Written by Joseph Samper Finberg

Abstract

”Quid est enim tempus? Quis hoc facile breviterque explicaverit? ” Augustine of Hippo 1623 years ago wrote, to this day it speaks to the enigmatic and elusive nature of time, a concept that has puzzled philosophers and physicists for centuries. In this article, we will examine the concept of time through the lens of Martin Heidegger’s philosophy, which proposes that time is closely tied to human consciousness and our recognition of our own finitude as conscious beings. However, we will also argue that non-physicalist temporal epistemologies, which do not take into account the material world, fail to fully grasp the true nature of time. Instead, we will suggest that there is a physical concept of time, t, that exists independently of the narratives we use to give meaning and structure to our lives. By acknowledging the limits of a physicalist understanding of time, we can more fully appreciate the multifaceted nature of this elusive and enigmatic concept.

Introduction

On a visit to Gothenburg in early November of 2020 in an attempt to avoid the tumultuous election back in the United States, a friend and I happened to find a movie theatre where we could pay 120 Kronas¹ per person to watch Christopher Nolan’s Tenet in a private theater.² The essential plot of the movie involved a terrifying new technology. Scientists had engineered a way to reverse the entropy of an object and cause it to move backwards in time. Eventually, the plot required not just objects, but also humans to be subjected to this ”inversion” process. Amusing to some physicists like myself was of course the presence of ”red” and ”blue” chambers representing the inversion, which is a reference to Maxwell’s daemon.³

The proposed technology presented in Tenet is effectively movie magic and falls philosophically apart in two spots. Firstly, for the reversal of entropy to completely equal the time reversal of an object, the total entropy of everything around it would need to also be reversed. So, if a bullet were to be ”inverted” and revert from a wall in which it is embedded back into the weapon from which it was fired, then all of the air molecules around it would also need to have their entropy inverted to the point where they return to their original state prior to the weapon firing. Secondly, the issue is further complicated with consciousness when people are being inverted in the film. This fails to account for the fact that an inversion of a person would also invert their brain chemistry’s entropy. This is leading to the prima facie conclusion that the functionality seen in the inverted characters in the film is not aligned with our current understanding of physical entropy, i.e., the human brain being effectively a heat engine which takes in energy from nutrients and then spends it to create thoughts and steer the vital processes of our body.4 But what in effect is this process?

The second law of Thermodynamics5 states that the amount of entropy in the universe always increases. We can define ’entropy’ by the variable S defined as the preponderance of disordered systems present in the universe.

where Ω designates the number of variable microstates available to a gaseous system. But what does this mean? In what way does entropy affect the concept of time? And is time merely the continual increase of disordered states in the universe?

Keeping this stat-mech interpretation in mind, we can look at a heat engine, as the change in entropy corresponds to the change in heat Q with respect to the inverse of time T:

Consider for a moment a closed system, which the universe appears to be.6 Dyson points out in his paper that this is distinct from being physically infinite; rather it refers to the universe being thermodynamically open or closed. It appears to be isolated.

We can then apply the Clausius inequality:

Let us now consider a loop which contains an irreversible section (A → B) and a reversible section (B → A). This can be simplified as:

Further, we generalize:

Therefore, the definition of ∆S does not vary with respect to the route from A → B. Hence, in a thermally isolated system where dQ = 0, the change in entropy will always be positive:

Given this, we conclude that we have a heat system where heat is flowing toward a reservoir:

These rules of entropy apply for a heat engine, such as the human metabolic system where heat flows out of the human into the surrounding air, and at the smaller scale of a brain which expels heat into the human body.

For the type of process depicted in Tenet to occur, there would need to be a way for the reservoir as well as the system to have negative entropy. This would lead to an overall reduction of entropy in the universe – a direct violation of the second law of Thermodynamics.

For the kind of temporal reversal seen in Tenet to occur would be physically impossible without having an entropy sync for the displaced entropy in the universe. This is not possible according to our current understanding of physics. This is to say nothing of the physical process of thought and operation of the human body, which requires the emission of energy. Tenet also used the thermodynamic concept of Entropy and made no use of Boltzman’s equation (a statistical statement) as such a plot would be sufficiently less exciting.

For the kind of temporal reversal seen in Tenet to occur would be physically impossible without having an entropy sync for the displaced entropy in the universe. This is not possible according to our current understanding of physics. This is to say nothing of the physical process of thought and operation of the human body, which requires the emission of energy. Tenet also used the thermodynamic concept of Entropy and made no use of Boltzman’s equation (a statistical statement) as such a plot would be sufficiently less exciting.

So if there is no way for a reversal in thermodynamics to be possible, can we effectively say that the increase in entropy is the physical concept of time itself? How does this account for the theory of relativity? Surely we can see that in a Lorentz transformation time will change with respect to a reference frame, and as of yet while we can construct a proof of the second that relies on ∆S_universe it would not be rigorously verifiable with physical data. We could even defer to the fundamental constants of the universe G, h, c, and k_B to arrive at the so-called ’Planck Units’ and define ’time’ to be ’equivalent to the time it takes light to traverse one Planck length’ which would be

approximately equal to 5.391247(60) × 10⁻⁴⁴ s. But this definition requires that there exist something called ’second.’

In the physical world, the concept of ’time’ as we consider it exists. Or is it merely our own way of measuring entropy, i.e., change, in our own reference frame which changes with speed and distance?

Martin Heidegger’s view of this is that time is innately human centred, that we view time as it relates to our being and our ability to recognise as conscious beings our own existence, and the finitude thereof. But this is actually not an answer, and Heidegger’s definition contains the acceptance that there is a thing called ’time’ which is distinct from Dasein.

