'The Far Horizons of Time' just published by De Gruyter Open

[shunyadragon]

Friends of science, and other questionable characters

This recommended reading available free on line.

Source: http://phys.org/wire-news/190118215/from-quantum-through-the-big-bang-to-infinity-how-to-explain.html

As Augustine of Hippo, expressed in the 4th century: What, then, is time? If no one asks me, I know; if I wish to explain to him who asks, I know not. Explaining time can be an onerous task, and, albeit fascinating, it is elusive. In particular, any attempt to define it inherently proves futile as it invariably involves time itself, leading to circular definitions.

H. Chris Ransford, the author of 'The Far Horizons of Time' just published by De Gruyter Open, takes up the challenge, trying to unmask this abiding conundrum - and explores time within the context of the apparent contradictions that seem to bedevil all attempts to come up with a coherent picture of time definition. His main contention is that the deeper role of mathematics in the way it is applied to, and reflects, real-world reality, must be resolved first.

Assuming no prior, specialist knowledge by the reader, the book raises specific, hitherto overlooked questions about how time works, such as how and why anyone can be made to be, at a given instant, simultaneous with events that are actually days apart. It examines also the critical issues in the physics of time or at its periphery, which still elude full explanation, such as delayed choice experiments, the brain's perception of time during saccadic masking, and more. The author suggests that these phenomena can only exist because they ultimately obey applicable mathematics, thereby agreeing with an increasingly common view that the universe and everything within it, including the mind, is ultimately mathematical structure.

© Copyright Original Source

I may post some stuff from this book.

[JimL]

Friends of science, and other questionable characters

This recommended reading available free on line.

Source: http://phys.org/wire-news/190118215/from-quantum-through-the-big-bang-to-infinity-how-to-explain.html

As Augustine of Hippo, expressed in the 4th century: What, then, is time? If no one asks me, I know; if I wish to explain to him who asks, I know not. Explaining time can be an onerous task, and, albeit fascinating, it is elusive. In particular, any attempt to define it inherently proves futile as it invariably involves time itself, leading to circular definitions.

H. Chris Ransford, the author of 'The Far Horizons of Time' just published by De Gruyter Open, takes up the challenge, trying to unmask this abiding conundrum - and explores time within the context of the apparent contradictions that seem to bedevil all attempts to come up with a coherent picture of time definition. His main contention is that the deeper role of mathematics in the way it is applied to, and reflects, real-world reality, must be resolved first.

Assuming no prior, specialist knowledge by the reader, the book raises specific, hitherto overlooked questions about how time works, such as how and why anyone can be made to be, at a given instant, simultaneous with events that are actually days apart. It examines also the critical issues in the physics of time or at its periphery, which still elude full explanation, such as delayed choice experiments, the brain's perception of time during saccadic masking, and more. The author suggests that these phenomena can only exist because they ultimately obey applicable mathematics, thereby agreeing with an increasingly common view that the universe and everything within it, including the mind, is ultimately mathematical structure.

© Copyright Original Source

I may post some stuff from this book.

The question I have about this is "Do the phenomena obey the math, or are they the math? It seems most physicists believe that the universe is described by math, but according to a new hypotheses the fundamental nature of the universe is math itself. The latter is an intriguing idea, but it seems to me that it makes of existence naught but a mathematical illusion. I don't fully understand it, and so I am still in the former camp, believing that objects have a reality in their own right. Thanks for the tip on the book though, sounds like a good read.

[Boxing Pythagoras]

Friends of science, and other questionable characters

This recommended reading available free on line.

http://phys.org/wire-news/190118215/...o-explain.html

I may post some stuff from this book.

Interesting. Looks right up my alley, considering my fascination with the philosophy and physics behind Time. Thanks for sharing!

[rwatts]

Friends of science, and other questionable characters

This recommended reading available free on line.

Source: http://phys.org/wire-news/190118215/from-quantum-through-the-big-bang-to-infinity-how-to-explain.html

As Augustine of Hippo, expressed in the 4th century: What, then, is time? If no one asks me, I know; if I wish to explain to him who asks, I know not. Explaining time can be an onerous task, and, albeit fascinating, it is elusive. In particular, any attempt to define it inherently proves futile as it invariably involves time itself, leading to circular definitions.

H. Chris Ransford, the author of 'The Far Horizons of Time' just published by De Gruyter Open, takes up the challenge, trying to unmask this abiding conundrum - and explores time within the context of the apparent contradictions that seem to bedevil all attempts to come up with a coherent picture of time definition. His main contention is that the deeper role of mathematics in the way it is applied to, and reflects, real-world reality, must be resolved first.

Assuming no prior, specialist knowledge by the reader, the book raises specific, hitherto overlooked questions about how time works, such as how and why anyone can be made to be, at a given instant, simultaneous with events that are actually days apart. It examines also the critical issues in the physics of time or at its periphery, which still elude full explanation, such as delayed choice experiments, the brain's perception of time during saccadic masking, and more. The author suggests that these phenomena can only exist because they ultimately obey applicable mathematics, thereby agreeing with an increasingly common view that the universe and everything within it, including the mind, is ultimately mathematical structure.

© Copyright Original Source

I may post some stuff from this book.

Time.

Bugga and poop.

I don't think that it really exists within the fabric of the universe either. But how do we do without it?