In this part of my conversation with ChatGPT, I had a few questions all designed to get to the bottom of whether special relativity necessarily entails eternalism, and if not, why. This is relevant to whether the A or B theory of time is true which, in turn, is relevant to whether the Kalam Cosmological Argument is sound.
Sam: Is eternalism or presentism true?
ChatGPT: Eternalism and presentism are two philosophical positions regarding the nature of time. Eternalism is the idea that the past, present, and future all exist in a fixed and unchanging four-dimensional space-time. According to eternalism, the past and future are just as real as the present, and the events that happen in them are as real as the events that happen now. It's also known as the block universe theory.
Presentism, on the other hand, is the idea that only the present exists, and the past and future are not real. According to presentism, the past and future are mere potentialities that are yet to be realized.
Both eternalism and presentism are philosophical positions and there is no scientific evidence to support either of them. The nature of time is a complex and unresolved question in physics and philosophy, and there is ongoing debate and research on the topic.
In physics, the theory of special relativity and the theory of general relativity suggest that time is relative, and that it can be affected by motion and gravity, but it does not provide a definite answer for the question of eternalism and presentism.
In summary, eternalism and presentism are two philosophical positions regarding the nature of time, and there is no scientific evidence to support either of them. The nature of time is a complex and unresolved question in physics and philosophy.
Sam: If special and general relativity do not imply eternalism, why do most physicists subscribe to eternalism?
ChatGPT: The theory of special relativity and the theory of general relativity, as they are currently understood, do not imply eternalism or presentism. They describe the behavior of space-time and gravity and do not address the question of whether the past, present and future are real or only potentialities.
However, many physicists find eternalism to be a more intuitive and consistent interpretation of the mathematical formalism of these theories. The mathematical models of special relativity and general relativity describe a four-dimensional space-time in which the past, present, and future are all equally real and exist in a fixed and unchanging manner. This idea is consistent with the concept of the block universe theory, which is closely related to eternalism.
Additionally, many philosophers and scientists have also argued that eternalism is a more parsimonious explanation of the mathematical formalism of these theories, in the sense that it does not require any additional assumptions or entities. It's worth noting that the question of whether eternalism or presentism is true is a matter of ongoing debate and research in the field of philosophy of science and physics. Some philosophers and scientists have argued that presentism can be a consistent interpretation of the mathematical formalism of special and general relativity and that eternalism is not the only interpretation of these theories.
In summary, while the theories of special relativity and general relativity do not imply eternalism or presentism, many physicists find eternalism to be a more intuitive and consistent interpretation of the mathematical formalism of these theories, and some philosophers and scientists argue that presentism can also be a consistent interpretation of the mathematical formalism of these theories. The question of whether eternalism or presentism is true is a matter of ongoing debate and research in the field of philosophy of science and physics.
Sam: How can presentism be true if there is no absolute simultaneity?
ChatGPT: Presentism holds that only the present exists, and the past and future are not real. This view has been challenged by the theory of special relativity, which states that there is no absolute simultaneity, meaning that different observers will not necessarily agree on the timing of events that are happening in different locations.
This means that it is not possible to define an objective present moment that is the same for all observers, as the concept of "now" is relative to the observer. Some philosophers argue that this means that presentism is not a consistent interpretation of the theory of special relativity.
However, other philosophers argue that presentism can be reconciled with the theory of special relativity by proposing that the present is the set of events that are causally connected to the observer. This idea is called the "growing block universe" theory. This theory holds that the present is defined as the set of events that are causally connected to the observer, and the past and future are defined as the set of events that are not causally connected to the observer.
In summary, presentism holds that only the present exists, and the past and future are not real, but this view has been challenged by the theory of special relativity, which states that there is no absolute simultaneity, making it hard to define an objective present moment that is the same for all observers. However, some philosophers argue that presentism can be reconciled with the theory of special relativity by proposing that the present is the set of events that are causally connected to the observer, which is known as the "growing block universe" theory.
No comments:
Post a Comment