The Arrow of Time

a reply to: roadgravel

You know there's an old song about the implications arising from the second law of thermodynamics? A damned good one too:

Also known as Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (Fate, Impress of the World).

I think it sets the mood perfectly for this thread and Susskind's lecture.

originally posted by: VP740
It turns out, that every known law of physics works the same whether you look at time going forwards or backwards.

Or sideways!
Eliminate 'time' from the equations, Einstein said, and the equations remain balanced.
Adding or subtracting 0 to 0 yields 0. *__-

An interesting read;

McTaggart’s proof of the unreality of time

www3.nd.edu...

So, if I understand Mc. Taggart correctly, the A series is like the tape player, and the B series is like the tape. From the link:

At this stage of the argument (§325), McTaggart takes it as established that time cannot be real if there is no A series, and hence no properties of being past, present, or future.

I never bought this. The tape player needs a tape to work, but the tape will always be there whether or not it's being played. I don't recall exactly how the arguments ran through my head as a kid, but I do remember concluding that everything exists and happens at its time. What was experienced yesterday was experienced yesterday, what is experienced now is experienced now, and what will be experienced tomorrow will be experienced tomorrow. But I took 'was' and 'will' or 'past' and 'future' to be relative terms; like left and right.

I see no paradoxes or contradictions from this view, even taking relativity into account. But rather than discussing things in terms of Einsteinian Relativity, let's go over a form of relativity more people will have to deal with personally. Right now in Nebraska, its October 10. Right now in Japan it's tomorrow, October 11. Is that contradictory? I may not be using the best language to describe the situation, but when I look at my calendar here in Nebraska this Monday, it says October 11. If I were to call someone in japan as I look at the Oct. 10th date (and if they're using the same type of calendar), they'll tell me their calendar shows Oct. 11th. If I want to talk about what's happening tomorrow in Japan, my language may confuse the people I'm talking to, but it won't confuse the sun or the calendars.

When I think of time I'm thinking of the 'original copy' of reality, not the 'TV' where it may be watched. Is there some kind of 'god' watching us through time on a 'divine TV'? If so, does that being watch us one moment at at time, the way we watch our videos; or does that being watch each moment all at once? I don't think that can be answered by those living in the record. I don't think that really has any impact on our relationship with time though; even if our relationship isn't the only one.

a reply to: VP740
How you imagine/experience 'time' is like when you eat ice cream. You experience it uniquely. Just for you.
Quantum mechanics has shown us that 'time' is not, ultimately, as we imagine it.
Yes, we can still get around, after a fashion, in an old model 'T' Ford; get to the store, visit our family, etc... but with our new understanding of cars and engines, we can do the same thing, but vastly quicker, more efficiently... a greatly improved experience.
That is the difference between understand (to some extent) what 'time' is.
It is, ultimately, not at all as you have come to accept it! And it is that very 'acceptance' that so severely limits you!
All limitations exist in/as 'thought'!
'Time/space' is merely one of those limitations that only exist in your 'thoughts. We 'identify' with thought/ego, and, thus, identify with the limitations therein; 'time', 'space', 'physicality'...
By our acceptance/belief/identification with 'thoughts', we construct our own prisons, and call them home! *__-
Modern science, quantum mechanics, gives us the understanding that can lead to the experience!
Enlightenment/unconditional Love will take us from our imagined 'cells', isolated, 'autonomous', limited, into Universal, transcending all 'time' and 'space', all 'life' and 'death', all the 'dualities of 'thought'.

a reply to: namelesss

That is the difference between understand (to some extent) what 'time' is. It is, ultimately, not at all as you have come to accept it! And it is that very 'acceptance' that so severely limits you!

Hmm... There are some limitations I accept. I don't see ultraviolet or infrared light with my naked eyes for instance, and I'm not motivated to try. I don't deny that those spectrums exist and can be useful though.

Unfortunately I have to confess some ignorance on the workings of quantum mechanics. I am aware of some of the principles though. Going back to classical physics, the goal was to create a conceptual model of the universe for logical analysis. Astronomers represented the heavenly bodies as mere points in their equations (and for the most part, they still do). Their models didn't match observation with complete accuracy though, and improvements were made. Geo-centrism was replaced with helio-centrism. Galileo began forming models for terrestrial physics (we can represent time as 't' in equations such as: h=1/2*gt^2). Newton came up with a unified model using gravity as an explanation for celestial motion. Newtonian physics were replaced with relativistic physics. An explanation for gravity was added, and time has a slightly more complex representation in the equations, no longer being a simple variable. Our models 'hold up' much better now, and give more reasons to explain their operations. While representing the Earth as a point in a Newtonian or relativistic equation doesn't come near representing my experiences living in this world, I wouldn't call these physics models wrong or invalid. They serve their purpose well enough.

Quantum Mechanics has to a degree, given up on adding details for the reasons on why things work the way they do. It can be less like predicting an eclipse, and more like predicting the weather. Rather than trying to track the details of all the workings in the model, it just makes guesses of how measurements which haven't been taken will turn out, based on the measurements which have been taken. Time becomes even more complex. And string theories can represent 'time' with more than one dimension: Why not two or more time dimensions?. Of course we'll need more complex sciences to build more complex machines.

