1,721,310 research outputs found
Conscious Experience and the Block Universe
No full textChapter 7 discusses the “argument from time as experienced,” which is alleged to be the most damning argument against the block universe. It shows that as typically presented the argument from experience is easily refuted. It then argues that all the “A-series” alternatives are, at the very least, no better off than the block universe at accounting for time as experienced. It further argues that the standard defense of the block universe in terms of the “argument from the equivalence of experience” is a good one. However, the proponent of the block universe, having eliminated the competitors, still has to explain time as experienced. Here it is argued that the standard moves, such as invoking some physical arrow of time or mental representations/neural mechanisms, fail. Indeed, it is argued that the block universe posit makes it doubly impossible to resolve the generation/hard problem of conscious experience, including time as experienced.</p
The Block Universe from Special Relativity
No full textBefore explaining how the God’s-eye view resolves the impasse of theoretical physics and foundations of physics created by the ant’s-eye view, the book presents a detailed argument for the block universe. Accordingly, the main thread of chapter 2 shows how the relativity of simultaneity resolves the paradoxes associated with time dilation and length contraction that result from special relativity. A short argument is then presented showing how the relativity of simultaneity implies a block universe, that is, the co-reality or co-existence of the past, present, and future. Philosophy of Physics for Chapter 2 provides a detailed argument for block universe, taking into account all counterarguments and assumptions of the abridged argument in the main thread. Foundational Physics for Chapter 2 shows how the second postulate of special relativity leads to time dilation and length contraction, and it contains the Lorentz transformations for the spacetime events used in the main thread.</p
This Community of Self: Algorithmic Friendship and the Performative Profile
No full textTalk for Performance of Self in Digital Space symposium
Block Universe
Goldsmiths, University of London
23 May, 201
The Block Universe: A Philosophical Investigation in Four Dimensions
Full text linkThe aim of this doctoral dissertation is to closely explore the nature of Einstein’s block universe and to tease out its implications for the nature of time and human freedom. Four questions, in particular, are central to this dissertation, and set out the four dimensions of this philosophical investigation: (1) Does the block universe view of time follow inevitably from the theory of special relativity? (2) Is there room for the passage of time in the block universe? (3) Can we distinguish past from future in the block universe? (4) Is there room for human freedom in the block universe? Although the answer of most philosophers would be yes, triple no, my own answer, controversially, is no, triple yes.
I thereby challenge the status quo with respect to each of these metaphysical questions, and argue that none of these questions can be answered from looking at physics alone. Physics may constrain our metaphysics, but it certainly does not settle it. What is needed in order to answer these questions, are additional metaphysical assumptions that fall outside the scope of modern physics. My primary goal in this dissertation, therefore, is not to settle the debates on the nature of time and human freedom, but to clarify them by expliciting the metaphysical assumptions that are otherwise left implicit
The Block Universe: A Philosophical Investigation in Four Dimensions
No full textThe aim of this doctoral dissertation is to closely explore the nature of Einstein’s block universe and to tease out its implications for the nature of time and human freedom. Four questions, in particular, are central to this dissertation, and set out the four dimensions of this philosophical investigation: (1) Does the block universe view of time follow inevitably from the theory of special relativity? (2) Is there room for the passage of time in the block universe? (3) Can we distinguish past from future in the block universe? (4) Is there room for human freedom in the block universe? Although the answer of most philosophers would be yes, triple no, my own answer, controversially, is no, triple yes.
I thereby challenge the status quo with respect to each of these metaphysical questions, and argue that none of these questions can be answered from looking at physics alone. Physics may constrain our metaphysics, but it certainly does not settle it. What is needed in order to answer these questions, are additional metaphysical assumptions that fall outside the scope of modern physics. My primary goal in this dissertation, therefore, is not to settle the debates on the nature of time and human freedom, but to clarify them by expliciting the metaphysical assumptions that are otherwise left implicit
The Block Universe and the Monument of Life
No full textThis paper offers a Resolution Theory reading of the block universe and argues that eternalism need not eliminate either free will or existential meaning. Free will is not treated as metaphysical indeterminacy, but as authored resolution within a fully explainable world. The paper contends that the usual bleak reading of the block universe depends on a mistaken picture of consciousness as a moving point travelling through time. If no genuinely moving present exists, that model fails. Conscious life is instead understood as a temporally extended, internally integrated structure whose present coordinate is locally inhabited but not metaphysically privileged. On this basis, death is not an experienced state of annihilation but the boundary of a conscious line, while grief is best understood as temporal absence rather than erasure. The paper concludes that, if the block universe is true, a life does not become nothing when it ends: it remains a complete conscious structure, not the tomb of life, but its monument
Block-universe and indeterminacy (iss.20250112)
No full textAccording to the Ontology of Knowledge (OK) reality is unspeakable, it is neither subject to form nor to time (see ref. OdC). The OK does not claim to tell an ontological truth (which would be unspeakable) but to propose an ontological model deepened in comparison to the common sense model. Relativity proposes the model of reality designated as the block-universe which is not in time but which contains time. Relativity is a scientific theory which abstains as much as possible from ontological pretension. In the absence of a passing time, the same questions of necessity and indeterminacy arise for both theories although in different contexts. It is by comparing these two theories that we will try to understand the place left to indeterminacy in the block-universe of Relativity
Block-universe and indeterminacy (iss.20250112)
Full text linkAccording to the Ontology of Knowledge (OK) reality is unspeakable, it is neither subject to form nor to time (see ref. OdC). The OK does not claim to tell an ontological truth (which would be unspeakable) but to propose an ontological model deepened in comparison to the common sense model. Relativity proposes the model of reality designated as the block-universe which is not in time but which contains time. Relativity is a scientific theory which abstains as much as possible from ontological pretension. In the absence of a passing time, the same questions of necessity and indeterminacy arise for both theories although in different contexts. It is by comparing these two theories that we will try to understand the place left to indeterminacy in the block-universe of Relativity
Navigational Agency In A Block Universe
Full text linkThe block universe hypothesis suggests that past, present, and future events all exist together within a single spacetime structure. This view is often taken to deny free will, since the future appears already fixed. This paper proposes a simple alternative understanding of free will using the analogy of a navigation system such as Google Maps. In this model, the structure of spacetime functions like a complete map, while human free will operates as local route selection. Although the future exists within the block universe, individual choices determine the path taken through it. When an agent makes a “wrong” decision, the future is not cancelled; instead, subsequent choices and events redirect the trajectory, much like a navigation system recalculates a route after a wrong turn. Free will is therefore not the power to change the destination of spacetime itself, but the capacity to navigate among available paths within it. This model preserves agency, responsibility, and meaning while remaining compatible with determinism
Time, Fission, Fusion: An Argument against the Block Universe with Endurance
Full text linkMany philosophers believe in the Block Universe containing all objects and events – those that we intuitively call past, present, and future. But some of those who endorse this ontology of time also believe that objects persist by enduring – by being present in their entirety at all moments at which they exist. This combination of views, the Block Universe with Endurance, has survived the initial assault of the problem of temporary intrinsics and of several later objections. But I argue that the Block Universe with Endurance fails to account for a striking feature of our temporal experience and must be rejected in favor of the Block Universe with Exdurance
- …