In this article, I will argue for the former and argue against what I consider to be non-physicalist, pseudo-scientific explanations of the idea of time by Heidegger, Hindu philosophers, and indigenous concepts of time and others who I believe steer too far into a human focused idea of time rather than a physicalist one. I posit there exists a physical concept that is t, and that all else is a narrative we construct to map meaning onto our own lives.⁷

First Principles

’Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.’⁸ In his introduction, Wittgenstein contributed to what I consider to be the central tenet of my paper. ”The world is all that is the case.” Something cannot exist in the world which is not physically describable, and that which we ”cannot speak of” or describe physically we must remain silent about. ’Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen.’⁹ It may be useful for example to pontificate the existence of an electron which exists between the nucleus and ground state. However, since our understanding of mathematics cannot provide a physical model for such a phenomenon, it is pointless to talk about such a thing existing since it does not in any real sense exist in the real world. Surely the words to posit ”What if an electron exists below the ground state?” exist and surely we could construct a proof by contradiction that would show why this is impossible. But since such a thing is ultimately not existent in the world, discussions only amount to building a worldview for oneself and are epistemically indistinguishable from millions of other religions and belief systems. In this regard, non-physicalist conceptions of time cannot be solved for what is ’true’ as the matter of a conception of time being ’true’ relies on it being describable by a physically reproducible model. So the conceptions made by A. N. Prior¹⁰ or Heidegger or Hindu scriptures or Abrahamic conceptions of time cannot be resolved for truth over one another.

The problem then arises in defining the physicalist concept, and then letting everything outside of this physicalist concept be understood as a form of therapy or religion. Time has confounded physicists and philosophers for centuries.¹¹

”Nullo ergo tempore non feceras aliquid, quia ipsum tempus tu feceras. et nulla tempora tibi coaeterna sunt, quia tu permanes; at illa si permanerent, non essent tempora. quid est enim tempus? quis hoc facile breviterque explicaverit?”,^12,13 Augustine wondered the same question that even today our greatest minds cannot understand fully. We have truly gotten close but ultimately the resolution of what Augustine considered time with our rigorous physicalist understanding of it could not be more different.

Temporality of Dasein

Heiddegger in ’Sein und Zeit’¹⁴ describes time as a uniquely human conception. That, because we as human beings are able to realise that we are going to die one day, that we have a concept of time through our being-in-the-world or Dasein (German for There being) Heidegger’s concept of temporality relies on the idea of time existing as a death horizon for our existence, having no material reality other than how it relates to humanity – a reason why the passionate irrationalists of the NSDAP would have found his philosophy compelling.

Time must be brought to light-and genuinely all conceived-as the horizon for understanding of Being and for any way of interpreting it. In order for us to discern this, time needs to be explicated primordially primordially as the horizon for the understanding of Being, and in terms of temporality as the Being of Dasein, which understands Being. This task as a whole requires that the conception of time thus obtained shall be distinguished from the way in which it is ordinarily understood. This ordinary way of understanding it has become explicit in an interpretation precipitated in the traditional concept of time, which has persisted from Aristotle to Bergson and even later thinkers.¹⁵

For Heidegger, the concept of Dasein critically relies on the ability of a being to be aware of their own self existence, and to be able to see death on the horizon. But that this definition of ’being-in-the-world’ is not something that can exist at one specific instance in time, it must be atemporal.

”Das Dasein existiert faktisch.”¹⁶ That is to say that Dasein is diffused throughout ’being’ referencing no doubt his findings in sections 12 and 13 that the experience of existence must perceive the concept of time in its totality spread out across all time within our reference frame. In physical terms, we could conceive of Heidegger’s ”horizon” as an event horizon. That by situating oneself on the event horizon and witnessing the totality of time can one conceive of their being. Or rather that ’being’ is only measured as an emergent property. But in terms of how Heidegger rigorously defines time in ”Sein und Zeit,” there exists only his descriptor of time as being meaningful solely in the experience. In this regard, I might agree with him insofar as the physicalist description of the world offers no guidance for life.

In Section 70 of ”Sein und Zeit,” Heidegger discusses the way in which the spatiality, or the way in which Dasein is situated within the world,¹⁷ is closely related to the temporality, or the experience of Dasein. He argues that the spatiality of Dasein is not a static, objective quality, but rather it is an essential aspect of Dasein’s mode of being and is closely related to its experience of time.

Heidegger argues that the spatiality of Dasein is not simply a matter of its physical location in the world, but rather it is a more complex and dynamic aspect of its mode of being. He suggests that the spatiality of Dasein is shaped and influenced by its relationships with other things and beings in the world, as well as by its own projects and goals. This spatiality is also closely related to Dasein’s temporality, or its experience of time, as it is through its spatiality that Dasein is able to engage with the world and experience the passage of time.

To Heidegger Dasein was separable and spiritual and thus existed over time and not at a point in it. It is this way that he is able to separate the concept from physicality. But the issue of a spiritualist idea that exists outside of time is tautological; it is not a thing-in-the-world but instead a judgement about the world.

Comparing this idea of time conceived of in its totality in the human focused, to the physicalist idea, we can turn now to Wittgenstein. Wie auch beim Tod die Welt sich nicht ändert, sondern aufhört,¹⁸ Der Tod ist kein Ereignis des Lebens. Den Tod erlebt man nicht. Wenn man unter Ewigkeit nicht unendliche Zeitdauer, sondern Unzeitlichkeit versteht, dann lebt der ewig, der in der Gegenwart lebt. Unser Leben ist ebenso endlos, wie unser Gesichtsfeld grenzenlos ist.¹⁹

Wittgenstein’s philosophy of time differs notably from Heidegger’s. Wittgenstein argues that time is a fundamental feature of the world and that it is not something that can be reduced to our experience of it. In particular, Wittgenstein asserts that time is not simply a product of our perception or subjectivity, but rather it is an objective feature of the world that exists independently of our experience of it.

