Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why ‘NOW’?

  • Discussion
  • Published:
Journal for General Philosophy of Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A recently published hypothesis on the nature of time by physicist Robert Muller seeks to provide an objective account of the present moment (the ‘now’) and the ‘flow’ of time. Muller also claims that his hypothesis makes testable predictions. It is shown that the predictions offered cannot be used to test Muller’s hypothesis, that the hypothesis (as presented) does not rate scientific status, has a number of questionable metaphysical premises, and is merely a re-fashioning of the Growing Block theory of time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  • Alexander, S. (1920). Space, time, and deity. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Khalili, J. (2012). Black holes, wormholes & time machines (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bojowald, M. (2017). Review of ‘Now: The physics of time’. Physics Today, 70, 57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourne, C. (2002). When Am I? A tense time for some tensed theorists. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 80, 359–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braddon-Mitchell, D. (2004). How do we know it is now now? Analysis, 64, 199–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braddon-Mitchell, D. (2013). Fighting the Zombie of the Growing Salami. In K. Bennett & D. Zimmerman (Eds.), Oxford studies in metaphysics (Vol. 8). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broad, C. D. (1925). Scientific thought. London: Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callender, C. (2000). Shedding light on time. Philosophy of Science, 267(Supplement), S587–S599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callender, C. (2008). The common now. Philosophical Issues, 18, 339–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callender, C. (2017). What makes time special?. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dainton, B. (2010). Time and space (2nd ed.). Durham: Acumen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, P. (2014). The arrow of time. Euresis, 7, 47–59. http://www.euresisjournal.org/public/article/pdf/31Davies.pdf.

  • Denbign, K. G. (1975). An inventive universe. London: Hutchison.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng, N. (2017). Making sense of the growing block view. Philosophia, 45, 1113–1127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dieks, D. (2006). Becoming, relativity and locality. In D. Dieks (Ed.), The ontology of spacetime. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorato, M., & Wittmann, M. (2015). The now and the passage of time: From physics to psychology. KronoScope: Journal for the Study of Time, 15, 191–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowden, B. (2013). Time. In: The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (ISSN 2161-0002, 2013). http://www.iep.utm.edu.

  • Earman, J. (2008). Reassessing the prospects for a growing block model of the universe. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 22, 135–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, G. F. R. (2007). Physics in the real universe: Time and space–time. In V. Petkov (Ed.), Relativity and the dimensionality of the world. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, G. F. R. (2013). The arrow of time and the nature of spacetime. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 44, 242–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, G. F. R. (2014a). The evolving block universe and the meshing together of times. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1326, 26–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, G. F. R. (2014b). Time really exists! The evolving block universe. Euresis, 7, 11–26. www.euresisjournal.org/public/article/pdf/Ellis.pdf.

  • Faye, J. (1989). The reality of the future: An essay on time, causation and backward causation. Odense: Odense University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, P. (1972). Nowness and the understanding of time. In PSA 1972: Proceedings of the biennial meeting of the philosophy of science association. Chicago: Philosophy of Science Association.

  • Fraser, J. T. (1987). Time, the familiar stranger. Redmond: Tempus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, B. (2004). The fabric of the cosmos: Space, time and the texture of reality. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grünbaum, A. (1973). Philosophical problems of space and time (Boston studies in the philosophy of science) (Vol. 12). Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heathwood, C. (2005). The real price of the dead past: A reply to Forrest and to Braddon-Mitchell. Analysis, 65, 249–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hempel, C. G. (1966). Philosophy of natural science. New York: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horwich, P. (1987). Asymmetries in time: Problems in the philosophy of science. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoyng, P. (2006). Relativistic astrophysics and cosmology: A primer. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jardine-Wright, L. (2016). Rethinking the arrow of time: Citing shortcomings in Eddington’s theory, a physicist proposes a new explanation for the existence of “now”. Science, 353(30), 1504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosso, P. (1992). Reading the book of nature: An introduction to the philosophy of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kroes, P. (1984). Objective versus minddependent theories of time flow. Synthese, 61, 423–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, B. (2016). A defeating objection to dynamic block theories of time. Thought, 5, 185–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewens, T. (2015). The meaning of science. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobo, F. S. N. (2008). Nature of time and causality in physics. In S. Grondin (Ed.), Psychology of time. Bingley, West Yorkshire: Emerald Group Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merricks, T. (2005). Goodbye growing block. In D. W. Zimmerman (Ed.), Oxford studies in metaphysics (Vol. 2). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montani, G., Battisti, M. V., Benini, R., & Imponente, G. (2011). Primordial cosmology. New Jersey: World Scientific.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Muller, R. A. (2016). NOW: The physics of time. New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller, R. A., & Maguire, S. (2016). Now and the flow of time. arXiv:1606.07975v1. https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.07975 (Cornell University Library).

  • Newton-Smith, W. H. (1980). The structure of time. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oaklander, L. N. (2001). Tooley on time and tense. In L. N. Oaklander (Ed.), The importance of time. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, D., & Silberstein, M. (2010). Relativity of simultaneity and eternalism: In defense of the block universe. In V. Petkov (Ed.), Space, time, and spacetime: Physical and philosophical implications of Minkowski’s unification of space and time. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petkov, V. (2017). Spacetime and reality: Facing the ultimate judge. In S. Wuppuluri & G. Ghirardi (Eds.), Space, time, and the limits of human understanding. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, H. (1996). Time’s arrow and Archimedes’ point: New directions for the physics of time. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, H. (2011). The flow of time. In C. Callender (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of time. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, S. (2007). Could we experience the passage of time? Ratio, 20, 75–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, S. (2013). The passage of time. In H. Dyke & A. Bardon (Eds.), A companion to the philosophy of time. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, S. (2016). Experiencing time. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Riggs, P. J. (2017). The Perceptions and experience of the “passage” of time. The Philosophical Forum, 48, 3–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rijsdijk, C. (2016). Book review: ‘Now—The physics of time’. MNASSA: Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 75(9–10), 246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rindler, W. (2006). Relativity: Special, general, and cosmological (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romero, G. E. (2015). Present time. Foundations of Science, 20, 135–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rovelli, C. (1995). Analysis of the distinct meanings of the notion of ‘time’ in different physical theories. Il Nuovo Cimento B, 110, 81–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, R. (2016). In exploring the ‘now,’ new book links flow of time with Big Bang. Berkeley News (20 September). http://news.berkeley.edu/2016/09/20/new-book-links-flow-of-time-with-big-bang/.

  • Sider, T. (2003). Four-dimensionalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. J. C. (1963). The river of time. In A. Flew (Ed.), Essays in conceptual analysis. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, N. J. J. (2011). Inconsistency in the A-theory. Philosophical Studies, 156, 231–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tallant, J. (2007). There have been, are (Now), and will be lots of times like the present in the hybrid view of time. Analysis, 67, 83–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tegmark, M. (2014). Our mathematical universe. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, E. (2017). The roots of C. D. Broad’s growing block theory of time. Mind. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzx020&gt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, D. W. (2005). The A-theory of time, the B-theory of time, and ‘taking tense seriously’. Dialectica, 59, 401–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, D. W. (2011). Presentism and the space–time manifold. In C. Callender (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of time. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author thanks the anonymous reviewer for helpful suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Quantum Science, Australian National University, Building 38a, Science Road, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia

    Peter J. Riggs

Authors
  1. Peter J. Riggs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter J. Riggs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Riggs, P.J. Why ‘NOW’?. J Gen Philos Sci 50, 171–180 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-018-9420-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-018-9420-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation