A Question about Time Travelling

[rwenzori]

One can claim that quantum mechanics demonstrates that, at the quantum level, determinism is false and some form of indeterminism is true and this does not imply that it is random. In fact, at best one can claim quantum mechanics is indeterministic and NOT random in any ontologically interesting manner.

Since it is indeterminate and indeterminable, you cannot make any claim, as you can neither find out nor know.

Stop trying to panelbeat quantum mechanics into your beloved classical framework.

 

[RiaX]

Nova had a very good documentry on this concept.

Fabric of the comos, part 2 delt with this concept of time we are discussing now. Fantastic documentry I would download it if you interested.

 

[Techne]

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblo...imeless-a-radical-theory-weekend-feature.html

Interesting research isn't it? Also interesting "times" we live in ...

 

[zippy]

Interesting research isn't it? Also interesting "times" we live in ...

Everyone lives in interesting times. It's interesting while it's happening. Tomorrow it's old news and no longer interesting. Which probably says why no one really wants to go back

 

[RiaX]

One must not forget it depends which time we speak of, real time or the mathematical concept of imaginary time

 

[zippy]

One must not forget it depends which time we speak of, real time or the mathematical concept of imaginary time

One must also not forget that the purpose of science is to describe reality.

 

[RiaX]

One must also not forget that the purpose of science is to describe reality.

Can you truely describe 'reality' from what we perceive? our ears cant hear everything our eyes cannot see all forms of light. So we must consider, what reality is to us

 

[Techne]

Can you truely describe 'reality' from what we perceive? our ears cant hear everything our eyes cannot see all forms of light. So we must consider, what reality is to us

Either it is possible to capture some or all of the very essence or nature of reality or it is not.

If it is not then science is just made up stuff, like fairies, useful fairies. We are ontologically and epistemologically screwed if you want to get technical.

If it is possible then we have to at least consider the possibility that some of our attempts to understand reality have succeeded and that we have to some extent grasped some of the very nature or essence of reality. In this case it becomes an epistemological problem and not an ontological problem.

 

[RiaX]

Its not possible with our limited sense of the world. Thats why we develop expensive machines to see and calculate what we cannot so it does fit in the same class as fairies

 

[Techne]

Its not possible with our limited sense of the world. Thats why we develop expensive machines to see and calculate what we cannot so it does fit in the same class as fairies

So your answer is number 2? I.e. we are at least able to capture some of the very essence or nature of reality with our unaided intellect and even more by using our intellect to design gadgets to help us get more sensual data for our intellects to analyse?

 

[RiaX]

Yes, just like how we cannot see infrared light we developed cameras to show use the presence and interpret the light for us. Though we will never know the "true colour" of infrared as our eyes cannot see it so the camera shows the light in blue green yellow red depending in the intensity

 

[Swa]

What is true color?

 

[RiaX]

dont know. Depends on the eye thats percieving the information hence why i put it in quotation marks