In Tractatus 6.431 and 6.4311, Wittgenstein discusses the relationship between time and the world and suggests that time is a dimension of the world, similar to space. He argues that the world is structured in a way that is analogous to a four-dimensional space-time, with time being one of the dimensions in which objects and events are located. According to Wittgenstein, this four-dimensional structure of the world is a necessary feature of the world and cannot be reduced to our experience of it.

In Wittgenstein’s time, the theory of relativity had recently been published and received much blow back particularly in certain conservative circles in the German speaking world. The German NSDAP considered both atomic theory and relativity to be ’Jewish physics.’ The reasons given were always vague and boiled down to a hateful expression of racism towards Jews, but there is insight into the fascist thought process from the ways in which some objected. The main objection was that the theory relied too much on complicated mathematics and was opposed to ’common sense’,²⁰this reliance anti-intellectual appeals to ’common sense’²¹ may seem to contrast with how well Heidegger’s concept of Dasein so closely maps onto right wing ideologies, except when we consider the following: Heidegger’s concept of time closely meshed with Nazi ideology in that it contained this idea of an atemporal esoteric racial spirit that existed out in the ’Æther,’ and that it was an esoteric spirit that told people how to live their lives. This spirit of the culture then could be experienced and lived by an entire culture (outside of time). This, in turn, contrasts with the physicalist explanation which offers no such guidance.

Some philosophers disregard this model of ’presentness’ entirely²² or rather refute the idea of time in motion all-together. Prior, for example, uses the example of Napoleon’s ’being’ continuing to exist as a form of Dasein for him due to the existence of facts about the man which came into existence with him and along his life. This could be an example of how Heidegger was referring to Dasein existing until the last syllable of recorded time that Napoleon’s being lives irrespective of his corporeal existence because the idea of him exists. In this regard the man is differentiated from Dasein particularly because myth is non-temporal. But, ultimately, this is a language game that tells us nothing about the nature of time and everything about the building of myth.

Our Interpretation of Dasein’s authentic potentiality-for-Being-a whole and our analysis of care as temporality-an analysis which has t arisen fro Interpretation-offer us the clue for construing historic ality existentially. The existential projection of Dasein’s historicality merely reveals what already lies enveloped in the temporalizing of temporality. In accordance with the way in which historicality is rooted in care, Dasein exists, in each case, as authentically or inauthentically historical. It becomes plain that Dasein’s inauthentic historicality lies in that which-under the title of ”everydayness”-we have looked upon, in the existential analytic of Dasein, as the horizon that is closest to us.²³

In this regard, Heidegger requires Dasein to be the being throughout history. Which combines with his idea ’Die Geschichte, die wesenhaft solche des Geistes ist, verläuft »in der Zeit«.’²⁴ That history is the study of the spirit over time, much in the same way that A N Prior describes being as not dying due to the existence of continued idea. In critiquing Hagel’s concept of time presented on the penomology of the spirit ’Wie ist der Geist selbst verstanden, daß gesagt werden kann, essei ihm gemäß, mit seiner Verwirklichung in die als Negation der Negation bestimmte Zeit zu fallen? Das Wesen des Geistes ist der Begriff.’ But in tension with this is the admission that temporality is required to make existence possible. So what to make of this? Heideggers central thesis is that time gives us meaning due to the ephemerality of it. Our ideas about ’decay’ and disorder that come along with our physical understanding for the far future meet well with this idea. But all of these are observations about time not about the essence of time. What is the being of time?

In a nutshell, Heidegger attempts to find meaning in a temporal framework that he takes for granted. He does assume some things will last for all of time (so long as there are humans); and in taking this for granted he assumes an epistemic framework of time which is hard to define other than the observation that it moves forward.

Are different temporal epistemological frameworks equally true?

In parting from Heidegger, I wish to take a brief amount of ’time’ to evaluate the ways in which the world’s major religions have conceptualised time, with regard to the physicalist vision of it. None of these are true, but they are not all equally false. Indeed some are more false than others.

Judaism, like Christianity and Islam which were based on it, holds a positive view of time as moving linearly forward in one direction. This is in contrast to the view of time posited by Hinduism. The point of distinction between Judaism and the other two Abrahamic faiths would be that the younger two view the present as being tainted by sin and becoming increasingly sinful until the ’day of judgement.’ In these two cases, their concepts of time are counting down towards an event rather than counting up arbitrarily. Because of this conception it has the potential to inhibit Christians and Muslims from taking action in the world as they can wash away any action, other than spreading their religion, as moot due to the urgency of preparing for the eschatological time by saving as many souls as possible.

Hindu conceptions of time in contrast are cyclic and more in line with the theoretical idea established by Dyson of a cyclic universe.^25,26 To Hinduism, time was not created at one point but is something that has always and will always exist. In this regard they conceptualise time as something that progresses in one direction, in stages, but then loops back onto itself. However, like with Christianity and Islam the conception of time progressing is one of decay and degradation. That humans become less and less virtuous until a crisis forms and produces a cataclysm and new beginning. According to this belief, time is not linear, but rather it goes through cycles of creation, preservation, and dissolution, with each cycle being marked by a different Yuga.In Hinduism, time is viewed as being cyclical in nature, with the Yuga cycle representing one aspect of this cyclicality.

In Hinduism, the Yuga cycle is a concept that describes the cyclical nature of time and the evolution of consciousness. It is believed that the universe goes through cycles of creation, preservation, and dissolution, and each cycle is marked by a different Yuga, or age.

