Matti Pitkšnen (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Sun, 28 Nov 1999 14:23:19 +0200
I have explained this several times but decided to bore you once more since
understanding of time is after all THE problem.
The paradoxes created by spacetimes containing causal loops show
that our view about relationship between geometric time and subjective
time must be somehow wrong.
Identification of physical state of world as time=constant
of single spacetime geometry is the source of troubles. The
identificication of snapshot is highly subjective: there is infinite number
of possible choices for time coordinate. Even in special relativity the
snapshots associated with observers moving with different velocitities
have only one point in common.
One must simply give up the idea about physics
as evolution for geometry of single time=constant snapshot.
In quantum jump between quantum histories picture (effectively
quantum jumps between superpositions of macroscopically equivalent
spacetimes) grandfather paradox disappears.
The problem is to understand the localization of the contents of
experience in a finite region of quantum average space*time*. In TGD
framework this localization can be understood. But I will save you from that
stuff. Just the keyworkds: classical nondeterminism
of Kaehler action; cognitive and material spacetime sheets,
localization in zero modes; psychological time as center of mass
time coordinate for cognitive spacetime sheet and as zero mode:
average increase of psychological time by 10^4 Planck times per
----- Original Message -----
From: Hitoshi Kitada <email@example.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 1999 4:54 PM
Subject: [time 1045] Re: [time 1044] The Un-logic
> Dear Robert and All,
> ca314159 <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Subject: [time 1044] The Un-logic
> > Dear Stephen, Hitoshi and all,
> > Stephen Paul King quoted:
> > > But there must be some bounds on how rich a repertoire of hidden
> > > properties can be ascribed to spacetime.
> > What happens when space-time topology is 'paradoxical' like
> > a Moebius strip or a Klein bottle ? Is it an "illogical"
> > space-time ?
> I think the Goedel's space-time is an example of such an illogical
> Koichiro refers to it as follows in his paper "Emergent Phenomena OF Time
> Quantum Mechanics" at
> > Relational aspect latent in what one calls globally synchronous
> > time is already implicit in general relativity. The presence of
> > closed timelike curves in the realm of general relativity discovered
> > by G$BčE(Bel (1949) suggests that unless globally synchronous time is
> > constrained internally, the forward causation along a closed timelike
> > curve would come to destroy the causation itself when it returned
> > to the younger stage while rounding the closed curve in the
> > forward direction. That is the grandfather paradox, referring
> > to the scenario that, for instance, a boy travels into the past
> > and shoots his grandfather at a time before he became father,
> > ending up with no such boy traveling into the past in the first
> > place (Earman, 1995). Although this paradox may look almost nothing
> > but a science fiction, it is quite pedagogical in pointing out the
> > possibility that globally synchronous time conceived in general
> > relativity as a self-contained theoretical framework could not
> > remain internally consistent in itself. General relativity may
> > require some additional constraints in order to remain consistent
> > even in its theory alone. Globally synchronous time in general
> > relativity can be relational in observing the global self-consistency
> > at the same time.The likelihood of globally synchronous time
> > being relational is thus both empirical and theoretical. We shall
> > first examine a relational underpinning of globally synchronous
> > time in the empirical domain, because an empirical discourse can
> > minimize intrusion of theoretical artifacts.
> This space-time looks like a concretion of Moebius strip/Klein bottle.
> > Space-time is a map of events which may have both causual
> > (logical and dependant) and acausual (or analogical;
> > correlated) relationships.
> > A 'poem' written especially for Hitoshi:
> Thanks a lot.
> > * Analogy, the Un-logic
> > I'm never completely wrong, because I'm never completely certain.
> > Therefore, within my uncertainty; I am somewhat right,
> > even when I'm wrong.
> > It's a logical loophole you see. It's an analogy.
> I hope I have been staying in this uncertainty region. This would be
> "logical loophole."
> > It allows me to win alittle, even when I loose alot;
> > which is always better than loosing everything.
> > That's how life survives, even when it dies.
> Yes, I hope my ideas could survive in spite of much loss accompanied...
> Thanks for your consideration.
> > --
> > http://www.bestweb.net/~ca314159/
> Best wishes,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed Dec 01 1999 - 01:15:40 JST