|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Oct 18, 2018 15:44:40 GMT
I agree with Arlon on this more or less. Hawking may have been brilliant in his field, at least within the context of the status quo approach to it, but he said a lot of stupid shit whenever he stepped out of his field. I agree with his conclusion about the existence of God, but his reasoning for it, at least as explained above, is poor. And the idea of "backwards" time travel is completely incoherent. It might work per how physics standardly deals with time in equations, but his physics standardly deals with time in equations isn't identical to what time is ontologically. And what time is ontologically--simply the ontological process of change or motion, makes it incoherent that we could travel back in time. I wouldn't get too fixated on your axioms and use them to declare what is coherent or incoherent. The history of science shows that any of them are open to question. For example classical physicists (including Newton) thought of time as an independent attribute of reality (unaffected by space or motion) and space as something that obeyed Euclidean geometry. Einstein's theories of relativity showed that those views are untenable. It's obvious what time is, though. That makes the idea of backwards time travel incoherent. I don't think it's something we need to pretend might be coherent out of some sort of feigned modesty or whatever. |
|
