Jump to content

What gives the 4D universe its persistence?


Genecks

Recommended Posts

From what I understand from Einstein's relativity, time is eternal and all moments pre-exist. Alright, so, my next question is what allows all this peristence?

 

I think if someone makes the "nothing is really there" argument, then there is nothing. However, at all moments in time, there is matter (Yes, it could be argued this is an assumption, as the understanding of matter may change). As such, there is something existing, regardless of energies balancing out to be zero. So, my question is what enables all of this to persist.

 

I guess in another way, I'm asking "Why hasn't the block universe broke down due to entropy?"

 

It's as though the universe is a 4-dimensional structure that maintains it's structure in perpetuation.. What is allowing this structure to be maintain in permenance? Does it break down? And if not, why not?

 

Part of me considers if dark energy makes the universe accelerate, then possibly some vacuum could bring a new universe into existence with new matter. But that seems like a spring effect, thus making me consider that something has to be breaking down somewhere.

Edited by Genecks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure where you got the idea that Einstein stated time is eternal, or that all moments pre-exist, it would if the universe is eternal, however we know it has a finite beginning and potentially also has an end.

 

the nothing is really there argument is also somewhat misleading, as the lowest energy state defined by QM is zero point energy which due to Heisnburg's uncertainty principle will still have some energy and virtual particle production e=1/2hv

 

a state of maximum entropy is heat death, we haven't reached this state yet, and its also conjectural no one really knows how universes break down or if they do, do they reach heat death or do they recollapse to bounce back to expansion? no one knows for sure

 

How universes form is also not known, LCDM and the hot big bang model only describes the universe from 10-43 seconds forward, prior to that our knowledge of physics breaks down. There is numerous conjectural models so no one can answer your questions with certainty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if I explained myself well enough.

 

In relation to Einstein's block universe, does it break down? If not, why not?

I've read about the heat death argument. I think that's irrelevant when assuming that heat death is pre-determined and already exists as a moment in space-time. I guess I'm taking the psychological arrow of time view, whereby space-time events pre-exist but human biology works off a presentist intuition about the metaphysical reality.

 

I guess if Einstein's block universe is a 4-dimensional object with all space-time events already existing, then does the 4-dimensional object ever break down? A rubik's cube would deteriorate with age. It would appear that Einstein's block universe never breaks down. But if not, why not? What's allowing the persistence?

Edited by Genecks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

in the block universe conjecture its meaningless to have a beginning or ending the flow of time is subjective not objective, as such the arrow of time has little meaning to the illusion of time, everyone is eternal. There is no change and there is no flow of time.

this is more philosophy than science but there is some science to it in that its consistent with SR, these artices can probably describe it better than I

 

http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_block_universe.asp

http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_mysterious_flow.asp

 

here is a comment from a peer review paper

 

"This block view is however an unrealistic picture because it does not take complex physics or biology seriously; and they do indeed exist in the
real universe. The irreversible flow of time is one of the dominant features of biology, as well as of the physics of complex interactions and indeed our own human experience"

 

http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0605/0605049.pdf

 

personally I don't find the block universe or the arrow of time of any particular use to understanding cosmology or physics, quite frankly they are both too speculative and conjectural but you go ahead have fun with it. For me time is simply a measure of change or duration any attempt to try to place added meaning to it are just too speculative, and largely based more on philosophy than science, GR and SR can be understood without referring to the block universe

Edited by Mordred
Link to comment
Share on other sites

genecks, I think the universe hasn't "broke down" because there is something still driving it. The same thing that delivered it, the algorithm of PI, as it plays out as a program for the computer (IBH) that describes the universes. I also like your notion of "some vaccuum bringing in a new universe" I have thought for about a year that the only thing required to make a universe is a (near) complete absence of information or a "pure" void....since there is a universe here, space is clogged up with virtual particles at a minimum, dis-allowing the natural creation events to take place. I see that a "pure" void has a default single bit of information (that indeed, it is one void) and that it morphs into a universe if it is not interfered with (entangled away from it's natural evolution by external forces) ...so I don't worry about another big bang causing trouble in this universe as space itself is keeping us safe...ps, I don't think time is a dimension, if that's what you mean by "4D" universe. I think other dimensions up to 10 could exist, but I see time as a "bookeeping" of however many changes are present within a given region, and acts more as a theoretical observer of space activities than a component of it

