McTaggart's argument:
- (1) Events are located in a B-series, only if time exists;
- (2) Time exists, only if there is genuine change;
- True because genuine change is all-pervasive.
- (3) there is genuine change in the world, only if events are located in a real A-series;
- True because tautological definition.
- (i) therefore events are located in a B-series only if they are located in an A series;
- True because Hypothetical syllogism.
- (4) if events are located in a real A-series, then each event acquires the absolute properties past, present, and future;
- True because that's what an A-series is.
- (5) there is a contradiction in supposing that any event has any two of these absolute properties;
- True because of relativity.
- (ii) therefore a real A-series cannot exist, and events are not ordered in a B-series.
- True because indirect proof, HS.
Horwich's argument:
- (1), (3)-(5) are fine as well as both conclusions.
- Tree-model defeats the contradiction of genuine change.
- No need for a moving now.
My argument:
- There is an alternative sense of change applicable to the tree-model.
- Other premises hold true when translated (except (4)).
- New contradiction based on newtonian mechanics and general relavitiy.
- Moving present would have equal opposite.
- Moving present was either created in motion or was put in motion.
- Cannot experience force because of masslessness of time.
- If a frame of reference had mass of universe, inconsistant masses over time because of energy conversion.
- LEss mass = more V (momentum conservation).
- Velocity of present = time experience of objects within.
- More time = less speed
- Universe is slowing down? Contradicts evidence of universe accelerating.
- Cannot have been put in motion post-creation.
- If it was created in motion, then opposite hits it's own creation immediately.
- Branching future, no branching past.
- Does not fit Horwich's model. Fits normal model of moving-time within tree.
mar 9 2011 ∞
mar 11 2011 +