[time 1050] Re: [time 1048] Re: [time 1045] Re: [time 1044] The Un-logic

Hitoshi Kitada (hitoshi@kitada.com)
Mon, 29 Nov 1999 01:04:34 +0900

Dear Matti and all,

Matti Pitk舅en <matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi> wrote:

Subject: [time 1048] Re: [time 1045] Re: [time 1044] The Un-logic

> Dear All,
> I have explained this several times but decided to bore you once more since
> understanding of time is after all THE problem.

What do you mean by "after all THE problem?" Do you mean "it is still a problem"
or "understanding of time is always a problem that cannot be understood?"

> 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.

I agree completely.

> 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
> conscious
> 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
> quantum jump.

Your TGD may be one candidate for a solution and it is good as such. I myself am
trying to give an understanding of the problem by considering the role of
subjectivity in physics, whose existence has been ignored in physics or at least
physics has been pretending to think that "subjectivity" is not a subject of
physics. I recognize here some points common to your TGD and my theory.

Best wishes,

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed Dec 01 1999 - 01:15:40 JST