>>12112554>Doesn't four-dimensionalism imply eternalism?No. QFT is special relativistic but is non-deterministic, as it's a quantum theory, so events cannot be predicted beforehand. This is all airy-fairy nonsense, though. What does it mean to say that the past and future are as "real" as the present? What does "real" mean here?
The only things that are real in QM are things you've actually made a measurement of. Most of the past and present aren't real, and nothing in the future is real.
>>12113065>Smolin argues for what he calls a revolutionary view that time is real, in contrast to existing scientific orthodoxy which holds that time is merely a "stubbornly persistent illusion"Lee Smolin is a crank who has no idea what he's talking about. No serious physicists think time is an illusion, though the vast majority understand that time is relative and differs between observers, but the same is true of space: you say I'm 1m in front of you, but someone else says you're 2m to their right.