Edited by hoola
Link to comment
Share on other sites

in the block universe conjecture its meaningless to have a beginning or ending the flow of time is subjective not objective, as such the arrow of time has little meaning to the illusion of time, everyone is eternal. There is no change and there is no flow of time.

this is more philosophy than science but there is some science to it in that its consistent with SR, these artices can probably describe it better than I

 

http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_block_universe.asp

http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_mysterious_flow.asp

 

here is a comment from a peer review paper

 

"This block view is however an unrealistic picture because it does not take complex physics or biology seriously; and they do indeed exist in the

real universe. The irreversible flow of time is one of the dominant features of biology, as well as of the physics of complex interactions and indeed our own human experience"

 

http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0605/0605049.pdf

 

personally I don't find the block universe or the arrow of time of any particular use to understanding cosmology or physics, quite frankly they are both too speculative and conjectural but you go ahead have fun with it. For me time is simply a measure of change or duration any attempt to try to place added meaning to it are just too speculative, and largely based more on philosophy than science, GR and SR can be understood without referring to the block universe

 

I've already read those ipod pages months ago. I already get the whole "time is an illusion" issue when taking into account the block universe philosophy, as it's assumed that all space-time events already exist. My question is what's allowing all those space-time events to have their persistent existence?

 

It could be argued that the past and future doesn't exist at all. That would mean that entropy, time, the flow of events, or what-have-you is unidirectional.

 

As with hoola has said, I think you have a general idea of what I'm thinking. I can only hypothesize a few resolves, and one resolve is that there does exist something outside of this universe that gives all space-time events their persistence. However, I believe that would also mean that the past and future are being altered to maintain their existence within the space-time continuum or else those events would deteriorate: House cleaning if you will. I have the belief that if the universe did expand to infinity, then it would make a vacuum, and a new universe would appear. However, bringing forth the new universe is not relevant as to what I'm talking about: At least, for what I believe unless the driving force that maintains all space-time events is what will eventually bring in a new universe were a new universe to be made by all matter expanding outward at an infinite distance for which a vacuum would be made: In general, it's like osmosis.

 

reality_block_time2.jpg

 

Why doesn't the block universe deteriorate? What's allowing the block universe to maintain its form?

Edited by Genecks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Why doesn't the block universe deteriorate?

 

That would require the "block" to change over time. But time is part of the block. So you are suggesting some sort of meta-time outside of the time and space we are aware of.

 

You might as well ask why the block universe doesn't move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had a little to drink. My asking of why it doesn't deteriorate is a presumption that it maintains its form. My presumption of it maintaining form comes from having read about Einstein's GR and SR along with eternalism arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how can the pie spoil if nothing ever changes, not enough drink is right, (speaking of which I need another hehe) I'll get back to you at some future time. ;)

Edited by Mordred
Link to comment
Share on other sites

in referring back to the idea of time being a book-keeping service, there could be a recording of all events readable with an analysis by a quantum computer of sufficient speed of the algorithm of PI. This could mathematically describe not only an early event such as the symmetry breaking of gravity, but give clues to pre-big bang developments...such as the development of logic, since PI contains all possible information. Within PI there are very many possible answers that are incorrect and at least one that is correct. Since our universe was built of one of the "correct" answers or it wouldn't exist, there could be a way of determining which answer gets expressed. Unless the multi-verse theory is right, and we are one universe that happened to be an expression of a "right" answer and so can exist and continue to persist. Others may exist (or have existed) in differing forms and abilities to hold together with varying levels of stability...so all possible universes could each be an answer to an "multiple choice test". Presumably ours in a rather good answer. On the multi-verse idea, I see that more than one universe may exist, but not an infinite series of them since I adhere to the no nothings and no infinities limitation, plus the strong possibility that it takes an extensive catalogue of information to describe a universe, even a flimsy one. With no infinite time, there isn't enough time to do an infinite anything...

Edited by hoola
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.