= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
quen_tin comments on The Dilemma: Science or Bayes? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (185)
I really doubt it. how could you factually prove that the past or the future exist ?
Let's say my position is a very narrow version of Tegmark's view, and that I call "present" (with a certain thickness) the parts of the past and future that actually "exist".
First of all, I should have wrote "logically inconsistent", but "factually incorrect" sounded better. :) More importantly, it is possible that I misinterpreted what you wrote:
I interpreted this as a positive statement that an observer-independent present does actually exist, hundred percent. This is in contradiction with special relativity, as someone else already noted. Reading other comments from you in this thread, it seems like this is not what you meant. It is more like you choose the second option of my dichotomy: the frog's view instead of the bird's view. I have no problem with that.