The laws of physics have no preferred direction for time, unless you take quantum cosmology into account.
Humanity has long struggled over the nature of time. In the last
century, physicists were shocked to discover that the arrow of time
cannot be derived from the laws of physics which appear perfectly
symmetric. For every solution for t, there seems to be an equally
valid solution for -t (except in a few cases involving the weak force
in which case the symmetry is more complex, involving charge, parity
and time)
At first glance that looks puzzling. But after a few years
reflection, most physicists agreed that it's perfectly possible for
symmetric laws to give rise to asymmetric phenomena. Physicists have
identified a number of such asymmetric phenomena that represent
"arrows of time", says Claus Kiefer at the Institut fur
Theoretische Physik in Cologne, Germany.
Perhaps the most famous is the thermodynamic arrow of time in
which the entropy of a closed system must always increase. But there
is also a quantum mechanical arrow of time in which a preferred
direction of time is determined by decoherence and a gravitational
arrow of time in which the preferred direction is determined by
gravitational collapse.
"What is peculiar is the fact that the time direction of the
phenomena is always the same," says Kiefer. It's almost as if
the arrow of time were predetermined in some way. "The question
raised by the presence of all these arrows is whether a common master
arrow of time is behind all of them," he asks.
What master law might be responsible? Kiefer's conjecture is that
the direction of time arises when quantum mechanics is applied to the
universe as a whole, a branch of science known as quantum cosmology.
Central to this idea is the Wheeler-DeWitt equation that describes
the quantum state of the universe as a whole, including both its
gravitational and non-gravitational states.
This equation does not contain any parameter that is equivalent to
our classical notion of time. In the Wheeler-DeWitt formulation,
spacetime does not exist in any classical sense and particles do not
have traditional trajectories in spacetime, just as particles do not
have traditional trajectories in ordinary quantum mechanics. Instead
all the information about the universe is encoded in its wavefunction
So how might an arrow of time arise? While the universe is
considered homogeneous to the first degree, there is no preferred
direction of time, says Kiefer. But he shows that when small
inhomogeneities are taken into account, an asymmetry arises in this
wavefunction.
He even says that with slight elaborations, this idea could be
applied to an arrow of time in the multiverse.
What he fails to do, however, is provide a way of testing this
idea. There is no way of determining experimentally whether the
Wheeler-DeWitt formulation is really the origin of the arrow of time.
Of course, that's a common failure of most thinking about quantum
cosmology (not to mention cosmology in general). And until physicists
find a way to prune their ideas about time with experimental data, we
can merely marvel at their creativity.
Ref: arxiv.org/abs/0910.5836 : Can the Arrow of Time be Understood from Quantum Cosmology?
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Comments
Material objects, which are large then 1.73 cm tends to agglomerate in their gravity field into larger ones. This is essentially negentropic process, related to inverse time arrow, whereas object smaller then CMB photons are evaporating into radiation, whis is indeed common entropic process. For particles of energy the whole situation remains reciprocal: large photons are dissolving like tachyons in CMB, while smaller one are condensing into solitons, i.e. material particles
http://aetherwavetheory.blogspot.com/2009/08/awt-and-cosmological-time-arrow.html
ZephirAWT
11/03/2009
Posts:158
http://www.motionmountain.net/download.html
"Time is a concept introduced specially to describe the flow of events around us; it does not itself flow, it describes flow. Time does not advance. Time is neither linear nor cyclic. The idea that time flows is as hindering to understanding nature as is the idea that mirrors Page 71 exchange right and left. The misleading use of the expression ‘flow of time’, propagated first by some flawed Ref. 36 Greek thinkers and then again by Newton, continues. Aristotle (384/3–322 bce), careful to think logically, pointed out its misconception, and many did so after him. Nevertheless, expressions such as ‘time reversal’, the ‘irreversibility of time’, and the much-abused ‘time’s arrow’ are still common. Just read a popular science magazine chosen at random.
The fact is: time cannot be reversed, only motion can, or more precisely, only velocities of ojects; time has no arrow, only motion has; it is not the flow of time that humans are unable to stop, but the motion of all the objects in nature. Incredibly, there are even books written by respected physicists that study different types of ‘time’s arrows’ and compare them with each other. Predictably, no tangible or new result is extracted. Time does not flow."
captpaul
11/03/2009
Posts:1
There is no problem of "the arrow of time." There simply is no arrow of time, as if time could go one "way" rather than another. That metaphor is an unfortunate result of spatializing time. The picture of time as a line along which one might travel in one direction or the other is a conceptual disaster. Time is becoming. Becoming is change. The undoing of a change is also a change. There is no "unbecoming."
Source: "Time, c, and nonlocality: A glimpse beneath the surface?" Physics Essays, vol. 7, pp. 335-340, 1994
The amazing counterintuitive truth is that a time dimension would make motion impossible. We can still talk about time but only in the abstract. Why isn't this common knowledge in the physics community? Why are so many famous physicists like Stephen Hawking, David Deutsch, Kip Thorne and others still talking about time travel as if it were a possibility? Why does anybody at Technology Review consider this to be a serious scientific topic? Physics needs another radical Kuhnian revolution. That's why.
Nothing Can Move in Spacetime:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Crackpots/notorious.htm
Mapou
11/04/2009
Posts:86
In analogy with water surface, which is forming local space-time for surface wave spreading, space dimensions are directions plan-parallel with water surface, whereas time direction is normal to this gradient. In this way, time has always an arrow, defined by gradient, which is forming space-time.
This geometrical model of space-time explains (between many others), why time has an arrow, whereas space-time not and it's easy to extrapolate into space-times with many time dimensions, like space-time branes.
ZephirAWT
11/04/2009
Posts:158
The very fact that we are here and now implies the need for some processes, which have taken their "time" to evolve and lead to the present situation. Allowing the possibility that these processes could be reversed is alike to considering that some God set them up intentionally just to create us, i.e. it's an unnecessary (and complicated) assumption. The "speed" of these processes may change, according to relativity (or to subjective experience, some psychologists would say), but reversing it would reverse any consequence of the concept "evolution", in any physical, logical or Darwinian sense. Which is pure nonsense.
Perhaps it is just a misunderstanding arising from mathematical formulations? I also appreciate the baffling beauty of the mathematical laws which attempt to describe our universe, but don't think that the existence of a possible "-t" solution should lead us to consider the possibility of a reversed causality flow. These consequences look unnecessarily complicated - normally the simplest solution is also the most likely.
Perhaps in the "-t" solution, things "evolve" exactly as in our world, but people draw graphs with a "time arrow" pointing to the left instead...
Fabrizio
11/04/2009
Posts:3
ZERO CAN BE TOO MAGICAL:
Any proposed formula explaining something can be turned into an equality equaling zero by subtracting some out_of_hat "K", etc to sprinkle a little fairy dust on the idea and get a fashionable zero out of it. Watch out for fashionable ways to get zero out of anything with magic numbers in units which maybe not quite exist.
REAL NON SYMMETRY
In a scenario where time has a from / to point which involves the conjecture a to / from point also may exist, seeking some non-zero sum, non transmutable quantities is essentially required. The explanations for inflation, etc to explain the disparity of matter and anti-matter to me, un convincing somewhat. If Cosmic censorship is true, no alteration of time can be directly experienced, no matter how much taxpayer money and thinking time is dissipated. Looking what comes and goes, and at what rate versus our "real time", is an indirect method. So, god(s) bless the measurers of c and electron volts, gravity, etc though we all expect nothing, there poking in the right bush set. I think they should poke in matter antimatter counts, and the Casmir effect.
dan_kolis
11/04/2009
Posts:2