Originally posted by twhitehead
Black beetle asked me to try and put my views in writing. Here goes:
Try to imagine the current point in time as a static state. From here, there is the past and the future. Based on the state of the present, we can calculate using the laws of physics both the past and the future.
Many of the laws of physics are rather ambiguous as to the arrow of tim ...[text shortened]... the other way. It does go both ways, but the bias is so strong that it seems to only go one way.
Well, I don’t believe in the flow of time either, however I have some remarks on your theory: if we accept that time is split into past, present and future, the conception of time loses its coherence because if "the past" is considered to produce "the present" and "the future", the latter two parts would be already included in the past and could not be properly said to have a separate being. On the other hand, if the present and the future are separate from the past, we are forced to assume that their self-contained existence leaves them uncaused, independent and without reference to the past -and this is absurd. Also, since the notions of present and future imply a relation to the past, we have another self-contradiction. So I conclude that neither the present nor the future exist, dew to the fact that neither identity with nor difference from the past is sufficient to establish the reality of the present and future.
However, although I deny the independent existence of time, I admit the unmediated experience of change is factual; unfortunately I cannot find a coherent way of expressing this experience in terms of the seeming flow of an independent substratum to reality. Since I reject the absolute existence of time and not the existence of the various temporal phenomena, I evaluate as false the hypothesis that time, phenomena and their mutual dependence are independent entities. All in all, since time is flux-in-phenomena and phenomena are merely phenomena-in-flux, time and the things that change are essentially one. Therefore methinks the constant change of things is the sole change over time;
Edit: “If we throw away… …which way it will go.”
Since a non-stationary time cannot be experienced and a stationary time which can be experienced does not exist, one can perceive time solely if it is experienced. So I see time as a product of our collective subjectivity that we invented for our convenience, and as such it exists solely in dependence to our own mind.
However, since the sole thing that takes place for sure is the constant change of the location of the photon in the context of the double-slit experiment, we should be able to spot the exact slit that the photon went through when we observe it. Therefore, even if we assume that the experiment is conducted during a fully observable by us condition of the photon that remain constant over time although it changes throughout space, the fact is that we still have no idea what the exact nature of the quantum particle is