@Bee nah I aint read the whole thing yet. But slowly but surely. And ripped the cartilage in me ribs. Gahhh there is not part of me not falling apart
Does antimatter factor into this agreement?
I dont see why it wouldnt but I dont see why it would make any difference either. The fact that it annihilates matter I dont think has any weight on objective truth. Its simply a feature of our reality.
I see what you're saying, and on one level I agree with the categories, but:
Ultimately "truth" is a conscious thing. It is not synonymous with reality, but is a judgement thereupon. What you're calling objective truth is in fact reality. Truth can only emerge via a conscious affirmation of that reality. It's when the historically derived constructs of a consciousness accord with a given stimuli - when something we experience accords with what we already know. Therefore truth requires a conscious observer, and the objective truth you're talking about is impossible.
Well there is a problem here and it comes down to do we consider truth to be simply an abstract or rather something concrete. I tenuously hold with the latter and in my thinking I hold that truth has as much substance as stone. I think this is somewhat derived from Plato's forms. But the implication of this would be that truth is an independent 'form' or 'thing' as much an entity as any other in reality. Thats maybe a little out there but I got a gut feeling. Would we ever find something demarked truth in a higher reality? I kindly doubt it but I feel as though it has a physical substance.
Had a quick look at the links - have seen similar material before. What these people are measuring isn't the kind of space I alluded to. The space between, say, our sun and another star is full of criss-crossing waves of all manner, and teeming with energy, but what of the space into which the furthest remnants of the big bang is still fleeing? The first photon of light that escaped the big bang is still fleeing the event at light speed, but into what? Unless scientists have found a means to overtake light that has been moving faster than us for some 14 billion years and then take measurements f the space into which that light is escaping, I don't think we can rule out perfectly empty space. The notion of the big bang states that all matter/energy/waves originated from the singularity. If there were no matter/energy/waves prior, then there must have been empty space surrounding it, no?
I've always thought of the laws applying only to energy/matter/waves anyway. When these elements enter into a void they take their rules with them. In empty space you don't need rules - there is nothing to apply them to.
Honest answer is I dont know. Practically speaking since its uninteractable it cant contradict our reality however it can obviously accomodate it. Now this assumes two things (and probably more): That the physical laws are embedded in the fabric of the cosmos and that the expansion of the universe is not simply the distribution of bayronic and other types of matter in an already existing and truly empty space. Except the problem is then if we are inhabiting a truly empty space then does the matter/energy carry its own laws within itself. But this assumes that the universe was injected for lack of a better word into an empty space but from what we know about the makeup of the universe it seems more like it bubbled up. At least thats how I understand quantum foam and Im probably wrong in that understanding.
I've got an alternative thought on time I wouldn't mind your thoughts on:
I always had a problem with the notion of a space-time continuum. It seemed strange to take a real phenomenon - space - and form a continuum with a man-made concept - time. So I asked "what is time?". It dawned on me that time is entirely dependent on change. Without change no hands rotate on a clock, no radio-isotopes decay, no planets rotate on their axes...
So time, I've come to think, is the measurement of change. But it's not that simple. Everything changes. Even rocks are slowly changing at the quantum level. Time is therefore really the measurement of change relative to change: rotations of the second hand per increments of the minute hand per increments of the hour. Change in state of an egg per sand through an egg timer. Rotations of the earth on its axis per orbits of the sun...
Once I thought of time as a measurement of change a space-time continuum made perfect sense:
1. Space without change is meaningless
2. Change without space is impossible
1 - If nothing changes, there is no meaning in the universe, for no information flows - no light reaches the eye, no particles the nose, longitudinal waves don't reach the ears, etc.
2 - Change, even at the quantum level, can only occur in space.
Therefore there is an intimate relationship between time and space. Time is only the alteration of space, after all.
I dont know. Im not sure we really understand the relation between time and space. In Of Time, Passion, And Knowledge JT Fraser wrote up this hierarchy of time:
atemporal -blank sheet of paper, objects travelling at speed of light, black hole/Big Bang, causation has no meaning
prototemporal -fragmented shaft of an arrow, particle-waves travelling at less than speed of light, instants may be specified only statistically, probabilistic causation joins prototemporal events
eotemporal -shaft of an arrow, countable and orderable without a preferred direction, nowless time, physical matter, time orientable but not time oriented, deterministic causation joins eotemporal events
biotemporal -short arrow, future, past, present, limited temporal horizons, organic present, simultaneities of necessity, organic intentionality directed toward concrete goals and serving the continuity of the organism's life, multiple and final causation, rigid programming gives way to dynamic programming
nootemporal -long straight arrow, "You'll come to me out of the long ago", intentionality directed towards concrete or symbolic goals, serving continued integrity of the self, human actions are connected through symbolic causes known as ideas, the possibility of choice among ideas and corresponding actions is known as human freedom, ideas can produce responses to imaginary challenges
sociotemporal -A society is a group of people with a family of conflicts that defines them and distinguishes them from other societies. man has capacity to change social institutions in response to symbolic causes
I would disagree with your first point that space without change is meaningless because look at any picture. Its static, as much as something can be in the medium, and it carries a whole host of meaning. A friend of mine is a physicist and he told me once that he couldnt understand the universe as anything other than a piece of art. It was the only way he could attribute meaning to the universe. If there is meaning it may be intrinsic and meaningful in a way thats outside our definition.