Eternalism vs Presentism

The relativity theory unifies space and time into a single 4-dimensional continuum called the spacetime.  Albeit their unity, however, the theory inexplicably assumes that the nature of  dimensions at every point in the continuum differentiates into those of the space and time.

Such concept of spacetime sometimes is referred to as the block time, block universe or eternalism. Time is considered as having similar ontology to that of space, that future events are already there, and that there is no objective flow of time. The spacetime is viewed as unchanging 4-dimensional block as opposed to the view of the world as a 3-dimensional space perpetually modulated by the passage of time 1 .

This concept of the block universe adopted by the mainstream physics makes the physics now in trouble. This concept is totally wrong both physically and philosophically. A continuum should have inherently equivalent dimensions at its every point, except it had a discontinuity or boundary a) along which the block’s dimensions are transformed into spatial (Figure-1).

In our daily life, the biggest natural laboratory we ever experience in, one clearly observes the difference between the past, the present and the future. One perceives that as time passes, the moment that was once the present becomes part of the past, and part of the future in turn becomes the new present. As such we experience or at least perceive the passage of time, with a present moment moving forward into the future and leaving the past behind 2. Philosophically, such view of time is called presentism.

As we explain in the previous articles, our concept about the spacetime continuum is in line with this presentism, except that everything exists ephemerally. As such, when the part of the [nebulous] future is transformed into the new present, the moment that was once the present is annihilated into part of the [void] b) past. In this view, only the present is real, as opposed to eternalist idea that all points in time are equally real.

This act of perpetual creation and annihilation gives us the perception of time passage. This modified presentism accentuates the actuality of the present and its obvious difference from the potentiality of the future and the nullity of the past. Matters which exist only in the present are  exerted by the gravity and held together as a single whole on the plane c) of the present.

In order that the cause and effect principle prevails in their “chaotic” block universe, the physicists are forced to set up a light-cones system in which the individual light-cone may have different orientation (Figure-2). However, such a concept may lead us to a chaotic closed timelike curve that questions the integrity of such physical edifice.

The physicists are unaware that in such a symmetric block universe, which is timeless and eternal, no matter can exist, neither movement nor changes can possibly occur. Sooner or later the mainstream physicists should abandon their concept of the block universe which has led us to many misinterpretations such as determinism, time travel, many-worlds interpretation etc.

In the presentist universe, the block is spontaneously broken d) in two halves, creating a 3-dimensional interface in between the two as it is transforming the dimension along the interface into spatial. The space and the present time are, in fact, two different aspects of the same thing which is the smallest unit  of time. The eternity is, thus, broken bearing perpetually the present moment which splits barely the past from the future.


a)    Such as an interface or a surface in the case of liquid-like or a fissure in the case of solid-like continuum.

b)    Void of matter but not of energy.

c)    or a wavy surface or interface in order to be in line with the general relativity theory.

d)    This may be happened because of the segregation of inherent pair of energy’s opposite elements: the positive and negative energy.



  2. ibid.
  3. Penrose, R.: “The Road to Reality”, Vintage Book, London, 2005, p. 409.d

This entry was posted in Natural Philosophy and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s