本集简介
双语字幕
仅展示文本字幕，不包含中文音频；想边听边看，请使用 Bayt 播客 App。
如果时间是一条河流，你是在河中随波逐流，还是站在岸边旁观时间流逝？
If time is a river, are you in the river flowing with time, or are you standing on the bank watching as time goes by?
我们说了这些之后，就开始把时间当作一种量来谈论。
We say all of that, and we start to speak of time as a quantity.
如果它是一种量，那它就是一种可以节省、浪费、存入银行或花掉的量。
And if it's a quantity, it's a quantity that you can save or waste or put in the bank or spend.
预言故事，是关于信息逆时间流动的故事。
Prophecy stories, they are stories about information moving backward in time.
这只是
It's just
视角不同而已。
that the perspective is different.
它们是从接收未来信息的人的视角讲述的。
They are told from the point of view of the person receiving the information from the future.
真正的预言故事，其实非常古老。
And real prophecy stories, they are really old.
它们可以追溯到数千年前。
They go back thousands of years.
我认为它们是时间旅行故事的前身，几乎和讲故事本身一样古老。
I think of them as, you know, this sort of antecedent of time travel stories that are almost as old as storytelling.
但关键是，我所知道的所有古老预言故事中，总有人得到一个关于未来将发生之事的预言。
But the thing is, all prophecy stories of old that I'm aware of, someone gets a prophecy of something that'll happen in their future.
他们采取措施试图避免它，但这些措施本身却恰恰促成了预言的实现。
They take steps to avert it, and then they the steps they've taken merely bring about the prophecy.
他们让预言成为现实。
They cause it to come true.
可以说，闭合类时曲线已经解决了这个问题，否则就会出现像祖父悖论这样荒谬的情形。
Arguably, closed time like curves make the case done, or else you get these silly things like the grandfather paradox.
你回到过去。
You go back into the past.
你杀死了你的父母，因此你就不可能存在。
You destroy your parents, so therefore you could not have existed in.
哦，悖论。
Oh, paradox.
如果你不认为有自由意志，而是将整个现实、整个未来、整个过去以及空间中的所有点都视为某个方程的解，那么你只是得到了一个解。
If you don't have this notion of free will, instead all of reality into all of the future and all of the past and all of different points in space is all just a solution to the equation, then you just got a solution.
它就静静地在那里。
It's sitting there.
它是一个静态的物体。
It's a static object.
你无法沿着世界线行动并以某种自由做出决定来改变过去已经存在的东西。
There's no sense in which you could go along a world line and make a decision with some freedom to undo what was there in the past.
现在，让我们来点完全不同的东西。
And now for something completely different.
去年十月，圣塔菲研究所在SITE Santa Fe举办了第三届星际节，庆祝人类在拓展对宇宙的理解与存在方面所面临的极其长远的时间尺度、深刻的科学与哲学问题、心理挑战和工程难题。
Last October, the Santa Fe Institute held its third interplanetary festival at SITE Santa Fe celebrating the immensely long time horizon, deep scientific and philosophical questions, psychological challenges, and engineering problems involved in humankind's great work to extend its understanding and presence into outer space.
在第三届活动中，我们将注意力转向了那些可能连下一代人都无法看到完成的远大项目。
For our third edition, we turned our attention to visionary projects living generations will likely not live to see completed.
星际旅行、地外城市，以及将时空视为一种邀请，让科学不再仅仅是有趣，而是变得极其有趣。
Interstellar travel, off world cities, radical new ways of understanding space time as an invitation to engage in science as not merely interesting, but deeply fun.
对于我们的第一个小组讨论，我们决定提出问题。
For our first panel, we decided to inquire.
时间究竟是什么？
What is time really?
科幻作品如何改变了我们追踪、衡量、谈论和体验时间的方式？
How has science fiction changed the way we track and measure, speak about, and live in time?
复杂系统科学又是如何提出并回答这些最根本的问题的？
And how does complex system science pose and answer these most fundamental questions?
欢迎收听《复杂性》，圣塔菲研究所的官方播客。
Welcome to Complexity, the official podcast of the Santa Fe Institute.
我是您的主持人迈克尔·加菲尔德。
I'm your host, Michael Garfield.
每隔一周，我们都会带您参与与全球范围内严谨研究者的深入对话，他们正在构建新的框架，以解释宇宙最深层的奥秘。
And every other week, we'll bring you with us for far ranging conversations with our worldwide network of rigorous researchers developing new frameworks to explain the deepest mysteries of the universe.
在本期节目中，我们将分享来自2022年星际节的关于时间的复杂观念小组讨论，该讨论由圣塔菲研究所所长大卫·克拉考尔主持，嘉宾阵容包括科学记者詹姆斯·格雷克、科幻作家兼圣塔菲研究所米勒学者姜峯楠，以及物理学家、圣塔菲研究所教授大卫·沃尔珀特。
In this week's episode, we share the complex conceptions of time panel from InterPlanetary Festival twenty twenty two moderated by SFI president David Krakauer and featuring an all star trinity of panelists, science journalist James Gleick, sci fi author and SFI Miller Scholar Ted Chiang, and physicist and SFI professor David Wolpert.
在本节目中，我们将探讨并剖析一些关于时间的流行隐喻，梳理时间数学化的历史，回顾科幻作品中的时间旅行，并审视自由意志与决定论之间的争论。
In this hour, we play with and dissect some favorite metaphors for time, unroll the history of time's mathematization, review time travel in science fiction, and examine the arguments between free will and determinism.
请务必访问我们的详细节目说明页面，获取所有参考文献的链接，网址为 complexity.simplecast.com；此外，我们还提供了互动式网页版“旅行者金唱片”内页说明，不仅包含2022年星际节所有小组讨论的链接，还有大量额外资源，如贡献者简介、同行评审论文、科幻与非虚构科学写作等。
Be sure to check out our extensive show notes with links to all of our references at complexity.simplecast.com, as well as the extensive interactive web based Voyager Golden Record liner notes with links to not only all the panels from IP Fest twenty twenty two, but also copious additional resources, including contributor bios, peer reviewed publications, science fiction and nonfiction science writing, and more.
如果您认可我们的研究与传播工作，请在Apple Podcasts或Spotify上订阅、评分并评论我们的节目，并考虑通过 santafe.edu/engage 网站捐赠或以其他方式参与我们的活动。
If you value our research and communication efforts, please subscribe, rate, and review us at Apple Podcasts or Spotify and consider making a donation or finding other ways to engage with us at santafe.edu/engage.
如果您希望获取圣塔菲研究所校园的高清虚拟背景用于视频通话，并有机会赢取一本由圣塔菲出版社签赠的书籍，请完成一项关于我们各SICOM渠道的调查，帮助我们提升科学传播效果。
If you'd like some HD virtual backgrounds of the SFI campus to use on video calls and a chance to win a signed copy of one of our books from the SFI press, help us improve our science communication by completing a survey about our various SICOM channels.
感谢您的时间。
Thanks for your time.
最后，我们即将推出一系列暑期项目。
Lastly, we have a bevy of summer programs coming up.
请于6月19日至23日参加‘集体智能基础与激进思想’活动，这是首次面向学术界与专业人士开放的活动，内容涵盖适应性物质、动物群体、大脑、人工智能、团队等主题。
Join us June 19 through the twenty third for Collective Intelligence Foundations and Radical Ideas, a first ever event open to both academics and professionals with sessions on adaptive matter, animal groups, brains, AI, teams, and more.
名额有限，但申请截止日期已延长至3月1日。
Space is limited, but the application deadline has been extended to March 1.
或者申请参加复杂性与社会科学研究生工作坊，或英国复杂性GAINS博士生项目，也可以查看我们发布的职员或研究职位招聘信息。
Or apply to the graduate workshop on Complexity and Social Science or the Complexity GAINS UK program for PhD students or check our open listings for a staff or research job.
加入我们的Facebook讨论组，结识志同道合的人，畅聊每一期节目。
Join our Facebook discussion group to meet like minds and talk about each episode.
感谢收听。
Thanks for listening.
如果坦诚地说，基本前提是我认为，要让科学变得享乐主义，需要什么条件？
The basic premise, I guess, if I was honest, is what would it take to make science hedonistic?
你不是要告诉人们他们必须去做，而是要告诉他们该停下来。
And instead of telling people that they have to do it, you'd have to tell them to stop it.
这就是我所希望的。
And so that's what I would like.
因此，接下来我将邀请今天的第一场时间主题小组上台，他们就坐在这里。
So with that, I'm gonna invite up the time panel for our first panel of the day, and they're sitting right here.
所以你们都上来和我一起吧。
So why don't you all come up and join me?
好的。
Alright.
你们每个人都有话筒。
So you all have mics.
记住，这些是实物，需要放在你们的嘴前，而不是耳朵旁边。
Remember, they're physical objects that need to be placed in front of your mouth, not by the side of your ear.
这些是东西。
So these are things.
让我来介绍一下我的 panel 成员。
So let me introduce my panelists.
在我左边的是传奇人物詹姆斯·格雷克，他是一位获奖的叙事性非虚构作家，被誉为有史以来最伟大的科学作家之一。
On my left, the legendary James Gleick, award winning author of narrative non fiction called one of the greatest science writers of all time.
据他自己说，他是《时间旅行：一段历史》《混沌：开创一门新科学》《信息》等书的作者，我认为詹姆斯和他的作品在某种程度上定义了我们所做的许多科学工作，他还撰写了极其出色的书籍，而这还远未穷尽。
According to him, he's the author of Time Travel, A History, Chaos, Making of a New Science, The Information, and he I think James and his work delimits a lot of the science actually that we do in one way or another, and has written really extraordinary books, not and that doesn't exhaust it.
他的费曼传记非常精彩，如果你还没读过，我强烈推荐詹姆斯的作品。
His biography of Feynman is really a wonder if you've not read it, so I highly recommended James' work.
坐在他旁边的是传奇人物特德·姜。
Sitting next to him, the legendary Ted Chiang.
他几乎赢得了你能想到的每一个科幻奖项。
He's won just about every single science fiction award you could name.
星云奖、雨果奖、洛斯奖，他的短篇小说《你一生的故事》被德尼·维伦纽瓦拍成了非常出色的电影《降临》，你们大多数人应该都看过。
Nebula awards, Hugo awards, Locust awards, his short story of your life was made into the really wonderful film Arrival by Denis Villeneuve, which most of you have seen.
他还是圣塔菲研究所的米勒学者，这可能是他做过的最重要的事。
He's also a Miller Scholar at the Santa Fe Institute, is the most important thing he's ever done.
我认为，特德在用优雅的方式阐述科学方面非常罕见。
Ted is rare, I think, in the elegance with which he writes about science.
他的故事有着精美的细工般的完美，我们都十分钦佩。
There's a beautiful filigree perfection to his stories, which we all very much admire.
他在《商人与炼金术之门》一书中有一句精彩的话，我们稍后会谈到，我认为这句话应该成为我们本次对话的精神指引。
He actually has a wonderful sentence in his book that we'll get to, The Merchant and the Alchemist's Gate, which I think should be the spirit in which we conduct this panel.
他说，是那种驱使人们去观察被处决者头颅的好奇心在推动着这一切。
And he says, driven by the curiosity that impel men to inspect the heads of the executed.
好吧，也许不是。
Okay, maybe not.
然后，当然，我的同事、圣塔菲研究所的教授大卫·沃尔珀特，他研究计算的热力学、物理学的基础以及社会组织的动态。
And then, of course, my colleague, professor at the Santa Fe Institute, David Wolpert, he works on thermodynamics of computation, the foundations of physics, the dynamics of social organizations.
他是一位真正的通才。
He's a true polymath.
大卫是那种能够轻松跨越逻辑与精密世界以及机器世界的人，这种能力非常独特。
And David's one of those people who seems to straddle quite effortlessly the world of logic and crystalline worlds and the worlds of machines, which is quite a unique set of skills.
