Block Universe Theory

To first summarize as to what this theory is: at it's core, this theory suggests that time is not truly flowing but instead exists as a four-dimensional "block," with all past, present, and future moments equally real. This means that, much like how every point in space exists simultaneously, every point in time also exists simultaneously. Which is really quite disturbing! Essentially, the universe is a giant, unchanging structure where change is merely an illusion of our perception.

The implications of this theory are mind-bending: It challenges our sense of free will, as the future is already "written," and it suggests that every event—past or future—is as concrete as the present moment. It's often associated with Einstein's theory of relativity, which treats time as a dimension just like space.

Do you feel like the universe must have some room for spontaneity? :-)

Interestingly, if the block universe theory were indeed true (or rather real) it would mean that there is an universe in which Venus is ruled by sentient marmalade. (They have a troublingly disturbing addiction of really quite hastily consuming creosote).

Also, the block universe theory, while fascinating, isn't without its critics! (I thought it best to include some of them here just in case you found the theory to be really very disturbing and required some immediate evidence to disprove it!)

If the past, present, and future are all fixed within the "block," it suggests that free will is an illusion. Many philosophers and scientists argue that this deterministic view is incompatible with human experience, where choices seem real and significant.

The block universe is largely rooted in relativity, but quantum mechanics introduces uncertainty and probabilities that don’t neatly fit into a fixed timeline. The randomness inherent in quantum events suggests that the future may not be fully predetermined.

The theory doesn’t fully explain our perception of the "flow" of time. While physics treats time as another dimension, human consciousness experiences time as a dynamic progression rather than a static structure.

If all moments exist equally, what determines the experience of cause and effect? Some argue that the block universe struggles to account for why the past influences the future but not vice versa in practical experience.

The second law of thermodynamics states that entropy increases over time, implying a directionality to time. Critics argue that this natural progression contradicts the idea of a fully predetermined block structure.

In conclusion, some alternative theories attempt to preserve a more intuitive experience of time - very much like the growing block universe, where the past is fixed but the future remains open! Salutations! :-)

  • "In short, the collection of conditional states can represent a human at every clock time as having the subjective perception of the present moment with memory of the past and awareness of the passage of time."

    The quantum theory of time, the block universe, and human experience
    Joan A. Vaccaro
    Published:28 May 2018

    royalsocietypublishing.org/.../rsta.2017.0316

  • Muslims believe that everything we do is written 'In the Tablets of Destiny' by Allah. While Revelation mentions 'The Book of Names' containing all destined for Eternal Life.

    From my experience, it seems that troublemakers were simply born that way. Fine with me. We shouldn't lose sleep over those who cause us harm. Some people just won't see the light. End of Story.

  • How do you know rocks aren't sentient?

  • I think you might find this to be interesting! (If, of course, you believe in Thermodynamics - that is!) To summarize, the second law of thermodynamics states that entropy always increases, which is as to why time seems to move forward rather than backward. This gives rise to the idea of the "arrow of time," which may be the best way to define the direction in which time ultimately progresses.

  • Really very interestingly, that is an ironically similar description to that of a future light cone, and (on further thinking!) time travel! (A classic space and time graph!) Although I do suppose we're trying to define time itself, and learn as to what it really is!

  • As do I! I have the same perception of time as a rock might have: absolutely and utterly nothing at all because rocks, as far as I'm aware, cannot perveive time nor "keep" it in the way of which we sentient organisms can. (To self!) What's carbon-dating about you idiot! Other than ageing, of course, which I really quite thankfully do too! Although I do very much like being young, and un-decrepidised! Never will I wish to age at a further rate! To summarize, I find it really very hard to keep time, especially so when I am tired! :-)

  • Interesting how earlier concepts of the Wyrd have assimilated through the years and have ended up in your thinking.

    The only theory of time I can get my head around is really a model of time — the worldwide 24 hour clock. It simply doesn’t make sense to me, to talk about anything other than that, otherwise it would be a different definition of ‘time’, and not as in 24 hours a day, 365 or 366 days per year, give or take a minor adjustment. Yes, of course there may be different recording mechanisms for time using say, the daily rising of the sun, or even approximations of time using say the average lifespan of a human, eg. 32 generations ago or 40 lifespans ago, but that is a different thing to the dimension of time in physics or talking about a predetermined future.

    I agree that not everything is predetermined, and I have forgotten all the philosophical arguments I once learned on the extent to which we are predetermined — they relate to free will arguments, none of us are truly free — but my brain becomes addled thinking of concepts such as time being an illusion.

  • I have no idea about time....I have a VERY awkward relationship with it, irrespective of whatever theory is ascribed to it.

  • Theses sorts of conversations make my head spin! I don't think time is a ball of string that unravels behind us into the past leaving the future in the as yet unwound ball ahead, nor do I believe that everyting is pre-determined. I've been working with the notion of the Wyrd for some years now and to me it makes the most sense, although I'm not sure I can explain it very well. The Wyrd is like a massive multidimensional tapestry, everything we do and say is woven from our threads mingliing and crossing with the threads of others, maybe some we've never met, the act of me writing this and you reading it means that our threads have crossed and/or aligned, we may weave our thread together or they will be side by side for a time, before one of us goes somewhere else and crosees with other threads. It all weaves a massive tapestry of being that incorporates all things, we maynot be able to change that which is already woven but we can choose how the weave is in the future.

    The Pagan Anglo-Saxons knew this and so did the Pagan Scandinavians, they personified the Wyrd as being woven by the Norns or Wyrd Sisters, bees as the agents of the Norns, tis is where the old belief still practiced by some, that you should tell the bee's all your family news, so as they can take it back to the Norns who will ensure it's woven into your thread.

  • Thanks Lotus. I’ll have a look at that. 

  • Hi Archaec, if you're interested in brain function and the differences between Autistic and NT minds, I'd recommend a book called "A field guide to Earthlings"  by Ian Ford

  • You have explained the arguments very clearly and they allowed me to reach my conclusion easily. I have never been able to get beyond the issue of ‘passage of time’ with many theories, but I like that you pose the question as I know it is of interest to people. 

    I recall posts on a similar topic on this forum a while back. Do you think that autistic people spend more time on this sort of thing than non autistic people? I don’t know anything about neuroscience but I would love to know and understand more about brain function. 

  • Whilst I don't actively believe in this theory, I do find it to be really very interesting - if not slightly disturbing! :-)

  • The theory doesn’t fully explain our perception of the "flow" of time

    It doesn’t explain the passage of time at all,  and that means I can’t get beyond that to engage in a serious argument.

    It might be an interesting philosophical exercise for some, and I expect it could lead to a discussion on the nature of free will, and to what extent we as human beings are determined by other’s actions.