slices that can be considered "real".
 
  • #9
Buckethead said:
we exist at each and every instant of time in this block. Not just as a ghostly image but as a conscious aware entity. This to me clearly cannot be the case otherwise I would be aware of every instant of time
This does not follow at all. If your “awareness” were expressed mathematically then it would be some function which varies along your worldline. The value of that function, at each event on your worldline, would depend only events in its past light cone. This is fully consistent with what we actually observe.
 
  • #10
The thread is closed now.
 

Related to Refined Interpretation of Relativity of Simultaneity?

1. What is the relativity of simultaneity?

The relativity of simultaneity is a principle in Einstein's theory of special relativity, which states that the concept of simultaneity is relative and dependent on the observer's frame of reference. This means that two events that appear simultaneous to one observer may not be simultaneous to another observer in a different frame of reference.

2. How does the relativity of simultaneity relate to time dilation?

The relativity of simultaneity is closely related to time dilation, which is another principle of special relativity. Time dilation states that time appears to pass slower for an object in motion compared to a stationary object. This is because the faster an object moves, the slower time appears to pass for it. The relativity of simultaneity explains that this difference in perception of time is due to the relative nature of simultaneity.

3. How does the relativity of simultaneity affect the concept of cause and effect?

The relativity of simultaneity has significant implications for the concept of cause and effect. In a classical Newtonian view, cause and effect are thought to be absolute and independent of the observer's frame of reference. However, in the theory of special relativity, the relativity of simultaneity suggests that the order of cause and effect may be different for different observers, depending on their relative motion.

4. Can the relativity of simultaneity be experimentally tested?

Yes, the relativity of simultaneity has been experimentally verified through various experiments, including the famous Michelson-Morley experiment. This experiment showed that the speed of light is constant for all observers, regardless of their relative motion, providing evidence for the relativity of simultaneity.

5. What is the refined interpretation of the relativity of simultaneity?

The refined interpretation of the relativity of simultaneity is a more detailed and precise understanding of the principle, taking into account the effects of acceleration and gravitational fields on the perception of simultaneity. It also incorporates the concept of spacetime, where time and space are intertwined in a four-dimensional continuum, and the relativity of simultaneity is a consequence of this unified spacetime fabric.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
32
Views
738
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
57
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
27
Views
2K
Replies
90
Views
6K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
886
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
47
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
58
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
54
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
1K
Back
Top