Sean Carroll - Events and the Nature of Time
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 сен 2024
- Are events measured by time? Or is time created by sequences of events? Which is more fundamental, events or time? Worse, we may get different answers from quantum mechanics and general relativity.
Click here to watch more interviews with Sean Carroll bit.ly/1OwhX5E
Click here to watch more interviews on events and the nature of time bit.ly/2v3TDQ0
Click here to buy episodes or complete seasons of Closer To Truth bit.ly/1LUPlQS
For all of our video interviews please visit us at www.closertotruth.com
More of him please. For us non physicists he makes a lot of sense
Just nice as a pleb to have someone clearly speak on things beyond my grasp in logical and easy to follow sentences. For me personally his greatest attribute is his mastery of speaking to people.
He has just started a podcast called mindscapes, you might want to check it out.
@@MartijnvanSchaardenburg has to be one of the best physics podcasts, he has brilliant guests on a wealth of topics.
Sean Carroll represents one of those very few physicists who can do the mathematics but also incorporate into his talks a philosophical perspective to our modern science. Notice no 'umms or ahs' - straight to the point with clear concise language and thinking.
I love hearing both of these guys so much...thanks for all that you do
I love this channel and Sean Carroll.
fascinating, one of the more thought provoking conversations, i'd like to hear more about sean's views regarding time being, or not being, fundamental.
Yeah he is right. The superposition. At the fundamental level there is no change. All the fundamental particles exist anywhere in the universe according to Quantum mechanics. I think i have a great insight from this video. Feel awesome 😄😊😊
All equations can be re-written without time. Maxwell's equations have already been re-written (instead of "time", flow of entropy is used). Long ago, we (wrongly) assumed that there is time (time was one of Aristotle's 10 ontological categories) and then we wrote 1000s of equations based on that wrong assumption. Even more stunning is the assumption that there is no "space" either. For if space existed, it would have to comply with GR equations, i.e. being "curved". But that would be impossible due to the fact that "space" does not have any properties by itself. Moreover, if it somehow were able to "curve" somehow, under the influence of some force, by the laws of physics there would be a reactive force of equal magnitude but opposite direction that would disable such "curvature" to occur. Thus the safest (in Bayesian sense) assumption is to assume that neither time nor space exist. The only thing that exists for sure is energy and primary substance (luminous aether).
Is there a quantum-state of Carroll, for which the configuration of his particles correspond to him believing time is emergent?
...mind change from fundamental property of classical dimensions to basic principle, because superposition is a moving target. Yes.
Time is not consistence in all conditions, can't be fundamental. It's by product of space
Time is definitely derivative, and only viewed as a perception/construct in the individual mind.
Whenever I see videos like this I always ask the question.....How long does the present last? For example it's not a second that's far too long, we're moving through time so the present must have a value.
Perhaps there is as much present in the present as there is meaning in that present. Some nows are much more meaningful than others.
Planck time (10 power -44) shorter than planck length (10 power -35) could indicate that something happen in future at planck time before moved into past at planck length.
Hi awesome channel ☺ Keep it up!
Way back in 1780's Immanuel Kant made a very good argument that for humans to make sense of anything it has to be describable in terms of Space, Time and Number(quantity). His argument is based on dissecting Reasoning into discreet components or concepts all of which have as a mother template the template of Space, Time and Number. Thus only data that fits the concept(s) can be thought about. Data that fits one concept(s) well can then be related to other data that has also fit well since the concepts dovetail with each other in various ways.
Kant raised the question as to whether humans could make sense of phenomenon that does not fit the concepts, or only partially fits. At the time of his writing, many decades after Newton had passed away, it seemed that the concepts were quite sufficient, though there was no way to know how sufficient they were.
Along comes quantum mechanics and wierd quantum paradoxes and Relativity and some of that does not make sense to the high degree that Newtonian physics was making sense. So Kant was right about what it means to make "sense", and the cutting edge of physics and cosmology are straddling the fence of making sense and not making sense.
Kant noted that since time immemorial, though humans had the faculty of reason they did not have enough empirical data to validate what could be reasoned, and so there always was a tendency to take Reasoning too far. Reasoning can be taken too far, says Kant, because it naturally extends to infinity in every way that it works.
What has happened in quantum physics, relativity and popular presentations of the paradoxes is that lacking enough of the right kind of empirical data everyone and his mother is extending Reason too far.
Consider that if Kant is right, then we may get stuck at some point in these new physics and cosmologies, stuck meaning we literally can't think some of what might be the right or best explanation.
If Kant is wrong then we have a most interesting situation, that being the most miraculous happenstance, namely humans having the ability to understand anything and everything to the point it all makes sense. That seems a bit implausible because it would imply that the human mind is directed not by preconfigured concepts but by some perfect truth detector which is incapable of error, only temporary errors at most which the truth detector will resolve eventually.
The equation of causation that has the change in space less the change in time being less than or equal to zero could mean that causation, the change in time being either the same or more than the change in space, is moving into the future?
Is it possible that time is related to entropy and it might be a description of the possible changes of matter .Temperature plays a significant role I guess but space and time are connected in macroscopic level there is no doubt about it
Chris Kokolios Brian Cox has a vid that explains the arrow of time as one directional due to entropy.
Ken Walter I didn't know that thank you
Chris Kokolios You're welcome.
Sean Carroll is going nuts. Especially if I consider his model with two arrows of time.
Brilliant
I love this series but why it starts with myopic scene which is very disturbing for myopic people?
Is space the past of an event / causation, with time being the future of an event / causation?
Is there full interview ?
On Amazon I think, shame
Time on quantum wave fundamental to multiverse. Space fundamental to expanding universe.
Is there video record from the conference?
A little curious that universe start around planck time (10 power -44), and cosmic inflation end around planck length (10 power -35).
That quantum field equations have time without space indicates the quantum fields are about the future, and maybe bring causation into the future?
What is Time?
1. Assume the three dimensional Universe is inside a three dimensional photo Frame. Everything in this universe is dynamic and changing in relative to other things and itself. Entropy is changing also.
2. Lowest possible changed state of the whole Universe inside the frame marked as Now Moment is separated from previous Now Moment by shortest possible separator Plunk-time.
3. Last Now Moments are Record, History, Memory or Information. Next Now Moments are next changed states of the Universe inside Frame.
4. Only Now Moment Exist. Past and Future do not exist.
5. Conscious Mind can make predictions of next Moments from experience and can plan events for next Moments.
6. Every Plunk-Volume’s “Now” of the Universe including space and stuffs in it is always in the same Now Moment Frame of the Universe. Relative Clock ticking, fast or slow, at different points for different conditions does not shift anything to previous or next Moment Frames of the Universe. All points Now remain in the Now Moment Frame of the Universe. That is why twins of paradox can meet at any ones Now though relatively they are backward or forward in respect of amount of time elapsed. Time travel is not possible. Our invented Clocks and Calendars are misleading us about time
7. Moment is repeating at Plunk-Time separation, even if nothing is changing, something is changing or all things are changing in the Universe. Flow of Time forward or backward does not exist. No arrow of time. Only Moment is ticking repeatedly at Plunk-Time interval with a photo of the Universe. No forward count. Many clocks under Universal clock. Reference frames and Clocks at every Plunk-Volume’s. Some clocks ticking slow than universal clock creating curved TimeSpace in the Universe.
Whenever I think of time I think of entropy even in relativity time dilation is probably a change of the rate of entropy
Time going to events need x = what there is between the events! Without x is't time fundamental.
Next time somebody asks me what time it is theyre gunna get an ear thrashing
A great, simple and clear explanation of his thinking. I am of the opinion, as he was previously that time is fundamental. He has doubts because he works in quantum physics, below the scale of the wave of time (faster than or partially idependant from, our large, slow scale time). Above this scale (slower), we are all floating in the sea of time, boobing up and down (time runs faster then slower) in the field. The quantum world is like the sea shore,or at least the water near the sea shore, which does not bob up and down the same as we do further out in the ocean. That's why we cannot predict events near the shore (quantum events) accurately. We have to use a probability analysis using two wave functions, ours out in the sea, and the different one nearer the shore. I think the world below the scale of the time wave, the quantum world, does not experience time in the same way that we do, driven by the wave into the future, into the next event and so on. I do not believe we will ever bring GR and QM together to form a unified theory since they operate within different realms of existance.
Might time be derivative of causation that is fundamental?
"Space" is energy itself.
"Time" is the flow of that energy.
"Space Time" is energy and it's flow.
1:05 Space-Time perhaps not fundamental, Time, yes, Space, no ?
So many experts in the comment section I'm afraid to put my two cents in. If time is the property of things happening, of the dilution of matter and energy, then such a thing or property exists independent of the human mind but which we call time.
Could be that space is slices within 4D space-time block universe, while time is layers of 4D space-time block universes stacked on top of one another.
Do quantum fields lack three dimensions of space, perhaps being two dimensional?
What is Time?
1. Assume the three dimensional
Universe is inside a three dimensional photo Frame. Everything in this universe
is dynamic and changing in relative to other things and itself. Entropy is
changing also.
2. The whole Universe inside the
frame marked as Now Moment is separated from previous Now Moment by shortest
possible separator Planck-time.
3. Last Now Moments are Record,
History, Memory or Information. Next Now Moments are next changed states of the
Universe inside Frame.
4. Only Now Moment Exist. Past and
Future do not exist. Flow of Time forward or backward does not exist. No arrow
of time. It is arrow of Change with elapse of Time. Moment is ticking
repeatedly at Planck-Time interval with a new 3D-Photo of the Universe.
5. Conscious Mind can make
predictions of next Moments from experience and can plan events for next
Moments.
6. Every Planck-Volume’s “Now” of
the Universe including space and stuffs in it is always in the same Now Moment
Frame of the Universe. Relative Clock ticking, fast or slow, at different planck-volume for different conditions does not shift anything to previous or next Moment Frames of the Universe. Because clocks ticking slow or fast does not mean Time elapsing slow or fast. It is error of the clock for certain condition which need to be adjusted. All points Now remain in the Now Moment Frame of the Universe. That is why twins of paradox can meet at any ones Now though
relatively they are backward or forward in respect of amount of time elapsed.
Time travel is not possible. Our invented Clocks and Calendars are misleading
us about time in the repetition of day & night and seasons.
7. The Unit by Clock is three dimensional at any
point of the Universe. X axis: Universal Period of Time, Y axis: Passage or
Elapse of Time and Z axis: Local Present or Now. Our Clocks only show one
dimension: passage of Time. Clocks are good measuring device with a Unit but that is not Time.
What does it mean to suggest time is either more or less fundamental than space. I think it's meaningless question. Matter, Space, and Time are emergent phenomena. I find it amusing when physicist suggest C is really the speed of casuality
Really? Are you sure about that one? Causual relationships are links which connect through the fabric of space and time. Light propagates at C through what exactly? Where is it? Mass-less. Mass emerges from a pressure differential (if u will) of compact energy in containment. The relative differences among different aspects of the one thing gives rise to all things in the observable Universe.
Could be that gravity pulls things into the future, then space moves the future into the past while light makes things feel like its the present.
It seems very quiet there outside.
Do you still believe in the arrow of time?
There are things.
They move.
There are abstractions.
Abstractions are, simplifying, useful, toolish thought nuggets.
I propose that 'Time' is the name of an abstraction and that time does not 'emerge', rather, it is synthesized by minds out of the apprehension of things and their movements for the purposes of, for example, starting work together and meeting for coffee.
Take a drug. Experience how time slooooooows down.
Can you put some time in a testing jig and apply some physics and experience time slooooowing down? No indeed!
Ah! but "relativity effects" you say. The synchronized clocks, one on the ground, one in space, read differently after a few orbits, what about that?
Good argument but for the fact that clocks don't measure time.
Inside a clock there is no aethereal antenna being gently induced to oscillation by the "flowing river of time". No, there are only springs and gears or crystals and electrons or atoms in oscillation, that is to say, only things, moving. And things, it seems, when subject to acceleration, behave differently than things not so subjected thus producing different readings on the clock faces. I'm at a loss for why acceleration should have this effect. I invite a physicist to comment.
The 'time' abstraction is assumed, underlies and is fundamental to all of our narrative processes. We are talking about time and measuring it and incorporating it into our calculations of engineering & physics and arranging to meet at a particular and finding the concept so profoundly useful throughout our entire conscious lives that we are almost always wrapped in the delusion that time is as 'real' as any thing, this keyboard, this chair, this body.
How do we know if something exists?
If something has mass or extent or location or weight or inertia or color or brightness or contrast or taste or temperature or oscillation, an inside, an outside, hardness, ductility, porosity, etc. we might be forced to concede 'existence'.
