Dear Georgina,

You must be tired!

Reading your essay I am struck by the number of references to 'the uni-temporal Now', which as you observe, Einstein messed up bigly with his multiple-time-based 'relativity of simultaneity' leading to 4D-ontology with no NOW.

I hope you will enjoy my current essay, Deciding on the nature of time and space, which provides strong support for this crucial aspect of your model, and does it based on an argument that also fits with your observation-based model.

I believe this will strengthen your model considerably, since you do appear to need the uni-temporal Now'. Please let me know your opinion.

Best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

    Georgina,

    I just saw your comment on another thread:

    "Trying to fit presentism and the block universe together is like forcing jigsaw pieces together."

    Wonderful! One must make a metaphysical choice of an ontology. Acting as if both are real is a formula for failure.

    Thanks Edwin. I am, though, showing how there can be non-simultaneity from the point of view of different observers of the same event, a happening in material reality -Now. There is -Now, which is the same time everywhere (really real) and the Present now, which is the unique products of processing newly received 'sensory' input.The Object, beable, reality and the observation product Image reality are different but work together without contradiction. As organisms, and observing devices are part of Object reality, their observation p products (image realities) are within Object reality but do not show Object reality as it is. The dimensions of the two kinds of space are different for example.

    Georgina Woodward re-uploaded the file Woodward_The_castle_and_ele.pdf for the essay entitled "The Castle and elephants; Indescribable, undecidable, un-computable, and unpredictable" on 2020-04-16 05:27:22 UTC.

    Georgina,

    Universal simultaneity is the same time everywhere; the universe is evolving in the present now. Of course observers only experience distant simultaneity when they are the exact midpoint between two simultaneous distant flashes. My essay treats the different dimensions you mentioned. I think you'll enjoy the essay and I look forward to any comments

    Edwin Eugene Klingman

    Hi Edwin, as you will see from my previous reply I differentiate between the Present now, and Unitemporal -Now. Present, now is the 'what and when' pertaining to products of observation. Experienced if an organism; produced and maybe output by an observing device. Unitemporal-Now is the foundational time, which is temporal expression of the entire configuration of existing things.

    I have been busy updating my own essay. I more clearly indicate how it addresses the set topic. I've also added further explanation of my use of 'beable' and the dimensions of observation products.

    The uni-temporal now is the one the I treat. This is interesting, the ability to update our essays. I look forward to reading your next version.

    5 days later

    Please don't be deceived by the elephants. This is a serious essay. I did not want to write a wall of words but something more interesting and attention holding.

    "Original and Creative: Foremost, the intellectual content of the essay must push forward understanding of the topic in a fresh way or with a new perspective. While the essay may or may not constitute original research, if the core ideas are largely contained in published works, those works should be those of the author. At the same time, the entry should differ substantially from any previously published piece by the author." FQXi.org competition guidelines (My added bold and italic emphasis).

    Dear Georgina,

    I like the elephant jokes and the notion of an elephant joke realm. I hadn't known that they were all the rage in the 60s but it does explain why I do happen to know one elephant joke - I was at the tail end of that wave. So thats one puzzle solved! Its unfortunately not publishable on this forum...

    Best of luck with the contest.

    Warm wishes

    Mozibur Ullah

      Hi Mozibur, thank you for taking a quick look and commenting. I do hope you get the chance to read the essay in full and are able to see that it goes much deeper. Part of it is dealing with contradiction and the notion of objectivity, which might be of particular interest to you.

      If a tree falls in the forest and there is no one to hear, does it make a sound?. The question was considered in drafting the original version, but cut to save characters.Sound (heard) is qualia, generated by the observer from pressure wave input to the auditory system of that observer. The wave phenomenon is potential sound but not manifest as sound until processing of the wave input is complete.So there is no sound (product) without an observer.There is a conundrum because the language is imprecise.If The external wave phenomenon and the experienced sensory perception are both be referred to as sound, that causes ambiguity. Re.what is the sound of one hand clapping? One hand alone does not make pressure waves that could be processed into sound (unaided by technology). Ignoring the idea that two hands 'become one' when they meet.Re. what is the colour of a vacuum? A vacuum does not contain substance that would absorb 'light'energy and re-emit only some frequencies, that when received by an observer can be processed into colour qualia. No colour is not a colour.

        nice insight on beagles, subjective,/objective reality. You have my votes. pls read/rate how Human bias or judgement made science, in my essay here https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3525.all the best to you.

          The language of Physics does not usually distinguish between potential sensory information in the environment and the product generated by an observer. eg. the words - Light, sound, smell, frequency.

          If true /false logic is a rock, then ambiguity is paper, and necessary and adequate differentiation is scissors.

          Thank Georgina, for engaging and interesting observations on my forum. To yours:

          The square of the hypotenuse is only equal to the sum of the squares on the other two sides if all sides are straight lines. If the hypotenuse is a wave path and the other two sides are straight lines, then Pythagoras theorem does not apply.

          I Answer.

          Yes, that's why I use exponents and logarithms in my formulas at the end of the essay. Then Pythagoras' theorem becomes a special case and approximation in the local part of the universe.

          Regards,

          Branko

            For any readers of the comments posted here. The comment I made eon Branko's page was written about Einstein's light clock thought experiment. The reasoning Einstein used about the experiment is used by him as support for Special Relativity. I was showing why that reasoning is not spot on. Written in regard to Branko's :"There are numerous traps in the application of mathematics in natural sciences...". and my: " it is difficult to know what is correct, when the model of reality being modeled is not necessarily so."

            9 days later

            Dear Georgina Woodward!

            We think that the concepts of the WORD and WORLD are not coincidentally so consonant. Оbviously the WINDOW used to be the WIND DOOR.

            We looked into our Siberian refrigerator and found a mammoth there!

            Pavel Poluian and Dmitry Lichargin,

            Siberian Federal University.

              Hi Pavel and Dmitry. I think if you read my essay you might find some ideas of interest to you in it. I do 'talk' about time near the beginning. The nature of time is a particular interest of mine. Near the end I'talk' about Pleistocene Park,, with which you must be familiar. Do you know about Harvard's project to create mammoth elephant hybrids? They have made some embryos.

              Hi Georgina,

              I know I have commented to you on my blog but I thought I had better re-inforce what I said here. Yours was the first essay I printed and read. I read it twice to my wife translating to her since I understood what you were saying. She asked me to vote publicly for her which I did early on.

              I have now read and commented on about 30 essays. It has been a full time job that I have taken seriously during these Covid19 isolation times. I have explored many nooks and crannies and found some like minded journeyists on the way. But you were the first I found that shared similar interests.

              I developed my theory of time some 5 years ago, although it had been a lifetime in the making. It has served me well, and even just yesterday explained the Andromeda Paradox away. So I get excited from time to time, when I use my own insights.

              Yesterday I critiqued Carlo Rovelli's essay on Presentism and Eternalism, and found that I did not agree with him on the definitions of presentism, which is why I think my relative verdandism makes more sense.

              We much touch base on the time topic after this essay comp. is over.

              Best regards

              Lockie Cresswell