Dear F. R. Ellis
I am waiting long time for discussion with Julian Barbour,but he keep silence
and now representing for you my counter-thesis
The special theory of relativity understood by Einstein as a four-dimensional space-time continuum implies a kind of superdeterrninisrn with the future completely determined down to the smallest detail. This was the reason why Einstein believed time is an illusion and why Karl Popper told Einstein "You are Parmenides," the Greek philosopher (515-445) who believed that being is not becoming and time (becoming) an illusion. With everything exactly predetermined there can be no free will, not even a hypothetical God, and a God without free will is an ontological impossibility.
One therefore can say: If Einstein is right, then there can be no God. The opposite though, is not true; true rather is if God exists then Einstein must be wrong."
If the Universe is a sequence of identical cycles, according to Penrose, that is, time is a circle, how do you identify past from future and vice versa?
The Past is the a Future. The Future is the Past.
I will try to show concrete difference between the 2 approaches:
Parmenides and Heraclitus.
Suppose two options with the same content:
1. The written Text by Nature
2. The Audio-recording of the same Text.(We live and listeniing audio-recording regime)
Written is Parmenides.
Audio-recording is Heraclites.
At first sight two approaches, Parmenides(book) and Heraclitus(audio-book) in a one picture seems as a schizophrenia. As Niels Bohr said:
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true."
The Complementarity is also applicable here as well.
It seems to me Julian's approach look like Parmenides.
I continue my attempts to understand the country just named Platonia.
Let's look at the dilemma Parmenides vs Heraclites on the other side, namely, deterministic and probabilistic approach.
Here, the first relates to determinism, the second to the randomness and free will.
As one wise man told "Randomness is lack of our Knowledge."
Advantage of Parmenides is knowledge of whole book.
Advantage of Heraclites is hearing of sounds of audio-book in concrete moment and free will.
Aharonov's fair view, he says, "is somewhat Talmudic: everything you're going to do is already known to God, but you still have the choice."
Just in case."Everything in the future is a wave, everything in the past is a particle.(Dyson)
Only posible reconcilation between Parmenides and Heraclites is the Cyclic Universe in modern Penrose version or oldest Heraclitus version.
Diogenes Laertius gives this summary of Heraclitus' doctrine of cyclical conflagration: "And it [the cosmos] is alternately born from fire and again resolved into fire in fixed cycles to all eternity, and this is determined by destiny" (Lives, 9. 8).
IMHO all is flow in one cycle,but all cycles repeat itch other,despite the violation of laws of thermodynamics.We don't now duration of one cycle and whether it makes sense asked this question.Does the Universe is hologram?
