(This is not a flame war of psuedofilled babble. This is a general investigation in physics history and dealings with observer-dependant models of physics.)
Time in Relativity and what it May Imply
What if you where to be told, that when big bang happened, just shortly after, a big crunch also occurred? A beginning and an end, from Alpha shortly comes Omega? Well, Einstein’s relativity theory says exactly this.
It turns out, that the past and the future are happening right now, which would seem to indicate there is no such thing as a past and a future, but exists as an illusory of the mind.
Einstein’s papers allows time travel to be a theoretical possibility, and that a man can be allowed according to the laws of physics, travel backward in time, and this would somehow suggest that for this to be true, somehow, the past exists right now.
This means, that somehow everything we come to do, say or write, is already written into space and time itself, or better said yet, everything we ever come to experience, has strangely enough already happened.
Counterintuitive?
Perhaps it is, but that is because our sense of perception, our linear way of viewing this four dimensional world clothes a maya over our eyes, a veil of deception and illusion. Einstein, along the same line of thought, and not quoting him word by word, bluntly remarked that only fools believed that the past and future where real.
He wasn’t a fan of models involving the observer (*), especially after the discovery that the mere act of an observation could bring about such drastic differences in the world, but he did realize the universe and perception was closely related to time, the now believed imaginary dimension of space.
I admit it seems strange, that we can come to know a past, but not know a future, especially when we are supposed to have already lived it, and still must do. But I remind you how strange it was for us to recognize that a moving observer experienced a slowing down of the time dimension, and how around certain strong gravitational objects, we could find distortions that opened holes in space and time itself.
But since space is not a fixed vacuum, neither is time, and evidently, from big bang to big crunch, anything with an ‘’operation’’ of events are merely illusions. Without the mind, there is no duration of time, no moments in space, and everything as I once said, may as well just happen in one great flash.
(*) – he may have unconsciously created relativity (especially special relativity for such a reason), because it is purely an observer-dependant model.
It’s All Laid Out
So our histories are all laid out before us, and all events seem to be frozen in time itself, like a fly stuck in amber. For us to have a predetermined existence like this, where all events are ready to come out of this frozen state by the appearance of mind, then time as we know it, is not only connected to the linear nature of the mind, but mind may itself be time.
This is not a wild theory, or by speculative thought. This is based on relativity, and what it has to say about a world that is somehow predetermined, and all events have happened, as though in one gigantic flash of existence, and we seem to drag along these sketches made in space and time, and we somehow make sense of a present time, and aware of a past and future.
Time without mind, is not linear by nature. It’s everywhere, and all at once. In a geometrical picture, one that can make sense of an expanding balloon analogy, with a wobbly surface. Except with mind, it is a whole new game. Time doesn’t seem as though it is everywhere, and there is a knowledge of the past, but no knowledge of the future. And the knowledge we do gain from the future, is only ever experienced in a present time, while some part of the nature of thought, diminishes into a realm of thought, and thus creates a past. This is a very linear nature of time.
No Time No Observer
In fact, there may be no such thing as a time dimension, without an observer. (And we are not talking about atomic observers here, since they hold no powers of recording their surroundings. This remains a unique property of the human, and possibly other species.) It may turn out, that time does not progress the evolution of things, but is rather a concept we have adopted for such a phenom.
This is certainly a strange way of thinking to adopt, but it seems to be revolutional. It would mean that time truly is an imaginary dimension of space, and isn’t as real as once previously thought. Not as real anyway, without someone there to make sense of it. You can even deal with an evolution of systems without the need of time. You can simply detail the universe down into entropy, and atomic reactions caused by the primal force. Movement is an intrinsic property of matter and systems of matter, so things will always tend to evolve some way. It just turns out that the evolution of this particular universe, seems so astronomical on statistical terms.
Granted, there must be some really strange universes, superstring universes in Everett’s Parallel Universe Theory (*), and ours on the fabric scale of spacetime, may not seem so complicated in this universe. However, one thing does make this universe unique, and that’s the observer. In Hawkings model of Cosmology, all the universes in the multiverse theory, have a wave function that spreads out over all the universes that are possible to contain life. The wave function is very high in this universe because of human observation, and his graph’s probability curve details this.
