We propose that all actual causes are simultaneous with their direct effects, as illustrated by both everyday examples and the laws of physics. We contrast this view with the sequential conception of causation, according to which causes must occur prior to their effects. The key difference between the two views of causation lies in differing assumptions about the mathematical structure of time.

In this paper I object some of the criticisms Wahlberg (2017. “Meso-Level Objects, Powers, and Simultaneous Causation.” Metaphysica 18 (1): 107–25) wages against Mumford and Anjum's (2011. Getting Causes from Powers . Oxford: Oxford University Press) account of simultaneous causation. A brief outlook on Wahlberg’s argument in favour of sequential causation is introduced. A first objection is presented and it is shown that sequential causation cannot deal with one of Mumford and Anjum’s argument: the possibility of prevention. When sequential and (...) simultaneous causation are put side by side and how the causal process in each of them interact with a subtractive preventer is analysed, sequential causation becomes visibly flawed while simultaneous causation accommodates the prevention. Then, a second objection argues that the solution Wahlberg puts forward is defective and the time intervals marking the beginning of the cause or effect merely change where the problem appears. Finally, I retort a series of concerns Wahlberg stresses about the structure of simultaneous causation: temporal directedness, causal configuration and non-negligible change and time. (shrink)

Special relativity describes a world of symmetric relations, yet physical reality unfolds asymmetrically. This paper revisits the simultaneity argument of Putnam and Penrose and identifies its missing physical element: closure. Between emission and absorption lies an open null connection that becomes real only when closed by interaction. The geometry of SR allows both directions of connection, but radiation in nature is single-headed - each photon is emitted once and absorbed once. From this asymmetry arises temporal order: the past is (...) the growing record of closed relations, while the future remains open. The proposed closure principle reconciles relativity with becoming and serves as the conceptual foundation for later developments in the Fixed-Now Growing Worldline (FNGW) and Closure-Oriented Radiative Expansion (CORE) frameworks. (shrink)

We show that true colors as defined by Chevreul (1839) produce unsuspected simultaneous brightness induction effects on their immediate grey backgrounds when these are placed on a darker (black) general background surrounding two spatially separated configurations. Assimilation and apparent contrast may occur in one and the same stimulus display. We examined the possible link between these effects and the perceived depth of the color patterns which induce them as a function of their luminance contrast. Patterns of square-shaped inducers of a (...) single color (red, green, blue, yellow, or grey) were placed on background fields of a lighter and a darker grey, presented on a darker screen. Inducers were always darker on one side of the display and brighter on the other in a given trial. The intensity of the grey backgrounds varied between trials only. This permitted generating four inducer luminance contrasts, presented in random order, for each color. Background fields were either spatially separated or consisted of a single grey field on the black screen. Experiments were run under three environmental conditions: dark-adaptation, daylight, and rod-saturation after exposure to bright light. In a first task, we measured probabilities of contrast, assimilation, and no effect in a three-alternative forced-choice procedure (background appears brighter on the ‘left’, on the ‘right’ or the ‘same’). Visual adaptation and inducer contrast had no significant influence on the induction effects produced by colored inducers. Achromatic inducers produced significantly stronger contrast effects after dark-adaptation, and significantly stronger assimilation in daylight conditions. Grouping two backgrounds into a single one was found to significantly decrease probabilities of apparent contrast. Under the same conditions, we measured probabilities of the inducers to be perceived as nearer to the observer inducers. These, as predicted by Chevreul’s law of contrast, were determined by the luminance contrast of the inducers only, with significantly higher probabilities of brighter inducers to be seen as nearer, and a marked asymmetry between effects produced by inducers of opposite sign. Implications of these findings for theories which attempt to link simultaneous induction effects to the relative depth of object surfaces in the visual field are discussed. (shrink)

This paper aims to show that Lessing develops in his aesthetics a pre-Kantian philosophy of consciousness. The concept of virtuality that the german writer puts forward in his essay Laocoon implies an interweaving of temporal dimensions similar to the threefold temporal synthesis described by Kant in the transcendental deduction of the Critique of Pure Reason. But whereas Kant thematizes an a priori of consciousness, Lessing is in search of an a priori of plastic art. It will be seen that perfect (...) sculpture presupposes the choice of that moment in time which can open the imagination to the past and the future in a way that enriches the present by transforming it into a "pregnant moment". The final aim of the article is to trace the genesis of the concept of simultaneity of temporal dimensions presupposed by the idea of the pregnant moment, and its implications for the idea of the temporality of consciousness. (shrink)

This paper investigates a well-known case of simultaneous discovery in twentieth-century chemistry, the origins of the concept of hybridisation, in the light of Kuhn's insights. There has been no ambiguity as to who discovered this concept, when it was "rst in print, and how important it was. The full-#edged form of the concept was published in 1931 independently by two American scientists John C. Slater (1900}1976) and Linus Pauling (1901}1994), although both of them had made their ideas public earlier: Slater (...) at the American Physical Society meetings in 1930, and Pauling in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 1928. Slater and Pauling both argued for the necessity of using an s orbital as well as three p orbitals in the carbon atom in order to explain carbon's four valences and the tetrahedral structure of methane. The metaphor &hybridisation' for denoting this mix of s and p orbitals was "rst used by Robert S. Mulliken and J. H. Van Vleck before gaining currency with the scienti"c community around 1935.2 The concept of hybridisation was indeed indispensable for extending the quantum-mechanical interpretation of the chemical bond as an electron pairing from diatomic molecules to polyatomic ones. To be sure, the emergence of hybridisation attests to scientists' growing interest in exploring the borderland between physics and chemistry, a trend that led to the creation of physical chemistry in the late nineteenth century and of chemical physics and quantum chemistry in the 1920s and 30s. Slater and Pauling themselves experienced and on many occasions talked about the fruitfulness of interdisciplinary research; and historians have legitimately illuminated their works by examining them in this broad context.3 Yet the careful analysis of their research notes and published papers reveals that Slater and Pauling were working in quite disparate disciplinary traditions, with di!erent approaches, for di!erent audiences, and towards di!erent goals. The aim of this paper is to explore their di!erent routes to a common destination*hybridisation*and thereby to explicate tensions existing between physics and chemistry amidst the institutional and conceptual overlapping of the two disciplines. (shrink)

Alexander of Aphrodisias picks up Aristotle’s insufficient treatment of simultaneous perception and develops an adequate solution for the problem, thereby offering an account of the unity of perceptual consciousness—the single mental activity of a single subject with complex content. I show the adequacy of the solution by using as criteria the requirements that have been identified by Aristotle and approved (and explained) by Alexander. I analyze Alexander’s solution in two turns. First, with respect to heterogeneous perceptibles, Alexander adopts and reformulates (...) Aristotle’s metaphorical account invoking the analogy with a point. Second, with respect to homogeneous opposites, accordingly, perception is judgement, but it involves physical changes in diverse parts of the primary sense-organ. By this account Alexander resolves the issue of the unity of the subject on the level of the capacity of the soul, and coordinates the complexity of content with the complexity on the physical level. In addition to being adequate, the solution is faithful to Aristotle. I suggest that the interpretative decisions Alexander makes (the clarification of the analogy; the reference he finds to the analogy; the two components of the solution, judgement and parts of the organ) form an ingenious extension of Aristotle’s treatment. Interestingly, even though many elements in Alexander’s interpretation are taken up by modern commentators, no one has followed it in its entirety, nor even treated it in its own right. (shrink)

Simultaneous hypothesis tests can fail to provide results that meet logical requirements. For example, if A and B are two statements such that A implies B, there exist tests that, based on the same data, reject B but not A. Such outcomes are generally inconvenient to statisticians (who want to communicate the results to practitioners in a simple fashion) and non-statisticians (confused by conflicting pieces of information). Based on this inconvenience, one might want to use tests that satisfy logical requirements. (...) However, Izbicki and Esteves shows that the only tests that are in accordance with three logical requirements (monotonicity, invertibility and consonance) are trivial tests based on point estimation, which generally lack statistical optimality. As a possible solution to this dilemma, this paper adapts the above logical requirements to agnostic tests, in which one can accept, reject or remain agnostic with respect to a given hypothesis. Each of the logical requirements is characterized in terms of a Bayesian decision theoretic perspective. Contrary to the results obtained for regular hypothesis tests, there exist agnostic tests that satisfy all logical requirements and also perform well statistically. In particular, agnostic tests that fulfill all logical requirements are characterized as region estimator-based tests. Examples of such tests are provided. (shrink)