But how are these poems represented in Quantum Mechanics?
Famous Haiku Poems

Yosa Buson

An autumn eve;
There is joy too,
In loneliness.

originally posted by: VP740
a reply to: namelesss

That is the difference between understand (to some extent) what 'time' is. It is, ultimately, not at all as you have come to accept it! And it is that very 'acceptance' that so severely limits you!

Hmm... There are some limitations I accept. I don't see ultraviolet or infrared light with my naked eyes for instance, and I'm not motivated to try. I don't deny that those spectrums exist and can be useful though.

Not anything exists that is not perceived.
Just because from 'your' Perspective, at this moment, you cannot perceive the infrared spectrum, it CAN be perceived from 'other' unique Perspectives;
The same One Consciousness peeks from 'behind' all eyes/Perspectives!
We are, thus, Omniscient.
All IS Known!
Again, 'access' is variably granted to Consciousness beyond our own little imaginary autonomous 'self', to the One ALL inclusive 'Self'!

... Going back to classical physics

Since quantum, a waste of time.
Why constantly reinvent the same square wheel?

"...scientists are condemned by their unexamined assumptions to study the nature of mirrors only by cataloging and investigating everything that mirrors can reflect. It is an endless process that never makes progress, that never reaches closure, that generates endless debate between those who have seen different reflected images, and whose enduring product is voluminous descriptions of particular phenomena." - The Adapted Mind

... Newton came up with a unified model using gravity as an explanation for celestial motion.

Zeno, centuries before showed how 'motion' (and thus 'time') is not, logically, possible!
So Newton was theorizing a mirage.
Quantum has finally demonstrated such.

I wouldn't call these physics models wrong or invalid. They serve their purpose well enough.

It was the best 'science' had, they are no longer relevant.
That 'physics' was all about our dualistic limitations, with all sorts of reasons that we are so limited.
Made up theories to explain 'appearances'.
I rarely recommend movies, but you might find "What the 'Bleep'; Down the Rabbit Hole!" (quantum edition is different every time that you watch it!) a damned good primer on relatively cutting edge thought in the science/quantum world.

Of course we'll need more complex sciences to build more complex machines.

Occam's Razor is being violated if we need more complexity to be able to include our unexamined assumptions.
Duality/thought always schizophrenically fragments/dualizes that which is One!
One Reality, not 43.39 'levels/dimensions'...
One Reality, not true and false, good and evil... all that is appearances to ignorant Perspectives.
Like 'time' and 'motion'.
It is amazing all (the unexplained mysteries) that suddenly fall perfectly into place, understanding this stuff; no more need for 'miracles' and the 'supernatural' (as if there is anything beyond Nature)... Psychic phenomena arer completely explained... the list is endless!

But how are these poems represented in Quantum Mechanics?
Famous Haiku Poems

Yosa Buson

An autumn eve;
There is joy too,
In loneliness.

Poetry exists in the eye of the beholder, like art and beauty.
We perceive as 'beautiful' that which we Love!
We perceive as poetry that which we Love.
The mathematician will find the same (cheap thrills) deep sense of being moved to tears at the beauty, the symmetry, the smell! of a suddenly realized sought equation, one that can translate what is in your heart! Poetry!
Another looks and just sees numbers; so what!
It's all about the eye of the beholder, Perspective, Here! Now! *__-

Time is entropy. The process of any system to deteriorate into disorder.
Because of entropy, there is an arrow of time. Try and unscramble an egg or stuff the cosmic rays back into the star.

a reply to: namelesss

... Going back to classical physics

Since quantum, a waste of time.

Not really. Arguably, classical physics are still the most relevant for us in 2016. While quantum mechanics may be necessary for advanced electronics and chemistry, I don't think it's used as much by architects, engineers, or programmers (it would be absurd to use quantum, rather than classical physics, in a flight simulator for training pilots). And astronomers will have more use for relativity than quantum mechanics.

Zeno, centuries before showed how 'motion' (and thus 'time') is not, logically, possible!

Zeno's paradoxes assumed infinite sections of space must be traversed for motion to occur, and that traversing infinite sections of space would be impossible. The basis of his argument has been refuted by scientists and mathematicians such as Newton, Leibniz, and Cantor.

I rarely recommend movies, but you might find "What the 'Bleep'; Down the Rabbit Hole!" (quantum edition is different every time that you watch it!) a damned good primer on relatively cutting edge thought in the science/quantum world.

I'll give them a look at some point, but I've already picked up some information from the writings of Stephen Hawking, Richard Feynman, Michio Kaku, etc... All these people mention distance motion and time while talking about quantum mechanics.

Occam's Razor is being violated if we need more complexity to be able to include our unexamined assumptions.

I don't understand this. To create and use a lever effectively requires one to keep track of few factors and doesn't take many steps to do anything. To create a clock will require one to keep track of more facts and go through more steps then are required to construct a lever. To create a quantum computer would be so complex as to make either of the previous examples seem trivial.

Poetry exists in the eye of the beholder, like art and beauty.

True!

Mathematics, rightly viewed, possesses not only truth, but supreme beauty—a beauty cold and austere, like that of sculpture, without appeal to any part of our weaker nature, without the gorgeous trappings of painting or music, yet sublimely pure, and capable of a stern perfection such as only the greatest art can show. -Bertrand Russell

Different languages are better suited for different things though.