One Answer

  1. Offhand, the view is affectedgrowing block in temporal philosophy, block-universe, the idea of the universe as a block growing into eternity. In this case, it is not clear whether there is a single line of cutting moments, a single time line, or an infinite number of them, and even branching. The same applies to eternalism (the block has already grown, let's say, from eternity in the past to eternity in the future, or rather, it is considered as a static object). I find both concepts compatible, by the way, and just ways to reason about time relative to the universe.

    But the very understanding of simultaneity in physics, at least in this case, concerns purely methods of detecting it, tied to the maximum speed (light) and the effects of time dilation when approaching the speed of light. That is, what, including the sequence of receiving signals, can be detected, is identified with reality. This identification of the knowable (detectable) and the existent infects the whole of quantum mechanics, at least the most popular, in sum, interpretations of it. Take the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, from the fact that it is impossible to accurately determine the 2 related parameters of a particle, the absence of accuracy itself in its objective meaning is deduced. Why then from the unreachability of the problem 3 bodies does not display the absence of gravity for 3 or more bodies?
    One of the illustrations of relativity of simultaneity:

    Einstein illustrated his point with another thought experiment. Imagine that an observer is standing next to the railway again and a train is rushing past him. At the moment when the central point of the train passes by the observer, lightning strikes at each end of the train. Since lightning strikes at the same distance from the observer, their light hits his eyes at the same time. It's fair to say that lightning strikes simultaneously.
    Meanwhile, exactly in the center of the train sits another observer. From his point of view, the light from two lightning strikes travels the same distance and the speed of light will be the same in any direction. But since the train is moving, the light coming from the rear lightning must travel a greater distance, so it gets to the observer a few moments later than the light from the beginning. Since the light pulses arrive at different times, we can conclude that lightning strikes are not simultaneous-one occurs faster.

    What really happens in this case? �2 lightning bolts hit at the same time. An observer from the platform can notice this, because he and 2 lightning bolts are in the same inertial frame of reference. The observer in the center of the train will first receive light from lightning ahead of the train, and only then-from behind. He doesn't even have to make a conclusion about the non – simultaneity of lightning, as opposed to receiving signals from these lightning bolts, he can make the same calculations, in any case, take into account that his train is moving. As it is not necessary when observing a “broken spoon” in a glass to conclude that the spoon is bifurcated at the point of contact of 2 media.

    That is, the possibility of simultaneous detection of phenomena is identified with the simultaneity of the phenomena themselves.

Leave a Reply

Categories