In this work it is shown how absolute simultaneity of spatially distinct events can be established by means of a general criterion based on isotropically propagating signals and how it can be consistently preserved also when operating with Lorentz-like coordinate transformations between moving frames. The specific invariance properties of these transformations of coordinates are discussed, leading to a different interpretation of the physical meaning of the transformed variables with respect to their prevailing interpretation when associated with the Lorentz transformation. (...) On these basis, the emission hypothesis of W. Ritz is then applied to justify the outcomes of the Fizeau experiment, thanks to the introduction of an additional hypothesis regarding the influence of turbulence on the refractive index of the moving fluid. Finally, a test case to investigate the validity of either the Galilean or the Relativistic velocity composition rule is presented. Such test relies on the aberration of the light coming from celestial objects due to the motion of the observer, and on the analysis of the results obtained by applying the two different formulas to process the data of the observed positions, as measured in the moving frame, in order to determine the actual un-aberrated location of the source. (shrink)

This paper argues that Kūkai’s esoteric philosophy articulates an ontology grounded in superposition rather than reflection or negation. Through an analysis of soku (即), the doctrine of sokushin jōbutsu (“Buddhahood in this body”), and the ritual logic of the Three Mysteries, the paper shows how identity is instantiated as non-sequential co-presence rather than transformative becoming. Esoteric ritual does not symbolize enlightenment but enacts simultaneity without synthesis. Drawing on Kūkai’s writings in dialogue with contemporary Continental thought, the paper presents superposition (...) as an inoperative structure of subjectivity beyond recursion and negation. (shrink)

In the laboratory method called simultaneous dichotic loudness balance (SDLB), the contribution-to-loudness that arises from the listener's continually exposed "fatiguing" ear is required to be matched (balanced) by the listener, by adjusting the intensity of a noncontinuous stimulus at the other ("comparison") ear. The latter intensity usually declines, allegedly indicating "fatigue" of the contribution-to-loudness from the "fatiguing" ear. However, no "fatigue" is found when one ear alone (with the other ear in quiet) experiences a continuous well-suprathreshold stimulus. This is a (...) quandary that remains unresolved. The present article offers a resolution, through a novel conceptual model in which any ear experiencing stimuli acts through a well-characterized physiological structure, the olivocochlear bundle, to "turn down the volume" at the opposite ear. The model explains how "fatigue" varies in eight different SDLB conditions, some having several subconditions. Altogether, the model demonstrates that "fatigue" is an artifact of SDLB itself. (shrink)

While social geographers have convincingly made the case that space is not an external constant, but rather is produced through inter-relations, anthropologists and sociologists have done much to further an understanding of time, as itself constituted through social interaction and inter-relation. Their work suggests that time is not an apolitical background to social life, but shapes how we perceive and relate to others. For those interested in exploring issues such as identity, community and difference, this suggests that attending to how (...) temporal discourses are utilised in relation to these issues is a key task. This article seeks to contribute to an expansion of the debate about time and sociality by contributing an analysis of a variety of ways in which Gloria Anzaldúa utilises temporal concepts as part of her work of rethinking social identity and community. In particular, I suggest that in contesting homogeneous identity, Anzaldúa also implicitly contests linear temporal frameworks. Further, in creating new frameworks for identity, I suggest the possibility of discerning an alternative approach to time in her work that places difference at the heart of simultaneity. I suggest that the interconnection between concepts of time and community within Anzaldúa’s work indicates, more broadly, that attempts to rework understandings of relationality must be accompanied by reworked accounts of temporality. (shrink)

The time-lag argument seems to put some pressure on naïve realism to agree that seeing must happen simultaneously with what is seen; meanwhile, a wide-accepted empirical fact suggests that light takes time to transmit from objects at a distance to perceivers—which implies what is seen happened before seeing, and, accordingly, naïve realism must be false. In this paper, I will, first of all, show that the time-lag argument has in fact involves a misunderstanding concept of simultaneity: according to Special (...) Relativity, simultaneity is a matter of convention rather than a matter of fact, so, in principle, we can stipulate a perceptual conception of simultaneity, according to which what is seen is simultaneous with seeing. Secondly, the generalized time-lag argument has a mistaken view on the perceived events and perceiving; it has a doubtful assumption that these events are momentary in the mathematical sense. Such idealization is the main reason why we have the intuition that the time-lag effect of perceiving is in conflict with our ordinary perceptual experiences. Finally, I argue that the naïve realist account of the perceptual relation is a nontemporal constitutive relation; and hence naïve realism is compatible with the claim that we can perceive things as they were, and it should not be weakened by the time-lag argument. (shrink)

