A growing number of scientists are convinced the future influences the past • Hacker News Board

Re: A growing number of scientists are convinced the future influences the past

#61

Post by theGnuMe » Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 5:00 PM UTC

wootland wrote: post #15

As a non-physicist I'm not sure I'm interpreting this correctly. Does this essentially mean that all states in time already exist and our consciousness is just traversing this 4D space in one direction on the time axis? If so, does that mean that the big bang could actually be the end of the universe and we're just experiencing time in "reverse" toward an initial starting state that we perceive as the future?

I like this concept. Is there any sci-fi based on this premise?

Re: A growing number of scientists are convinced the future influences the past

#62

Post by orbz » Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 5:01 PM UTC

gfd wrote: post #43

I used to believe that the world is lazily loaded. That means the first moment I see something (e.g., a world map) is the point where all the past history to consistently explain the observation gets "locked in".

Wave function collapse in effect?

Re: A growing number of scientists are convinced the future influences the past

#63

Post by peter_d_sherman » Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 5:30 PM UTC

>"But what if this forward causality could somehow be reversed in time, allowing actions in the future to influence outcomes in the past? This mind-bending idea, known as retrocausality, may seem like science fiction grist at first glance, but it is starting to gain real traction among physicists and philosophers, among other researchers, as a possible solution to some of the most intractable riddles underlying our reality."

Linguistics: retrocausality -- is going into my 2023 lexicon...

Re: A growing number of scientists are convinced the future influences the past

#64

Post by Spivak » Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 5:53 PM UTC

KwisatzHaderack wrote: post #57

gfd wrote: post #43

I used to believe that the world is lazily loaded. That means the first moment I see something (e.g., a world map) is the point where all the past history to consistently explain the observation gets "locked in".

I feel like this assumes solipsism.

Multiplayer solipsism. That part of the game doesn't load until at least one player observes it.

Re: A growing number of scientists are convinced the future influences the past

#65

Post by jspank » Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 5:53 PM UTC

theGnuMe wrote: post #61

wootland wrote: post #15

As a non-physicist I'm not sure I'm interpreting this correctly. Does this essentially mean that all states in time already exist and our consciousness is just traversing this 4D space in one direction on the time axis? If so, does that mean that the big bang could actually be the end of the universe and we're just experiencing time in "reverse" toward an initial starting state that we perceive as the future?

I like this concept. Is there any sci-fi based on this premise?

Reminds me of the Tralfamadorians from Slaughterhouse-Five. They are able to see in four dimensions so humans appear as fetuses at one end of the four-dimensional person and dying at the other end.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tralfamadore#Slaughterhouse-Fi...

Re: A growing number of scientists are convinced the future influences the past

#66

Post by sdwr » Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 5:54 PM UTC

gfd wrote: post #43

I used to believe that the world is lazily loaded. That means the first moment I see something (e.g., a world map) is the point where all the past history to consistently explain the observation gets "locked in".

Was coming to say something like this. Gets to some fun conclusions - ex. paleontologists invent dinosaurs by looking for them.

Another angle on it would be showing that the universe has multiple possible levels of detail - that objects behave like newtonian point masses most of the time, that digestion is replaced by a simple hunger meter when nobody's paying attention.

From this direction, time's main function is compressing "now" so there's more space for something else later.

I'd be willing to believe that everyone has a god-given amount of universe rendering time that can be allocated in different ways, and that other people's attention stacks with it in a complex, layered way.

Re: A growing number of scientists are convinced the future influences the past

#67

Post by a_subsystem » Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 5:54 PM UTC

Well... yes.

http://gurdjiefffourthway.org/pdf/GURDJIEFF%20AND%20TIME.pdf

Re: A growing number of scientists are convinced the future influences the past

#68

Post by dbtc » Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 5:55 PM UTC

gfd wrote: post #43

I used to believe that the world is lazily loaded. That means the first moment I see something (e.g., a world map) is the point where all the past history to consistently explain the observation gets "locked in".

'the world' vs 'my world' and 'your world'

Re: A growing number of scientists are convinced the future influences the past

#69

Post by Apocryphon » Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 5:56 PM UTC

kwhitefoot wrote: post #18

wootland wrote: post #15

As a non-physicist I'm not sure I'm interpreting this correctly. Does this essentially mean that all states in time already exist and our consciousness is just traversing this 4D space in one direction on the time axis? If so, does that mean that the big bang could actually be the end of the universe and we're just experiencing time in "reverse" toward an initial starting state that we perceive as the future?

The block universe: https://plus.maths.org/content/what-block-time

Is it the same thing as the holographic universe theory that was in vogue a couple of decades ago?

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/27/d7/8c/27d78c9c3ee93c13eda4...

Re: A growing number of scientists are convinced the future influences the past

#70

Post by yamtaddle » Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 5:57 PM UTC

paulusthe wrote: post #38

marcus_holmes wrote: post #37

Interesting because it messes with the school of thought that everything is determined already and we're just following a sequence of actions that arise from the starting conditions of the universe. If causality is broken then maybe we have free will?

That's a very lazy school of thought though. It's just atheistic Calvinism, a tautology masquerading as a "philosophy". Calvin believed in pre-destination (your fate and every decision you make is decided before you exist) on the grounds that, because God exists and is omnipotent, what you are doing must therefore be what God wants to happen, both good and bad. After all, God is omnipotent, so there you go. Today's C…

> In fact, it's an arguably more ignorant version of Calvinism, because it requires that one completely dismisses any knowledge they have of probability theory. So it's the "smarter" Calvinism that requires you be ignorant of 20th century mathematical advances.

I entirely fail to see how probability theory means it's impossible for the universe to be deterministic.