God and the New Physics by Paul Davies

Author:Paul Davies
Language: eng
Format: azw3, epub
Tags: Science, Religion & Science, General, Religion
ISBN: 9780141962726
Publisher: ePenguin
Published: 0101-01-01T00:00:00+00:00

imaginations of many eminent physicists. The problem was first stated clearly by Ludwig Boltzmann in the late nineteenth century, but the controversy continues today. Some scientists have asserted that there exists a peculiar non-material quality, a time-flux, that is responsible for the arrow of time. They assert that ordinary molecular motions are incapable of imprinting a past-future asymmetry on time, so that this extra ingredient, the time-flux, is essential. Efforts have even been made to trace the origin of the flux to quantum processes or the expansion of the universe. In many ways the belief in a time-flux is closely analogous to — and equally as dubious as — the belief in a life-force.

The mistake is to overlook the fact that time asymmetry, like life, is a holistic concept, and cannot be reduced to the properties of individual molecules. There is no inconsistency between symmetry at the molecular level, and asymmetry on a macroscopic scale. They are simply two different levels of description. One suspects then, that time doesn't really ‘flow’ at all; it's all in the mind.

When we try to pin down the origin of the time-flux in our perceptions we encounter the same tangle of paradox and confusion that greets attempts to understand the self, and it is hard to resist the impression that the two problems are really closely related. It is only in the flowing river of time that we can perceive ourselves. Hofstadter has written of the ‘whirling vortex of self-reference' that produces what we call consciousness and self-awareness, and I strongly believe that it is this very vortex that drives the psychological time-flux. It is for this reason I maintain that the secret of mind will only be solved when we understand the secret of time.

Naïve images of time are to be found everywhere in art and literature: time's arrow, the river of time, time's chariot, time marching on. It is often said that the ‘now’ or present moment of our consciousness is steadily moving forward through time from past to future, so that, eventually, the year 2000 will become ‘now’ and by the same token the instant in which you read this will by now have been passed over and consigned to history. Sometimes the now is considered anchored, and time itself is thought to flow, as a river flows past a bankside observer. These images are inseparable from our feelings of free will. The future seems not yet formed, and thus capable of being shaped by our actions before it arrives. Yet surely all this is rubbish?

Problems instantly crop up when one tries to defend the above imagery. A conversation in 1983 between a physicist and a sceptic might go something like this:

Sceptic: I just came across this quote from Einstein: ‘You have to accept the idea that subjective time with its emphasis on the now has no objective meaning… the distinction between past, present and future is only an illusion, however persistent.’ Surely Einstein must have been off his rocker?

Physicist: Not at all.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.