What if Time is an illusion?

[andread]

I don't think so.
As a physicist, Nima's physics is baseball. His philosophy, as all philosophy, is about keeping the ball away from the bat.

Some information from Wikipedia:

Arkani-Hamed is now on the faculty at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey.[2] He was formerly a professor at Harvard University and the University of California, Berkeley.

In July 2012, he was an inaugural awardee of the Fundamental Physics Prize, the creation of physicist and internet entrepreneur, Yuri Milner.[8] He has previously won the Sackler Prize from Tel Aviv University in 2008, the Gribov Medal from the European Physical Society in 2003, and the INFN-Pisa Gamberini prize in 1997. He was awarded the Packard and Sloan Fellowship in 2000

Looks like his philosophy is doing quite all right.
Now, care to explain what your quite trenchant opinion is based on?

As to the topic, following a page on Wikipedia I found an interesting generic article on medium.com:

https://medium.com/the-physics-arxi...w-time-emerges-from-entanglement-d5d3dc850933

If I understand it correctly it's not that time does not exist, but it can be explained in terms of other factors. A bit like a magnetic field can be explained in terms of the electric field

 

[StarDust9182]

Ten fingers => we use a decimal number system

The sun rises each day, tides cycle each month, seasons repeat each year => we 'use' time

Environment + intuition / perception + mind capacity => the models we use

--

An analogy:

It's like learning to trade the wrong way, based on naive perception, then having to spend much effort undoing the 'wrong' thinking in pursuit of a better model that more accurately reflects how things really are.

I think tha the babylonians used base 60 - it is hard to imagine the size of their hands! The truth is out there ( and will set you free).

 

[stu]

Now, care to explain what your quite trenchant opinion is based on?

erm...first, your links confirm Nyman's physics not his philosophy and it's physics, not philosophy, that holds; which is my point.

Philosophy: A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing. Ambrose Bierce

Hence my baseball comment.
Hope that clarifies.

 

[andread]

erm...first, your links confirm Nyman's physics not his philosophy and it's physics, not philosophy, that holds; which is my point.

Philosophy: A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing. Ambrose Bierce

Hence my baseball comment.
Hope that clarifies.

Not really, no. Actually your difference between physics and philosophy is sort of making everything more confusing, as I'm starting to think I might have misunderstood. Let's try to be more explicit.
The implication of your comments is that when Nima Arkani-Hamed talks about physics he shouldn't be listened to. I posted those quotes (didn't mean to post any link) to show that quite a few knowledgeable people disagree.
So I'm not sure if I understood what you said, but when this guy talks I prefer to listen. I find it difficult to follow that video, though. I must be too stupid.

 

[stu]

The implication of your comments is that when Nima Arkani-Hamed talks about physics he shouldn't be listened to.

I really don't understand how you come to that. Surely it's clear I'm suggesting it's the philosophical propositions being derived here which I'm saying don't follow through with the science he confirms.

I too prefer to listen to Nima. He is a brilliant physicist. All I suggest is the philosophical approach which broadly speaking proposes space-time is deterministic not fundamental, isn't borne out in (Nima's) physics.

Nima offers a more legitimate question than saying "space-time must go" or "time is an illusion" in that it necessary to see the physics of the infinitely large coalescing with the physics of the infinitely small, in the way Einstein does with Newton.

 

[andread]

I really don't understand how you come to that.

A couple of things, like your definition of his physics as baseball. That didn't sound very respectful. It's your second post that got me thinking that maybe I interpreted it the wrong way

Surely it's clear I'm suggesting it's the philosophical propositions being derived here which I'm saying don't follow through with the science he confirms.

I too prefer to listen to Nima. He is a brilliant physicist. All I suggest is the philosophical approach which broadly speaking proposes space-time is deterministic not fundamental, isn't borne out in (Nima's) physics.

Okay, I'm starting to understand what you mean, but I'm missing something. I think what you mean by philosophy is what usually is referred to as theoretical physics
He's a physicist, how can you say his propositions are philosophical? My quantum mechanics is a bit rusty so I'm definitely not going to discuss the theory, but his job should be exactly to build propositions that follow through with science, as theoretical as they can be. There must be something in what he says that makes sense.

Sometimes I really regret I didn't study physics. I read quantum mechanics is not so difficult though

 

[stu]

andread

My comment about baseball was analogous. There's nothing disrespectful at all about being compared to baseball in my view. The basic point being it (physics) is the real thing where ball meets bat.

I meant philosophy in terms of a misunderstanding, which becomes, or almost becomes, a belief not based on the facts it refers to.
Theoretical physics is not that.

Scientific indications or pointers produced from theoretical physics can shoot off into philosophical assumptions which is not what I would accuse Nima specifically of doing from that video, but is what nitro has done with his "space-time / time is an illusion" malarkey.

I think you have gotten the wrong end of the stick by what I said. Apologies for not being more clear.

 

[andread]

Scientific indications or pointers produced from theoretical physics can shoot off into philosophical assumptions which is not what I would accuse Nima specifically of doing from that video, but is what nitro has done with his "space-time / time is an illusion" malarkey.

Ah, I see. I think
No, it wasn't clear, sorry. At least for me.