今天的讨论主题并不是时间本身，而是时间的表征。
Let me today's panel is not about time per se, but the representation of time.
时间是一条河流，时间是时空，时间是反馈回路。
And time is a river, time is space time, and time is feedback loops.
我们对这一主题的思考，其深度只取决于我们对其的表征方式。
And our thinking about this topic is only as strong as our representations of it.
我们常常会困在自己的表征中，也许我们可以结合1922年爱因斯坦与柏格森的辩论来讨论这一点。
And often we get locked into, actually, our representations, and we'll talk about that maybe in relation to the Einstein Bergson debate in 1922.
但首先我想快速问你一个问题，他们其实没料到我会问这个：你对时间有没有一种直觉性的审美感受？
But the first thing I want to ask you quickly, and they're not really expecting this, is do you have an instinctual aesthetic sense of time?
你有没有一个特别喜欢的关于时间的模型或隐喻？
Do you have a favorite model and metaphor for time that you think about?
詹姆斯，因为你离我最近，我先问你。
James, since you're closest to me, I'll ask you first.
隐喻。
Metaphors.
时间全都是关于隐喻的。
Time is all about metaphors.
你已经提到了河流。
You've already mentioned river.
这可是每个人的最爱。
That's everybody's favorite.
时间是一条河，你无法两次踏入同一片水域。
Time is a river that you can't step into the same place twice.
这是对一个根本不存在的记忆的扭曲翻译，而这个记忆本应是赫拉克利特说过的话。
That's a butchered version of a butchered translation of a nonexistent memory of something Heraclitus is supposed to have said.
豪尔赫说时间是一只老虎。
Jorge said time is a tiger.
人们常把时间比作一根线或一架梯子。
People talk about time as a thread or a ladder.
目前，我们无法不用隐喻来谈论时间。
Currently, can't talk about time except in metaphors.
河流这个隐喻的奇妙之处在于，它完全说不通。
What's fantastic about the river metaphor is it makes no sense whatsoever.
也就是说，如果时间是一条河，那你是在河里随波逐流，还是站在岸边看着时间流逝？
That is, if time is a river, are you in the river, floating along, flowing with time, or are you standing on the bank watching as time goes by?
我们说着这些话，又开始把时间当作一种量，而这种量是可以节省、浪费、存入银行、花费或耗尽的。
We say all of that, and we say, we start to speak of time as a quantity, and if it's a quantity, it's a quantity that you can save or waste or put in the bank or spend or pass.
许多科幻作家、哲学家，以及现在的物理学家都在为此苦苦挣扎，这正是让我觉得如此有趣的原因。
So many science fiction writers, philosophers, and now physicists are struggling with it, and that's what makes it so much fun for me.
作为非科学家，我有这种优势，不必对我所认为的科学未能得出最终答案而过于焦虑。
I have the luxury, not being a scientist, of not having to be too anxious about what I see as science's failure really to come to any final answer.
我并不是说科学应该试图为这个问题寻求一个最终答案。
Not that I believe science should attempt a final answer for that.
我觉得这些隐喻已经够多了。
I think that's enough metaphors.
很好。
It's good.
这些隐喻都很棒。
They're good metaphors.
它们
They're
有力。
strong.
泰德，你呢？
Ted, how about you?
你有最喜欢的吗？
Would you have a favorite?
所以我想提一个隐喻，这并不意味着我真的用它来看待世界，但我读过关于艾马拉文化的资料，他们的时空观与我们在西方最常见的观念恰恰相反。
So I guess one metaphor that I'd like to mention, which is not to say that I actually view the world through it, but I read about the Aymara culture where their perception of time runs counter to the ones that sort of we are most commonly familiar with in the West.
因为在西方，我们认为未来在我们前方，过去在我们身后。
Because in the West, we think of, you know, the future lies ahead of us, and the past lies behind us.
但据称，艾马拉人恰恰相反。
But apparently, the IMARA, they have it the other way around.
他们认为，在他们的语言中，未来是这样，过去是那样。
They think the metaphor in their language is that the future is this way, and the past is this way.
而且，某种程度上，这其实更有道理，因为你能看到前方的东西，而我们了解过去，却看不到身后的事物，也无法预知未来。
And, you know, at one level, this actually makes a lot more sense because, you know, you can see what's ahead of you, and we know the past, whereas we can't see what's behind us, and we don't know the future.
从这个角度看，这个隐喻其实比我们的隐喻更有道理。
In that sense, that metaphor actually makes a lot more sense than our metaphor.
对我们大多数人来说，当
To most of us, when
我们第一次听到这个说法时，会觉得很奇怪，因为这似乎意味着你是在倒着走之类的。
we first hear this, we'd like, that's weird because it seems like we're then you're, like, walking backwards or something.
但同样，你知道，这是因为我们将时间的流逝与物理运动联系在一起。
But again, you know, like, that's because we associate movement through time as being, you know, analogous to physical movement.
我们甚至称其为‘时间的流动’，这本身就是一种物理类比。
The the fact that we even call it movement through time is a physical analogy.
因此，当我以这种方式理解时间时，就好比我静止不动，而时间从我身边流过，随着越来越多的时间进入视野，这种理解似乎更有道理。
And so when I try and time that way, you know, it's like maybe I'm standing still and time is flowing past me, and, like, as more of it comes into view, that sort of makes sense.
但同样，你知道，这与我们在西方社会以及最熟悉的语言中所习惯的标准隐喻完全相反。
But, again, you know, like, it it runs very counter to the the standard metaphors that we have in Western society in the languages that we are most familiar with.
所以，正如我所说，这不是我能真正内化的一种隐喻，但我认为它非常有趣，值得思考，因为它提醒我们，我们对时间的普遍观念是多么受文化影响。
So like I said, you know, it's not a metaphor that I am really able to internalize, but it's one that I think is really interesting and worth thinking about as a way of reminding us of how culturally bound our sort of common conception of time is.
谢谢。
Thank you.
我会试着深入探究这一点。
I would try to dig deeper there.
这里有大量的隐喻。
There's a huge number of metaphors.
那么它们的共同点是什么？
So what is the commonality?
这些隐喻背后隐藏的共同根源是什么？
What is the hidden seed underneath from which all of these sprout?
为了进一步阐述我们从广义相对论中了解到的部分内容，关于这个洛克模型，我实际上会先厘清泰德提到的两个隐喻：一是过去与未来不同，二是似乎你在时间中移动。
To elaborate part of what we know from general relativity, this Locke model concerning this, I would actually start by disentangling a little bit two of the metaphors that Ted mentioned, that you know the past and not the future, and it appears as though you're moving across time.
时间本身并不移动。
Time does not move.
这是非常基础的物理原理。
That's very simple physics.
当你在纸上绘制图形时，要在一个变量上移动另一个变量，你需要两个维度。
For you to move one variable across another, when you graph something on a piece of paper, you need to have two dimensions.
这种运动是指，这个以某种特定速度变化，而另一个则在下方以不同速度变化。
The movement is that this one is changing at this particular rate of speed or what have you compared to that one down there.
因此，你有两个变量，一个是位置，另一个也是位置。
So there, you've got two variables, position versus, in that case, position.
时间是一个单一变量的东西。
Time is something with a single variable.
所以一定还存在别的东西。
So there's got to be something.
因此，并不存在所谓的时间这个概念。
So there's no such notion of time.
我们并没有一个‘现在’，然后另一个是时间。
We don't have, here is a present, and here is time.
我们并没有这两个变量。
We don't have the two variables.
那么，是什么让我们产生了误解，以至于不得不依赖隐喻呢？
So what might cause us to distort our understanding so that we are forced to rely on metaphors?
我认为泰德实际上触及了在很多方面属于根本性答案的内容。
And I think that Ted actually touched on what is, in many ways, the fundamental answer.
我们了解过去，但不了解未来。
We know the past and not the future.
在此基础上进一步探讨。
Build on that.
更准确地说，我们拥有记忆。
We have memories, to be a little bit more precise.
在文献中，这些记忆有时被称为过去的记录。
Sometimes they're called records in the literature of the past.
未来则没有任何记录。
None in the future.
再深入挖掘一下。
Dig further.
当我们说记忆与预测时，我们究竟指的是什么？
What do we mean when we say a memory versus something like a prediction?
记忆，两者都只是对过去某事物的统计概率性评估。
A memory, both of them are just statistical probabilistic assessments of something in the past.
你的记忆可能是错误的。
Your memories could be wrong.
我不是在谈论大脑那种缸中之脑之类的东西。
I'm not talking about a brain, the vat kind of a thing.
我只是想说，总体而言，你是在进行一种统计推断。
I'm just saying in general, it's a statistical inference you're making.
你正在观察眼前的一些东西——沙滩上的脚印、胶片上的照片、月球上的陨石坑——并根据你当前所见，对过去发生的事做出某种概率性预测，而这种预测有可能是错的。
You're viewing something here, a footprint on a beach, a photograph on a piece of film, a crater on the moon, and from that, you're making some statistical prediction about something that was in the past based upon what you're seeing right now, and it's got some probability of being wrong.
我们也会根据现在所见来预测未来。
We also make predictions about the future based upon what we see now.
我就说到这里，但我认为，我们之所以不得不使用如此多不同的隐喻，而且这些隐喻在各种文化中各不相同，究其深层原因，就在于我们对过去的记忆——也就是回溯预测——比对未来的预测要准确得多。
And I'll leave it here, but I think that a large part of the reason that we are forced to resort to so many different metaphors, which vary across all these cultures, actually, if you dig down, it's got to do with why our memory of the past, our retrodiction rather than our prediction, is so much more accurate than our memory of the future.
有理由相信物理学实际上提供了答案，但我会说，这种不对称性是所有其他现象的根本原因。
There are reasons to believe that physics actually provides the answer, but I would say that asymmetry is the cause of all the rest of it.
而这些隐喻、艺术与美感，正源于我们无法将这一切全部内化。
And the metaphors, the art, the beauty arises from our not being able to internalize all of that.
这是一个清晨的挑战，让我稍作展开。
This is an early morning challenge, let me expand a little bit.
其中一个重要的表征二元性，大卫其实也在暗示这一点，那就是叙事与几何之间的区别。
One of the big representational dichotomies, and sort of David David is alluding to that, is the narrative versus the geometric.
因此，有时这些被称为时间的A型理论与B型理论。
So the and sometimes these get called type a theories versus type b theories of time.
A型时间是有时态、变位和语法的时间。
Type a time is tensed, conjugated, grammatical time.
它认为存在现在、未来和过去。
It says there's a present, a future, and a past.
过去存在过，曾经存在。
The past exists, did exist.
充其量，它只是一种记忆。
At best, it's a memory.
现在是唯一真实的东西，未来则是可能性。
The present is the only thing that's real, and the future is potentiality.
这与大卫可能所指的另一种时间形成对比，即闵可夫斯基的四维时空，在那里一切皆已存在。
That's in distinction to this other time that David might be alluding to, which is Minkowski, four d space time, where everything exists.
这是一个静态的宇宙，你只是沿着世界线移动，这就是你对时间的体验。
It's a static universe, and you just move through the world line, and that's your experience of time.
于是问题就来了，我们稍后会谈到：为什么你会朝一个特定的方向移动。
And the question then becomes, and we'll get to it later, why you move in a preferred direction.
这一点让我很好奇，詹姆斯，你对此读过一些相关内容。
And this and I wonder, James, you've read about it a bit.
1922年在巴黎曾发生过一场重大争论。
There was a big debate in 1922 in Paris.
这其实算不上一场辩论。
It wasn't really a debate.
这实际上是爱因斯坦的一场演讲，柏格森在场，并对这种四维时空的块宇宙观提出了异议。
It was really a talk that Einstein gave, and Bergson was there, and objected to this four d space time block universe.