There are four Yugas in the cycle, each representing a different level of consciousness and spiritual attainment. The four Yugas are: Satya Yuga (also known as the Golden Age): This is the first and highest Yuga, characterized by truth, righteousness, and virtue. It is a time of great spiritual advancement and prosperity, when people are naturally inclined towards dharma (righteousness) and live in harmony with each other and the natural world. Treta Yuga: This is the second Yuga, and it is characterized by a decline in spiritual attainment and a decrease in the prevalence of truth and virtue. It is a time of conflict and strife, but also a time of great heroes and epic battles. Dvapara Yuga: This is the third Yuga, and it is marked by a further decline in spiritual attainment and an increase in ignorance and materialism. It is a time of conflict and struggle, but also a time of great cultural and artistic achievements. And finally, Kali Yuga (also known as the Dark Age): This is the fourth and final Yuga, and it is characterised by a complete absence of spiritual wisdom and a total degeneration of moral values. It is a time of great suffering and conflict, and is considered to be the lowest point in the cycle.

The Yuga cycle is believed to be an endless cycle, with each Yuga lasting for many thousands of years. It is believed that humanity is currently in the Kali Yuga, but that the cycle will eventually turn and the Satya Yuga will return.

According to the Hindu tradition, the Yuga cycle is cyclic because it is believed to be driven by the law of karma, which states that every action has consequences. At the end of each Yuga, the accumulated karma of humanity determines the next Yuga that will follow.The concept of the Yuga cycle is linked to the concept of reincarnation, which is the belief that the soul is eternal and goes through a series of incarnations, or rebirths, in different physical bodies. It is believed that the soul progresses through different stages of evolution and spiritual attainment in each incarnation and that the Yuga cycle reflects this progress.

In the case of the Kali Yuga²⁷, it is believed that the negative actions and energies of humanity contribute to the degeneration of the world and the decline in spiritual attainment. However, as the cycle progresses, it is believed that the negative karma will eventually be exhausted and the cycle will turn, leading to a new Golden Age or Satya Yuga.

It is also believed that the cyclical nature of the Yuga cycle reflects the eternal and cyclical nature of the universe itself, which is believed to go through cycles of creation, preservation, and dissolution. Each cycle marks a new beginning and a new opportunity for humanity to evolve and progress spiritually.

I would argue that the Eschatological conception of time in Hinduism, when compared to Christianity, Judaism, or Islam is a significant epistemic difference. The conception of time in Hinduism is also viewed as being relative and subjective, with different levels of time existing simultaneously. For example, it is believed that there are different levels of time that correspond to different levels of consciousness, and that the speed of time can vary depending on one’s level of consciousness. This conception leading to a world that is constantly being reborn and destroyed all the time. In contrast with the eschatological end depicted in the Christo-Islamic tradition where a cataclysm in the end of days will lead to the final defeat of evil and years of glory forever after. In this regard the Horizon spoken of by Heidegger is more closely mapped onto the later. Though Strauss-howe (and the meme derivatives thereof) contains a kind of cyclic eschatology. These concepts of a final end and ’judgement’ in the minds of some Christians and Muslims I’d argue are often used as a pretext to deny taking proactive action in the present. That being said these conceptions of time in religious conceptions have the shared commonality in that they hold that time moves around us (people) and that it can continue after our deaths. The Hindu conception of time as we will see later does seem to share some ideas with Conformal Cyclic Cosmology but this is likely a coincidence.

These religions also hold the human experience as the singular driving force within time that there exists a spiritual dimension which exists outside of time and space, and that the passage of time is something lower than or external to our experience of it. Heidegger’s conception and the physicalist one seem to show that we live on the tracks of time setup by the universe. Nonetheless all of these religions can agree on one thing, and possibly the most mysterious about time; It moves Forward.

Time as a Material Concept

Why does time only move in one direction?

Every single classical physical law we use can be computed with time moving in the positive or the negative. A cup dropped on the ground which shatters into pieces can easily be seen as a series of cup fragments leaping from the floor to form a seamless cup. Indeed in drawing a diagram of such a collision and using time as an additional axis it can be shown how this reassembly can occur. Seemingly there exists no reason why we couldn’t have a model with a symmetry of the kind in lemma 8.

A small non complicated system is indifferent to time. The orbit of The Earth moving around the sun for example will behave kinematically identically if you reverse the angular velocity

For a complex system, if you were able to look at a recently cooled glass of water, and had the ability to know the position and velocity of every particle in that system, then you could in fact reverse the process in your head to see what the conditions of that glass of water were before. Quantum mechanically this is physically impossible for anyone to know.

The complication comes from The Second Law of Thermodynamics which again seems to require energies to fill all possible less ordered configurations as a function of statistics. This progression from ordered systems to disorder is of course a product of our current model of the universe which holds a uniformly low entropy universe expanded into what we have now and will continue doing so until a state of maximum entropy has been reached. A process which Freeman Dyson estimated would take 10¹⁰²⁶ years²⁸ while we understand the equations behind this flow of time, we do not know fully why the universe behaves this way. Only that we see the residue of the incredibly violent early years of our universe.

Some philosophers would say that a time-scale such as this holds no actual meaning in the world as there would not be a consciousness in the universe to observe the existence of such a grand phenomena. Dyson himself and my own mentor Brian Greene have posited that it would be possible for particles briefly to develop flashes of consciousness in this time. But this holds the assumption that these laws of physics depend on our consciousness.

On the subject of consciousness however it is worthwhile to ask, ’why do we remember the past but not the future’. Surely we experience life at one interval to another and it is this ability to notice change happening that we perceive as ’time’ or rather this appears to be true in the prima facie.

