I noticed this awhile back, but not sure if I have the educational level to comment correctly on the particulars. I do think the issue of time is one that needs to be resolved and is largely unresolved.
However, the concept of both time and space being removed, or considered somewhat derivative or illusory is probably correct, as the one physicist noted, and as GR indicates via length contraction and time dilation.
One concept has sort of interested me in it being related, which is the concept that from the photon's perspective, time is non-existent and so too is space due to length contraction eliminating all distance (via the comments on the other thread), and to me this is a profound concept because it suggests everything can be thought of as an immaterial singularity occupying neither space nor time!
Keep in mind any theoritical measurement from any vantage point in the universe should be as accurate as another and so the measurement of space and time as not existing, from the photon's perspective, seems to me just as accurate, even if baffling, than measuring from earth-space and time.
This message has been edited by randman, 08-16-2005 01:04 AM
This message has been edited by randman, 08-16-2005 01:07 AM
Looking at the following comment, I cannot but think of how it parallels theology and imo, an intelligent view of God's perspective, which is of course the right one.
In Barbour's universe, every moment of every individual's life birth, death, and everything in between exists forever. "Each instant we live," Barbour says, "is, in essence, eternal." That means each and every one of us is immortal. Like the perpetually unmoving lovers in Keats's "Ode on a Grecian Urn," we are "for ever panting, and for ever young." We are also for ever aged and decrepit, on our deathbeds, in the dentist's chair, at Thanksgivings with our in-laws, and reading these words.
This is something I have thought and articulated for awhile, but from a theological perspective, namely that from God's perspective or we can say, from the most correct and scientific view of reality (if Barbour is right), the entire history is ever now, and still exists.
I have used this to talk of how God can still save every man that has gone to damnation because he is still alive before that, and able to be "elected" unto salvation.
Now, before a mod slams me for getting off-topic, I am just illustrating how it seems this idea that physics has stumbled on existed in theology before that.
In terms of the science, I cannot comment on the math behind it. I do think time dilation and length contractio support the concept, but then again, that would support the concept of both time and space merely being an artifact of our perspective, and not something that holds up from other perspectives, physical perspectives mind you, within the universe.
But I am fairly new to a lot of physics.
Maybe someone in that field can comment more?
This message has been edited by randman, 08-16-2005 01:19 AM
I think from a theological perspective, the idea is not too difficult to grasp. Just imagine the creation like a movie, except God is present both at all points in the movie, and has the DVD on his computer and tinkers away sometimes (and maybe even others try to break in to do the same), but He keeps it under His control.
So from God's perspective, it is all in the present, and He can change the movie at anytime.
But it's very interesting to think physics and math is at the level of stating the same thing!
Thanks for posting this stuff, by the way.
This message has been edited by randman, 08-16-2005 01:45 AM
Yep, it's very interesting and probably will take us on a technological evolutionary leap. Hope we don't blow it.
But where is all the data from all these eternal universes stored?
I think he's saying the data just isn't stored but the whole thing is still there all the time.
Still, it seems to me that the fact that we have particles that take billions of light years to get to us and yet from their perspective got here in zero time over zero distance is enough to at least get one's attention.
No kidding. May make sense in math, but it doesn't lessen the paradigm altering nature of it.
It seems to me, that as anything that travels at light speed is effectively outside of time, then light would be able to move freely from one universe to the next under Barbour's scenario.
That's a pretty interesting concept, and one I suspect he contains within his idea.
Thanks again for bringing this stuff to the fore. I may have to take some time to try to digest his book if not too technical, and maybe even quit posting so much.