What If Time Really Exists? (2008) • Hacker News Board

Re: What If Time Really Exists? (2008)

#11

Post by Alex3917 » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 4:31 AM UTC

DougN7 wrote: post #7

monktastic1 wrote: post #2

Between modern physics suggesting time and space may be illusions, leading technologists agreeing that we're almost certainly in a simulated reality, and many ancient traditions being certain that this is all an illusion, I may have to have to go ahead and take this seriously....

What is ironic is the amount of blind faith required to accept some of these things that are so completely against everything we experience. It's very nearly a religion.

> It's very nearly a religion.

I'd argue it is a religion. The word religion means to "bind back" or "yoke" [edited], i.e. to seek an understanding of the universe and our place in it.

That's what physicists and cosmologists do. These disciplines also fulfill the needs of scientists for meaning and community and ritual, not unlike Christianity or Islam or whatever.

Just because you might happen to believe something doesn't make it not a religion.

Re: What If Time Really Exists? (2008)

#12

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 4:32 AM UTC

stale2002 wrote: post #10

monktastic1 wrote: post #2

Between modern physics suggesting time and space may be illusions, leading technologists agreeing that we're almost certainly in a simulated reality, and many ancient traditions being certain that this is all an illusion, I may have to have to go ahead and take this seriously....

The simulation argument comes from the fact that there a quite a lot of physics effects that are both surprising, and look an awful lot like dirty hacks that a programmer might put it. Quantum physics looks a lot like lazy evaluation (State doesn't exist until "observed"). The speed of light seems like a hack to prevent an n squared problem of everything in the universe effecting everything at the same time.

[deleted]

Re: What If Time Really Exists? (2008)

#13

Post by woofyman » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 4:36 AM UTC

stale2002 wrote: post #10

monktastic1 wrote: post #2

Between modern physics suggesting time and space may be illusions, leading technologists agreeing that we're almost certainly in a simulated reality, and many ancient traditions being certain that this is all an illusion, I may have to have to go ahead and take this seriously....

The simulation argument comes from the fact that there a quite a lot of physics effects that are both surprising, and look an awful lot like dirty hacks that a programmer might put it. Quantum physics looks a lot like lazy evaluation (State doesn't exist until "observed"). The speed of light seems like a hack to prevent an n squared problem of everything in the universe effecting everything at the same time.

I think it's hubris to suggest that just because something is surprising to us that we explain it based on our experience with our own limited technology.

Re: What If Time Really Exists? (2008)

#14

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 4:37 AM UTC

[deleted]

Re: What If Time Really Exists? (2008)

#15

Post by mjrpes » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 4:40 AM UTC

stale2002 wrote: post #10

monktastic1 wrote: post #2

Between modern physics suggesting time and space may be illusions, leading technologists agreeing that we're almost certainly in a simulated reality, and many ancient traditions being certain that this is all an illusion, I may have to have to go ahead and take this seriously....

The simulation argument comes from the fact that there a quite a lot of physics effects that are both surprising, and look an awful lot like dirty hacks that a programmer might put it. Quantum physics looks a lot like lazy evaluation (State doesn't exist until "observed"). The speed of light seems like a hack to prevent an n squared problem of everything in the universe effecting everything at the same time.

It also seems just as good an argument for the athropic principle.

Re: What If Time Really Exists? (2008)

#16

Post by Jizzle » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 4:42 AM UTC

stale2002 wrote: post #10

monktastic1 wrote: post #2

Between modern physics suggesting time and space may be illusions, leading technologists agreeing that we're almost certainly in a simulated reality, and many ancient traditions being certain that this is all an illusion, I may have to have to go ahead and take this seriously....

The simulation argument comes from the fact that there a quite a lot of physics effects that are both surprising, and look an awful lot like dirty hacks that a programmer might put it. Quantum physics looks a lot like lazy evaluation (State doesn't exist until "observed"). The speed of light seems like a hack to prevent an n squared problem of everything in the universe effecting everything at the same time.

The appearance that quantum effects might be attributed to 'hacks' probably has more to do with the hackish nature of the Copenhagen interpretation. For instance, there is no stated physical explanation for the collapse of a wavefunction--it is only an extremely convenient way of explaining many experiments. A crude analogy--you can describe the flipping of coins with simple probability, but this is a non-physical yet very convenient explanation.

Re: What If Time Really Exists? (2008)

#17

Post by ChristianGeek » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 4:44 AM UTC

tomelders wrote: post #8

Time exists. It's the observed difference between two states. Also, i am not a physicist.

Exactly; it's the measurement of change. As long as things are changing, time exists. (The fact that this discussion is taking place proves it's existence!)

Re: What If Time Really Exists? (2008)

#18

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 4:46 AM UTC

woofyman wrote: post #13

stale2002 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simulation argument comes from the fact that there a quite a lot of physics effects that are both surprising, and look an awful lot like dirty hacks that a programmer might put it. Quantum physics looks a lot like lazy evaluation (State doesn't exist until "observed"). The speed of light seems like a hack to prevent an n squared problem of everything in the universe effecting everything at the same time.

I think it's hubris to suggest that just because something is surprising to us that we explain it based on our experience with our own limited technology.

[deleted]

Re: What If Time Really Exists? (2008)

#19

Post by wu-ikkyu » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 4:50 AM UTC

tomelders wrote: post #8

Time exists. It's the observed difference between two states. Also, i am not a physicist.

>Time exists. It's the observed difference between two states.

For something to be said to exist, must it not be immediately observable in the present?

Since state is perpetually changing, isn't "the observed difference between two states" always an observation of the past and never the present?

Perhaps it is more precise to say that change exists rather than time because "the observed difference between two states" can never include the present state.

Re: What If Time Really Exists? (2008)

#20

Post by oh_teh_meows » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 4:59 AM UTC

tomelders wrote: post #8

Time exists. It's the observed difference between two states. Also, i am not a physicist.

Or that there really is only one unchanging state, and what you perceive to be the passage of time is really just a very particular configuration of your 'memory' through which you 'remember' a different state, and that hasn't really changed at all.