But as for time ’flowing,’ fundamentally it appears to be tied to the period since the big bang. The big bang represents the ultimate low entropy highly organized state of the universe, then upon expansion, the amount of disorder began and has continued to increase. So it is reasonable to say that our perception of time is only possible because we live in a universe where we are under the influence of the big bang. Using Boltzmann’s constant It is possible to quantify the entropy of the early universe as 10⁸⁸k_B whereas the present entropy of the universe now is approximately 10¹⁰³k_B. The starting point we should note is not Zero entropy. Interestingly the increase in entropy differs from the entropy of the CMB 10⁹⁰k_B by orders of magnitude. This dramatic increase we believe to be from Black Holes. But this implies that were we to be able to not be living in a reference frame where the influence of the big bang were so pronounced would there be such a thing as ’time’ returning now to Dyson’s model 10¹⁰²⁶ years after the big bang. This universe would be one of free floating photons and electron positron pairs. At this stage of this incredibly diffused homogeneous and isotropic universe is it even meaningful to discuss the concept of ’time’? I would again answer in the affirmative, though the concept may be less pronounced and this universe certainly would lack directional orientability it would still be relevant to describe a photon moving across a vast and empty universe at c.

So, we have this statistical model which effectively shows us that time is merely the product of continual statistical probabilities. In this regard there is nothing in the laws of physics that say that cause should come before effect, rather that cause is statistically more likely to come before effect, and that in the macro this must happen. Or more broadly the concept we see as the arrow of time is the emergent property of being under the influence of the big bang. When looking in the micro, one can construct Feynman diagrams which make as much physical sense in the t and −t directions.

In this diagram both iterations of the electron positron anahialation look identical to each other. So an observer witnessing it in the quantum level would not have a concept of whcich came ’first’.

Even in a more complex diagram like below of the beta plus decay process.

This could just as easily be a proton meeting with a W boson generated by an electron-electron neutrino collision which converts one of its up quarks into a down quark by adding the approximately 2.8 MeV needed.²⁹

In the macro, it is not impossible for extreme amounts of energy to suddenly concentrate upon a neutron star and to counteract the extreme forces which converted its interior protons into neutrons. However, this would be shortlived, as gravity causes the process depicted in Figure 2 to quickly overpower this effect.

In the far future of the universe, there is a statistical certainty due to the nature of infinity that pockets of ordered energy collections will form in the cold, sparse, empty universe and mirror an early universe, which would statistically lead to the expansion of space-time from that point onwards, and the separation of various forces, the formation of quarks, and eventually hydrogen, stars, complex life, reality TV, and even Hentai.

Some people, would make the argument that my temporal epistemology is too macro and that time as we know it is the process of arguing of the human body and of life, or is measured by the cycle of the moon or the sun and the stars. But it is only in the macro that the fundamental concept of time emerges. As much as Heidegger envisions Dasein only being observable in totality, time is only observable relative to the Big Bang.

Relativity and Simultaneity

The concept of simultaneity is complicated by our physical reality. It is fairly intuitive to our senses that two things can happen at the same time but this is not in fact how the universe works. From a basic principle, if person A shines a laser pointer at person B there may be the appearance of simultaneity from when the laser moves from the emitter in person A’s hand to person B’s eye. But the light moves at c and is not instantaneous, then there is also a subluminal speed which it takes the brain of person B to register the presence of the Laser, and then it again takes the photons bouncing off of B’s face travelling at speed c hitting A’s retina and being processed by his brain at subluminal speed. So even in this instance there does not exist a physical concept of a ’now’ as once an event has been witnessed it is already in the past. In fact this does not scale at distance with how we consider time, considering for example the Lorentz transformation matrix where we can calculate the rigorous concept of simultaneity and time in two distinct reference frames. Two frames S and S’ are said to be in standard configuration when their relative velocity v is aligned along the positive e₁ direction, something completely possible since coordinate systems are arbitrary, such that the origin of both coordinate systems coincide at t = 0. Considering the value β = v/c and the Lorentz Factor γ = (1 − β)^1/2

Then:

In terms of each index transforming:

A useful analytical tool in Special Relativity is that of a space-time diagram. In essence, this is a graph of space-time in which we can represent events and the world-lines of particles. In two dimensions, time is typically represented on the vertical axis, with space being represented on the horizontal axis, as shown in Figure 3 (a). From the axes, it is clear that the propagation of light should be represented with a straight line with a gradient of unity. Given this mathematical framework, we can see that our concept of the simultaneity of events is disrupted. Does this imply that all time is happening all at once? No, even from the reference frame of a hypothetical conscious photon there is a noticeable change with respect to time. The photons which we observe in the Cosmic microwave background which have been travelling towards us since the period of

recombination have passed through billions of light years of space and in truth do experience some concept of time, though heavily dilated from what we consider.

In ’proper time’ we can see this famous ’twin paradox.’ If there are two twins (A and B) on earth, and A departs in a rocket and accelerates away from earth at a speed v arbitrarily close to c and travels a distance along the x axis measured in light years, we can then construct a mathematical model for how time is perceived and experienced by twin A in the rocket versus twin B on earth. This can be done using the Lorentz Transformation or with Proper Time which is inherently preserved by the Lorentz Transformation. So trying this you will actually see that the twin in the rocket has aged slower by a considerable amount depending on v and x. Meaning that an A would in all likelihood arrive back on earth to find that B and all of B’s decedents are long since dead.³⁰ In establishing this concept of relativity it breaks the epistemic concept of time which has been relied on previously.³¹

So why is this? Thinking of space-time as one thing, where ripples and distortions in it are created by the presence of massive objects. Just as the universe in a macro perspective; going from an extremely low entropy state to a high entropy state due to the big bang. In this regard we are moving through time, not time moving around us, and time itself is stretched and bent. In accordance with the presence of mass which distorts it.