Does 'time' have even one of these attributes?
It does not and so I am forced to the conclusion that time is not 'real'.
As soon as we adopt the idea that time is an abstraction we immediately understand why we have never met a 'time traveler'. I mean, in a universe with an infinite amount of 'real' time wouldn't we expect to, wouldn't it be inevitable, shouldn't we be crawling with them?
The realization that time is abstract has eroded the pleasure I get from those science fiction works in which the plot involves time travel. The Time Machine, Back to the Future, Loopers, Travelers etc. all absurd, all refusing to address the glaring paradox. GLARING!
What do you think?
About the time travelers:
- Suppose that i built a spaceship that can accelerate to 99.9% of speed of light. I call it EARTH 2018.
- Suppose that i travel today to a star 4 light years away from earth. At 99.9% of speed of light it would take 14 weeks to go and 14 weeks to return to earth.
- But from the point of view of everybody in the planet earth, my journey takes 4 years to go and 4 years to return.
- When i arrive back in the planet, i traveled 8 years TO THE FUTURE with my spaceship. But from the point of view of earth, the entire planet is traveling 8 years TO MY PAST, represented by my SPACE 2018.
- Then everybody in contact with me, will be talking with a man from the past. In this sense, its possible to travel to past and future at same time.
If all matter in base particles is emergent from the Quantum Gravity Field and their mass effects clock time in relation to spatial position, this would strongly indicate time as also being an emergent factor of the Q.G.F., perhaps times causation is the collapse of the wave function or entanglement processes. Time will tell...
Is there a quantum-state of Carroll, for which the configuration of his particles correspond to him believing time is emergent? ...
Unfortunately, the answer to that question is still in superposition and can not be definitively answered at this time...
waiting for the man to collapse! at least his wave-function ;-)
Seth Lloyd theorized in the 70's, I think it was, that entanglement is possible causation of the arrow of time. I personally think our consciousness exists after we die in an entangled " bunched " sets of quantum fields, but that is another animal to be explored later after present theories become confirmed. A complete understanding of the collapse of the wave function has still not been reached, nor quantum physics and GUT. I remember as a child looking at the particles in a glass of water and wondering what was making them move...
What is that 'noise' at 4:10?
Cellphone ring?
but time does exist if events are happening
I personally think time is emergent and not fundamental but i could be persuaded either way
I find Sean Carroll so annoyingly arrogant and dismissive of ideas that aren’t part of his religion. I can’t listen to him. Most fundamentally he is a physicalist who ignores the paradox of subjectivity. He is an eliminativist like Dennett which is just a way of side stepping the hard problem of consciousness rather than offering any valuable contribution to the discussion. Meanwhile he is a proponent of Everittian Many Worlds Theory which is a way of side stepping the measurement problem. He offers no solutions. Only obfuscation.
I think I'm disagreeing with Sean, Time does not exist. (or is that agreeing?)
We are conscious of time passing, only because of those process we observe are also subject to the effects of increasing Entropy. When we try to do the same with sub-atomic particles we have a problem, because they are affected by quantum states, and we see no arrow of time.
Of course for this to be totally wrong would mean we are living in a simulation...all reality would be a simulation, all the way down to the last *Turtle*.
"Emergence" is just a term used when we don't have an answer. That and "fundamental property."
Time is fundamental! Each photon oscillation only occurs once forming an uncertain future relative to the atoms of the periodic table. The future in unfolding with each new photon electron coupling or dipole moment relative to our actions! In such a theory the wave particle duality of light and matter in the form of electrons is forming a blank canvas that we can interact with forming the possible into the actual.
You're calling causality time. Causality is fundamental. Domino effects (cause and effect) do occur IN ORDER. How fast or slow is relative.
Sean Carroll could use some minoxidil.
first!
Good pointless babble
Yeah, why aren't they discussing something important, like the love lives of celebrities or whether some minority is being marginalised or what shoes to wear with a red skirt?
Like how you managed to bury some minority being marginalized in between the other superficial subjects. Doubt you would feel that way if it were you. Not that this video was pointless.
Les That's because you're not understanding what they are talking about.
Sure, talk to another bozo and he will something else.
Not a bozo who knows his physics. Except for the areas still open to question, they will agree on all matters. As Carroll says at the end, he may even disagree with his former self by this time next year.