4 ms·

> There is only one universe ok, except what else just has 1 of them > Time is real ask a photon that

by mbfg 10y ago

Manishearth 10y ago
The whole "time is real" part of the article read like meaningless drivel to me. I have no idea what they were trying to communicate.
- mindcrime 10y ago
  As far as that goes, we arguably don't even know what time is.
  - Manishearth 10y ago
    That can be said of just about anything in physics.
    - mindcrime 10y ago
      Good point!
- sgt101 10y ago
  That the block universe model is just that : a model which is useful for solving problems, not a description of reality. This is a big problem for physics; confusing the modelling for truthiness. If you go for it all the way eventually you end up in a room with very, very think wallpaper engaging Max Telmark in a shouted conversation. This is part of the maths as selectively reflective of reality conversation.
  - Manishearth 10y ago
    > This is a big problem for physics; confusing the modelling for truthiness I'm pretty sure it isn't ; ever since quantum mechanics physicists have been very good at separating the two. Popsci, not so much, but the actual physics is very clear about it being a model.
    - sgt101 10y ago
      Ok - all that is needed is for physicists to do interviews where they say "it's only an interpretation of part of a model for solving problems after all" repeatedly when asked about time in the universe, holographic principles or many universes. But this is not what a lot of physicists seem to do.
      - Manishearth 10y ago
        Like I said, "popsci, not so much". It's pretty implicit when physicists talk about it with each other -- they understand how to keep it separate, but they won't caveat everything they say. This means that they may keep it implicit when talking in interviews, too. And popular science reporting just loves to say things like "the universe is a hologram!!!" so they are happy to spin it that way. It's not like this lack of context-sensitive speech is specific to physicists either. Programmers do it all the time too.

> There is only one universe ok, except what else just has 1 of them > Time is real ask a photon that

by mbfg 10y ago

> There is only one universe ok, except what else just has 1 of them > Time is real ask a photon that

The whole "time is real" part of the article read like meaningless drivel to me. I have no idea what they were trying to communicate.

mindcrime 10y ago
As far as that goes, we arguably don't even know what time is.
- Manishearth 10y ago
  That can be said of just about anything in physics.
  - mindcrime 10y ago
    Good point!
sgt101 10y ago
That the block universe model is just that : a model which is useful for solving problems, not a description of reality. This is a big problem for physics; confusing the modelling for truthiness. If you go for it all the way eventually you end up in a room with very, very think wallpaper engaging Max Telmark in a shouted conversation. This is part of the maths as selectively reflective of reality conversation.
- Manishearth 10y ago
  > This is a big problem for physics; confusing the modelling for truthiness I'm pretty sure it isn't ; ever since quantum mechanics physicists have been very good at separating the two. Popsci, not so much, but the actual physics is very clear about it being a model.
  - sgt101 10y ago
    Ok - all that is needed is for physicists to do interviews where they say "it's only an interpretation of part of a model for solving problems after all" repeatedly when asked about time in the universe, holographic principles or many universes. But this is not what a lot of physicists seem to do.
    - Manishearth 10y ago
      Like I said, "popsci, not so much". It's pretty implicit when physicists talk about it with each other -- they understand how to keep it separate, but they won't caveat everything they say. This means that they may keep it implicit when talking in interviews, too. And popular science reporting just loves to say things like "the universe is a hologram!!!" so they are happy to spin it that way. It's not like this lack of context-sensitive speech is specific to physicists either. Programmers do it all the time too.