Under presentism, there is no hypersurface or light cone, both 4 dimensional concepts. So if you seek information about any of the simultaneous events...
Ditto with presentism, which also has states in between, else it is a series of discreet jumps. Getting down to the quantum level, neither case is inf...
The article never says that there is no motion under anything. The word in fact never appears. I am at the top of the stairs, and 2 seconds later, fac...
Sounds to me like you traveled about a year into the future, just like we all do. Travel into the future seems effortless. It's not doing it that's th...
I know of two premises of SR (one of which predates the theory by several centuries), and a third for GR. None of them are "All things change place as...
Exactly, just as the twin that takes a side trip to some other star and back is not measuring the duration between the two events of departure and ret...
I can measure the distance between myself and that tree over there, and get an indeterminate value because one of the measuring tapes takes a path aro...
A misconception in a post from another thread: This is a feature of your future light cone. That cone, not the present, delimits events which can and ...
I think you have a different concept of presentism than the one typically presented on philosophy sites, which might ask when the twins get back toget...
It is called a preferred reference frame, or at least a preferred foliation (an objective ordering of events). Presentism must assume such a thing, bu...
A lot of what was just posted can be illustrated with the balloon analogy. The universe is like the balloon, with the galaxies painted on it, moving a...
No clock or other device measures objective time, so this doesn't follow. All clocks run slow, and some slower than others, so it is to be expected th...
Apparently I was responding to a different quote, the one just below the one quoted in that response. It is about how time dilation doesn't invalidate...
Well, I buy into neither presentism nor time travel, so I'm trying to imagine how a presentist would envision travel to a time that is no longer exist...
One clock runs slower than the other. Neither of them tracks the pace of the advancement of the present. If there was a device that could do that, you...
Well, they 'rewind' along with the rest of 'history', which isn't even a violation of physics. Only what you (the 'traveler') are doing is a violation...
I presume you ride the 'now' into the future. That's how it worked. To travel to the past, I suppose you'd have to get time to go the other way, and s...
You need presentism of course. Travel isn't possible at all in eternalism, given the usual A-definition of 'travel'. I plan to travel to 2024, but it ...
If there is no distinction between the present and other times, then yes. I'm no nihilist, but rather a relativist, so I think 'to exist' is a relatio...
Best I can explain the general stance is that eternalism gives equal ontological status to all events. What that status is isn't necessarily part of t...
I thought I was pretty explicit in my comment there, so you either have no understanding, or you refuse to accept the way I am using the word. By your...
The fact that 'exist' appears on both sides. 'Exist' means 'presently existing'. 'Hot' means has a hot temperature. Those are useless circular definit...
I dislike calling it B-theory since that name includes growing block view, which is still presentism. I'm an eternalist, not just a B-theorist. All th...
I can agree that I find little meaning to the block universe existing or not. I see no need for distinction between the two. But as for the run of the...
No tensed verbs for starters. The universe cannot be a created object for instance. There is no 'there was no universe, and then later there was'. If ...
That would be two times: The one in which the block is created, and another that is a dimension of the block. Eternalism is not a view of there being ...
An example below: Both "appeared out of nowhere" and "always existed" are A-series references, which of course are incompatible with B series. The blo...
I think a lot depends on you definition of free will, and a stance on theory of mind, and not so much if determinism is true. As for determinism, it d...
As an ontological principle, it demands a preferred frame. Without that, two events cannot be actually simultaneous. TOR does not assert that preferre...
Agree, but theory of relativity is not an ontological principle. The standard interpretation is, but you can't use its premises in a different interpr...
If you insist. Seems to put your presentism on shaky ground then, if relativity contradicts it. It requires you to reject it. Seems harsh. Well, I sta...
Standard interpretation, yes, but not the only one. I think what you're described here is an inconsistent set of assertions. You describe an assertion...
It probably does imply it, but does not assert it. If you interpret it that way (as did Einstein), then it would be logically inconsistent with "There...
Einstein did not assert eternalism in his TOR. I know he held that metaphysical view personally, but the theory was about empirical physics, not metap...
SR has no concept of 'now at the present'. You can add that to it, but it doesn't presume it, nor does it forbid it. In fact it makes no mention of it...
Yes, multiple approaches (I count three), or interpretations of time, but they are no presents, or one present. No view has multiple presents. One is ...
Umm... No. There is nothing that 'passes' under eternalism. Maybe you should read up on it, Thus asserts the presentists, and you seem to be one, desp...
I consider myself to be an eternal being: From the non-presentist viewpoint (the one your title claims to be arguing for), I didn't start to exist, no...
Yes, but only two of your 'nails' (5 & 6) talk about that, and one of them argues for it, not against it. Both presentists and eternalists might give ...
OK, yazata pointed out the same thing. Your reply: No, presentism does not assert a lack of start to time. Maybe it started with the big bang, or mayb...
I've not read all the replies, but wanted to comment on my first impression of the OP: Do you know what presentism is??? These six points all seem to ...
I am totally in the dark as to how the CMB would pick out a specific moment. How does a selection of a frame suggest there being a special moment in i...
That's why I wonder about before-before, which blatantly puts cause well after effect, and in any reference frame. Or at least it does in non-local in...
A model is considered time ordered when it proposes that a cause event tomorrow can effect a measurement taken yesterday in the same place? Perhaps I ...
No frame, preferred or otherwise puts cause before effect in the Bohmian interpretation of before-before results. So I guess I don't understand where ...
BTW, none of this directly relates to presentism, or A-theory as you call it. A preferred frame is not a preferred moment, even if a preferred moment ...
Comments