[Continuation] Why James Webb Telescope rewrites/doesn't the laws of Physics/Redshifts (2) - Page 35

Mike Helland · Yesterday, 10:05 PM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Which means that your universe isn't homogeneous.

That should have consequences. Have you tried to figure out what they would be?

Yeah. But haven't completely.

The gist is that the manifold implied by the metric is really only good for one observer at r=0 and t=0.

And supposedly that isn't a "habitable" place.

I'm not sure why that is, unless you're making the perfect fluid assumption to get there.

But here's the thing... our current place in spacetime isn't habitable. That's congruent with our experience of physical reality. Something keeps propelling us into the future. In my metric, only at r=0 is the present, which is closer to the future than the other points. It should feel the "arrow of time" more sharply than other events in spacetime.

The idea is that the reality we observe isn't universe-shaped. The reality we observe is shaped like a 4D light cone. We live on the tip.

steenkh · Yesterday, 10:42 PM

Originally Posted by Mike Helland

Something keeps propelling us into the future.

Yes, it’s called thermodynamics.

Roboramma · Yesterday, 11:18 PM

Originally Posted by steenkh

Yes, it’s called thermodynamics.

It's a consequence of thermodynamics that if you start with a low entropy state it will evolve toward a higher entropy state. But I don't think that justifies the statement that thermodynamics is propelling us toward the future.

That's an odd metaphysical claim whose meaning I can't even really parse here.

Yesterday, 10:05 PM	#1361
Mike Helland Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2020 Posts: 4,240	Originally Posted by Ziggurat Which means that your universe isn't homogeneous. That should have consequences. Have you tried to figure out what they would be? Yeah. But haven't completely. The gist is that the manifold implied by the metric is really only good for one observer at r=0 and t=0. And supposedly that isn't a "habitable" place. I'm not sure why that is, unless you're making the perfect fluid assumption to get there. But here's the thing... our current place in spacetime isn't habitable. That's congruent with our experience of physical reality. Something keeps propelling us into the future. In my metric, only at r=0 is the present, which is closer to the future than the other points. It should feel the "arrow of time" more sharply than other events in spacetime. The idea is that the reality we observe isn't universe-shaped. The reality we observe is shaped like a 4D light cone. We live on the tip.
	__________________ I'm not entirely sure what I'm talking about, but based on what little I know, the above seemed like a reasonable thing to say. Thank you in advance for any corrections.

Yesterday, 10:42 PM	#1362
steenkh Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Denmark Posts: 7,122	Originally Posted by Mike Helland Something keeps propelling us into the future. Yes, it’s called thermodynamics.
	__________________ Steen -- Jack of all trades - master of none!

Yesterday, 11:18 PM	#1363
Roboramma Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shanghai Posts: 15,490	Originally Posted by steenkh Yes, it’s called thermodynamics. It's a consequence of thermodynamics that if you start with a low entropy state it will evolve toward a higher entropy state. But I don't think that justifies the statement that thermodynamics is propelling us toward the future. That's an odd metaphysical claim whose meaning I can't even really parse here.
	__________________ "... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together." Isaac Asimov