1

Does anyone know any philosopher(s)/mathematician(s) who has proven that existing is being part of change in time or a journal article from a credential academician/scholar who conclude this with proof or claimed by valid axiom(s)?

Some source came up like Kant and Hume, but I seek specific reference to sources and (page numbers).

With change I mean that the arrow of life is always moving forward in time independent of the observer. An axiom would be even better.

|improve this question
  • Most believe that abstract/mathematical entities exist atemporally, so proving "that existing is being part of change in time" would be hard. An axiom is anything taken without proof, so what does "valid" mean? Are you asking for philosophers who do not allow for anything non-temporal to exist? Kant will not be one of them, try presentism. Time independent of the observer was a standard postulate of classical physics since Newton, see Absolute space and time, but is dropped in relativity. – Conifold Apr 4 '19 at 19:14
  • With valid axioms. It mean an a statement that is so evident or well-established. Their is not another way, if it is correct, to proof things besides the proof methods and axiom's. The philosopher who would be suited are the the one, who allowed temporal things to exist in human sense (e.g. dying and birth). But also allowed to reason about an independent chain of events (e.g history of human civilization are some really true events independent of humans view of point). Maybe some philosophers which researched relativity has thought about these questions. – user35095 Apr 4 '19 at 20:10
  • 1
    Leaving aside mathematical entities it is not really necessary to preve that things existing is space-time must constantly change since it is obvious. If an electron in another galaxy moves then so have I relative to it. If there is no change internal to the object then it is eternal and immutable, contrary to BB theory and all the evidence. It is possible to argue the Absolute never changes, pace Parmenides, but not if it is placed in space-time. . . , – PeterJ Apr 6 '19 at 9:36
3

Which philosophers have proven existing is being part of the change in time?

Coincidentally, I became interested in the work of Lee Smolin just last evening. A renowned theoretical physicist, he has made major contributions to the philosophy of physics. His areas of research includes cosmology. According to Wikipedia, in an article he wrote for Physics World, The Unique Universe (02 Jun 2009) Smolin shared profound discoveries about the nature of time:

  • There is only one universe.
  • All that is real is real in a moment, which is a succession of moments. Anything that is true is true of the present moment. Not only is time real, but everything that is real is situated in time. Nothing exists timelessly.

[Which is just a different way of saying that everything exists within the framework of time.]

  • Everything that is real in a moment is a process of change leading to the next or future moments. Anything that is true is then a feature of a process in this process causing or implying future moments.
  • Mathematics is derived from experience as a generalization of observed regularities, when time and particularity are removed. Under this heading, Smolin distances himself from mathematical platonism...

Furthermore:

Smolin views rejecting the idea of a creator as essential to cosmology on similar grounds to his objections against the multiverse. He does not definitively exclude or reject religion or mysticism but rather believes that science should only deal with that of which is observable. He also opposes the anthropic principle, which he claims "cannot help us to do science."

Outlining a review of Smolin's book, Time Reborn (2013), the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics (Canada) presents many intriguing points, including:

  • Whatever is real is just real in a moment of time, being one in a succession of moments.
  • The past was, but no longer is, real. We can, however, interpret the past by finding evidence of past processes in the present.
  • The future does not yet exist, and thus it is open. We can, however, make predictions, yet the future may produce genuinely novel phenomena.
  • Nothing transcends time, not even the laws of nature, which therefore can evolve over time.

I easily resonate with Smolin's ideas, except that I happen to believe contrarily that God does fit neatly into the elusive logical equation of ultimate truth and reality; despite the fact that so many philosophers and religious doctrines have traditionally (and probably wrongly, in my humble opinion) concluded that God transcends both space and time. My own believe is rather a little bit more like Spinoza's, and Bernardo Kastrup's, who stated in one of his videos that "the Universe is the body of God". I believe that God actually equals (rather than transcends or exists outside of) space and time, that God = Universe. I also believe God is Righteous (capital R).

In conclusion, to answer your question, "Which philosophers have proven existing is being part of the change in time?"

Lee Smolin has done an excellent job of proving it scientifically, and has given the world a tremendous body of evidence for it in his books, essays, and papers. Smolin is (or has been) also on the faculty of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics (cited here).

Wikipedia

Physics World, "The Unique Universe" by Lee Smolin (02 Jun 2009)

Academia, presentational review by the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics of Smolin's book, "Time Reborn", and article, "Time, Laws, and the Future of Cosmology", in Physics Today, AIP, March, 2014

Time Reborn by Lee Smolin (2013)

YouTube, "Lee Smolin Public Lecture: Time Reborn"

|improve this answer

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy