Tell me more ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Is existence subjective or objective? There are two observers, Alice and Bob, in a de Sitter cosmology with a positive cosmological constant. Both coast along their geodesics with some initial spatial separation between them. Soon, the de Sitter geometry will push each of them out of the causal horizon of the other observer. According to the causal patch hypothesis, past the point of no return, Alice will conclude she exists, but Bob no longer does. Bob will conclude the exact opposite. Unlike black hole complimentarity, no one will face a certain impending doom at a singularity, which would complicate matters.

Who is right about questions of existence? If there is a transcendental arbiter/judge to decide, we can go along with it. But what if there is no higher arbiter? Or what if there is a higher arbiter, but it (or "god") is not universal or fair, and it makes ad hoc judgments? Does each observer have their own reality? If there is continual two-way communication between observers, we may combine them into a single larger observer creating a mutual consensus reality, but what if such a communication channel breaks down with no global perspective? Are we condemned to postmodernism then?

The naive correspondence theory of truth and existence breaks down without a global perspective of a god, or objective reality. What then is truth or existence?

share|improve this question
Of course, the answer is that existence is objective. Do you really think that your own existence is anything less than absolute, just because someone else doesn't know about it? If a philosophy or theory says that existence is relative in this way, that's a refutation of it. – Mitchell Porter Jun 15 '12 at 12:40

closed as off topic by Arnold Neumaier, David Zaslavsky Jun 15 '12 at 14:59

Questions on Physics Stack Exchange are expected to relate to physics within the scope defined in the FAQ. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about closed questions here.

1 Answer

You say:

According to the causal patch hypothesis, past the point of no return, Alice will conclude she exists, but Bob no longer does. Bob will conclude the exact opposite.

but I don't understand this point of view. According to you the interior of a black hole doesn't exist either, but we can calculate geodesics past the event horizon, and indeed for Reissner–Nordström and Kerr black holes we can follow selected geodesics back out of the black holes again.

There have been suggestions by Linde et al that the current accelerated expansion will reverse in the very far future and the universe will start contracting again. Does that mean the objects on the far side of our cosmological event horizon cease to exist then spring back into existence when the universe starts contracting?

Finally one last point: Alice will never see Bob pass the cosmological event horizon. The time dilation at the horizon means she will see Bob slow down as he approaches the horizon. Alice would have to wait an infinite time to see Bob pass through the horizon.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.