4 ms·

No, and Yes, because there is no "back in time", nor "forward in time". Time is just a useful illusion we create to navigate space. This idea is set up on a fa

No, and Yes, because there is no "back in time", nor "forward in time". Time is just a useful illusion we create to navigate space. This idea is set up on a false premise. But I was extremely happy to read; "There’s no such thing as wave-particle duality" "Light only ever travels as a wave". Everything is only fundamentally a wave. Please take a look at "The end of time : the next revolution in physics" by Julian Barbour. Or here are some YouTube videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K49rmobsPcY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K49rmobsPcY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoTeGW2csPk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoTeGW2csPk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ogiQ2E6n0U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ogiQ2E6n0U

gitfan86 2y ago
This seems like the most likely answer to the Fermi paradox. Our assumptions about time and space are wrong. If we understood them we wouldn't be looking this way
meindnoch 2y ago
I've watched the videos, but they were just ramblings without any physical or mathematical substance.
- FollowingTheDao 2y ago
  This is a depressing comment to me. Solving this problem is not just about "Math" and he explained it in the videos. The current math is based on a flawed premise, that time continues when there is no movement or change.
  - meindnoch 2y ago
    Ok, I'll bite. Name a single phenomena that behaves differently in this "timeless" model of reality. Surely, if the concept of time is such a flawed premise, there must be some way in which a timeless model produces better results in describing our reality.
    - FollowingTheDao 2y ago
      I do not think you watched the videos, because this is directly addressed. Julian says Newtonian physics is fine but it has a limit. Nothing "behaves differently" in this timeless model, because nothing changes but our perception. What would change though is the math. Getting rid of time" in quantum equations would fundamentally change the way quantum mechanics is formulated, potentially requiring a complete rethinking of the theory, as it would involve removing the time variable from the Schrödinger equation. See: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-some-physicists-want-to-get-rid-of-time/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-some-physicis...

gitfan86 2y ago

This seems like the most likely answer to the Fermi paradox. Our assumptions about time and space are wrong. If we understood them we wouldn't be looking this way

meindnoch 2y ago

I've watched the videos, but they were just ramblings without any physical or mathematical substance.

FollowingTheDao 2y ago
This is a depressing comment to me. Solving this problem is not just about "Math" and he explained it in the videos. The current math is based on a flawed premise, that time continues when there is no movement or change.
- meindnoch 2y ago
  Ok, I'll bite. Name a single phenomena that behaves differently in this "timeless" model of reality. Surely, if the concept of time is such a flawed premise, there must be some way in which a timeless model produces better results in describing our reality.
  - FollowingTheDao 2y ago
    I do not think you watched the videos, because this is directly addressed. Julian says Newtonian physics is fine but it has a limit. Nothing "behaves differently" in this timeless model, because nothing changes but our perception. What would change though is the math. Getting rid of time" in quantum equations would fundamentally change the way quantum mechanics is formulated, potentially requiring a complete rethinking of the theory, as it would involve removing the time variable from the Schrödinger equation. See: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-some-physicists-want-to-get-rid-of-time/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-some-physicis...