Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

I believe a fundemantal problem with conventional spacetime diagrams is that for the T axis they use an abstract emergent /observer object that, by definition, cannot and does not follow a preferred geodesic.

A more accurate spacetime diagram would only use a preferred geodesic as any one of the axises on the diagram/graph.

That would give a picture that is much more revealing of the actual fundemantal physical nature of timeless spacetime.

It would likewise mean that no massive objects and thus also no observers could travel on or parallel to any of the axises.

In fact, in the most accurate diagram, any object with mass would presumably have to have a non-straight worldline, such that shortest path between any two points is a straight line (straight on the graph), meaning all straight lines on the graph correspond to preferred geodesics.

Granted, the paths of massive objects could be approximately represented as as a line with width with the understanding that the actual path of the photons and massless waves making up the object are themselves zigzaging (i.e. non-straight) lines.

The short simple point is that even when we are mapping special relativity in flat spacetime, non-preferred geodesics don't exist, and the flaw of the diagrams is that they use a non-preferred geodesic as the t axis.

A non-preferred geodesic instead needs to be represented as a zigzag.

[Elizabeth Atieno 7]

One fundamental problem with spacetime diagrams is their inherent two-dimensional representation, which can lead to misconceptions about the true nature of four-dimensional spacetime. Understanding events and causality accurately in such diagrams can be challenging due to this simplification.

[Josphat Gisiora]

This method could be particularly useful in scenarios where clarity and quick comprehension are essential, such as navigation systems or instructional diagrams. It allows users to easily identify alternative routes or deviations from the optimal path.

[Ronald Aminga]

By employing such a preferred trajectory as one of the axes, the diagram becomes a more faithful representation of the actual spacetime structure, allowing for a more nuanced understanding of the interplay between space and time along this specific geodesic. This precision is particularly beneficial in scenarios where certain paths or motions hold particular significance, enabling a more detailed analysis of events within the context of the chosen geodesic.

[Magrine Moegi]

This misalignment introduces a distortion in the depiction of spacetime dynamics, compromising the accuracy of the representation. To convey special relativity accurately, it's essential to adhere to the principles of preferred geodesics and ensure that diagrams faithfully reflect the true nature of flat spacetime phenomena.

[Sushan]

I see your point. Although I am not an expert in physics I know that time is relative and it tends to be affected by the mass of large objects like planets. We experience relatively short time periods close to the surface of the earth and same time periods gets lengthy when we are away from the surface. So indeed we face practical issues when taking time into an axis of a diagram due to its relativity.

However, I recently started a discussion on its effect on our moral responsibility, and here is the link to that discussion topic.

https://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums ... hp?t=19575