Have you went down any internet rabbit holes only to come out with a deep set existential crisis? If so, what are they?

  • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    You can have situations where person 1 sees an event happen as A B and person 2 sees that same event happen as B A.

    This is only true if A and B are not causally related. If A causes B all observers will see A causing B.

    • Colonel Panic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Are you 100% on that? I thought it was recently proved that it actually could be reversed. Maybe I misunderstood. Thinking about this stuff makes my brain feel fuzzy and numb, but like, more than usual.

      • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yes, I am 100% on that.

        If A causes B, that is true for all observers. Otherwise you get into causeless actions.

        Imagine observer 1 (O1), sees one rock (A) crash into another (B) and it changes it’s direction of travel. O1 has on opinion on the sequence of events.

        How imagine observer 2, (O2) watching the same events from a different perspective.

        There is no situation or perspective O2 can take which would have B change direction before the collision with A.

        Therefore no matter their perspective both O1 and O2 agree on the sequence of events. Thus causality is fundamental.