So is this to say that time, the effect of entropy changes as we move faster along warped space-time? That is to say that the expansion of space due to the big-bang continually causes entropy to increase, is it fair then to say that as space-time increases that it means that there is simply more space for matter to concentrate in, thus the expansion of entropy is fundamentally a function of space-time increasing? There is more space for 1L of gas to occupy in a 20L container than there is for it to occupy in a 5L container. Thus as the container for our universe expands the disorder increases. But what is the fundamental structure of this universe? What becomes of Time ad the Planck scale?

In this regard, relativity conceptualizes time as a space that is moved through along with space. But these dialation effects do not as far as we know work the same way at the quantum level. Though the conceptualization of space-time as a ’field’ would fill the hole in our physicalist understanding of spacetime.

Quantum Time

Heidegger proposes time is undetermined until we are able to explore it as human beings. He argued that time is not a static, objective concept but rather an essential aspect of human existence that is closely related to our experience of the past, present, and future. He believed that this experience of time is closely tied to our sense of self and our place in the world, and that it shapes and influences how we as human beings understand and engage with the world surrounding us.

Both Heidegger’s philosophy of time and quantum mechanics recognize that the future is not predetermined and that it is inherently uncertain. In Heidegger’s philosophy, this uncertainty is closely tied to the concept of the future being open and unfolding, and to the fact that human beings are constantly aware of their own finitude and the fact that they will eventually die. This awareness of death gives humans a sense of urgency and drives them to live their lives in a meaningful way.³²

In quantum mechanics, the concept of uncertainty is related to the idea that the position and momentum of a subatomic particle cannot be precisely measured at the same time. This uncertainty is a fundamental aspect of the quantum world and is described by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle

shown in full with the wave function in (Lemma 9).

It is important to note that they are not the same thing. They come from very different philosophical and scientific schools of thought. Heidegger’s philosophy of time is focused on the subjective, experiential aspect of time and how it relates to human existence, while the concept of uncertainty in quantum mechanics is a fundamental aspect of the quantum world that is described by the laws of physics.

Just as we know that we cannot know the position and momentum of a particle at a given time, we cannot also have a complete measurement of our future at any given time, the future from a human focused perspective exists only in terms of probabilities. But In terms of long term these probabilities converge on a specific point. For a human being these convergent probabilities they converge to death, for the universe they converge to heat death. But, The Path can only exist as a wave function.

This should not be construed in the inverse as saying that a human consciousness is required for a physical phenomena to be true. In fact this is the exact opposite of what is true. A wave function, unobserved, has a position, and has momentum, and has spin. But until we actually measure the system these exist in terms of probabilities. Inversely this is not true about life, we don’t have any pre set tracks or positions in life, only directions and momentum.

Our Materialist conception of time must take into account the apparent loss of quantum information from a black hole.³³ As it exhibits the clash between relativity and quantum mechanics. If a black hole is the curving of time and space which just treats spacetime as a dimension, then this complicates our understanding of how a particles wave function will change with respect to the time coordinate. But this is complicated by Hawking’s work where we see clearly that the radiation emitted by a black hole contains information only about the total mass, electric charge and angular momentum of the initial state of a particle that had crossed the event horizon. Not the innately encoded spin or other quantum elements. But these are supposed to be intrinsically encoded into the wave function, and there is no reason why these should disappear when entering a black hole. Even taking into account the coordinate shift which happens on the other side of an event horizon.³⁴

So more fundamentally we need a physical understanding of time that is able to describe this uncertainty at a quantum level. This has historically been a problem for multiple reasons and still confounds physicists.³⁵ Not of the particles acting upon it but of the actual field that is spacetime. Whereby the metrics which make up the degrees of freedom in spacetime are converted to spin functions.³⁶ Thus the particles are acting on the Planck scale with small loop like quanta which are able to form the fabric of spacetime which we view in the macro.

Or consider in the form of a wave function

Here we see the ’Wheeler-Dewitt equation which turns the metrics of spacetime into quantum operatiors and describes the Hamiltonian of the wave function of the entire universe which should ideally come to zero. Written another way we can see the usefulness of in describing a system that does not evolve with respect to t which would be necessary for such a concept.³⁷

The resultant spacetime conception at the Planck scale would be packets of excitement in a ’gravity’ field which would describe the gravitational field not as a tensor or vector but as a spinor.³⁸ Thus turning our ’metric space’ into ’field space’ treating gravity and thus time like a field. The issue of this is that it would need to be timeless.³⁹ This does not however imply that ’time’ does not exist. The Wheeler-Dewitt equation assumes a simple form for a small universe and an infinitely complex form for a larger one. Using Quantum Gravity, we are able to redefine time in terms of the increasing entanglement⁴⁰ and see entropy as an emergent, tautological process in an expanding universe. In quantum gravity thus t is treated as the increase in gravitational degrees of freedom.⁴¹ Because of this, we treat the expansion of the universe as an expansion of entangled particles⁴² which increase with the increasing of space in the universe. Because of this the ’space’ in the universe increasing causes entropy to increase.

The direction of time is thus defined by the direction of increasing entanglement. In this sense, the expansion of the universe would be a tautology…the wave function of the quantum universe must go to zero for large scale factors. Since the quantum theory cannot distinguish between the different ends of a classical trajectory (such ends would be the Big Bang and the Big Crunch), the wave function must consist of many quasi-classical components with entropies that increase in the direction of a larger Universe; one could then never observe a recollapsing universe.⁴³

Thus the concept of time resolved down to its most ’pure form’ is at this time unsolved. But we know for example that some things are truer than others. Time must be closely associated with spacetime, must exist as a mathematical spinor, and must be describable in the macro for the larger universe, but in the micro have relatively no meaning. This theory still has yet to actually be solved. But this is where we leave the current knowledge for the ’time-being’ that time is at its core a mathematical object, and our arrow an emergent property of the big bang.