Perfect hedging promises complete protection against financial risk, yet mathematical proofs establish fundamental limitations to this goal. This paper synthesizes evidence across financial theory, market microstructure, systemic risk analysis, political economy, and cryptocurrency markets to examine how theoretical hedging impossibility manifests in empirical pricing patterns and wealth concentration mechanisms. Through analysis of incomplete markets theory (Harrison-Kreps 1979), irreducible model uncertainty (Cont 2006), and novel cross-referencing of offshore leak data (Panama Papers, Pandora Papers) with derivatives market structures, we document systematic pricing (...) differentials that transform hedging from risk management into potential wealth transfer mechanisms. -/- Empirical evidence reveals substantial barriers to effective hedging: dealer markups reaching 25-fold spreads (Hau et al. 2012), collateral costs exceeding hedging benefits above 70% hedge ratios (Swidan et al. 2019), systemic concentration with top-10 dealers controlling 73% of credit default swap markets, and positive correlation between derivatives usage and wealth inequality across 16 countries (Angelopoulos et al. 2024). Case studies demonstrate divergent outcomes: Southwest Airlines bearing $1 billion cash collateral burdens, the $50 billion Luna-UST algorithmic stablecoin collapse, and petrostate currency pegs enabling high-net-worth offshore positioning while devastating household savings. These patterns suggest hedging effectiveness varies systematically by actor sophistication, information access, and institutional positioning. -/- This paper proposes a research program connecting mathematical impossibility with empirical wealth concentration mechanisms. Building on Derrida’s pharmakon concept—remedies that simultaneously poison—we argue that hedging’s dual nature stems from incomplete markets creating unavoidable pricing ambiguity. We propose regulatory enhancements including mandatory hedging cost decomposition, systemic concentration registries, public hedging options to discipline private markets, and extension of anti-money laundering frameworks to recognize hedging-based wealth transfer mechanisms. The perfect hedge, like the philosopher’s stone, reveals fundamental truths about markets, power, and uncertainty precisely because it cannot exist. (shrink)

Empirical research has indicated that there is a positive association: 1) between coherent oscillating electrical and magnetic fields arising from the brain and coherence in cognition and 2) between incoherent oscillating electric and magnetic fields arising from the brain and incoherence in cognition. Maxwell’s 4 laws for electromagnetism describe electric fields and magnetic fields in general, including oscillating electric and magnetic fields arising from the brain (neural oscillations). The reasons for the above associations are: 1) all electromagnetic phenomena are described (...) by Maxwell’s laws in inertial reference frames moving at a constant velocity relative to one another; 2) the Lorentz transformation equations in special relativity provide the way to transform electromagnetic phenomena between inertial reference frames (coordinate systems) moving at a constant velocity relative to one another without any change in Maxwell’s laws (through the use of coordinate transformations between the coordinate systems that are cognitive, logical in nature); 3) in special relativity, the existence of electric and magnetic fields in a coordinate system depends on the relative state of motion of “stationary” and “moving” coordinate systems with regard to each other (through the use of Lorentz coordinate transformation equations between these coordinate systems). In a scenario, one coordinate system is arbitrarily the “stationary” system and the other the “moving” coordinate system. 4) Either coordinate system can be the “stationary” coordinate system while the other is the “moving” coordinate system since empirical evidence has indicated that the human observer (who could be moving) can see himself at rest even if he would be moving; 5) Einstein showed that the fundamental derivation of the Lorentz transformation equations depends on the relativity of simultaneity in special relativity. In special relativity, there is a switch from the emphasis on material items, such as an electric charge or a magnet, in pre-relativity physics to emphasizing coordinate transformations between coordinate systems. This switch is possible because we move from the Galilean coordinate transformation equations in which time and space are absolute to the Lorentz coordinate transformation equations in special relativity in which time and space in a reference frame (actually a coordinate system) is relative. In contrast to the absolute simultaneity in pre-relativity physics, the relative time and space in coordinate systems in special relativity is set up through the relativity of simultaneity between coordinate systems moving at a constant velocity relative to one another. Neural oscillations thus rely on Maxwell’s laws, indicating that neural oscillations involve logic and cognition that allows them to be the interface between mental and physical phenomena as demonstrated by the empirical evidence regarding the association of coherence in neural oscillations and coherence in cognition and the association of incoherence between neural oscillations and incoherence in cognition. The foundation for the association of neural oscillations and cognition are the logical, cognitive, and perceptual features of special relativity described here that have not been appreciated. It appears that electromagnetic phenomena arising from the brain are the link between body and mind, including consciousness. (shrink)

A-theoretic presentness is commonly regarded as non-solipsist and non-relative. The non-solipsism of a non-relative, A-theoretic presentness requires at least two space-like separated things to be present simpliciter together – this co-presentness further implies the global, non-relative, non-conventional simultaneity of them. Yet, this implication clashes with the general view that there is no global, non-relative, non-conventional simultaneity in Minkowski space-time. In order to resolve this conflict, this paper explores the possibility that the non-solipsism of a non-relative, A-theoretic presentness does (...) not require at least two space-like separated things to be present simpliciter together. This can be done by holding exclusive disjunctivism –that mutually space-like separated things are present simpliciter exclusively disjunctively, and each one of them gets to be present simpliciter in a non-successive way (just like mutually time-like related things are present simpliciter exclusively disjunctively, and each one of them gets to be present simpliciter, but in a successive way). (shrink)

This paper proposes a conceptual framework in which time is understood not as a universal linear dimension but as an emergent property arising from the summation of causal contributions within a given domain. In this model, a “now” is defined as the boundary at which all prior causal effects have been integrated into a coherent state for an observer or system. Because two events cannot mutually contribute to each other’s causal summation, true simultaneity is impossible even within a single (...) domain. This framework synthesizes insights from relativity, quantum measurement, and causal‑set thinking, offering a unified philosophical account of why time is locally linear yet globally undefined, and why an absolute “now” could only exist from a vantage point external to spacetime. (shrink)

In discussion of the interpretation of quantum mechanics the terms ‘ontic’ and ‘epistemic’ are often used in the sense of pertaining to what exists, and pertaining to cognition or knowledge respectively. The terms are also often associated with the formal definitions given by Harrigan and Spekkens for the wavefunction in quantum mechanics to be ψ-ontic or ψ-epistemic in the context of the ontological models framework. The formal definitions are contradictories, so that the wavefunction can be either ψ-epistemic or ψ-ontic but (...) not both. However, we argue, nothing about the informal ideas of epistemic and ontic interpretations rules out wavefunctions representing both reality and knowledge. The implications of the Pusey–Barrett–Rudolph theorem and many other issues may be rethought in the light of our analysis. (shrink)

The relativity of simultaneity is at the heart of special relativity. It is the relativity of simultaneity in special relativity as opposed to absolute time in pre-relativity physics that leads to the different kinematic and dynamic results between special relativity and pre-relativity physics. Cognition and logic that are at the heart of the relativity of simultaneity in special relativity. Rock’s work on induced self-motion and induced self-rest, including an experiment, supports this idea. A detailed analysis of Einstein’s (...) arguments on the relativity of simultaneity is presented. Einstein maintained that physical measurements are necessary in all instances in his argument. It is shown that logic and cognition replace the apparent need proposed by Einstein for certain physical measurements to demonstrate the relativity of simultaneity. The importance of cognition and logic occurs because of Rock’s empirical finding that a moving human observer can experience himself at rest but cannot experience himself at rest if he knows that he is moving. This human observer experiencing himself at rest in one inertial reference frame can deduce that the simultaneity in his frame does not extend to the other moving frame. The relativity of simultaneity involves two reference frames moving at a constant velocity relative to one another. Rock’s empirical finding allows for the argument on the relativity of simultaneity to made in either direction, i.e. with either reference frame the “stationary” reference frame while the other reference frame is the “moving” reference frame. Without Rock’s findings, there would be a preferred reference frame and special relativity would not be possible. The work discussed here regarding special relativity indicates that oscillating electric fields and magnetic fields arising from the brain are likely the link between body and mind, including consciousness since electromagnetic phenomena can ONLY be correctly understood in special relativity. (shrink)