反对的主要依据来自他的著作《创造进化论》。
And the main basis of objection came from his book Creative Evolution.
爱因斯坦的宇宙中没有任何新颖之处。
There's no novelty in Einstein's universe.
没有任何创造。
There's no invention.
但你想谈谈这场辩论以及你的立场吗？
But do wanna talk about the debate a bit and where you stand?
是的。
Yeah.
这场辩论有关于柏格森和爱因斯坦之间的争论，吉梅娜·卡纳莱斯写了一本精彩著作。
So the debate was there's a wonderful book about the argument between Bergson and Einstein by Jimena Canales.
在我进一步谈论之前，我应该先推荐这本书。
So I I should point to that book before I say anything else about it.
但1922年的这场辩论，如果算得上一个转折点，那它标志着物理学家开始掌握主导权，而将哲学家抛在身后——不是简单地抛下，而是埋葬了那些直到那时还被视为我们时间问题学术专家的哲学家和心理学家。
But this debate in 1922 was a kind of, if it was a turning point, it was a moment where I think looking back we can say that the physicists were taking charge and leaving behind the philosophers, not leaving them behind, burying the philosophers and psychologists who up until that time had been our, let's say, academic specialists on the subject of time.
在历史上，并不是说如果你想要了解、想要讨论时间、时间的表征或时间的复杂性，就一定会去找物理学家。
It wasn't automatic through history that if you wanted to know, if you wanted to talk about time, representations of time or the complexity of time, you would talk to a physicist.
牛顿当然有自己的时间观，他认为时间是流动的。
Newton, of course, had his view of time which was actually that it flows.
就连牛顿也在他关于时间最著名的论述中使用了‘流动’这个隐喻，说时间均匀地流逝；而牛顿本人也清楚，他当时首次发明或定义的这种数学时间，与我们所有人都熟悉、都感受到的那种充满奇妙与复杂性的心理时间是不同的——比如，当你玩得开心时，时间似乎过得更快，还是相反？
Even Newton used, resorted to that metaphor in his most famous statement about time, that it flows equitably, and Newton himself understood the difference between that mathematical time that he was inventing or defining for the first time and the psychological time that we're all familiar with, all aware of the funny, complicated things that happen, that time seems to go faster when you're having fun or is it the other way around?
当你变老时，岁月飞逝；而当你年轻时，一小时却像一个月那么漫长。
And when you get older, the years flash by and when you're young, an hour seems like a month.
柏格森试图保留这些观点，试图为时间辩护，反对他所认为的爱因斯坦物理学那种还原主义、狭隘且禁锢性的观点，这正是大卫所称的‘块宇宙’观点。
Berkson was trying to preserve some of that, was trying to defend time from what he thought was a reductionist, narrower, imprisoning view of the physicists of Einstein, which is what David called the block universe view.
某种程度上，我是不是该引用H.
In a way, should I resort to H.
G.
G.
威尔斯呢？还是留着以后再说？
Wells or should I save that?
保留H。
Save H.
G。
G.
威尔斯。
Wells.
我会保留这个。
I'll save that.
我想说，我们通过记忆过去、只预期未来来区分过去和未来，这个观点。
I wanna say that this, the idea that we distinguish between the past and the future by saying that we have memories of the past and we only anticipate the future.
当下对我们来说非常特别。
The present moment is something very special to us.
它是唯一感觉真实的时刻。
It's the only moment that feels real.
这正是柏格森会说的。
That's what Bergson would say.
但爱因斯坦会说，这是一种幻觉。
But Einstein would say, that's an illusion.
在物理学中，当下时刻没有任何意义。
The present moment means nothing in physics.
他的四维时空连续体，他的块宇宙模型，将时间视为与另外三个空间维度相同的另一个维度，整个宇宙在物理学家眼中都存在于现在——而在爱因斯坦看来，‘现在’这个词根本没有意义。
His four dimensional space time continuum, his block universe treated time as though it were merely another dimension like the other three, and the whole universe is to be viewed by physicists as existing now, a word that has no meaning in Einstein's view.
众所周知，在爱因斯坦去世前几周，当他安慰一位因他人离世而悲痛的朋友时，他说：‘我们这些懂物理学的人，我们这些相信物理学的人——注意，是相信，不是理解——都知道，过去与未来的区别只是一种顽固而持久的幻觉。',
And very famously, a few weeks before Einstein died when he was consoling a grieving friend after someone else's death, said we who understand physics, we who believe in physics, he said believe in physics, not understand, know that the distinction between past and future is just a stubbornly persistent illusion.
关于这个话题，让我们转向泰德对你人生的叙述，因为它非常优美地触及了这一点，想想看。
So on that topic, let's turn to Ted's story of your life, because it touches on this very beautifully, think.
再强调一下，为了让人们更好地理解：在物理学中，描述时空中的轨迹有两种等价的表示方式。
Again, just to get people keyed into this, so in physics, there are two equivalent representations of trajectories through time and space.
一种是牛顿式的，你们在学校里会学到——或者你们中的一些人可能已经学过——其中你们写下坐标，它是因果性的。
The Newtonian, which you will learn in school, or some of you might have, where you write down the coordinates and it's causal.
抱歉，你能再说一遍吗？
Sorry, could you say that again?
哦，那是Siri。
Oh, that's Siri.
再说一遍。
So say that again.
好的。
Okay.
这还不够清楚。
This wasn't clear enough.
而另一种源自珀塞斯的表示方法，有时被称为最小作用量原理或哈密顿形式，是轨迹的另一种表示方式。
And then the other representation that comes from a Perseus originally, sometimes called the principle of least action, the Hamiltonian formalism, is an alternative representation of a trajectory.
但在这种情况下，你必须确切知道起点和终点。
But in this case, you have to know exactly where you start and where you end.
所以这是每个人都学过的内容。
And so this is something that everyone learns.
这些是等价的数学框架。
These are equivalent mathematical frameworks.
后者实际上要优雅得多。
The latter is much more elegant, actually.
而泰德把它发展成了——据我所见，他把这个相当深奥的理念，转化成了七肢桶语言。
And Ted turned it into, as far as I can see, he took this idea, which is quite esoteric, and he turned it into a language that heptapods speak.
如果你还记得电影里那些美丽的插图，那些叫作‘语符’的东西，对吧？
And if you remember the beautiful illustrations in the film, semigrams, is that right?
这是一种作用过程。
It's an action.
所以我只是想知道，泰德，这个想法是从哪里来的？你是如何深入钻研经典力学，进而产生这种想法——即作用原理可以成为一段感人叙事的基础？
So I'm just wondering, Ted, where that came from, how you immersed yourself in classical mechanics and then came to this idea that the action principle could be the basis of a very touching narrative.
所以，是的，当我上高中时，我读过关于物理学中这些变分原理的解释。
So, yeah, when I was in high school, I was reading an explanation of these variational principles of physics.
而且，再重申一下大卫刚才说的，但在此之前，我对物理学的理解是：你观察一个物体，看它的位置和速度，然后根据这些信息推断它未来的位置，再结合它的新位置和新速度，继续推演下去。
And, yeah, just to restate what David was saying, but up until then, my conception of physics was that you look at an object, what's its position, what's its velocity, then you know, based on that, where it's gonna be in the future, and with its position and its new velocity, then you can keep going.
而变分原理则恰恰相反。
And with variational principles, it works the other way.
你知道物体现在的位罝，也知道它最终的位置，根据这两点，你就能推断出它在这之间的整个路径。
You know where the object is right now, and you know where it's gonna be at the end, And based on those, you can tell the entire path it's gonna take in between.
我当时就觉得，这简直太让我震惊了，居然还能这样。
And I was like, that that kinda blew my mind that this was possible.
结果发现，这两种方法在数学上其实是等价的。
And it turns out that they are actually mathematically equivalent.
但关键是，这个想法——如果你能完全确定起点和终点，就能推导出中间的一切，这让我觉得太不可思议了。
But, yeah, the idea that, like, oh, you're like, if you know if you can fully specify, like, the beginning point and the end point, then you can determine everything in between.
这对我来说实在是太迷人了。
It's like, that was just so fascinating to me.
很长一段时间里，我就是想聊聊这个话题。
And and, you know, for a long time, I just wanted to talk about it.
我隐隐有个念头，有没有办法用这个来讲述一个故事呢？
And I had, you know, I had this vague desire, like, is there a way I can use this to tell a story?
我能不能写一个科幻故事，来揭示这个理念？
Like, can I write a science fiction story that illuminates this idea?
而且，你知道，这看起来根本不可能。
And, you know, I I it didn't seem possible.
所以，你知道，这并不是我有意在做的事情。
So, you know, it wasn't really something I was intentionally working on.
然后，纯粹是出于偶然，我观看了一个人的独角戏，一位演员在表演中讲述他放弃表演，因为他的妻子死于癌症，而他们都知道结局会怎样，因为很明显会发生什么。
And then, you know, just purely by chance, I was watching a one man show, a solo performance, where this man was talking about he was giving up performance about the experience of his wife dying from cancer, and both of them knew how it was gonna end because, you know, it was clear what was gonna happen.
而当我观看时，这是一段极其动人的表演。
And while I was and it's an incredibly moving piece.
但，是的，在观看的过程中，我突然有了一个想法，也许我可以利用这一点。
And but, yeah, while I was watching it, I had this idea that maybe I could use this.
我可以讲一个关于这个物理理念的故事，并将其与那种‘知道故事结局’的情感故事联系起来。
I could tell a story about this idea, this physics idea, and tie it to this emotional story about, you know, like, knowing how the story ends.
于是，这最终成为了《人生故事》。
And so that eventually became story for life.
在写作过程中，我进一步了解了语言学，以及语言学中所谓的‘施为性语言’这一概念。
And, you know, in the course of writing it, I then learned more more at linguistics and this idea in linguistics of what they call performative language.
大多数语言表达都是交流性的，用于传递信息，但还有一种表达是施为性的，即你说话的目的本身就是实施某个行为。
Most linguistic utterances are communicative, where you are conveying information, but there are these utterances which are performative in that you speak in order to actually perform an action.
一些经典的例子是：'我现在宣布你们为夫妻。'
And some, like, classic examples are like, I now pronounce you husband and wife.
你必须说出这句话，才能真正完成结婚的行为。
You're like, you can't actually marry people unless you actually say it.
你必须说出这句话，才能完成结婚这一行为。
You have to say it to actually commit the act of marrying people.
或者像'我为这艘船命名，比如圣玛利亚号'这样的说法。
Or if you have things like, I christened this ship, you know, the Santa Maria or something.
如果不说出来，你就无法完成这个行为。
You can't do it without saying it.
你不能只是悄悄地完成它。
You can't do it, like, just quietly.
你必须说出来，才能让它生效。
You have to say it in order to do it.
因此，我也觉得，这种通过语言来行动的方式是一个非常有趣的概念。
And so that, I also thought, was, like, a very interesting idea of this this way of, you know, acting through language.
而且这似乎也能融入我脑海中关于外星物种的故事。
And that that seemed like that could also feed into this story I had in mind about an alien species.
他们对时间的感知方式不同。
They see time a different way.
他们使用语言的方式也不同，这一切都融入了这个关于个人失去的故事中。
They speak language a different way, and that, you know, all feeds into this story about an individual's story about loss.
所以现在我要问大卫一个难题，那就是：你的生命故事是经典行动。
So I'm gonna ask David a difficult question now, which is so Ted's story of your life is classical action.
它不是量子行动。
It's not quantum action.
我想知道，泰德，如果你要根据‘不，路径’来重写这个故事的话，
And I wondered, Ted, if you had to rewrite that story based on No, the path
我不是。
I'm not.
在经典作用量中，只有一条路径，你对拉格朗日量进行积分，正如泰德所说，你会得到在引力场等场中最优轨迹的等价表示。
So in classical action, there's one path and you integrate the Lagrangian, and as Ted said, you get these equivalent representations of the optimal trajectory in a field, like a gravitational field.
但在1933年，狄拉克提出：如果在量子力学中这样做，会发生什么？
But in 1933, Dirac said, What happens if you do that with quantum mechanics?
随后，费曼著名地提出了这一框架。
And then Feynman famously presented his framework for this.
其核心思想是，在量子领域，你必须对无限多条加权的概率性轨迹、随机游走进行求和。
And the idea there is in the quantum domain, you have to sum over an infinite number of weighted probabilistic trajectories, random walks.
大卫，当采用量子作用量时，泰德的叙事会发生什么变化？
What happens, David, to Ted's narrative when you do quantum action?
量子力学是时间对称的。
Quantum mechanics is time symmetric.
最小作用量原理以及这一观念——就物理学而言，如果牛顿能够胜任，他本也能看到——其基础都是时间对称的，正如爱因斯坦所依赖的那样。
The underlying basis for the least action principle and for this notion that as far as physics is concerned, what was underlying Einstein, if Newton had been up to the task, he would have seen as well, all of these equations are time symmetric.
这些方程既可以向前，也可以向后进行。
They can go forward, or they can go backward.
而且你可以用一种完全时间对称的方式重新表述量子力学。
And you can reformulate quantum mechanics in a completely time symmetric way.
这最终取决于确保你的系统与外界隔离，并按照所谓的幺正演化进行。
It depends ultimately on making sure that you define your system so that it is isolated from the outside world, evolving according to what is called a unitary evolution.
你可以向前或向后推演。
And you can go backwards and forwards.
两者没有区别。
There is no difference.
你提出的问题之所以非常重要，部分原因在于——我读过泰德的故事，我想想，我上高中时还没读，但很小的时候就读过，那故事大概源于他年轻时——正是因为它间接地引出了这样一个问题：为什么我们，而不是外星人，会觉得我们了解过去却不了解未来？
Part of the reason that this is very important, the question you raise, part of there are many reasons why I found Ted's story, which I read, I think, let's see, I wasn't in high school, but when I was very young, I read his story, which I guess had his genesis when he was young, is precisely because it indirectly draws attention to this question of why is it that we, as opposed to the aliens, feel that we know the past and not the future?
回到你一开始提到的享乐主义观点，科学真正应该做的，其实就是那个四岁孩子不断问的‘为什么？’
What science, properly speaking, should be, to get back to your hedonism statement at the very beginning of all this, it really amounts to the four year old child who says, why?
如此这般，不断追问。
And so on and so forth.
所以我们现在谈论的，或许已经超越了隐喻，而是关于在块宇宙中，这一切归根结底在于：我们认为自己对过去的推断比对未来的预测更准确。
So we're right now talking, perhaps a little bit more than metaphor, about maybe in the block universe, it all boils down to the fact that we think we have more accurate retrodiction than prediction.
但如果你深入探究这一点，想想‘记忆’这个词在哪些情境下被使用，比如这个小玩具、这个小饰物里的记忆，实际上完全是时间对称的。
But if you really drill into that, if you think about just where the word memory is used, in some situations, like for example, the memories that are in this little toy, this little bauble, those are actually completely time symmetric.
以你手机或你正在看的平板电脑中的RAM为例，从数学上严格分析的话，这种意义上的记忆同样能为你提供关于未来和过去一样准确的信息。
Memory in the sense of the RAM in your phone, in that tablet you're looking, can actually provide you just as accurate information about the future as it does about the past, if you actually drill down into it by mathematically formalizing it.
其他类型的记忆，比如沙滩上的脚印，则不具备这种特性。
Other memories, like a footprint on a beach, do not have that character.
当你看到沙滩上的脚印时，你不会由此推断未来，而只会得出关于过去的某些结论。
You look at that footprint on the beach, you're not gonna come to conclusions about the future, you're gonna come to some conclusions about the past.
那么为什么呢？
So why?
第二种记忆——与第一种明显不同——其基础是什么？
What is the basis for those second types of memory, which are actually distinct from the first one?
像沙滩上的脚印或月球上的陨石坑这样的事物，究竟有什么特殊之处，让我们能如此确信地推断出曾有人走过那片沙滩、有陨石撞击过月球，却无法对将来做出同样确信的推断？
What is it about things like a footprint on the beach or the crater on the moon that allows us to so confidently retrodict that somebody walked on that beach, that some meteorite hit that moon in a way that we cannot for the future?
而这实际上与另一整套物理学理论相关，爱因斯坦也曾参与其中，虽然他并非主要人物，但这一理论主要由一百多年前的其他研究者发展起来，即统计物理学。
And that actually ties in with a whole another body of physics that was, Einstein was involved there too, the guy got around, but is mostly associated with other practitioners going back over a century or so, which is statistical physics.
是的，我们马上就会说到。
Yeah, we're gonna get there.
我们一会儿就会谈到时间的一小时。
We're gonna go to hour of time in a bit.
我试图保持一点经典和相对论的视角。
I'm trying to stay a little bit classical and relativistic.
那让我问一个问题。
But let me ask this question then.
你回避了我的问题，大卫，我只是想提醒你一下。
You dodged my question, David, just to point something out to you.
你没有解释泰德说的是什么
You didn't explain what Ted goes
没有
didn't
那就是
That's
多么好的采访者啊。
what a good interviewer.
做
Do
根本不会。
it at all.
好吧，没关系。
Okay, that's okay.
但我确实想问这个问题，我想问问简，因为你写了费曼的传记，你是否曾就这些话题与他交谈过？
But I did want to ask this question, and I would like to ask Jane, since you did write the biography of Feynman, whether you ever spoke to him on some of these topics.
但在那之前，为什么你的书里会谈到时间旅行呢？
But before I do that, why is it so you talk about in your book, time travel.
你提到了普鲁斯特，也谈到了亨利·詹姆斯的最后一部小说《埃德温·德鲁德》，那部未完成的关于时间旅行的作品，实际上我觉得它在意图上与泰德的一些故事有些相似。
You do talk about Proust, and you talk about Henry James' last book, His Edwin Drood, his unpublished book on time travel, which is a bit like some of Ted's stories, actually, I think, in its intention.
既然时间在存在意义上如此核心，为什么它在科幻小说中被如此谨慎地处理，而在文学小说中却并未得到充分的展开？
Is time given that it's so existentially central, why is it so carefully treated in science fiction and not particularly expansively treated in literary fiction?
普鲁斯特当然是一个很好的例子，但那是经典的回忆。
Proust is, of course, a good case, but it's canonical memory.
它不是反事实的。
It's not counterfactual.
你认为为什么会这样？
Why do you think that happened?
我不知道你们两位有没有什么想法。
I don't know if either of you have ideas.
我认为我不同意这一点。
I think I would argue with that.
好的。
Okay.
很好。
Good.
我不认为这完全正确。
I don't think that's quite true.
确实，如果我们想在科幻小说和文学小说之间划一条界线，这样做会不会冒犯到你？
It is true that if we wanna draw a line between science fiction and literary fiction, can we do that without offending you?
不会。
No.
我不认为真的存在这条界线，但我们都明白它指的是什么。
I don't I don't I don't actually, I I don't believe in that line, but we all know but we all know what we mean by it.
而且确实，过去一个半世纪，甚至四分之一个世纪以来，科幻小说对时间的探讨比文学小说更加自由、更加疯狂和奇特。
And and it is true that science fiction has talked about time in the last century and a half century and a quarter, let's say, in a much freer way, in a much crazier, freakish way than literary fiction has.
但我想说的是，在人们开始思考时间旅行的那个时期——大约上个世纪之交——所有人都在以更复杂、更丰富的方式思考时间，这背后有各种文化原因，比如铁路、钟表的发展，以及地质学拓展了我们对真实时间尺度的认知，还有考古学以最生动的方式挖掘着过去。
But I guess what I would say is that everybody around the time that people started thinking about time travel, around the turn of the previous century, was thinking about time in more complex and richer ways and they were doing that for all sorts of cultural reasons to do with railroads and clocks and the development of geology that expanded our sense of real time scales and archaeology which was digging up the past in the most vivid way.
所有这些因素都在促使人们以更复杂的方式思考时间。
All of these things were making people think about time in more complex ways.
而你一想到普鲁斯特，他确实是该被想到的合适人选。
And the fact that you think about Proust immediately, he's the right person to think about.
这不仅因为他的书名叫《追忆似水年华》，更因为他明确地书写着时间，并且将时间与记忆密不可分地联系在一起。
And not just because his book is called In Search of Lost Time, he is so explicitly writing about time and inextricably about memory.
他运用记忆的方式——我们不需要在这里做文学批评，但他对记忆的处理所展现出的复杂性，在文学中确实是前所未有的，这让我想到，如果可以的话，回到泰德和大卫，因为他们都提到了一个关键事实：一方面，物理学家可以以爱因斯坦的时空连续体来思考，认为当下是一种幻觉，并不具有特殊的现实性。
He is using memory in a we don't need to do literary criticism here, but the complexity of his treatment of memory is really something new in literature, which I think brings us back to, if it's alright, to Ted and David because they both are talking about this crucial fact that on the one hand, a physicist can think in terms of the Einstein space time continuum in which the present is an illusion and has no particular privileged reality.
但另一方面，我们此刻就在这里，我说‘现在’，而我们感受到‘现在’正悄然滑入过去，我们直觉上认为，对过去的记忆与对未来的期待是截然不同的。
But on the other hand, here we are and I say now and we feel now slipping away into the past, and we feel intuitively that our memory of the past is something different from our anticipation of the future.
我知道你在论证这未必在本质上不同，或者我认为你是这么认为的，因为这一切都发生在iPhone里。
I know you're arguing that it's not necessarily qualitatively different, or I think you are, because it's all in the iPhone.
泰德的故事令人惊叹之处——如果我再剧透一点的话——在于他认真地探讨了爱因斯坦观点的可能性：宇宙是决定论的，未来已然存在，并提出，如果你能拥有对未来的记忆，且这些记忆与对过去的记忆感觉完全一样，会怎样？
What's extraordinary about Ted's story, if I can spoil it some more, is that he takes seriously the possibility that Einstein is right, that the universe is determined that the future already exists, and asks, What if you could have memories of the future that felt just like memories of the past?
对我来说，首先，这令人困惑。
And for me, that's just first, it's baffling.
然后，它让人烦躁，因为我并不相信这一点。
Then it's it's annoying because I don't believe in that.
但接着，它变得极其有力，因为你真的让它显得如此令人信服。
And then it's incredibly powerful because you really make it so convincing.
也就是说，如果你不相信决定论的宇宙，如果你相信自由意志，相信我们正在做出选择，那么你可以问：如果真的拥有对未来的记忆，并意识到我没有自由意志，我所做的一切，正如泰德在故事中所说，都像演员在背诵台词，那会是什么感觉？
That is, if you don't believe in a deterministic universe, if you believe in free will, if you believe that we're making choices, I think you can ask, what would it feel like to actually have memories of the future and be aware that I don't have free will, that everything I do is, as Ted says in the story, is like an actor reciting lines.
你能那样生活吗？
And could you live that way?
特别是，面对即将来临的可怕悲剧时，你能那样生活吗？
Particularly, could you live that way in the face of an oncoming terrible tragedy?
所以，我真正想问你的问题是——这可能有点不公平——你真的相信世界会是那样吗？
And so, actually, the question I really wanna ask you, but it's possibly unfair, is do you actually believe that the world could be like that?
你把它描述得如此令人信服。
You made it so convincing.
我想我，而且我想我们稍后在讨论中可能会再深入谈谈这个话题。
I guess I and I think we'll probably talk about this a little more later in the panel.
