Maybe I'm just too steeped in pragmatism to notice, but it seems your question has already been answered. For example:

Does a limit on the precision of time at this level imply that these are actual indivisible and discontinuous units?

No, a limit on precision tells you that it's not meaningful to ask whether or not there are actual indivisible and discontinuous units. There's no experiment that could tell the difference.

[anonymous]8y0

I think pragmatism is a fine approach here, but could you clarify for me what your think the answer to my question is exactly? If it's not meaningful to ask whether or not there are indivisible and discontinuous units, then is the answer to my question "Does QM's claims about Planck time imply that time is discontinuous?" simply "No" because QM says nothing meaningful about the question one way or the other?

Welcome to Less Wrong! (2010-2011)

by orthonormal 1 min read12th Aug 2010805 comments

42


This post has too many comments to show them all at once! Newcomers, please proceed in an orderly fashion to the newest welcome thread.