Got a Minute?

The Order of Time by Carlo Rovelli

This book will hurt your brain and you will like it! In the first part he destroys all concepts of past, present and future. In subsequent chapters he puts them back together for you in a comfortable manner, only to tear apart the theories again. The main theme of the book posits there is no variable “t” for time. There are only events, relationships between events and probabilities which define time. All of which depend on our perspective. This doesn’t help because there are as many different perspectives of time as there are points of space in the universe.

The author has spent most of his life trying to pin down the science of time in facts we can prove as well as theoretical. One aspect that stick with me is the theory that time, like matter is granular. Just as there is a minimum Planck length of matter, there is also a minimum Planck length of time. Below which time doesn’t exist. This is Rovelli’s main area of study.

The book intertwines science and philosophy but he makes clear distinctions of which he is talking about. Although each can seem as valid as the other.

I found it captivating and also interesting for another reason. It was narrated by Benedict Cumberbatch. That was a surprise to me but I know very little about him other than his name showed up quite frequently in social media, I suppose for it’s uniqueness.

I am waiting to listen to another of Rovelli’s books, “Seven Brief Lesson on Physics”

2 thoughts on “Got a Minute?

  1. I guess to me what clearly demonstrates to me that time exists (although how we conceive of it is certainly relative, and gravity warps space-time) is that if I am at a place with coordinates X-Y-Z at time A, but not time B, and someone else is at X-Y-Z at time B, but not time A, we’re not there together. If we’re both there at time A, we’re on top of one another. X-Y-Z are the same; the difference is time.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. That is how I think. I can’t explain his reasoning but his idea is there is no such thing as the same place at the same time. They are outdated concepts so it makes no sense to ask the question. He admits most of the book is conjecture. But based on the study of physics. He is theoretical.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s