但目前，我只想说，我觉得爱因斯坦的论点很有说服力。
But for now, I'll just say, I guess I find Einstein's argument convincing.
因此，我相信块宇宙的存在。
And so I do believe in a block universe.
不管这是不是反映了我见识浅薄也好，总之，爱因斯坦确实让我信服了块宇宙的观点。
And whether that reflects my lack of sophistication or whatever, but, yeah, Einstein convinced me about the block universe.
所以，这对我们的日常生活意味着什么，我认为总体上并不显著。
So the implications of that for our, you know, daily life, I think, are, in general, not not significant.
但同样，我们可能稍后可以再深入讨论这一点。
Think but, again, you we can probably talk about that a little more later.
我的意思是，让我们来谈一谈，提醒一下那些记不清的人，块宇宙就是闵可夫斯基的四维时空。
I mean, let's talk about so just to remind everyone who doesn't remember, block universe is the Minkowski four d space time.
也就是说，将时间空间化，这一点最近受到了很多批评。
So the spatialization of time, and this has been very criticized recently.
这个观点认为，你只是把时间以几何方式表现出来。
So this is the idea that you just take time and represent it geometrically.
明白吗？
Okay?
这样做的一个后果是，几何结构是各向同性的。
And one of the consequences of doing that is geometry is isotropic.
对吧？
Right?
展开剩余字幕（还有 359 条）
你往哪个方向走都无所谓。
That doesn't matter which way you walk.
我可以走到那边，也可以走到另一边，但在时间上，我不能随意在时间中移动。
I can walk over there and I can walk over there, but in time, I can't just move around in time.
泰德的七肢桶在某种意义上可以。
Ted's heptapods can in a certain way.
他们生活在时间的所有点上。
They live at all points in time.
但这就是块宇宙所指的意思。
But this is this that's what the block universe is.
它是一个几何化的宇宙。
It's the geometric universe.
你需要另一个理论，大卫提到的，我们稍后会谈到，那就是埃丁顿的时间之箭、统计力学，为世界线赋予方向性。
And you need another theory, which David is alluding to, which we'll get to, which is Eddington's arrow of time, statistical mechanics, to give polarity to the world line.
我不知道，大卫，你想不想介绍一下另一种观点？我不确定你对它了解多少。
I don't know, David, do you want to I wanted to introduce an alternative, I don't know how much you know about it.
所以这是哥德尔度规。
So it's the Godel metric.
因此，爱因斯坦晚年变得厌世，对自己未能实现统一场论感到懊恼，而他唯一愿意花时间相处并享受交流的人就是库尔特·哥德尔。
So when Einstein, at the end of his life, was becoming very misanthropic and annoyed that he hadn't achieved a grand unified theory, the only person he'd ever spend any time with that he enjoyed was Kurt Godel.
他们曾在普林斯顿来回散步。
And they'd walk back and forth in Princeton.
而哥德尔已经解出了爱因斯坦场方程。
And Godel had solved the Einstein field equation.
哥德尔提出的一个解因给出了所谓的闭合类时曲线——即时间旅行的可能性——而闻名。
One of the solutions that Godel came up with was famous because it gives something called closed timelike curves, the possibility of time travel.
我只是想知道，大卫，你对这个有了解或思考过吗？
I'm just wondering, is that something, David, you know anything about or thought about?
是的，我学过广义相对论的课程。
Yeah, I took my courses in GR.
实际上，哥德尔并不是第一个。
So actually, Godel was not the first.
还有其他人提出了爱因斯坦方程的解，这些解允许存在闭合类时曲线。
There were others who had come up with solutions to Einstein's equations, which allowed for closed time like curves.
但他们并没有意识到这一点。
They did not recognize it as such.
而戈德尔宇宙。
And the The Godel universe.
爱因斯坦方程是一个延伸，我该不该跟你讲一点关于什么？
Einstein's equations are an extent Should I Do you want me to talk a little bit about what?
就讲一点点，好吧。
Just a teeny little bit, okay.
所以爱因斯坦方程，我假设至少有人对牛顿方程有点了解。
So Einstein's equations, people I assume are glancingly familiar at least with Newton's equations.
F等于MA之类的，如果你足够勇敢去学大四的微积分，你就会写出导数，然后你就拥有了一个工具，比如说，如果你知道一个系统的初始条件，或者末态条件等等，你就能解出它在整个空间或微分方程所涉及范围内的精确状态。
F equals MA and so on, you write down derivatives if you are so brave as to take your senior lyric calculus, And then that provides you a machinery that you can, let's say, okay, if I know the starting conditions, or if I know the ending conditions, or so on, of a system, I can then solve for its exact state everywhere else across the entire space or whatever my differential equations consider.
有时候你会读到所谓的爱因斯坦方程。
What's called, sometimes you'll read what's called Einstein's equations.
从某种意义上说，它们是牛顿方程的延伸，构成了广义相对论的基础。
They are an extension, in a certain sense, of Newton's equations that are the basis of general relativity.
与牛顿方程不同，它们是经过删减的。
They, unlike Newton's equations, they are an deleted.
我相信你在演讲中曾快速提及过某些粗话被删去的情况。
I believe you had a nice, quicksartic beep in your presentation concerning expletives being deleted.
它们是经过删去粗话后用来求解的方程。
They are an expletive deleted to solve.
它们非常难以求解。
They are very difficult to solve.
直到今天，这仍然是研究黑洞物理等领域的一个重大问题，比如所谓的信息悖论，这仍然是一个非常活跃的研究领域。
To this day, that's a major problem with people doing things on, like, black hole physics, what's called the information paradox, which is still a very active field of research.
哥德尔找到了一个特定的解。
Godel found a particular solution.
这个爱因斯坦方程的解，即宇宙可能根据宇宙定律构成的一种方式，是一个无限宇宙，其中到处都具有均匀的粥状气体密度。
That solution to Einstein's equation, so this possibility for how the universe could, according to the laws of the universe, have been constituted, was an infinite universe that actually has a uniform density of gruel, of gas everywhere.
为了防止这个宇宙因引力吸引而坍缩，它以一种优美而冷静的广义相对论方式旋转，宇宙中的每一个点都会观察到它围绕自身旋转。
To prevent that universe from actually collapsing under gravitational attraction, it's rotating In a nice, cool, general relativistic way, it actually every single point in the universe sees it as rotating about itself.
因此，每一个点实际上都是相同的。
So every point is actually the same.
这些是有效的解，它们包含了一种被称为闭合类时曲线的奇特性质。
These are valid solutions, and they have in them this rather strange property of what's called a closed time like curve.
这意味着，存在无限多个你可以到达的地点，只要你以正确的方式加速你的火箭，你永远不会超过光速或类似的情况。
That means that there's actually an infinite number of spots you can go to where if you just accelerate your rocket in the correct way, you're never going faster than the speed of light or anything like that.
你最终会到达某个地方，眼前的一切不断变化，直到你开始看到一个奇怪的人坐在舞台上，旁边还有三个奇怪的家伙——我注意到我们也是。
You will eventually go, and everything will just keep changing in front of you until you start seeing this weird guy sitting on a stage with three other weird I noticed we're guys.
在同一舞台上，你会从他们的过去见到这个人。
On the same stage, and you'll come in and see this person from their past.
所以，你不是简单地去趟农贸市场，而是绕行一圈，最终回到的正是你出发的地方。
So rather than just traveling around and going down over to farmer's market, you'll go traveling around, and where you end up with is exactly where you started.
当然，这已成为许多科幻电影中间接使用的桥段。
And, of course, this has become a trope indirectly in many science fiction films and so on and so forth.
我觉得，《黑客帝国》系列电影就融入了很多这类元素，等等。
I think, like, the matrix movies have this kind of stuff built into a lot of them and so on and so forth.
那么问题来了，这会带来什么影响呢？
The question then is what are the implications of that?
正如我所说，在哥德尔之前，甚至哥德尔之后，都构建过更多关于宇宙的现实模型。
And as I say, there are more realistic models of universes that were constructed before Godel and actually after Godel as well.
比如所谓的蒂普勒圆柱体，以及一大堆其他概念。
There's what are called Tipler cylinders and a whole bunch of things.
实际上还有其他方法可以构造这些闭合类时曲线。
There are actually other ways to construct these closed timelike curves.
哥德尔对时间本质有一些古怪的想法，本质上是对康德所区分的‘综合’与‘分析’命题的延伸，很难真正理解。
Godel was he had some weird ideas about what time is that are essentially elaborations of Kantian distinctions between what's called synthetic and analytic, and it's hard to really make sense of them.
但从某种角度来看，如今物理学界——至少是宇宙学领域大部分研究者——的共识是，闭合类时曲线的可能性，虽然他们不太愿意这么说，但实质上意味着：自由意志根本就是一种幻觉，事情已经板上钉钉了。
But from a certain perspective, the consensus in the physics community now, I would say consensus, at least a large fraction of the people who are working in cosmology, is that the possibility of closed time like curves, really, if you they are loath to phrase it this way, but what that amounts to is the face accompli case closed that free will is just a delusion.
醒醒吧，你们这些年轻不成熟的人类。
Grow up, you young immature humans.
根本就不存在这种东西。
There ain't no such thing.
事实上，自由意志本身就是这种时间向前流动的感知的一种变体。
Free will, in fact, is itself a variation of this metaphor of this perception that time is moving forward.
如果你不把时间看作是以这种方式展开的，那么自由意志的概念就完全站不住脚了。
If you don't view time as unfolding in this way, notion of free will loses all strength.
它失去了所有依据。
It loses all traction.
这实际上蕴含在块宇宙之中。
This is actually inherent in the block universe.
可以说，闭合类时曲线已经让这个论断尘埃落定。
Arguably closed time like curves make the case done.
否则你就会遇到这些荒谬的情况，比如祖父悖论、祖母悖论之类的。
Or else you get these silly things like the grandfather paradox or the grandmother paradox or what have you.
你回到过去，杀死了你的父母，因此你就不可能存在了。
That you go back into the past, you destroy your parents so therefore you could not have existed in.
哦，悖论。
Oh paradox.
如果你没有这种自由意志的概念，而是认为整个现实——包括所有未来、所有过去以及空间中的所有点——都只是方程的一个解，那么你仅仅得到一个解。
If you don't have this notion of free will, instead all of reality into all the future and all the past and all of different points in space is all just a solution to the equation, then you just got a solution.
它就静静地存在着。
It's sitting there.
它是一个静态的物体。
It's a static object.
你不可能沿着世界线前行并以某种自由去做出决定，从而改变过去已存在的东西。
There's no sense in which you could go along a world line and make a decision with some freedom to undo what was there in the past.
不。
No.
一切都将保持一致。
It's all gonna be consistent.
好的。
Okay.
所以让我简单问一下，因为我们开始得有点晚，之后我们就开放提问。
So let me just quickly ask quick here about since we started a bit late, and then we'll just open it up.
H.G.威尔斯。
HG Wells.
我知道你想谈谈H.G.威尔斯。
I know you wanna talk about HG Wells.
还有《商人与炼金术之门》，因为这两部都是很棒的时间旅行叙事作品。
And then also The Merchant and the Alchemist's Gate because these are two wonderful time travel narratives.
所以《时间机器》，虽然我并不特别喜欢，但你似乎很喜欢，还有你对时间旅行的独特处理方式。
So The Time Machine, which I don't particularly love, you seem to love it, and then your particular treatment of time travel.
好的。
Alright.
我也想回应一下所有
I wanted to also respond to all
这些内容。
of that.
做吧。
Do it.
好的。
Yeah.
我们先做这个，然后再做一个简短的回应。
We'll do that first, and then we'll then do a little response.
好的。
Alright.
所以我喜欢《时间机器》吗？
So do I love the time machine?
实际上，每个人都以为自己读过《时间机器》，所以我想问你们，你们读过吗？
Has anybody actually, everybody thinks they've read the time machine, so I want to ask you if you've read it.
最近有谁读过《时间机器》吗？
Have has anybody read the time machine recently?
一只手举起来。
One hand.
两只手。
Two hands.
读起来并不容易。
It's not easy to read.
当我重新读它的时候，我其实有点震惊，有点沮丧。
I was actually a little shocked, a little depressed when I went back to it.
让它显得不是特别有艺术性的一个原因是，故事的开头是一群人围坐在一起聊天。
One of the things that makes it not a particularly, I think, artfully constructed story is that the way it begins is with a bunch of people sitting around talking.
实际上，我应该说是一群人围坐在一起听，因为一直在说话的那个人是H。
And there actually, I should say a bunch of people sitting around listening, because the guy who's doing all the talking is the guy who H.
G。
G.
威尔斯只称他为时间旅行者。
Wells calls only the time traveler.
他没有名字。
He has no name.
他在故事开头所做的，是向他们解释：他们一直以来所熟知的几何学都是错误的。
And what he does at the outset of this story to lay the groundwork for it is explain to them that everything they have always known about geometry is wrong.
他们以为只有三个维度，这个物体——我没法一边举起来一边说话。
They've thought there are just three dimensions that this object well, I can't hold it up and talk into it at the same time.
它有高度、宽度和长度。
It has height, width, and length.
但他也说，如果你仔细想想，它还有第四个维度。
But he also says, if you think about it, it has a fourth dimension.
它有持续时间，因为如果没有持续时间，它就不存在，等等。
It has duration because if it didn't have duration, it wouldn't exist, and so on.
他进一步阐述了我们现在所认知的块宇宙图景，而爱因斯坦正是十年后提出了这一理论。
He goes on to lay out what we now recognize as the block universe picture that Einstein created ten years later.
没有人会声称爱因斯坦是从H.G.威尔斯那里获得这一想法的，但至少我们可以承认，当时空气中确实弥漫着某种促使人们思考的氛围。
Nobody's gonna claim that Einstein got it from h g Wells, but I think we can at least admit that there was something in the air that was leading people to think.
我想有些人会说，烟雾正在散去，我们的幻觉正在消退，我们终于看到了宇宙的真实面貌。
I guess some people would say the the smoke was clearing, and our illusions were fading away, and we were seeing the universe as it really is.
但你也可以这么说，人们开始觉得这是一种思考宇宙的有趣且便捷的方式。
But you can also say that people were starting to find this an interesting and convenient way to think about the universe.
所以是1895年。
So 1895.
大约是1895年。
1895 or so.
这就是它的开端。
This is where it started.
我们可以称之为爱因斯坦-闵可夫斯基块宇宙，但其实它源自H。
We can call it the Einstein Minkowski block universe, but it's really H.
G。
G.
威尔斯的。
Wells'
对。
Right.
实际上，我认为这可以追溯到更早的玻尔兹曼、洛克·施密特等人，无论如何。
Actually, I would say it goes a bit earlier than that to Boltzmann and Lock Schmidt and things like that in any case.
你提到你的故事，尤其是最明确的时间旅行故事，是受到基普·索恩的一次演讲启发的，能说说吗？
How about your you talk about your story or most explicit time travel story as being inspired by a talk by Kip Thorne.
实际上，在我讲到那里之前，我想先纠正一下。
Actually, before I get there, I'd like to Rebite.
因为我知道你曾说过，H.
Because I know that you've said that H.
G.
G.
威尔斯发明了时间旅行的概念，你还说过，奇怪的是，在H.
Wells invented the idea of time travel and that you've said that it's odd that before H.
G.
G.
威尔斯之前，从来没有人想过有可能回到过去，去修正自己曾经犯下的错误。
Wells, no one ever wondered about the possibility of you know, going back and, you know, fixing a mistake that they had in the past.
不。
No.
不完全对。
Not quite.
这比我实际表达的意思要更强一些，不过你继续说吧。
That's putting my claim a little more strongly than I think I made it, but go ahead.
我知道在威尔斯之前就有很多类似时间旅行的事例。
I know there are lots of counterexamples of things of time to have travel ish things
在威尔斯之前。
before Wells.
但这一切都指向《商人与炼金术士》，我认为时间旅行故事实际上是某种非常古老故事类型的现代版本，那就是预言故事。
But I This is all leading up to Merchant and Alchemist I think that time travel stories are actually a modern version of a very old kind of story, and that is prophecy stories.
我们通常不认为它们是相同的，但我认为在很多方面它们确实是，因为我觉得任何物理学家都会说，把物质送回过去和把信息送回过去是一回事。
We don't usually think of them as being the same, but they actually I think in a lot of ways they are because I think any physicist will say that, you know, sending matter back in time is the same thing as sending information back in time.
这基本上是同一个问题。
It's, you know, it's pretty much the same issue.
因此，预言故事是关于信息逆时间流动的故事。
And so prophecy stories, they are stories about information moving backward in time.
只是视角不同而已。
It's just that the perspective is different.
它们是从接收未来信息的人的角度讲述的。
They are told from the point of view of the person receiving the information from the future.
而预言故事是非常古老的。
So and, you know, prophecy stories, they are really old.
它们可以追溯到数千年前。
They go back thousands of years.
所以我认为，它们是时间旅行故事的前身，几乎和讲故事本身一样古老。
So, you know, I think of them as, you know, this sort of antecedent of time travel stories that are almost as old as storytelling.
但问题是，我所知道的所有古老预言故事中，有人得到一个关于未来将发生之事的预言，于是采取措施试图避免它，结果却恰恰因为这些措施而促成了预言的实现。
But the thing is that all prophecy stories of old that I'm aware of, someone gets a prophecy of something that'll happen in their future, they take steps to avert it, and then they with the steps they've taken merely bring about the prophecy.
它们让预言成真。
They cause it to come true.
所以，所有的预言故事都有这种典型的模式。
So prophecy stories all have this you know, these classic prophecy stories.
它们都有一个共同点：从未来获得的信息并不能帮助你避免那个未来。
They all have this commonality where getting knowledge from the future does not help you avoid that future.
因此我认为，作为时间旅行故事演变过程中的一步，如果你不相信自己能改变未来，那你更不会想到能改变过去。
And so I think that, you know, as a step along the evolution to time travel stories, if you don't believe that you can change your future, it's certainly not gonna occur to you that you could change your past.
我认为真正的转折点出现在大约1830年，当狄更斯出版了《圣诞颂歌》。
I think the big turning point comes actually in, like, around 1830 when Dickens publishes A Christmas Carol.
因为在《圣诞颂歌》中，埃比尼泽·斯克鲁奇得到了一个预言。
Because in A Christmas Carol, Ebenezer Scrooge, he gets a prophecy.
他被展示了自己死亡的景象，而他不喜欢所看到的一切，因为死后无人哀悼。
He is shown, yo, his death, and he doesn't like what he sees, you know, because he's unmourned.
你知道，没人对他有半句好话。
You know, no one has a good thing to say about him.
他对那个幽灵——未来的圣诞精灵说：你给我看的，是必将发生的事的影子，还是可能发生的事的影子？
And he says to the spirit, you know, the spirit of Christmas yet to come, he says, what you've shown me, are these shadows of what will be or shadows of what may be?
所以他本质上是在问：我有自由意志吗？
And so, like, he's basically asking, do I have free will?
我能对此做些什么吗？
Can I do anything about this?
当他醒来时，他改变了人生。
And when he wakes up, he changes his life.
他开始努力确保自己所见的景象不会成为现实。
He get he sets about to make sure that what he has seen does not come to pass.
文中暗示他成功了。
And it's it is implied that he is successful.
因此，我相信这是文学史上第一次，有角色收到关于未来的预言，并成功避免了所见的未来。
And so I believe that this is the first time in literature where someone a character received a prophecy about the future and was able to avert the future that they saw.
他们获得了关于未来的资讯，并用它来阻止那个未来发生。
So they got information of the future, and they used it to prevent that future from coming to pass.
所以我认为，这标志着文学上从‘我们受命运束缚’的普遍信念，转向了‘我们确实能做出有影响的决定’的信念。
So I think that is the literary indicator of a shift away from this popular belief that we were bound by fate and toward a belief that we can actually make decisions that make a difference.
我们实际上可以掌控自己的命运。
We can actually control our destiny.
我们可以改变自己的生活。
We can change our life.
你可以成为一个更好的人。
You can be a better person.
所以，一旦你开始这样思考，就有可能去想象时间旅行。
And so once you start thinking that way, then it is possible to think about time travel.
因为那时你会开始想，我可以改变将要发生的事。
Because then you start thinking about, I can change what will happen.
而且，你知道，奇怪的是，你知道，H。
And, you know, and the odd thing is, you know, H.
C。
C.
威尔斯的故事完全没涉及这一点，因为时间旅行者在某个时刻遇到了一位女性，而她死于一场火灾。
Wells' story never touches on this at all because the time traveler, at one point, he meets this woman, and she dies in a fire.
他从来就没想过这一点。
And, like, it never occurs to him.
你确实拥有一台时间机器。
You do have a time machine.
你可以回到过去，也许能救她，别让她被火烧死。
You could go back and maybe rescue her from being, you know, killed in a fire.
他就是从来没想过。
Never occurs to him.
当他回到维多利亚时代的英国时，他已经看到了未来，而那未来糟透了。
And, like, when he goes back to Victorian England, he's seen the future, and it's terrible.
似乎他就是没意识到这一点。
Like, it doesn't seem to occur to him.
也许你可以做点什么，来阻止那个未来发生。
Like, maybe you could do something to prevent that future from coming to pass.
但，是的，我觉得渐渐地，我们开始进入一种思维方式，就是：我能改变事情。
But but, yeah, I think, like, gradually, you know, we start moving into a way of thinking where it's like, you know, I can change things.
我有能动性。
I have agency.
我可以做出改变现状的决定。
I can make decisions that will have a difference.
而现代时间旅行故事的主体就源于此。
And that's where you get the bulk of modern time travel stories.
所以，说到商人、炼金术士和传送门，如果你思考当代的时间旅行故事，可以把它们分为两类：一类是历史无法改变的故事，另一类是历史可以改变的故事。
So the thing so to get to Merchant Alchemist Gate, if you think about contemporary time travel stories, if you divide them into, you know, stories where it is not possible to change history and stories where it is possible to change history.
通常，那些历史无法改变的故事都是悲观的。
And, usually, the stories where it's not possible to change history, those are downbeat stories.
充满了悲剧。
There's tragedies.
你知道，就像，嘿，我们穿越了时间。
You know, it's like, yo, we traveled through time.
我们试图做这件事，但失败了。
We tried to do this thing, and we failed.
而那些可以改变历史的故事，则被视为胜利。
Whereas stories where you can change history, they're seen as, you know, victories.
就像我们穿越了时间。
There's like, we traveled through time.
我们做出了改变。
We made a change.
事情变得更好了。
Things are better.
因此，这里存在着一种明显的悲伤结局与快乐结局的二元对立，这与能否改变过去直接相关。
And so there's this real sort of, you know, sad ending, happy ending dichotomy that correlates to the ability to change the inability or ability to change the past.
所以，我感兴趣的是：我能否讲一个无法改变过去的故事？
So what I was interested in is, can I tell a story where it is not possible to change the past?
我能否讲一个无法改变过去、却不是悲剧的时间旅行故事？
Can I tell a time travel story where it's not possible to change the past, but it's not a tragedy?
无法改变过去，并不意味着必须是悲惨的结局。
It's not a downbeat ending, the fact that you cannot change the past.
这正是我一直在想的，这样的故事会是什么样子？
That is something that I was you know, what does a story like that look like?
某种程度上，我认为我们正开始将这种类型视为时间旅行故事的一个子类别。
And, you know, in a sense, I think that is you know, we're starting to see that as a type the assertive of a subcategory of time travel stories.
如果你看过奈飞剧集《俄罗斯套娃》第二季，它实际上传达了同样的信息：关于时间旅行，但你无法真正改变任何事。
If you've watched the Netflix series Russian Doll, season two of Russian Doll is actually this the same message that, you know, about time travel, but you can't actually change things.
我认为，这种类型的时间旅行故事，某种程度上传递了与许多心理治疗相同的讯息：你无法改变过去发生的事，但或许你能改变过去对你现在造成的影响。
And I think, you know, this type of time travel story, it has what it in some ways, it carries the same message as as a lot of therapy does, which is that you cannot change what happened to you, but maybe you can change the effect of what happened to you on you right now.
你知道吗？
You know?
这正是治疗师总是试图告诉人们的。
That's and I think it's something that therapists always try to tell people.
是的。
Yeah.
你无法改变过去发生的事，但或许你能改变它对你造成的影响。
You can't change what happened to you, but maybe you can change the effect it has on you.
所以我认为，这种类型的时间旅行故事传达的就是这个信息。
And so that I think is the message of, you know, this sort of news category of time travel story.
谢谢。
Thank you.
我知道我们有点晚了。
I know we have to know we're a bit late.
我知道那边有人在看我，我们稍微放宽一点。
I know I'm being looked at over there and we're opening this up a bit.
我不太确定我们是怎么重置计时器的。
I'm not quite sure how we've reset the timer.
我们就直接播放吧。
We're just gonna show okay.
太棒了。
Fantastic.
但我确实认为，这提出了一个关于泰德所带来内容的非常有趣的观点——如果你还没读过这些故事，你应该去读一读，它们从一方面深刻探讨了存在主义叙事与科学理论结构的结合。
But I do think this makes a really interesting point about one of the things that Ted brings to bear, and if you've not read the stories, you should, is this very interesting, on the one hand, exploration of the union of existential narrative and the structure of scientific theory.
我认为这实际上远远超越了H.G.威尔斯，因为他将人类的感性与分析的感性结合得如此出色。
I think it's way beyond HG Wells actually in terms of what he's actually done in combining human sensibility and analytical sensibility.
但基于这一点，我想把时间交给Quest。
But with that point, I would like to open it up to Quest.
如果你有问题是的话，我们就让整个小组轮流发言。
You've got any of them, then we'll spread it around the panel.
后面有人提问。
There's a question back there.
我想问问各位小组成员。
I'd like to ask the panelists.
我不是数学家。
I am not a mathematician.
我有物理学背景，所以这个概念我并不理解。
I have a background in physics, so this is not a concept I understand.
但关于块宇宙，我曾在通俗报刊上读到过直觉主义数学的概念，它否定了无限精确数字客观存在的观点，而这种精确性正是绝对主义块宇宙所必需的。
But with regard to the block universe, I've read just in the popular press about the idea of intuitionist mathematics, which refutes the idea of the objective existence of infinite precision numbers, which is what you require for an absolutist block universe.
我朴素的理解是，这是二十世纪初与大卫·希尔伯特论战失败后，一群激进的数学家分支提出的观点。
My naive understanding is that this is an idea put forth by radical splinter sect of mathematicians who lost with David Hilbert in the early twentieth century.
我很想听听各位嘉宾对这个观点的看法。
I would love to hear the panelists thoughts on whether there's anything to this idea.
我是不是该在这里投资一下？
Should I take it take the investment here.
我觉得那些复杂的问题。
I feel the gnarly ones.
我们会详细聊聊我的《康涅狄格州的 Yankee 在亚瑟王宫廷》，这是一部明确涉及时间旅行的作品，是的。
We're gonna talk all about my Connecticut Yankee King Arthur's Court, very explicitly time travel and Yeah.
在 H.G. 威尔斯之前两年，是的。
Two years before h g Wells Yeah.
明确的时间旅行，但你还记得故事中时间旅行的技术是什么吗？
Explicitly time travel, except do you remember what the technology of time travel is in the story?
他是在睡觉中度过的。
That he's slept was sleeping.
他被敲了脑袋。
He gets banged on the head.
是的。
Yeah.
他卷入了一场打斗，被砸到了头。
He gets into a fight and gets whacked on the head.
我不想这么说，不。
I don't wanna say that No.
但这只是一个洞察。
But that was just an insight.
哦，好吧。
Oh, okay.
因为我想回应一下。
Because I do wanna respond.
关于康涅狄格州有太多话要说。
Have so much to say about the Connecticut.
好吧。
Alright.
现在请说吧。
Now go ahead.
我没什么可说的。
I have nothing to say.
实际上，直觉并不重要。
Actually, Intuition doesn't matter.
哪个
Which
这里起着非常关键作用的是预测。
is that there's a very crucial role played by prediction.
预测即将发生的月食，这在古巴比伦时代当然是件大事，等等。
Predicting a a gonna be a lunar eclipse, which of course is a really big deal if you go back to Babylonia and so on and so forth.
泰德提出了一些非常有趣的观点。
And Ted was raising some very interesting points.
其中一些与信息有关。
Some of them have to do with information.
信息在本质上完全是关于概率的。
Information is formally at its foundation all about probabilities.
预测完全基于概率，而记忆、后推和预测之间的一个很好的区别例子是，我们对某些未来事件的记忆非常准确，比如日食、日出等等，但它们的性质不同，而目前在物理学基础领域，阐明这类预测与其他类型的信息传递（从一个时刻到另一个时刻的后推，我们称之为记忆）之间的差异，仍然是一个极具挑战性的持续性工作。
Prediction is all about probabilities and actually a very good example of the difference between memory, retrodiction and prediction is that there are some things there are some memories we have of the future that are quite accurate, things like eclipses, the sun rising, and so on and so forth, but they have a different nature and it's very challenging ongoing work actually in foundations of physics to elucidate this of what is it that's the difference about those kinds of predictions from the other kinds of transfers of information from one moment to a time, retrodictions which we call memory.
所以回到刚才那里。
So back over there.
抱歉。
Sorry.
我得把这一点说清楚。
I had to get that in.
我得把这一点说清楚。
Had to get that in.
这是拿到话筒的人的权限。
License of somebody who's got the mic.
所以我认为你指的是布劳威尔直觉主义数学，特别是尼古拉·吉辛，以及他最近的一些假设等等。
So I believe you're referring to Brower Intuitionist Mathematics and then Nicolas Gisin, in particular, some of his recent hypothesizing so and so forth.
这实际上涉及到我的一些不同项目。
So this actually touches on different projects of mine.
但在数学和数学基础中，实际上存在许多不同类型的逻辑。
But in mathematics and the foundations of mathematics, are actually very many different types of logic.
数学哲学家们经常研究这些问题。
Philosophers of mathematics work on these things a lot.
这里的人以为他们知道什么是逻辑与非逻辑，但实际上对此根本没有任何接近共识的看法。
People here think that they know what logical versus illogical is, but there's actually nothing close to receive consensus about this.
那边所提到的内容，主要是由布劳威尔发起的，我认为他是一位杰出的数学家。
What is being referred to over there started primarily with Brower, I believe, a brilliant mathematician.
这被称为直觉主义数学。
It's called Intuitionist Mathematics.
除此之外，你并不假设排中律。
Among other things, you don't assume the law of the excluded middle.
你允许A和非A同时成立。
You allow both A and not A.
你允许大卫·克拉考尔既在舞台上，又不在舞台上。
You allow it to be both the case that David Krakauer is on the stage and he's not on the stage.
这种对逻辑允许范围的看法并不被大多数人接受，但确实有一些人支持。
So it is not a view of the what yours allowable in terms of logic that are subscribed to by many, but it is subscribed to by some.
我认为尼古拉·吉辛主要是一位高能理论物理学家，可能是意大利人，他最近提出了一种基于直觉主义的假设：当你在实验中测量一个实数的连续数字时，每一个新数字并不是预先确定的，而是在当下随机构建出来的。
And Nicolas Gisin is a I believe he's primarily a high energy theorist, Italian, I think, who has recently hypothesized sort of building on intuitionism that maybe actually when you look at the successive digits of a real number that you're measuring in experimental in an experimental situation, that each new digit is not, so to speak, preordained, and you are just learning it, but it is constructed stochastically on the fly.
这项工作尚未被深入展开和详细推演，仍停留在高层次的概念层面。
That work has not been elaborated and drilled down really behind high level conceptualizing.
就其可能带来的影响而言，目前还没有人（至少我没见过）提出过这样的假设：物理学的基础中可能存在时间不对称性。
In terms of what its implications might be of if you just reversed because it's not anywhere that I've seen at least hypothesized that there might be time asymmetries in the foundations of physics.
因此，所有这些在时间反向时也同样成立。
So all of this will be just as true going backwards as forwards.
但这是一个非常有趣的问题：如果我们采纳适当的逻辑形式，那么‘现实是随着我们前进而构建的’这一观念在数学上是被允许的。
But so it is a very interesting question that there are these notions that reality is constructed as we go forward, which are mathematically allowed, so to speak, if you just adopt the appropriate flavors of logic.
但迄今为止，还没有人通过实验确凿地证明这些观点适用于我们。
But nobody yet has actually certainly experimentally established that there's any sense in which they apply to us.
这就像一个环形宇宙，虽然逻辑上允许，但显然我们并不生活在一个环形宇宙中。
It's like a girdle universe in that it's allowed, but it's very clear that we do not live in a girdle universe.
我不知道这是否真的回答了你的问题。
I don't know if that's actually answering your question or not.
好的。
Okay.
我们来，好吧。
Let's Okay.
谢谢你，大卫。
Thank you, David.
这不是个简单的问题。
Was not easy question.
我们还有其他问题吗？
Some do we have another question?
我看到前面有人举手，哦，阿尔谢尼拿到话筒了。
I see one up front and then Oh, Arseny has the mic.
我有
I have
话筒。
the microphone.
你有话筒。
You have the mic.
我有一个关于块宇宙的问题。
So I have a question about the block universe.
我们之前只是匆匆提到了对它的批评，对吧？那种批评缺乏新意，但主观的新颖性绝对不是一种批评，因为它只是对块宇宙中某种转变的主观描述，我想是这样。
So we had like a fleeting mention of the criticism, right, that lacks novelty, but subjective novelty is definitely not a criticism because it's a description subjective description of a transition in this block universe, would imagine.
对吧？
Right?
但说宇宙缺乏新意作为对这个模型的批评，只是因为你不想它这样而已。
But saying that the universe lacks novelty as a criticism against the model is just, don't want it to be this way.
所以我在想，有没有什么合理的批评意见，对吧，不是吗？
So I was wondering, are there any legitimate criticisms, right, not?
简单说一下，我认为这一点，再次强调，欢迎大家发表看法。
Just to say quickly, I think that and, again, let's have opinions on this.
我觉得所有这些观点有时都是不可反驳的，因为这是任意维度的解决方案，是应对新颖性问题的常规做法，其实就是一种取巧。
I think all the I think it's sometimes irrefutable, and it would be because it's arbitrary dimensionality, it's the usual solution to the problem of novelty, which is just opening up another dimension so it's a cheat.
我认为柏格森更关注的是人们做出发现这一心理事实。
I think Bergson was just more interested in the psychological fact that people make discoveries.
所以换一种说法就是，物理时间不足以解释心理时间。
So another way of saying this is that physics time is inadequate to explain the psychological time.
而要解释这一点，你需要热力学第二定律，以及我们在圣塔菲研究所所做的复杂性研究。
And for that, you need the second law and everything that we do at SFI, Complexity.
这是一种超越物理时间概念的新时间观，但它们是建立在物理时间概念之上的。
It's it's new concepts of time that go way beyond physical concepts of time, but they sit on physical concepts of time.
所以这只是另一种不同的世界观，实际上不是物理意义上的，对吧。
So it's just a different I think it's a different world actually, not a physical Yeah.
我觉得这是对的。
I think that's right.
我觉得你一定很失望，因为我们讨论到这个地步，却还没提到‘熵’这个词，我知道。
I think you must be disappointed that we've gotten to this point in the discussion, and the word entropy has not even I know.
我本可以出现的。
I could have been appeared.
谢谢。
Thank you.
你松了一口气。
You're relieved.
我对这个问题的回答是，我并不反驳块宇宙观。
My answer to the question is that I don't refute the block universe.
我怎么能呢？
How could I?
我怎敢呢？
How would I dare?
我完全接受，这是过去一个世纪物理学赋予我们最强大的概念之一，如果不是最强大的话，但它并不能解释一切。
I complete I accept that this is one of the most powerful, if not the most powerful conceptions that physics has given us in the past century, but it's not an explanation for everything.
它在其适用范围内有效。
It applies in its domain.
我认为你可以相信，块宇宙模型、爱因斯坦的时空连续体，是一个极其出色的物理模型，能让科学家对广泛的现象做出非常精确的预测，但并非对所有现象都能如此。
I think you're allowed to believe that the block universe model, the Einsteinian space time continuum, is a fantastic model of physics that that allows scientists to make very accurate predictions about a broad range of phenomena, but not about everything.
正如我左边的大卫所说，它排除了任何自由意志的概念。
It rules out, as David to my left said, any notion of free will.
你不能既接受它作为对现实的完整描述，又相信自由意志有任何意义。
You can't accept that as a complete description of reality and also believe that free will has any meaning.
但除此之外，我认为它排除了圣塔菲研究所进行的几乎所有研究方向。
But beyond that, I would say it rules out practically every direction of research that is done at the Santa Fe Institute.
有没有哪位科学家
Is there any scientist
并不排除这一点。
Doesn't rule it out.
这根本不相关。
It's just not relevant.
不。
No.
这不相关。
It's not relevant.
是的。
Yeah.
如果你想要从你的世界观中剔除时间，如果你想说过去和未来之间没有有意义的区别，如果你想说“现在”这个概念以及因果链条只是幻觉，那么大多数科学家所做的事情就没有任何实际意义。
And that is if you want to subtract time from your worldview, if you wanna say that there is no meaningful difference between the past and the future, if you wanna say that the concept of the present and the concept of chain is just an illusion, then what most scientists do has no particular use.
对。
Yeah.
让我稍微展开一下。
Let me just open up.
所以我不确定。
So I don't know.
只是想确保我们在这里能收到一个问题。
Just wanna make sure that we get a question in over here.
那边能给个麦克风吗？
There's a can we have a mic just right there?
谢谢。
Thank you.
抱歉。
Sorry.
是的。
Yeah.
所以我在想，有一种时间旅行的版本是只有一个你，你穿越到另一个时间点并占据自己。
So I'm thinking about there's a version of time travel where there is just one you and you go and inhabit yourself in another time.
还有一种版本是你被复制了，你可以同时站在舞台上，又看着舞台上的自己。
And then there's a version where you get doubled up and you can, you know, be both on the stage and then watching yourself on the stage.
我想知道在数学上这两种情况是否有区别。
And I'm curious if there's any distinction between the mathematically.
所以我认为这两种只是两种叙事上的套路。
So I think the you'll those are just two narrative, you know, tropes.
我认为，从物理学角度来看，唯一有某种物理依据的是你被复制的那一种情况。
I think the physics, the only one that has any kind of physical justification would be the one where you're doubled up.
你穿越回过去并进入自己同一具身体的想法，我认为纯粹是一种叙事惯例。
The idea that you travel back in time and then you'll wind up in your same body, that I think exists purely as a narrative convention.
而且这可能是由于大多数时间旅行故事实际上都是关于自由意志的这一事实造成的。
And it has I think it's kind of a result of the fact that I think most time travel stories are actually about free will.
因此，为了更好地讲述一个关于自由意志的故事，把时间旅行者送回他自己的身体里更容易，这样他们才能真正施展自己的意志。
And so in order to better tell a story about free will, it is easier to send your time traveler back into their same body so that they can, you know, actually exert their will.
但是，是的，我认为这只是一个叙事套路。
But, yeah, it's, I think, just a narrative trope.
在物理学上并没有依据支持这种说法。
There's no basis for it in physics.
下一个问题，哦，等等。
The next question oh, wait.
还有一个问题，但这个问题必须关于熵，因为从我们的角度来看，无法脱离熵来讨论时间。
One more question, but this question has to be about entropy because you can't talk about time from our point of view.
詹姆斯写了一本叫《信息》的书。
James wrote a book called The Information.
泰德讲过一个关于宇宙热寂的美丽故事，叫做《呼气》。
Ted has a beautiful story on the heat death of the universe, exhalation.
大卫的所有工作在某种程度上都基于时间之箭。
All of David's work is based in some sense on the hour of time.
这个问题必须关于熵。
This question has to be about entropy.
安德雷斯，这个问题必须关于熵。
Andres, this has to be about entropy.
你谈到了闭合类时曲线，而我们知道热力学第二定律表明熵打破了时间的对称性。
So you talked about the closed timelike curves And we know from second law of thermodynamics that entropy breaks the symmetry of time.
这难道不是一个悖论吗？
Isn't this a paradox?
如果我在一个好的状态。
If I'm in a Okay.
所以也许我完全误解了，但对我来说这看起来像是一个悖论。
So maybe I'm completely misunderstanding, but it seems like a paradox to me.
如果我从一个点出发，沿着一条轨迹运动，然后回到相同的位置和时间，此时我的熵变高了，但不应该是一样的吗？
If I get started at a point and then I follow a trajectory and then come back to the same position and the time, and then my entropy is higher now, but it shouldn't be the same?
我应该有这样的感受吗？
Should I feel this way?
是的。
Yeah.
我很好。
I'm good.
顺便说一下，为了进一步说明之前的观点，我不会说块宇宙实际上是圣塔菲研究所所做工作的基础。
By the way, just to elaborate a point before, I wouldn't say that the block universe is actually the foundation for what the SFI does.
这并不是说它完全无关。
It's not that it's actually irrelevant.
这是起点。
It's the starting point.
它是不完整的，某种程度上类似于哥德尔的不完备性定理——它与心理学、创新以及我们关注的所有这些内容无关，但它确实是真实且正确的。
It is incomplete, almost in the sense of, like, Godel's incompleteness theorems in that it does not have anything to do with the psychology, with innovation, with all that we focus on, but it is certainly true and real.
回到圣塔菲研究所的基础，圣塔菲研究所并没有以任何方式否定量子力学和物理学的定律。
And going back to the foundations of the SFI, it's like the SFI does not somehow refute the laws of quantum mechanics and physics.
它只是说，还有一大堆其他的东西。
It's just saying there's a whole bunch of stuff.
所有更多的东西都是不同的，我们也需要研究这些。
Everything more is different, and we need to investigate all that as well.
因此，块宇宙是真实且正确的，并不与之矛盾。
So the block universe is real and true and is not at some sense at odds.
它实际上是起点。
It's actually the starting point.
关于安德烈亚斯的问题，曾经有一种宇宙学模型，现在不太流行了，它是爱因斯坦方程的一个解，具有周期性——过去曾发生过大爆炸。
To get to Andreas' question, there was, for example, it's now not so popular, but there was a kind of a universe, a cosmology that is a solution to Einstein's equation where it's periodic, that you have a you had the big bang in the past.
顺便说一下，这里有个让很多人头疼的难题。
And by the way, here's a a mind bender for people out there.
时间似乎在向前流逝，我们似乎能回忆过去，却无法以同样的精确度预知未来，目前的共识是，这仅仅是一种残留现象。
The fact that time seems to you to be going forward, that we seem to have memories that we can look backwards but not forwards with the same accuracy, that ultimately, the current consensus is, that's a residue.
当你每天早上醒来时，你心中确信宇宙在130亿年前经历过大爆炸，那时宇宙的熵处于最低水平，这本身就是一种证明。
That's a proof within your conceptions as you wake up in the morning that there was a big bang thirteen billion years ago, which the universe had minimal entropy.
所以，如果你想每天早上醒来时都被震撼一次，这个想法很值得放在脑子里。
So if you want to have your brain get blown up every time you wake up in the morning, that's a good thought to have in there.
但在周期性宇宙模型中，我们的过去经历过一次大爆炸，未来也将会迎来一次大挤压。
But so, anyway, under the periodic universe, there was a big bang in our past, and there's also a big crunch in the future.
实际上，现在仍有人讨论这个观点，比如肖恩·卡罗尔，他是SFI的米勒还是外部研究员？
And this is actually still some people talk about this, actually, Sean Carroll, who's SFI Miller or external?
分形的。
Fractal.
分形的。
Fractal.
他对此有一些深入的思考。
He has had some ruminations concerning that.
你遇到的是同样的情况，所以这里的观点是，宇宙始于一个社会。
You run into a same kind of an so the idea here is that the universe started at the society.
我们本质上就像一个白洞，大约一百三十亿年前开始，如今正向外膨胀，但最终当我们达到极限后，会经历一个时间倒流的过程，数十亿年后迎来大挤压。
We essence started as a white hole, so to speak, thirteen billion years ago, and we are now just exploding outwards, but that eventually, we get as far as we can, and then we just go through, in essence, a time reversed version of things to hit a big crunch some number of billions of years into the future.
关于中间会发生什么，显然有一个问题。
There's an obvious question about what happens right in the middle.
如果正如我刚才轻率提出的那样，我们感觉时间向前流动的原因——热力学第二定律、时间的箭头——是由于我们相对近期的过去发生了大爆炸，那么在大挤压那一侧，根据热力学第二定律，时间在我们今天讨论的所有意义上，似乎会朝相反方向流动。
If, as I just glibly threw out there, the reason that we think that time feels like it's going forward to us, the second law, the thermodynamic arrow of time is due to this big bang in our relatively recent past, presumably over in the big crunch side of things, time will seem, according to the second law, in all the senses in which we have been discussing today, to be going the opposite direction.
那么，中间到底发生了什么？
So what the blankety blank happens in the middle.
这实际上牵涉到其他一些问题，我会闭嘴不谈，那就是：在一个时间对称的宇宙中，如何能出现时间不对称的热力学第二定律。
And this actually gets to other issues, which I will shut up and not get into, which is how you can actually have the time asymmetric second law in a time symmetric universe.
从某种意义上说，这正是SFI使命在所有这些其他系统中的具体体现。
In a certain sense, that is the essence of the SFI's mission just instantiated in all these other systems.
如何真正推导出第二定律等等，这是一个非常微妙、深刻且极其精彩的问题，我就说到这里。
And how you actually derive the second law and so on is a very subtle, deep, super cool issue, and I'll leave it at that.
非常感谢各位嘉宾。
So thank you very much, panelists.
非常感谢。
Thank you very much.
那么，由于我们的安排完全被打乱了，现在这个流程是怎么进行的？
And I so how is this now working given the schedule's been completely messed up by us?
谢谢大家的聆听。
Thank you for listening.
《复杂性》由圣塔菲研究所制作，这是一个位于新墨西哥州高沙漠地区的非营利性复杂系统科学中心。
Complexity is produced by the Santa Fe Institute, a nonprofit hub for complex systems science located in the High Desert Of New Mexico.
如需获取更多信息，包括文字稿、研究链接和教育资源，或支持我们的科学与传播工作，请访问 santafe.edu/podcast。
For more information, including transcripts, research links, and educational resources, or to support our science and communication efforts, visit santafe.edu/podcast.
关于 Bayt 播客
Bayt 提供中文+原文双语音频和字幕，帮助你打破语言障碍，轻松听懂全球优质播客。