Well explained and clear stream of conciousness, for this observer. Started to loose the thread at 9:35, as I'm trying to imagine and equating the sudoko puzzle with a 4d spacetime, making the event of measurement of the entanglement a spacetime location in that fourdimensional manifold, and with that two spacetime coordinates and events. Which makes a foliation...which comes back to the original problem of simultaneity. So yes, my mind is still boggled by all this, and one day hope your sudoko picture clicks with me. I see some kind of resemblence with the block universe...but I cannot make the picture click in my brain. And it makes me feel bad, because it implies ms. Adlam understands something I don't
10:20 More like time is relative and a perspective. She didn't touch the quantum eraser delayed choice or the 3 polarization trick. Also constraints of the systems. In the end quantum needs to fit with classical and classical needs to fit with quantum to make the shared reality we all see. Bell even argued for hidden variables after his results. Not only that, but limitations on quantum foam and what part of gravitational waves contributes if any. The universe as one timeline also gets to predictive analytics and modeling and the general rule of the more you know about a system, the more predictive power you can have. To add to it all. The colapse theories and emission are known, nothing to argue about really. Other than which one to use or argue points about. At any rate. Nice to see someone thinking about the time parts.
Theres nothing in sudoku that looks like spatially linear causality either, so the metaphor kind of falls apart. Anyone wanting to claim that time isn't linear needs to explain why causality looks awfully linear. To me it makes mich more sense to look at neo-lorentzian special relativity. Has exactly the same math and predictions as spcial relativity as we know it, but the geometry is emergent from an absolute space and time. It sounds a little kooky at first, but when you wrap your head around it a little more, it makes an incredible amount of sense amd seems very difficult to argue against.
So interesting talk! I like the big picture it provides on perception of time and what it means from scientific and human-being perspectives.
Well explained and clear stream of conciousness, for this observer. Started to loose the thread at 9:35, as I'm trying to imagine and equating the sudoko puzzle with a 4d spacetime, making the event of measurement of the entanglement a spacetime location in that fourdimensional manifold, and with that two spacetime coordinates and events. Which makes a foliation...which comes back to the original problem of simultaneity. So yes, my mind is still boggled by all this, and one day hope your sudoko picture clicks with me. I see some kind of resemblence with the block universe...but I cannot make the picture click in my brain. And it makes me feel bad, because it implies ms. Adlam understands something I don't
10:20 More like time is relative and a perspective. She didn't touch the quantum eraser delayed choice or the 3 polarization trick. Also constraints of the systems. In the end quantum needs to fit with classical and classical needs to fit with quantum to make the shared reality we all see. Bell even argued for hidden variables after his results. Not only that, but limitations on quantum foam and what part of gravitational waves contributes if any. The universe as one timeline also gets to predictive analytics and modeling and the general rule of the more you know about a system, the more predictive power you can have.
To add to it all. The colapse theories and emission are known, nothing to argue about really. Other than which one to use or argue points about.
At any rate. Nice to see someone thinking about the time parts.
Theres nothing in sudoku that looks like spatially linear causality either, so the metaphor kind of falls apart. Anyone wanting to claim that time isn't linear needs to explain why causality looks awfully linear.
To me it makes mich more sense to look at neo-lorentzian special relativity. Has exactly the same math and predictions as spcial relativity as we know it, but the geometry is emergent from an absolute space and time. It sounds a little kooky at first, but when you wrap your head around it a little more, it makes an incredible amount of sense amd seems very difficult to argue against.