Talk:Problem of time

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 5 June 2014 by reviewer Ritchie333 (talk · contribs).

Philosophy: Science / Contemporary Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophy of science
	Contemporary philosophy

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Time in quantum mechanics[edit]

at the end, where it says:

"Newtonian notion of time essentially carries over to special relativistic systems, hidden in the spacetime structure."

it is referring to the Causal structure of spacetime.

See also

Spacetime topology, or the topological structure of spacetime

Local spacetime structure, or spacetime structure on a local level

Mathematics of general relativity#Spacetime as a manifold (see Local versus Global structure) 71.82.112.140 (talk) 09:53, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

expert-subject template[edit]

I've added the expert-subject template. This article has some interesting ideas in it, but some of it is wrong, and a lot of it reads like an attempt by someone without deep expertise to summarize half-understood stuff that they've read.--76.169.116.244 (talk) 03:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

many-worlds interpretation[edit]

The article currently has this: "The theory that combines general relativity and quantum mechanics, Many worlds interpretation is called Wheeler–DeWitt equation. Wheeler–DeWitt equation says there is no time at all." This is total nonsense in technical terms, as well as being ungrammatical. The MWI has nothing to do with general relativity, nor does it "say there is no time." I'll delete this, but it's just the most egregious example of the poor quality of the article.--76.169.116.244 (talk) 04:02, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed, the many worlds theory does say that time does not exist in the way that time is ordinarily conceived. Time is not "flowing forward," or flowing at all. You just don't get it. 2600:8801:BE31:D300:870:52B6:866E:5A1A (talk) 01:16, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple histories[edit]

[1]"The only way to reconcile all the observations, Cotler says, is to conclude that the photon went through multiple histories in parallel."

So the reality may be against the Copenhagen interpretation and concept of consistent histories... Kartasto (talk) 11:42, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GR & QM[edit]

Is there scope for an article describing the conflicts/incompatibilities between general relativity and quantum mechanics, linking to this subject, and anything else, along with links to all the theories trying to merge/reconcile differences . This would be an overview, but could potentially be a place to provide more detail on this Fmadd (talk) 13:47, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OR?[edit]

I am not an expert but this looks awfully like OR / someone's pet opinion William M. Connolley (talk) 10:13, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The word "this" seems to refer to the whole article. I agree that time is hard to define. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gdklrtwb (talk • contribs)

The difficulty is mentioned in the WP article entitled Time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gdklrtwb (talk • contribs)

Arrow of time[edit]

"It also involves the related question of why time seems to flow in a single direction, despite the fact that no known physical laws at the microscopic level seem to require a single direction. For macroscopic systems the directionality of time is directly linked to first principles such as the second law of thermodynamics."

This is plain incorrect. There is a related "problem"/open question in physics under the name "the arrow of time", but both QM and GR are agnostic with respect to time reversal. Kilgore T (talk) 03:09, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]