(*) – I say this, because superstring theory could still work in another universe, or branch, if that branch contains a correct amount of spatial and temporal dimensions. In Everett’s theory, there are mutually an infinite amount of universes, so in theory, at least an infinite amount of universes could hold the laws capable of sustaining matter as strings. It’s really a matter of understanding that the infinity talked about in this theory, potentially states all the weirdest universes you can think of, exists.
Bringing back the importance of the observer like this, in a parallel universe model, is very important to an observer-dependant model of the universe, which is said to be required in a Grand Theory of Everything. Even if the final theory is not solipsistic in content, it will still proclaim a portion of the theory to be an observer-model chunk, since relativity is an observer-dependant model.
It does become difficult however not to resort to a solipsistic nature of a theory, than to objectivism, since somehow physics does state that the observer brings their own reality about, and exists as a subjective dimension, rather than any objective qualities. Subjectivism is probably simpler to accept, if it was understood, that even if reality continued to exist, it would be pointless to talk about it, unless someone was there to define it. In a sense, this is a relative view, where the observer is relative to the universe.
We somehow add detail to the universe, which would be void if we had not taken that first intelligent thought on its beauty. It may be even simpler, if one just said that reality as we know it, would not exist if we where not around to know, and its this knowing that is the true reality, to our limitations, and also some back-reaction, were the limitations of the universe, could be us, from a relative sense.
But when the solutions of reality was constructed, we found solutions to parallel universes, from a relative sense, with equally an infinite amount of worlds just like this one, but ever-so-slightly different. Just like how we predicted that an electron posited an infinite amount of ghostly electrons in the vacuum, we learned there where many of us, existing in their own present time. And this took away our importance.
Everything Can Still Exist Without the Observer!
Of course, it could be argued in a negative direction. Instead, everything is objective, and there is only an illusion of subjectivism. This would mean that this particular universe evolved independently of the observer, and even the observers eventual appearance by its very evolution. All of this was simply just, and no observer was ever really needed. That makes our appearance in this universe, very miniscule indeed, since we don’t even have any special place in the evolution of our very lives, and any of the thoughts we may come to have, any things we come to do, or even the many things we may come to write, is nothing but, it simply is.
That can make us quite inferior, but to redeem some kind of hope in our lives, we do have the importance of communication, and our thoughts are not alone. Evan Harris Walker, a famous physicist once said,
‘’The observer – indeed the whole system are coupled to the extent that agreement on the final state of the system that is involved… The will arises from the pool of all consciousness – a pool formed by small contributions of each without spatial or temporal bounds.’’
Our ability to communicate on the universal scale we can with each other, gives rise to a sea of thought, and even though there are individual thinking systems there, there is still unity in a unique sense, that somehow everyone makes up one whole of something, that is, as Evan Walker says, exists in no dimensions. It’s certainly not pseudoscientific to think this could be true, because we are living properties of one part that would not make sense if the other part did not exit. If we stacked all of this up, it would still be tiny if we squeezed this analogy into infinity, since it contains no dimensions, and it would still look miniscule on the scale of spacetime itself. So what could Dr Harris be referring to then? I’m being serious as well, because I am not even sure what on means by a ‘’thing’’ existing in zero-dimensions.
Well, it’s not even zero-dimensional. We can no longer thing in dimensions, zero and some, but instead, something that cannot be explained physically. This may mean in the end, that consciousness cannot really be explained by matter alone. There may be some other aspects of it that will remain to philosophical for physics to give total explanations on, mind you, I don’t know if this is what Dr Harris was meaning.
Going back to parallel universes, the deterministic reality is an important thing to consider from relativity, but the transactional interpretation says some interesting things concerning the wave function. The deterministic reality does not exist in the local system however, but does, when it interacts with a ‘’stroke’’ that comes from the future.
As Hoyle said, we can’t deal with a deterministic reality if things alone go from past to future, but instead, there is also a future to past stroke, which condenses the wave function.
‘’In analogy to a two-stroke engine, quantum mechanics is just one of the cylinders, stroking from past to future. The other cylinder serves to condense the wave function, and it strikes from future to past…. The cylinder which strokes from future to past is directed by intelligence, and through the condensation of the wave function our thoughts are controlled.’’
The Wave Function in Objectivism
In the transactional interpretation, there is a ‘’handshake’’ in time, as Dr Cramer puts it. An Echo Wave and an Offer Wave leave from an initial position, where the oscillate throughout the time dimension, one moving into the past and the other moving into the future, and they return, to square into the final systems stage, and this the condensation of the wave function. But by Cramer terminology, it’s preferred ‘’Transaction.’’
This process of creating a system, is something I see somewhat parallel to what David Bohm once said,
‘’We have to consider the system attentively trying out all possibilities, out of which only one actuality emerges.’’
Indeed the attentively seeking echo and offer waves come together with out of which one real system can emerge. The best way I imagine it, is by a simple analogy. You can think of a massive thundercloud, and eventually that cloud will condense to make droplets of rain, and this is what the wave function does. It collapses, and forms actual systems of solid matter. But in this theory, the future does not determine the past, but the past can determine the future in a statistical way. This means that the emitter is given a ‘’privileged’’ role. The last few theories can provide models without the aid of an observer-dependency, as it can supplying them.
They provide sufficient models that it could be argued to be enough. There is still however the question of relativity, and its relations to observer-dependant models, but usually, its not questioned right now, considering we have far to go to answer all the cosmic difficulties and complex factors. Maybe the case is even simpler. Maybe the universe is far too complex, to ever be reduced into a single equation.
I certainly don’t believe that we could simplify all those variables so confidently. There will be some order we haven’t overlooked, or one order not explainable. I think any hope of holding onto this, is just stupid. Again, there are too many variables to account for, an infinite amount to be exact.
The reason why I say this is because this universe yields infinite values throughout. One side yields an infinite amount of space. The other yields an infinite amount of time. And this gives rise to possibilities, and they are infinite in nature too.
(I'll have more to say later.)
Time in Relativity and what it May Imply
What if you where to be told, that when big bang happened, just shortly after, a big crunch also occurred? A beginning and an end, from Alpha shortly comes Omega? Well, Einstein’s relativity theory says exactly this.
It turns out, that the past and the future are happening right now, which would seem to indicate there is no such thing as a past and a future, but exists as an illusory of the mind.
Einstein’s papers allows time travel to be a theoretical possibility, and that a man can be allowed according to the laws of physics, travel backward in time, and this would somehow suggest that for this to be true, somehow, the past exists right now.
This means, that somehow everything we come to do, say or write, is already written into space and time itself, or better said yet, everything we ever come to experience, has strangely enough already happened.
Counterintuitive?
Perhaps it is, but that is because our sense of perception, our linear way of viewing this four dimensional world clothes a maya over our eyes, a veil of deception and illusion. Einstein, along the same line of thought, and not quoting him word by word, bluntly remarked that only fools believed that the past and future where real.
He wasn’t a fan of models involving the observer (*), especially after the discovery that the mere act of an observation could bring about such drastic differences in the world, but he did realize the universe and perception was closely related to time, the now believed imaginary dimension of space.
I admit it seems strange, that we can come to know a past, but not know a future, especially when we are supposed to have already lived it, and still must do. But I remind you how strange it was for us to recognize that a moving observer experienced a slowing down of the time dimension, and how around certain strong gravitational objects, we could find distortions that opened holes in space and time itself.
But since space is not a fixed vacuum, neither is time, and evidently, from big bang to big crunch, anything with an ‘’operation’’ of events are merely illusions. Without the mind, there is no duration of time, no moments in space, and everything as I once said, may as well just happen in one great flash.
(*) – he may have unconsciously created relativity (especially special relativity for such a reason), because it is purely an observer-dependant model.
It’s All Laid Out
So our histories are all laid out before us, and all events seem to be frozen in time itself, like a fly stuck in amber. For us to have a predetermined existence like this, where all events are ready to come out of this frozen state by the appearance of mind, then time as we know it, is not only connected to the linear nature of the mind, but mind may itself be time.