For what is time? Who can easily and briefly explain it?

An entire culture, may have a completely false concept of time and this may indeed influence the way in which they orient themselves towards the world. And yet, the existence of this belief does not make it physically true. Our physicalist conception of time is defined for the physics of the very big but as we have seen gals apart at the Planck Length. But out physicalist model does exist, Time and physics at large do not depend on our consciousness. Every so often you will hear a charlatan describe how quantum mechanics requires a conscious observer. But as already discussed this is nonsense. To believe we live in a human centred world and that time exists ’for us’ falls into the same logical trap as the Christo-Islamic view of time. It ignores our being by assuming the universe is for us. This freedom in the face of our own smallness may be shocking, but I would argue it is a way for us to once again embrace our own existential freedom. I concur with Heidegger that our being-toward-death is our best conception of time. Ours is to stare out from the event horizon and watch the universe hit us like a freight train.

Wittgenstein has taught us that what is true is tautologically true. This idea of time which I would consider to be called ’pure time’. Is a mathematical construct that matters in some meaningful ways at the granular level. For all practical purposes we perceive our lives on the day to day, that is to say that the world around us is the reality we are condemned to live in. There does not at present exist a way to alter the past.⁴⁴ This pure time is indifferent to us in a fundamental way. Our perspective of ’our’ time is centred around our own perspectives. Thus while we can imagine ourselves to be the twin on the rocket or the one who stayed home. We are moved by seeing the horizon of our being fade away. We feel that twinge of pain in our heart when we imagine ourselves in the place of Matthew McConaughey in ’Interstellar’ returning from his long space voyage to find his daughter dying of old age in a hospital bed, surrounded by her grand children, his great-grandchildren. This is the conception of our place in the universe that sticks with us. The universe, not innately human focused, but rather how we are affected by its laws. This is not to say that time can be measured by our lifetimes in the objective sense. But rather that the arrow of time is so central to Dasein because our existence exists around it.

Time as a physical concept is completely indifferent to us, and to our own conception of how it operates. But yet we are moving through it, and by moving through this dying universe, the afterglow of cosmic expansion we are able to have this brief moment of fleeting consciousness. We cannot imagine an existence outside of physical time any more than we could imagine our own nonexistence. This is because the influence of living in the aftereffect of the big bang is so ever-present in our existence that it effectively defines it. The limits of the physicalist idea of time are the same as the limits of the concept of truth. While pure truth exists, it tells us nothing about how to live life or how to think of our lives. With the exception of defining base reality for us. Such as the speed of light which we use for our GPS systems or the fundamental rules of mathematics. These however are tautological truths which explain how things ’are’. The physical truth of time itself is at some level both existent and meaningless. That is to say that the important part about Heidegger’s findings was not to describe how time operates but rather that time ’is’ and because time ’is’ we ’are’.

---

Endnotes

1. Approximately 12 Euro at the time
2. Nolan, “TENET.”
3. Knott, Life and scientific work of Peter Guthrie Tait: 213–215
4. Brändas, “A Universe in Our Brain: Carnot’s Engine and Maxwell’s Demon.”
5. Contrary to popular belief, the ”second law of thermodynamics” is not ”do NOT talk about
   thermodynamics.”
6. Dyson, “Time without end: Physics and biology in an open universe”: 454
7. A point I must cede to the unrepentant Nazi Martin Heidegger.
8. Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus: 1.
9. Wittgenstein: 7.
10. Prior, “Thank Goodness That’s Over.”
11. Augustinus Hipponensis, “Confessiones.”
12. Augustinus Hipponensis.
13. At no time, therefore, had Thou not made anything, because You had made time itself. And no times are co-eternal with You, because You remain for ever; but should these continue, they would not be times. For what is time? Who can easily and briefly explain it?
14. Heidegger, Being and Time.
15. Heidegger, Being and Time: 39.
16. Heidegger, “Sein und Zeit”: 181.
17. Heidegger, “Sein und Zeit”: 367.
18. Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus: 6.431.
19. Wittgenstein: 6.4311.
20. An argument often made today by the far right in opposition to complicated ideas.
21. Hofstadter et al., The paranoid style in American politics, by Richard Hofstadter.
22. Prior, “Thank Goodness That’s Over.”
23. Heidegger, “Being and Time”: 428.
24. Heidegger, “Sein und Zeit”: 428.
25. Coward, “Time in Hinduism”: 22.
26. Dyson, “Time without end: Physics and biology in an open universe”: 453.
27. You’ve likely come across the meme ’Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times’ likely the text superimposed out of context onto photos from the Roman Empire. So while this does owe some of its modern incarnation to esoteric thinkers like Julius Evola, its intellectual genesis can be found in the Yuga cycle, the aforementioned cylce of golden ages followed by decay and then crisis. Amusingly this also emerges in pop-science conceptions such as ’Strauss-Howe generational theory’ which envisions generations in 20 year cycles known as ’turnings’ which follow the order of High, Awakening, Unravelling, Crisis, followed by another high point built out of the crisis. And or course each point in these turnings contains a generational archetype Prophet(Idealist), Nomad(reactive) , Hero(Civic) , Artist (adaptive). The trouble with this conception of time in Strauss Howe theory is that it suffers from a kind of presentism whereby it applies a cultural modality which worked in the post-WWII era to previous eras and then claims to have discovered some kind of large pattern. It is effectively an eschatological claim made, based off a vulgar understanding of Hinduism. Strauss Howe, and the memification of the Kali Yuga have become a kind of pseudo-secular eschatology in their own right, where concepts in christian eschatology, roman history and US history are blended together to create a worldview and call to action. Indeed this conception of the time has less to do with the past, and everything to do with the present and future. Strauss-Howe is a simulacrum.
28. Dyson, “Time without end: Physics and biology in an open universe”: 453
29. Though I am unsure of what would become of the remaining energy as the mass of the W−boson is 80GeV
30. When put in such abstract terms (you will notice I did not give them names) it may seem granular and clinical. But imagine for a second names given to these characters.
31. Weinberg, Gravitation and cosmology: 25–31.
32. Wellman, “Memento Mori: Reflecting on Mortality to Inspire Vitality and Meaning in Life”: 101.
33. Hawking, “Breakdown of predictability in gravitational collapse.”
34. See ”Penrose Diagram”
35. Anderson, The Problem of Time in Quantum Gravity.
36. Ashtekar, “New Variables for Classical and Quantum Gravity.”
37. Marletto and Vedral, “Evolution without evolution, and without ambiguities.”
38. Ashtekar, “New Variables for Classical and Quantum Gravity.”
39. Kiefer, Does time exist in quantum gravity?
40. Moreva et al., “Time from quantum entanglement: an experimental illustration.”
41. Zeh, The physical basis of the direction of time.
42. Zeh, The physical basis of the direction of time.
43. Kiefer, Does time exist in quantum gravity?: 8.
44. Though if there is I would greatly appreciate another bottle of Veuve Clicquot at 0154 in my Oxford apartment this new years (morning) of 2023. Perhaps a time traveller will see this and bring it to me. Or perhaps in their effort to time travel to me they will forget to move properly along the spatial axis and float in the void with my champagne infinitely

