Philosophy Discussion Forums

Saying "gravity is an expression of time" seems to imply to me that time is somehow a causal agent of gravity, and I can't imagine why anyone would say this. I don't know of anyone who posits that "time" is a cause of anything.

Actually, all phenomenon occur over time. So one could say that any phenomena is an "expression of time", in the sense that we need our cognition of time in order to observe them. The fact that there is a relationship between two variables does not imply to me that one is the "expression of" the other. It simply means that there is a relationship between the two variables.

Atreyu wrote:Saying "gravity is an expression of time" seems to imply to me that time is somehow a causal agent of gravity, and I can't imagine why anyone would say this. I don't know of anyone who posits that "time" is a cause of anything.

Actually, all phenomenon occur over time. So one could say that any phenomena is an "expression of time", in the sense that we need our cognition of time in order to observe them. The fact that there is a relationship between two variables does not imply to me that one is the "expression of" the other. It simply means that there is a relationship between the two variables.

Not quite. The relationship between time and gravity is specified in General Relativity and has been empirically verified many times. Although I prefer to think of the duration of time intervals as determined by the strength of the gravitational field I do this only for my own conceptual convenience. It would make just as much sense the other way around. We can't really say that gravity causes time or that time causes gravity because they're just two different ways of saying the same thing. Therefore they can be quantised equivalently and thus we have quantum gravity.

Do us a favour, mate. Could you ring the blokes In Oslo and let them know? I've no real interest in a Nobel but the missus could do with the dough.

Regards Leo