Reconciling the Concept of Time Flow with the Static Block Universe

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

In this project I aim to investigate whether advocates of the static block universe, in which all of time exists equally with no defined present moment or moving parts, must be committed to a flowless picture or whether it is possible to reconcile the two viewpoints by reinterpreting what flow is. This research will contribute to our understanding of how physical theories relate to time and how they can encapsulate all its properties. Current literature (Arthur, 2019) (Savitt, Myrvold, & Joy, 2009) (Dieks, 2006) proposes a concept of static flow based on localised occurrences of events and an investigation into how they do this and where they fail will reveal the challenges facing such an attempt. I will consider whether what they describe is truly flow and what implications it has for our interpretations of theories in the physical world. The structure of the block universe will be affected by the picture of flow built into it and what theoretical concepts it relies on.This project would aim to look at three main areas to build a picture of flow.Part A: Concepts of FlowMy first aim will be to look at identifying the essential features of flow and show how a static version, without a moving present moment, can be formulated.1.What properties must flow possess?Dynamic flow advocates have defined essential properties such as a moving present (incoherent due to the infinite regress argument given above) and a rate of flow (Price, 2009), as well as direction and continuity. I will examine Russell's (1903) "at-at" theory of motion being simply occupying different states at different times and Maudlin's (2002) view of passage as an intrinsic asymmetry in spacetime. Having done this I can also assess which of these properties contradict a static version of flow.Part B: Flow in Modern PhysicsRichard Arthur's recent book puts forward arguments for the localized passage of time following proper time along a worldline, the path an object traces out in spacetime. A full assessment of how successful Arthur's work is can be made based on the key properties identified in the first stage of the project. Particular projects will include:1.How can Arthur's analysis be extended to non-inertial reference frames in special relativity?Arthur lays out a picture of flow in special relativity but only considers inertial frames. Extending this to accelerating frames will provide insight into how his formulation holds against modern physics and what flow is like in different situations. Specifically, I will consider constantly accelerating Rindler Coordinates which can help to model phenomena such as black holes. This can then also be extended to general relativity. 2.Does a localised, rather than universal, notion of flow still have the features we require of it?Much of our common sense understanding requires a universal moment progressing uniformly, whether Arthur's localised version can satisfy these requirements needs full consideration.Part C: Physical FlowFollowing this examination, it becomes apparent that many of our notions of time depend on the physical structures of matter in the universe. This has strong implications for how time flow can be understood.1.How do different understandings of relativity theory effect the idea of flow?Harvey Brown (2005) drew the distinction between understanding the consequences of relativity as an effect of the geometrical structure of spacetime and as an effect of dynamic laws governing forces on objects and processes. I wish to consider whether different interpretations of the postulates of relativity effect our understanding of flow.2.What features must a process have to be able to measure time and how can flow be understood in systems without these features?Certain features are necessary to define a process as timekeeping, are these features all necessary and how can we understand flow without one or more of them?