Time&Eternity

Time in the Formulation of Scientific Theory 165
According to the assumption that the most comprehensive theory always
contains the more special ones as a limiting case, it follows: If this critical
interpretation applies, the collapse of the dynamic conception in quantum
cosmology must be of greater fundamental significance than the
evolutionary models for explaining the world. Then the collapse of the dynamic
concept in quantum gravity is “not just a detail at some irrelevant
scale, because it affects, or should affect, the concepts of space and time as
they are used at all levels.” 275
Repeatedly, experiments have been designed with the aim of circumventing
the problem of time. The physicist Julian Barbour provides an example
in this direction. 276 In 1999, he introduced his theory of a timeless
quantum cosmology. He maintains that he has been successful in uniting
Einstein’s theories of relativity, which deny the existence of a universally
valid time, with quantum mechanics, which appears to require such a time.
According to Barbour, there is no time. In his eyes, recognizing this represents
a revolution in our understanding of the universe. What we consider
to be time and movement is illusion. The only things that exist are timeless
moments. Barbour considers the notion of a timeline or a time arrow to be
unnecessary. Instead, he speaks of “time capsules.” 277 Such time capsules describe
all static formations that generate the impression that a process has
occurred. Both the brain seen in its entirety and the earth in its entirety are
time capsules. The time capsules can be hidden inside of one another like
Russian dolls. In deliberate allusion to the Greek philosopher, the world,
which is made of these special moments, is called Platonia. The name is
meant to mirror the mathematical perfection and the timeless landscape.
Platonia is the arena that, according to Barbour, replaces space and time.
Platonia and the quantum-theoretical wave function, as Barbour understands
it, form the universe. The philosophy or theology that appears to result
from this concept expresses itself in a worship of the “now” or in a pantheistic
worldview. 278 In Barbour, once again that which has already been
addressed several times becomes evident, namely, how short, in many respects,
the distance is between mathematics and theology: “It seems that the
greatest engine of cultural change—the scientific world-view—rests on a
mathematical foundation that, in many respects, is ultimately religious.” 279
What has been presented in this section indeed deals with ideas that lie
within the sphere of what currently constitutes the boundary of cosmological
research and no doubt contains speculative elements. Nevertheless, it is
clear that the universe does not have a precisely defined time if one wishes
to unite the general theory of relativity with quantum physics. Thus, the
possibility “that the evolutionary presentation [of space and time in cosmology]
is one of limited validity, and not the most fundamental one” 280 cannot