Bibliography

1. Anderson, Edward. The Problem of Time in Quantum Gravity, 2010.
   https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1009.2157. https://arxiv.org/abs/1009.2157.
2. Ashtekar, Abhay. “New Variables for Classical and Quantum Gravity.” Phys. Rev. Lett. 57 (18 1986): 2244–2247. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.57.2244.
   https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.57.2244.
3. Augustinus Hipponensis, Aurelius. “Confessiones.” Chap. 14, vol. XI. 400.
4. Brändas, Erkki J. “A Universe in Our Brain: Carnot’s Engine and Maxwell’s Demon.” In Advances in Methods and Applications of Quantum Systems in Chemistry, Physics, and Biology, edited by Alexander V. Glushkov, Olga Yu. Khetselius, Jean Maruani, and Erkki Brändas, 305–330. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021.
5. Coward, Harold. “Time in Hinduism.” Journal of Hindu-Christian Studies 12, no. 1 (January 1999). https://doi.org/10.7825/2164-6279.1206. https://doi.org/10.7825/2164-6279.1206.
6. Dyson, Freeman J. “Time without end: Physics and biology in an open universe.” Rev. Mod. Phys. 51 (3 1979): 447–460. https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.51.447.
   https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.51.447.
7. Hawking, S. W. “Breakdown of predictability in gravitational collapse.” Phys. Rev. D 14 (10 1976): 2460–2473. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.14.2460.
   https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.14.2460.
8. Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time. Chap. 2, 53–63. Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 1962.
   1. ____. Being and Time. Chap. 2, 39. Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 1962.
   2. ____. “Being and Time.” Chap. 5, 428. Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 1962.
   3. ____. “Sein und Zeit” [in German]. Chap. 6, 181. Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1927.
   4. ____. “Sein und Zeit” [in German]. Chap. 4, 367. Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1927.
9. Hofstadter, Richard, Hillary Angelo, Mark Edmundson, and Justin Beal. The paranoid style in American politics, by Richard Hofstadter, March 1963. https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/.
10. Kiefer, Claus. Does time exist in quantum gravity?, 2009.
    https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.0909.3767. https://arxiv.org/abs/0909.3767.
11. Knott, Cargill Gilston, ed. Life and scientific work of Peter Guthrie Tait. 213–215. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, April 1911.
    https://archive.org/stream/lifescientificwo00knotuoft#page/212/mode/2up.
12. Marletto, Chiara, and Vlatko Vedral. “Evolution without evolution, and without ambiguities,” 2016. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1610.04773.
    https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.04773.
13. Moreva, Ekaterina, Giorgio Brida, Marco Gramegna, Vittorio Giovannetti, Lorenzo Maccone, and Marco Genovese. “Time from quantum entanglement: an experimental illustration,” 2013. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1310.4691.
    https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.4691.
14. Nolan, C. “TENET.” Syncopy, WB Pictures, 2020, 150 min.
15. Prior, A. N. “Thank Goodness That’s Over.” Philosophy 34, no. 128 (1959): 12–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0031819100029685.
16. Weinberg, Steven. Gravitation and cosmology [in en]. 25–31. Nashville, TN: John Wiley & Sons, January 1972.
17. Wellman, Jodi. “Memento Mori: Reflecting on Mortality to Inspire Vitality and Meaning in Life,” July 2020. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342846179_Memento_Mori_ Reflecting_on_Mortality_to_Inspire_Vitality_and_Meaning_in_Life.
18. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Translated by C.K. Ogden. HARCOURT, BRACE COMPANY, INC, 1922. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/5740/5740-pdf.pdf.
19. Zeh, H Dieter. The physical basis of the direction of time [in en]. 5th ed. Chap. 5. The Frontiers Collection. Berlin, Germany: Springer, April 2007.
    1. ____. The physical basis of the direction of time [in en]. 5th ed. Chap. 6. The Frontiers Collection. Berlin, Germany: Springer, April 2007.