In Simultaneity and Delay: A Dialectical Theory of Staggered Time, the Canadian philosopher Jay Lampert challenges theories that define time in terms of absolute simultaneity and continuous succession. To counter these theories he introduces an alternative: the dialectic of simultaneity and delay. According to Lampert, this dialectic constitutes a temporal succession that is no longer structured as a continuous line, but that is built out of staggered time-flows and delayed reactions. The bulk of the book consists of (...) an attempt to give a conceptual order to the ‘unsystematic analyses of simultaneity and delay sprinkled through the history of philosophy’ (2). This conceptual analysis leads us through ancient (Plato and Plotinus), medieval (Origen) and late modern issues (Kant, Hegel and Lessing), as well as scientific discussions (Einstein, McTaggart), and culminates in the central chapter of the book, which attempts to show ‘how the problems of the great simultaneity philosophers - Husserl and Bergson - might be solved by the great delay philosophers - Derrida and Deleuze’ (147). In this review, I will focus on three points. 1. The problem of synchronization. 2. The problem of synthesis. 3. Theproblem of localization. (shrink)

The Leibnizian theodicy, justifying the actual world as the best of all possible worlds via the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR), subjects divine sovereignty to an external axiological calculus. This paper departs decisively from this framework. We argue that divine creative choice is not an optimization among commensurable worlds, but a sovereign selection from among axiologically incommensurable possibilities. We formalize this through a synthesis of Cantorian set theory and Category Theory. First, we model divine knowledge as a transfinite manifold, establishing (...) radical equilibrium freedom. Second, we define three world-types—redemptive struggle (W₁), perfect obedience (W₂), immanent virtue (W₃)—as objects in distinct, non-isomorphic categories, demonstrating their categorical and thus axiological incommensurability. Third, we argue God’s will, identical with His intellect in a simple, eternal act, chooses one category via spontaneous fidelity to His agapic essence. The logical consequence is Strong Occasionalism: God must be the immediate cause of all states of affairs, as secondary causality would introduce a competing sufficient reason. We defend this against the trilemma of regularity, evil, and agency, reinterpreting moral responsibility through a categorical theory of acquisition (kasb), offering a novel agency solution. The result is a coherent theodicy where the actual world is not the “best possible” but the sovereignly willed manifestation of a specific, incommensurable form of divine love. (shrink)

The purpose of this article is to examine two important issues concerning the agency theory of causality: the charge of anthropomorphism and the relation of simultaneous causation. After a brief outline of the agency theory, sections 2–4 contain the refutation of the three main forms in which the charge of anthropomorphism is to be found in the literature. It will appear that it is necessary to distinguish between the subjective and the objective aspect of the concept of causation. This will (...) lead, in section 5, to contrast two kinds of anthropomorphism, one which has been rightly rejected by modern science and one which is fully compatible with the objective reality of the causal processes. Finally, section 6 will apply the preceding considerations to simultaneous causation. On the one hand, in a basic sense, there can be no simultaneous causal relations. On the other hand, simultaneous causation arises when we consider the natural change by abstracting from the agent and from her/his projects of interven.. (shrink)

This paper presents the proof of the apparent nature of relative simultaneity originally derived from Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity (STR). The proof does not challenge the validity of the STR but uncovers fundamental and widespread error in understanding of practical implications of Lorentz transformations. It is demonstrated that more than a century long debates generally miss the point. This results in counterintuitive claims of coexisting multiple time realities by mere equivalence of equal clock indications and simultaneity. Such (...) claims have little empirical significance but they are substantial in education and philosophy which has become utterly confused after universal acceptance of the STR and rejections of Henri Bergson’s challenge. There is nothing more to “relative simultaneity” other than the effect of identical clocks being shifted by an offset which depends on synchronisation method. (shrink)

English Translation from "(Anti)Necessitarismo, Simultaneidade e Possibilidade de Prevenção". In: Merlussi, P. & Nunes, R. de O. (2024). Metafísica Analítica. Toledo: Editora Quero Saber.

Condorcet's famous jury theorem reaches an optimistic conclusion on the correctness of majority decisions, based on two controversial premises about voters: they are competent and vote independently, in a technical sense. I carefully analyse these premises and show that: (i) whether a premise is justi…ed depends on the notion of probability considered; (ii) none of the notions renders both premises simultaneously justi…ed. Under the perhaps most interesting notions, the independence assumption should be weakened.

