What is the growing universe or growing block view?

According to the growing block universe theory of time (or the growing block view), the past and present both exist, and the future as yet does not. The growth of the block is supposed to happen in the present, a very thin slice of spacetime, where more of spacetime is continually coming into being.

What is the difference between Presentism and the growing block?

Presentism, eternalism, and growing-blockism are theories or models of what the temporal and ontic structure of the world is, or could be. Growing-blockism is, intuitively, a view that falls somewhere between presentism and eternalism. It rejects the ontological theses of both eternalism and presentism.

Is there an alternative to the block universe view?

First, to show that the block universe view, regarding the universe as a timelessly existing four-dimensional world, is the only one that is consistent with special relativity….Social Networking:

Who created the block universe theory?

Miller, who is the joint director for the Centre for Time at the University of Sydney, explained the theory in a piece published by ABC Science. Miller described how all moments that exist are relative to each other within three spatial dimensions and a single time dimension.

What is block universe theory?

According to the block universe theory, the universe is a giant block of all the things that ever happen at any time and at any place. On this view, the past, present and future all exist — and are equally real.

Does relativity of simultaneity imply the block universe?

We might summarize this argument in a single sentence as: relativity of simultaneity implies the block universe (i.e., it implies that all of 4-D spacetime must be fixed). However, as just stated, the argument is not complete; we need an additional premise.

Is the “block universe” view valid?

So in summary: a common argument for the “block universe” view, based on proposition (1), is invalid; but it’s invalid not because the conclusion doesn’t follow from the premises (it does), but because the second premise is not established.

How does Penrose divide the universe into the uncertain future and certain past?

In other words, Penrose is implicitly claiming that every observer, at a given event, divides the universe into the “uncertain future” and the “certain past”, based on his “surface of simultaneity” through that event.