This is not a wild theory, or by speculative thought. This is based on relativity, and what it has to say about a world that is somehow predetermined, and all events have happened, as though in one gigantic flash of existence, and we seem to drag along these sketches made in space and time, and we somehow make sense of a present time, and aware of a past and future.
Time without mind, is not linear by nature. It’s everywhere, and all at once. In a geometrical picture, one that can make sense of an expanding balloon analogy, with a wobbly surface. Except with mind, it is a whole new game. Time doesn’t seem as though it is everywhere, and there is a knowledge of the past, but no knowledge of the future. And the knowledge we do gain from the future, is only ever experienced in a present time, while some part of the nature of thought, diminishes into a realm of thought, and thus creates a past. This is a very linear nature of time.
No Time No Observer
In fact, there may be no such thing as a time dimension, without an observer. (And we are not talking about atomic observers here, since they hold no powers of recording their surroundings. This remains a unique property of the human, and possibly other species.) It may turn out, that time does not progress the evolution of things, but is rather a concept we have adopted for such a phenom.
This is certainly a strange way of thinking to adopt, but it seems to be revolutional. It would mean that time truly is an imaginary dimension of space, and isn’t as real as once previously thought. Not as real anyway, without someone there to make sense of it. You can even deal with an evolution of systems without the need of time. You can simply detail the universe down into entropy, and atomic reactions caused by the primal force. Movement is an intrinsic property of matter and systems of matter, so things will always tend to evolve some way. It just turns out that the evolution of this particular universe, seems so astronomical on statistical terms.
Granted, there must be some really strange universes, superstring universes in Everett’s Parallel Universe Theory (*), and ours on the fabric scale of spacetime, may not seem so complicated in this universe. However, one thing does make this universe unique, and that’s the observer. In Hawkings model of Cosmology, all the universes in the multiverse theory, have a wave function that spreads out over all the universes that are possible to contain life. The wave function is very high in this universe because of human observation, and his graph’s probability curve details this.
(*) – I say this, because superstring theory could still work in another universe, or branch, if that branch contains a correct amount of spatial and temporal dimensions. In Everett’s theory, there are mutually an infinite amount of universes, so in theory, at least an infinite amount of universes could hold the laws capable of sustaining matter as strings. It’s really a matter of understanding that the infinity talked about in this theory, potentially states all the weirdest universes you can think of, exists.
Bringing back the importance of the observer like this, in a parallel universe model, is very important to an observer-dependant model of the universe, which is said to be required in a Grand Theory of Everything. Even if the final theory is not solipsistic in content, it will still proclaim a portion of the theory to be an observer-model chunk, since relativity is an observer-dependant model.
It does become difficult however not to resort to a solipsistic nature of a theory, than to objectivism, since somehow physics does state that the observer brings their own reality about, and exists as a subjective dimension, rather than any objective qualities. Subjectivism is probably simpler to accept, if it was understood, that even if reality continued to exist, it would be pointless to talk about it, unless someone was there to define it. In a sense, this is a relative view, where the observer is relative to the universe.
We somehow add detail to the universe, which would be void if we had not taken that first intelligent thought on its beauty. It may be even simpler, if one just said that reality as we know it, would not exist if we where not around to know, and its this knowing that is the true reality, to our limitations, and also some back-reaction, were the limitations of the universe, could be us, from a relative sense.
But when the solutions of reality was constructed, we found solutions to parallel universes, from a relative sense, with equally an infinite amount of worlds just like this one, but ever-so-slightly different. Just like how we predicted that an electron posited an infinite amount of ghostly electrons in the vacuum, we learned there where many of us, existing in their own present time. And this took away our importance.
Everything Can Still Exist Without the Observer!