This paper addresses global bioethical challenges entailed in emerging viral diseases, focussing on their socio-cultural dimension and seeing them as symptomatic of the current era of globalisation. Emerging viral threats exemplify the extent to which humans evolved into a global species, with a pervasive and irreversible impact on the planetary ecosystem. To effectively address these disruptive threats, an attitude of preparedness seems called for, not only on the viroscientific, but also on bioethical, regulatory and governance levels. This paper analyses the (...) global bioethical challenges of emerging viral threats from a dialectical materialist (Marxist) perspective, focussing on three collisions: (1) the collision of expanding networks of globalisation with local husbandry practices; (2) the collision of global networks of mobility with disrupted ecosystems; and (3) the collision of viroscience as a globalised research field with existing regulatory frameworks. These collisions emerge in a force field defined by the simultaneity of the non-simultaneous. Evidence-based health policies invoke discontent as they reflect the normative logic of a globalised knowledge regime. The development of a global bioethics or macro-ethics requires us to envision these collisions not primarily as issues of benefits and risks, but first and foremost as normative tensions closely entangled with broader socio-economic and socio-cultural developments. (shrink)

In this paper, we have tried to prove the lack of discretion by providing a logical and philosophical connection between the fundamental concept of a function in mathematics and one of Einstein's most exceptional relativity results, namely, the relativity of simultaneity. Then, by providing real examples of social experiences and philosophical interpretations of them, we propose another proof for lack of discretion.

Kant’s three Analogies of Experience, in his Critique of Pure Reason, represent a highly condensed attempt to establish the metaphysical foundations of Newtonian physics. His strategy is to show that the organization of experience in terms of a world of enduring substances undergoing mutual causal interaction is a necessary condition of the temporal ordering even of one’s own subjective states, and thus of coherent experience itself. In his Third Analogy—an examination of the necessary conditions of judgments of simultaneous existence—he argues (...) that certain conceptual presuppositions consistent with Newtonian physics are necessary to time-awareness. His argument, however, appears to be undermined by conventionalism in natural science generally, and by the conventionality of simultaneity in particular. In this paper I discuss Kant’s claims in light of contemporary relativity theory. I suggest that, while his project is obsolete in major respects, there may still be useful insights into time-awareness to be drawn from his work. (shrink)

Starting from the special theory of relativity it is argued that the structure of an experience is extended over time, making experience dynamic rather than static. The paper describes and explains what is meant by phenomenal parts and outlines opposing positions on the experience of time. Time according to he special theory of relativity is defined and the possibility of static experience shown to be implausible, leading to the conclusion that experience is dynamic. Some implications of this for the relationship (...) of phenomenology to the physical world are considered. (shrink)

This is a review of Monika Michalowska's critical edition of question 3 from Richard Kilvington's questions commentary on the Sentences by Peter Lombard. It is published in open access under a CC BY 4.0 license.

A disregard for human traditions, the brutality of predation, sacrifice, and sexual desire are ingrained in languages across cultures. This paper concerns a key linguistic feature reflecting this predicament: utterances that encapsulate their opposite and effectuate a U-turn in meaning. This mode of communication stands out as a representation of the friction between incommensurable worlds—conceived together. An enemy’s perspective or an unpalatable reality finds a host within language. I embark upon a multidisciplinary search for examples of such utterances and present (...) an assemblage of five pertinent images. Each of these makes a distinct conceptual contribution. Vigilance and an awareness of other points of view underpin most of the utterances under study, which I propose to call “sharp communication” at the intersection of opposing perspectives. (shrink)

The debate on the conventionality of simultaneity and the debate on the dimensionality of the world have been central in the philosophy of special relativity. The link between both debates however has rarely been explored. The purpose of this paper is to gauge what implications the former debate has for the latter. I show the situation to be much more subtle than was previously argued, and explain how the ontic versus epistemic distinction in the former debate impacts the latter. (...) Despite claims to the contrary, I conclude that special relativity leaves the debate on the dimensionality of the world underdetermined. (shrink)

This paper proposes a unified model relating relativity, quantum mechanics, perception, and consciousness through a framework called Veritas Opportunus (VO). VO represents a finite temporal and spatial bandwidth—approximately a 15-second temporal integration window and a 15-light-second spatial bubble—within which physical events become experientially real. Drawing from Einstein’s relativity of simultaneity, quantum entanglement, delayed-choice experiments, and recent work in perception science, this paper argues that consciousness evolved to operate within this measurable domain of spacetime. The paper further contextualizes VO within (...) string-theoretic models, bubble-universe cosmology, and computational interpretations of physical law. The proposed model suggests that the present moment is not a metaphysical abstraction but a physically grounded region of spacetime within which observers interact with and partially determine quantum outcomes. VO is offered as a candidate medium in which consciousness and physical reality dynamically interface. (shrink)

