Seven Pines Conference Achieves Nothing...
True Nature Of
Time Appears
If We Look 'Outside The Box'
It seems to me, the Time Philosopher, that physicists today understand time little better than they did back when Einstein's theory of general relativity was first published, now almost a century ago. There was a conference on time and space in June 2001 in Stillwater, Minn. A reporter for the New York Times, James Glanz reported on the meeting, the Seven Pines Symposium.
Glanz began by saying both philosophers and physicists seemed bewildered by the questions posed by the nature of space and time. Of course, to me, their real problem involved only time. If they viewed time flow as set forth in this web site and as correctly understood by Einstein, they would not have been bewildered. To borrow loosely from the logician Kurt Gödel's proof about the unproveability of axioms in mathematics by using mathematics alone, I believe that an understanding of the true nature of time can only be gained by looking in from outside the system of physics.
If we examine physics "from outside the box," using the tools of philosophy and psychology, we can see that time flow is an illusion. We see that it takes an observer to compare relative motion through space by matter and energy and to observe related changes in the configuration of mass and energy caused by this movement. We see that a mental model of the observed situation must be created, and the thought processes of the human mind accomplish this. This is what Einstein called "subjective time." The concluding point here is that without an observer, time flow simply does not exist.
Yes, the changes in the universe exist but they are timeless because time is a system of measuring physical movement and change. All systems of measuring require a sentient observer and a comparison of measurements made by this observer. What is left of time after subjective mind-dependent time flow is subtracted? The answer, of course, is "objective time" It is what happens as physical changes progressively occur, even if unobserved.
And, as we eliminate observation from time phenomena, we can see that "objective time" is not is a system of measurement, but is simply what is measureable. We see that it exists whether or not any measurement occurs. We see it is merely the progression of change or the "aging" phenomena, which can be measured if an observer is present to do so. Objective time exists with or without an observer. It is simply what's left when Einstein's subjective time is subtracted.
Events in objective time have no meaning until observed and then mentally measured and compared with subjective clock time. While many physicists understand that the theory of relativity eliminated the notion of absolute time in the universe, many of them still cling to false notions about time flow and even believe that some form of time travel might be possible. But how can they cling to such a notion in a universe in which Einstein banished absolute time? It logically follows then that there can be no absolute "present moment," and that "present moments" are just human-scale observations as explained elsewhere in this web site. Without absolute present moments, there are no stations in time from which a traveler might come and go.
So, I'm not bewildered by time and I don't think Einstein was either, although I do wish he had said much more than he did about this subject.
SevenPines.htm, posted 10-2-01