The nature of the physical worldEddington, Arthur Stanley, Sir
Philosophy
The nature of the physical world
Eddington, Arthur Stanley, Sir
Physics -- Philosophy; Science -- Philosophy
In such a region we lose time’s arrow. You remember that the arrow
points in the direction of increase of the random element. When the
random element has reached its limit and become steady the arrow does
not know which way to point. It would not be true to say that such
[Pg 79]
a region is timeless; the atoms vibrate as usual like little clocks;
by them we can measure speeds and durations. Time is still there and
retains its ordinary properties, but it has lost its arrow; like space
it extends, but it does not “go on”.
This raises the important question, Is the random element (measured
by the criterion of probability already discussed) the only feature
of the physical world which can furnish time with an arrow? Up to the
present we have concluded that no arrow can be found from the behaviour
of isolated individuals, but there is scope for further search among
the properties of crowds beyond the property represented by entropy.
To give an illustration which is perhaps not quite so fantastic as it
sounds, Might not the assemblage become more and more beautiful
(according to some agreed aesthetic standard) as time proceeds?[8] The
question is answered by another important law of Nature which runs—
Nothing in the statistics of an assemblage can distinguish a
direction of time when entropy fails to distinguish one.
I think that although this law was only discovered in the last few
years there is no serious doubt as to its truth. It is accepted as
fundamental in all modern studies of atoms and radiation and has proved
to be one of the most powerful weapons of progress in such researches.
It is, of course, one of the secondary laws. It does not seem to
be rigorously deducible from the second law of thermodynamics, and
presumably must be regarded as an additional secondary law.[9]
[Pg 80]
The conclusion is that whereas other statistical characters besides
entropy might perhaps be used to discriminate time’s arrow, they can
only succeed when it succeeds and they fail when it fails. Therefore
they cannot be regarded as independent tests. So far as physics is
concerned time’s arrow is a property of entropy alone.
Are Space and Time Infinite? I suppose that everyone has at
some time plagued his imagination with the question, Is there an end
to space? If space comes to an end, what is beyond the end? On the
other hand the idea that there is no end, but space beyond space
for ever, is inconceivable. And so the imagination is tossed to and
fro in a dilemma. Prior to the relativity theory the orthodox view
was that space is infinite. No one can conceive infinite space; we
had to be content to admit in the physical world an inconceivable
conception—disquieting but not necessarily illogical. Einstein’s
theory now offers a way out of the dilemma. Is space infinite, or does
it come to an end? Neither. Space is finite but it has no end; “finite
but unbounded” is the usual phrase.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account