Of course, it could be argued in a negative direction. Instead, everything is objective, and there is only an illusion of subjectivism. This would mean that this particular universe evolved independently of the observer, and even the observers eventual appearance by its very evolution. All of this was simply just, and no observer was ever really needed. That makes our appearance in this universe, very miniscule indeed, since we don’t even have any special place in the evolution of our very lives, and any of the thoughts we may come to have, any things we come to do, or even the many things we may come to write, is nothing but, it simply is.
That can make us quite inferior, but to redeem some kind of hope in our lives, we do have the importance of communication, and our thoughts are not alone. Evan Harris Walker, a famous physicist once said,
‘’The observer – indeed the whole system are coupled to the extent that agreement on the final state of the system that is involved… The will arises from the pool of all consciousness – a pool formed by small contributions of each without spatial or temporal bounds.’’
Our ability to communicate on the universal scale we can with each other, gives rise to a sea of thought, and even though there are individual thinking systems there, there is still unity in a unique sense, that somehow everyone makes up one whole of something, that is, as Evan Walker says, exists in no dimensions. It’s certainly not pseudoscientific to think this could be true, because we are living properties of one part that would not make sense if the other part did not exit. If we stacked all of this up, it would still be tiny if we squeezed this analogy into infinity, since it contains no dimensions, and it would still look miniscule on the scale of spacetime itself. So what could Dr Harris be referring to then? I’m being serious as well, because I am not even sure what on means by a ‘’thing’’ existing in zero-dimensions.
Well, it’s not even zero-dimensional. We can no longer thing in dimensions, zero and some, but instead, something that cannot be explained physically. This may mean in the end, that consciousness cannot really be explained by matter alone. There may be some other aspects of it that will remain to philosophical for physics to give total explanations on, mind you, I don’t know if this is what Dr Harris was meaning.
Going back to parallel universes, the deterministic reality is an important thing to consider from relativity, but the transactional interpretation says some interesting things concerning the wave function. The deterministic reality does not exist in the local system however, but does, when it interacts with a ‘’stroke’’ that comes from the future.
As Hoyle said, we can’t deal with a deterministic reality if things alone go from past to future, but instead, there is also a future to past stroke, which condenses the wave function.
‘’In analogy to a two-stroke engine, quantum mechanics is just one of the cylinders, stroking from past to future. The other cylinder serves to condense the wave function, and it strikes from future to past…. The cylinder which strokes from future to past is directed by intelligence, and through the condensation of the wave function our thoughts are controlled.’’
The Wave Function in Objectivism
In the transactional interpretation, there is a ‘’handshake’’ in time, as Dr Cramer puts it. An Echo Wave and an Offer Wave leave from an initial position, where the oscillate throughout the time dimension, one moving into the past and the other moving into the future, and they return, to square into the final systems stage, and this the condensation of the wave function. But by Cramer terminology, it’s preferred ‘’Transaction.’’
This process of creating a system, is something I see somewhat parallel to what David Bohm once said,
‘’We have to consider the system attentively trying out all possibilities, out of which only one actuality emerges.’’
Indeed the attentively seeking echo and offer waves come together with out of which one real system can emerge. The best way I imagine it, is by a simple analogy. You can think of a massive thundercloud, and eventually that cloud will condense to make droplets of rain, and this is what the wave function does. It collapses, and forms actual systems of solid matter. But in this theory, the future does not determine the past, but the past can determine the future in a statistical way. This means that the emitter is given a ‘’privileged’’ role. The last few theories can provide models without the aid of an observer-dependency, as it can supplying them.
They provide sufficient models that it could be argued to be enough. There is still however the question of relativity, and its relations to observer-dependant models, but usually, its not questioned right now, considering we have far to go to answer all the cosmic difficulties and complex factors. Maybe the case is even simpler. Maybe the universe is far too complex, to ever be reduced into a single equation.
I certainly don’t believe that we could simplify all those variables so confidently. There will be some order we haven’t overlooked, or one order not explainable. I think any hope of holding onto this, is just stupid. Again, there are too many variables to account for, an infinite amount to be exact.
The reason why I say this is because this universe yields infinite values throughout. One side yields an infinite amount of space. The other yields an infinite amount of time. And this gives rise to possibilities, and they are infinite in nature too.
(I'll have more to say later.)