Registered: Dec 2003
Julian Barbour has popularized the idea that "change is primary, time is something we deduce from it" which is very similar to your suggestion. Time is something that emerges.
Where my personal views differ from what you said is how time and space are related. It is not that space is first, then comes time, but rather a phenomenon comes first, and space and time are both consequences that emerge from this.
I'll try to explain, starting with what can be considered to be a
strictly materialist view of the universe:
Any arrangement of matter can be considered to be processing
instructions for a computation device.
Let's talk about the computation device. If the matter is the
instruction for a computation device, what is the computation device
itself? It can't be matter.
So we'll call it... oh what the hell, God. We'll call it God. Why not?
If anyone can think of a better name (that not non-linear algorythm in
the sky?) I'd like to hear it but for right now I hope everyone
reading this can be intelligent enough to realize that "God" is simply
meant to be the computing device by which matter arranges itself.
It's obvious to see that there is some correlation between the
arrangement of the matter before the computation and the arrangement
of the matter after the computation. In fact, it is so strong that we
might begin to think that the arrangement of the matter before and
after the computation is dependent on each other to the degree that
the before may be considered an instruction... a parameter of sorts.
But, this is merely a product of our imagination. What is the saying?
"Coincidence does not imply causality"?
I want it to be clear that the arrangements of matter are *not*
instructions, parameters, or in any way something used in the actual
computation. The arrangements of matter are *soley* the product of the
Like the computation device, the computation's parameters are not
physically existing things like arrangements of matter. For fun
consider that God's parameters are the properties of angels.
So, we have a few different things here, the computation device (God)
its parameters (angels) and its results (information, whose analysis
yields all that physically exists, arrangements of matter, space, and
time). The resulting information, because it is what physically
exists, can be considered synonamous with "a phenomon".
A quick aside is that this view of matter, existing within the
analysis of phenomena seems to be the most consistent view of matter
with quantum mechanics (it even explains the uncertainty principle and
wave-particle duality from the looks of it).
More details here:
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged