Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Quote:
Seems to me that 'present' can be defined only in relation to consciousness


Would you say that time can be defined only in relation to consciousness...?

I think it most likely that time is as inextricably linked to consciousness as it is to space; that not only can there be no consciousness without spacetime, but no spacetime without consciousness.

"The problems highlighted by the cat-in-a-box experiment raise some very deep questions. What for example are the requirements needed to qualify as a 'conscious observer'? Do the probability waves of particles spread out again when not observed and particles somehow become less 'real', as described by the Copenhagen Interpretation? Does the universe exist only because we are here to observe it?"

http://www.thekeyboard.org.uk/Quantum%20mechanics.htm

"Does the Universe Exist if We're Not Looking", at:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/208321/Does-the-Universe-Exist-if-Were-Not-Looking-Discover-Mag

and

http://discovermagazine.com/2002/jun/featuniverse/article_view?b_start:int=1&-C=

(There's a problem with the last link. You may need to copy and paste it)

Incidentally, repeating what I noted elsewhere, it appears from my reading that the Planck time is considered by many theorists not to be the smallest possible time interval, only the smallest interval that could, theoretically, be measured. I may have read the wrong things - after all, the internet is a misinformation free-for-all - but all such info obviously needs thorough checking by anyone seriously studying the topic.



"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler