Now: The Physics of Time

Wow--what a great book! Muller's hypothesis about the flow of time is mind-blowing, and makes intuitive sense. Also, his explanation of quantum physics is by far the clearest I've read.
In addition, the author's provocative thoughts on science vs. spirituality are well worth reading. His attitude reminds me of many of the ancient Greek thinkers ("the fathers of Western science"): willing to engage reality in its fullness.

The book took me from virtual ignorance of relativity to an appreciation of how Einstein affects my life today. Muller is a little full of himself but that might be necessary in producing a book such as this.

I thoroughly enjoyed this book. Interesting, very readable, an exploration of ways of knowing things through the lens of science. The explanations of various theories of space and time and their limitations and successes broadened my understanding of how physics works. From the good theories that are falsifiable to explanations that are more like stories that seem to explain things (the arrow of time) that we don't understand. I'm looking forward to following the progress towards a scientific / physics understanding of "now" and the creation of new time. Well done.

Haven't finished it as yet but professor Muller has a great presentation of time using relativistic precepts. He also discusses interesting philosophical implications of other associated physics concepts. So far its a great read.

This is an excellent book! Not only does it contain up-to-date information about time but also covers all aspects of quantum physics and how time is related to quantum physics. Although this book is written for non-physicists, there is a lot of information on each page. Don't skim any pages! After reading the first chapter, I started underlining important sections with a ruler and pen. (I obviously had a paperback copy.) Would definitely recommend this book!

The author has a tendency to attempt to justify his philosophical beliefs via fallacious reasoning, for example by saying, quite directly, that Gödel's incompleteness theorems show that science cannot "know" everything, therefore not believing in "God" or a higher power is not scientific. The book does a good job of summarizing much of special relativity, though, so I guess that's worth 2 stars.

This is not an easy read. Consider myself having an above average intelligence but after reading this book, maybe not! Math lovers will love this book; lots of equations, formulas. etc. Understood about 50% of the content. Nevertheless, glad I read the book. The 'other' 50% was interesting and informative.

Expounding that nonphysics knowledge allows for understanding is just nonsense. I'm surprised at the author's lack of awareness of the mathematical precepts underpinning such "nonphysics"'knowledge as altruism. It speaks to an ignorance of advances in other disciplines. Still, the concept of "now" as the wave front of time is fascinating and has altered my understanding profoundly.

The past is different than now. All change happens now or when now was then. Columbus discovered the new world in the past but he was in the present every step of the way. I was hoping for an explanation of now that distinguished now from the past and the future. This book is readable but not what I hoped for,

I suspect Dr. Muller, like Lee Smolin, has simply become too old to do actual physics … or explain it competently. Both of these scientists long to get their free will back and insist that our perceptions of "time" truly reflect physical reality.

While evidently accepting Einstein's Relativity Physics, Muller fails to mention the timeless Block Universe, a direct implication of the Relativity of Simultaneity. He also mysteriously states that Einstein became religious in his old age, a complete fabrication. Perhaps he's looking for a precedent for his own descent into spiritualist nonsense.

Relativity tells us that there is no “now” in the universe or the laws of physics and that a Newtonian flowing time doesn't exist. How can Muller not understand that both must therefore be artifacts of consciousness? Now is a feeling not a time. It's the default state of consciousness – all of our conscious moments occur “now”. It's always “now” in our dreams. Flowing time is an illusion rooted in the well known flow of consciousness.

Paul Davies provided accurate descriptions over a decade ago in his Scientific American article, “That Mysterious Flow”. On “now”:

“Physicists prefer to think of time as laid out in its entirety - a timescape, analogous to a landscape - with all past and future events located there together ... Completely absent from this description of nature is anything that singles out a privileged special moment as the present or any process that would systematically turn future events into the present, then past, events.”

On the “flow of time”:

“After all, we do not really observe the passage of time. What we actually observe is that later states of the world differ from earlier states that we still remember. ... Nothing other than a conscious observer registers the flow of time. A clock measures durations between events much as a measuring tape measures distances between places; it does not measure the “speed” with which one moment succeeds another. Therefore, it appears that the flow of time is subjective, not objective.”

Free will is simply a feeling. Both of these scientists are trapped in their naïve realism and woefully ignorant of the obvious workings of consciousness and of neuroscience in general. None of this is surprising, however. After years of denying global warming, physicist Richard Muller now says "global warming is real and humans are almost entirely the cause." Golly. Given another few years, Muller might discover that consciousness is real too. I rate it two stars because hating a book (1 star) is silly.

This book is about: “Now: The Physics of Time.” Strangely, it has been a best seller in the store.com under the category of books on “Entropy,” and not “Time.” It has enjoyed the best seller status for over a year.
Unfortunately, very little is said about entropy in this book, and what is said is either meaningless, or not even wrong. As Hawking’s “A Brief History of Time” and Carroll’s “From Eternity to Here” this book is all about misconstruing Time with Entropy.
In the first paragraph of the Introduction we find the statement:
“Understanding now requires knowledge of relativity, entropy, quantum physics, antimatter, backward time travel, entanglement, the Big Bang, and dark energy.”
I doubt that knowledge of any of the concepts listed here can contribute to “understanding now.” I have no doubt however, that knowledge of entropy is totally irrelevant to either now, and time; past, or future.
On page 9, we find:
“Eddington attributed the flow of time to the increase in entropy, a measure of disorder in the universe. We now know enormously more about the entropy of the universe than did Eddington in 1928 when he proposed the theory, and I’ll argue that Eddington got it backward. The flow of time causes entropy to increase, not the other way around. Entropy production does not exert the tyranny that is often attributed to it. Control over the pathways of entropy turns out to be essential for our understanding of now.”
First, entropy is not a measure of disorder. It is strange to read such a statement, now, in “Now” in 2016! The “disorder” interpretation of entropy was proven to be wrong long ago.
Second, we do not know anything about the “entropy of the universe.” In fact, the entropy of the universe has never been defined, and I doubt that it will ever be defined. Therefore, saying that we “know enormously more about the entropy of the universe,” is not an exaggeration, is not wrong, it is simply a hollow statement.
Third, it is not true that “the flow of time causes entropy to increase, not the other way around.”
Entropy is a state function. It is defined for a well-defined system at equilibrium. As such, it is not a function of time. The flow of time (whatever that means) is not the cause of entropy increase, and it is not the other way around!
On pages 164-166 the author discusses the entropy of the universe along with “three other big tanks of entropy.” These are: The neutrinos left over from the Big Bang, the entropy of super massive black holes, and the “event horizon of the universe.”
None of these “tanks of entropy” have anything to do with the thermodynamic entropy, and none of these “tanks of entropy” have anything to do with ether “now,” ‘time” or “the arrow of time.”
Another typical meaningless statement we find on page 22:
“To understand now, we have to bring together not just relativity and the Big Bang, but an understanding that the onslaught of entropy has limits.”
I have no idea what the “onslaught of entropy” is, and what its “limits” are.
In my opinion, to understand now, (or time, past, or future), one does not need to know anything about entropy, certainly not the meaningless “onslaught of entropy.”
The last chapter is on “The Meaning of Now.” I did not find any explanation of the meaning of “now” in this, or any parts of the book. Perhaps, the following meaningless statement is the meaning of Now. On page 304, we find:
“Now is the only moment when we can exercise influence, the only moment when we can direct the increase in entropy away from ourselves so that we can orchestrate local entropy to decrease.”
Such meaningless statements can only confuse the reader who already has an intuitive idea of the meaning of now.
Finally, in Appendix 2, the author discusses the “Noether Theorem.” This theorem states that the conservation of energy is associated with the time-translational symmetry. It is not, “The most fascinating, precise and practical definition of energy,” as the author claims. Noether’s theorem does not define energy – not precise, not practical!
If you have read either Hawking’s or Carroll’s books, you will find here more of the same confusing ideas about time and entropy.

Muller is obviously a competent physicist with, as they say in Zen, a beginner's mind. He is willing to ask questions many physicists are either too comfortable in their devotion to "physicalism" (limiting their world to the physical period) or afraid to venture into the unknown world of the non physical\. This causes some reviewers to dismiss the back half of this book. Too bad for them I guess.

Undeniably, like the world at large, physics is nibbling at the edges of a paradigm shift and it will be wonder- filled to see where it goes. Like David Bohm (Wholeness and the Implicate Order) and Brian Whitworth (Ten Reasons Why Our Universe is Virtual) Muller is playing with reality a bit. Nothing wrong with that.

Muller does not profess to have all the answers but he asks some brilliant questions and has a sense of humor too. Good for him. Good for us. I love the book and highly recommend it.

The problem with this book it takes a concept that can really only be of value to a physicist and puts in everyday language that any intelligent reader can understand.While he achieves this goal the concept itself is beyond ordinary people's ability to understand.This leads to the obvious question - Why write this book?

I persevered through it, always hoping it would get better, alas it went from acceptable to bad. Pseudoscientific nonsense. Another physicist with little knowledge of philosophy or modern neuroscience stepping outside their domain of expertise with disasterous results. Don't read it or you'll just become more confused. If you can't see fundamental error, read Decartes' Error (Damasio).

While the author self-congratulatory gives himself many near Noble prizes and displays a vast knowledge of science, he is not a scientist. The purpose of this book does not match the title. While under the guise of discovering the origin of time, he is really trying to discredit modern physics. Although quite familiar with Einstein and Feynman, he never addresses M theory of any string theory (except to scoff at it). This book is really trying to convince you (himself?) Of a spiritual Christian God. The book offers little to fulfil the time title and meanders. I found myself writing sidenote nearly every page. Again, don't bother.

“Understanding ‘now’ requires knowledge of relativity, entropy, quantum physics, antimatter, backward time travel, entanglement, the Big Bang and dark energy.” - Richard A. Muller, “NOW”

I once had a girlfriend who had a real problem with the whole “time” thing, especially the “now” part. The chances of her ever showing up where she was supposed to be, at the time she was supposed to be there, were right around zero. Dr. Muller’s words suggest a possible, science-based explanation: it may be that my friend’s knowledge of dark energy was sketchy.

Dr. Muller sets himself to the task of remedying such deficiencies in his readers. He walks us through the things that he feels we need to know. He wonders if the reader will turn out to be the next Einstein. Going along with Dr. Muller on his stroll through the garden of physics gives readers a chance to estimate their own Einstein potential.

Dr. Muller’s central idea is that the Big Bang is ongoing, and “The explosion of the universe continuously creates not only new space but also new time. The expanding edge of time is what we refer to as ‘now,’ and the flow of time is the continual creation of new ‘nows’.”

Dr. Muller also shares with us his thoughts on the soul, God, free will and “the religion of physicalism.” I went ahead and read these meditations, but since I was reading a book subtitled “The Physics of Time” and not “Philosophy and the Supernatural in Everyday Life” I felt free to mostly pay them no mind.

“Now” was, for the most part, fun and interesting to read. It did, however, leave me unsatisfied on a number of points. I think this book needs a sequel. I am even prepared to suggest a title, “That was Then, THIS is Now!” This sequel would give Dr. Muller a chance to clear up a few things:

pg. 76: “You, sitting at the surface of the Earth, are constantly accelerating upward…That acceleration is what we call the gravitational pull of the Earth…” Okay, if gravity is accelerating us upward, what is holding us down? I suppose it is complicated, but what are books like this for, if not to explain complicated matters to simple minds?

pg. 29: “…you are in a spaceship moving at 97 percent the speed of light…the time interval between your birthday celebrations is one year. In the Earth frame, the time interval between those same two birthdays is not one year but only three months.” If I remember the relativity I learned in elementary school, the guy in the space ship is supposed to age slower, not faster. Actually, I think I have figured this one out. I’m pretty sure it was just a case of Dr. Muller having a senior moment right after his publisher, W.W. Norton & Co., laid off all their science editors in a cost-cutting move, but I suppose it would be best to check.

pg. 271: “I know I have a soul…It’s that thing that goes beyond physics, that is beyond the body and past the brain and sees…” And what happens to the thing that sees if, for example, Dr. Muller drinks the better part of a pint of scotch, or does some LSD or inhales some ether? Why should any mere molecules have any effect on something that is beyond physics? Why should any physical event be able to produce a temporary or permanent alteration of perception, thought, behavior and/or personality?

pg. 127: If you have ever wondered where the big bang happened, it was right where you are sitting now. You have remained still at the center of creation while the spatial edge of the still-progressing big bang has moved very far away. In Dr. Muller’s scheme it appears that while we are all stationary in the center of the spatial dimensions, we are swept along at the very outer edge of the conjoined temporal dimension. How so? I don’t know how to even begin thinking about this. I can deal with two dimensions, but I am in for a struggle when I have to start thinking in three. Four dimensions, forget it. Dr. Muller has some work to do here.

And, while we are considering the expansion of the universe, it occurs to me that distant galaxies are moving away from us at velocities well in excess of the speed of light (allowed, since there is no theoretical limit to the speed at which space can expand, carrying those galaxies with it) which means that, from the point of view of our proper frame, those galaxies are moving backward in time, back toward the big bang. This makes the entirety of space-time look like a torus (a doughnut, google “An illustration of the fabric of space”). Where is “now” in all of this?

pg. 296: Dr. Muller is interested in experimental tests of his proposal regarding the nature of now. In the sequel, he might consider time symmetric quantum mechanics. As I’m sure we are all aware, in regular, time asymmetric quantum mechanics, quantum events are the result of probability waves that propagate in only one direction in time, from the past into the present. Time symmetric quantum mechanics proposes that probability waves also propagate from the future (which, in Dr. Muller’s scheme, does not yet exist) into the present and play a role in determining what happens now. There have been experimental tests of this hypothesis, with results that have been interpreted as providing support (googling Yakir Aharonov + weak measurement should get you started, if you are interested in details).

pg. 52: A story about a farmer who wants to put a 40-foot pole in a barn that is 20 feet on a side. The farmer figures that if he gets running at near light speed, the pole, as seen by a stationary observer, will contract sufficiently to fit in the barn. His problem is that, as seen by himself, the pole will stay at its original length, while the barn he is running toward will contract to a still shallower depth. Can he get the pole in the barn or not? Dr. Muller reasons thus and so, does some calculations, and concludes that yes, he can. I would lean toward “no” since, when the farmer and his pole hit the barn at relativistic velocity there will nothing left of any of them but subatomic particles and gamma rays, so you couldn’t really say that the pole is in the barn.

Just think, the next Einstein could be reading this even now, and jotting a few equations on the back of an envelope.

This book is not about "now", "time" or even "physics". I am not saying this, the author states it in his book. In fact he labels people who thinks physics provide answers as "physicalists". So why he calls his book Physics of time, when all he talks about souls, spiritual world, empathy and attacks every other physicists. In fact he claims there could be a spiritual world "entangled" with our world. Worst part is he pretends he is an expert in areas like biology which he has no clue.

This is the worst "physics" book I have ever read. I wish he would have focused on cosmology which is the area he is an expert. If you love Dan Brown books, or if you are into new age "philosophy", big foot, ghosts you will love this book otherwise do not waste your time or money on this. My only star goes to his description of the original entanglement experiments at Berkeley, which was excellent.

Muller is obviously a competent physicist with, as they say in Zen, a beginner's mind. He is willing to ask questions many physicists are either too comfortable in their devotion to "physicalism" (limiting their world to the physical period) or afraid to venture into the unknown world of the non physical\. This causes some reviewers to dismiss the back half of this book. Too bad for them I guess.

Undeniably, like the world at large, physics is nibbling at the edges of a paradigm shift and it will be wonder- filled to see where it goes. Like David Bohm (Wholeness and the Implicate Order) and Brian Whitworth (Ten Reasons Why Our Universe is Virtual) Muller is playing with reality a bit. Nothing wrong with that.

Muller does not profess to have all the answers but he asks some brilliant questions and has a sense of humor too. Good for him. Good for us. I love the book and highly recommend it.

Fascinating book that brings you up to speed on the latest knowledge in physics. It covers dark matter, time, relativity, quantum physics, etc. as well as an unfortunate foray into the concept of free will. Without that glaringly naive perspective, I'd have given this book 5 stars.

Muller claims that he believes free will exists and that he hopes tachyons do not exists because they would disprove free will, as they are a theoretic particle that can travel faster than light. But his philosophical depth is shallow when considering what free will actually is. He also states that unpredictable behavior of humans is a better indicator of free will. And since the quantum behavior in some instances cannot be predicted, that that is a good foundation for humans' free will. But if that's the case, then one could say that unpredictable quantum particles have free will.

What is free will? He uses the example of choosing to make a tea cup or destroy one. Sure we can make the decision to do either, but we must realize that we only act based on desire or impulse. We will make or destroy depending on what we desire to do, and we do not control our desires. And how would a chaotic/randomness support free will anyway? Wouldn't chaotic behavior be the opposite of behavior guided by "will"?

So Muller falls short in his philosophy, but otherwise wrote a fascinating book.

The title should be "Now: the Metaphysics of Time".

This book covers the physics of time - opt ugly pieces and entropy; temporal in variance in quantum mechanics; relativistic effects- very clearly. It should have stopped there.

The author's rants against the limits of physicalism are repetitive, time-worn (no pun intended) and, in a number of cases, simply misplaced, such as his argument that quantum indeterminacy and the death of the Newtonian 'clockwork Universe' imply that it's open season for incorporating spiritualism into the scientific programme. I was expecting far better; I certainly was not expecting a whole appendix dedicated to an Appeal to Authority quoting eminent physicists who have held spiritual beliefs.

I want my money back.

I won't rehash the reviews that praise this book. Suffice it to say that Richard Muller is an excellent teacher and researcher with a solid knowledge of physics and a clear writing style. What I found refreshing were two things. First, his idea that time is being created just as space is being created in our expanding universe. He even suggests ways in which this can be tested experimentally. Second, he is not afraid to claim that there is much truth beyond physics and measurement. I firmly believe this for many reasons, some of which he argues quite persuasively. For those who don't consider the last part of the book "scientific", i.e., those who might subscribe to physicalism or don't care about philosophical or metaphysical issues, I understand your disappointment. However, I find it hubristic to ignore or denigrate arguments that look at the limits of physics in understanding reality.

I've always been interested in time, and read this book with great
interest. I was not disappointed. Much of it was a lucid review of physical
thought from Einstein onward, punctuated by personal anecdotes. Some
reviewers found these rambling: true, but rambling in a comfortable way,
helping me relate to the man behind the words. Much of what I've read in
previous physicists' books has been baffling: "time is an illusion"; "time is
just a fourth dimension that can be shown in a static spacetime block diagram"
(if so, why can't we travel to other parts of it?). It was worth reading this
book just to find a serious, eminent physicist who validates my intuitive
sense that time is real, and expands at the edge of creation as the moment
we experience as "now.".

There were some points that I'd like to talk to the author about, if I
ever get the chance. In a section "Beyond Physics," he says, e.g., "maybe
your blue is my red," citing personal conditions that make each of his eyes
see things in slightly different colors, and each ear hear tones a bit
differently. I can't prove that my subjective blue isn't like his red, but I
think that if the these perceptual anomalies were investigated anatomically
and physiologically, point-by-point distinctions could be found that correlate
in a definite way with the subjective experiences, suggesting that people's
experiences of vision and sound are not arbitrarily different; that similar
perceptual pathways should generate much the same subjective results. This is
part of the basis for empathy, a virtue of which Muller writes further on.

Muller reflects about the possibility of teleportation a la Star Trek,
concluding that it might be possible, but he wouldn't risk doing it because
his "soul" might not come along. He doesn't consider that our personalities
might not be nonphysical entities, but patterned physical processes. The
analogy that first led me to think about this is candle flame, that has stable
shape and structure but depends on a constant energy flow to exist. Perhaps
our own more complex essences are something like standing waves in our
tissues, that require metabolic support to stay stable. It seems to me then
that teleportation would require not only duplicating each particle at the
correct location in the body, but maintaining the exact energy flow pattern
among the particles at the moment, where failure would entail more or less
serious defects in the transportee--irrespective of an immaterial "soul."

Muller mentions that physicists still can't predict the time of decay of
radioactive particles. I wonder whether the quantum phenomenon of
"entanglement"--instantaneous communication between mysteriously-linked
particles--may be involved. He states that physicists have established that
all fundamental particles are exactly alike. But in a sense they are not:
each of them is in a different place than any other. Could all particles in
the universe be entangled at some level, so that seemingly random events like
radioactive decays might be responses to shifts in the overall pattern?

Muller repeatedly touches on another puzzling quantum situation: that an
"observer" is required to "collapse wave functions" to a definite state, as
per the famous Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment. He quotes Einstein's
mocking comment "do you really think the moon isn't there until we look at
it?" He doesn't clarify the matter entirely, but agrees with Einstein that
"observations" don't have to be that conscious and literal to create reality.

I didn't benefit much from Muller's speculations on nonphysical truth,
but overall, I enjoyed this non-dogmatic, thought-provoking book more than
anything else I've read on these issues (with the possible exception of some
of the fantasy stories of Lord Dunsany...)

Richard Muller is one of the most original physicists of his generation. He has the unusual distinction of having handed over to a younger colleague a project that led to the discovery of "dark energy" and a Nobel prize (we should not be fixated on prizes, but we are; it was a great discovery, with or without a prize). Why? Because he thought the younger man was better equipped to carry it out. Rich did this understanding the project's importance and likely rewards if a discovery were made.

"Now" includes accounts of much profound physics that is fuzzy in almost every other book. He gives the clearest explanations of the twin and barn door "paradoxes" (properly, a "paradox" is something that seems self-contradictory, but isn't upon closer examination) of relativity. that I have ever seen. Surrounding this it poses the more philosophical question of the meaning of now and the "arrow of time"---why time seems to have a direction of flow: We remember the past, but not the future; we may fear annihilation of consciousness at our deaths, but aren't bothered by the absence of our consciousness before our births. It effectively debunks the naive argument that time flows because the entropy of the Universe increases. At best, that only defines the direction of the flow of time, in a somewhat arbitrary manner. These puzzles don't have the clear resolution of the paradoxes of special relativity, so they will stump the reader, and keep him fascinated.