This paper introduces Veritas Opportunus (VO), a proposed structural feature of reality defined as a finite temporal and spatial bandwidth—approximately a 15-second temporal integration window and a 15-light-second experiential bubble—within which physical events become available to consciousness. Drawing on Einstein’s relativity of simultaneity, quantum nonlocality, delayed-choice experiments, and neuroscientific models of temporal integration, I argue that the “present moment” is neither an instantaneous boundary nor a subjective illusion, but a measurable region where quantum potentialities crystallize into classical outcomes. Consciousness, (...) on this view, evolved to operate within VO, coupling biological prediction systems with the structure of spacetime. I situate VO within broader theoretical contexts, including string-theoretic extra dimensions, bubble-universe cosmology, and the simulation hypothesis. VO is proposed as a unifying conceptual framework linking time perception, quantum measurement, and the experiential boundary between potentiality and actuality. (shrink)

In this paper, we develop a mathematical model of awareness based on the idea of plurality. Instead of positing a singular principle, telos, or essence as noumenon, we model it as plurality accessible through multiple forms of awareness (“n-awareness”). In contrast to many other approaches, our model is committed to pluralist thinking. The noumenon is plural, and reality is neither reducible nor irreducible. Nothing dies out in meaning making. We begin by mathematizing the concept of awareness by appealing to the (...) mathematical formalism of higher category theory. The beauty of higher category theory lies in its universality. Pluralism is categorical. In particular, we model awareness using the theories of derived categories and (infinity, 1)-topoi which will give rise to our meta-language. We then posit a “grammar” (“n-declension”) which could express n-awareness, accompanied by a new temporal ontology (“n-time”). Our framework allows us to revisit old problems in the philosophy of time: how is change possible and what do we mean by simultaneity and coincidence? Another question which could be re-conceptualized in our model is one of soteriology related to this pluralism: what is a self in this context? A new model of “personal identity over time” is thus introduced. (shrink)

A description of consciousness leads to a contradiction with the postulation from special relativity that there can be no connections between simultaneous event. This contradiction points to consciousness involving quantum level mechanisms. The Quantum level description of the universe is re- evaluated in the light of what is observed in consciousness namely 4 Dimensional objects. A new improved interpretation of Quantum level observations is introduced. From this vantage point the following axioms of consciousness is presented. Consciousness consists of two distinct (...) components, the observed U and the observer I. The observed U consist of all the events I is aware of. A vast majority of these occur simultaneously. Now if I were to be an entity within the space-time continuum, all of these events of U together with I would have to occur at one point in space-time. However, U is distributed over a definite region of space-time (region in brain). Thus, I is aware of a multitude of space-like separated events. It is seen that this awareness necessitates I to be an entity outside the space-time continuum. With I taken as such, a new concept called concept A is introduced. With the help of concept A a very important axiom of consciousness, namely Free Will is explained. Libet s Experiment which was originally seen to contradict Free will, in the light of Concept A is shown to support it. A variation to Libet s Experiment is suggested that will give conclusive proof for Concept A and Free Will. (shrink)

In this paper, we propose a mathematical model of subjective experience in terms of classes of hierarchical geometries of representations (“n-awareness”). We first outline a general framework by recalling concepts from higher category theory, homotopy theory, and the theory of (infinity,1)-topoi. We then state three conjectures that enrich this framework. We first propose that the (infinity,1)-category of a geometric structure known as perfectoid diamond is an (infinity,1)-topos. In order to construct a topology on the (infinity,1)-category of diamonds we then propose (...) that topological localization, in the sense of Grothendieck-Rezk-Lurie (infinity,1)-topoi, extends to the (infinity,1)-category of diamonds. We provide a small-scale model using triangulated categories. Finally, our meta-model takes the form of Efimov K-theory of the (infinity,1)-category of perfectoid diamonds, which illustrates structural equivalences between the category of diamonds and subjective experience (i.e.its privacy, self-containedness, and self-reflexivity). Based on this, we investigate implications of the model. We posit a grammar (“n-declension”) for a novel language to express n-awareness, accompanied by a new temporal scheme (“n-time”). Our framework allows us to revisit old problems in the philosophy of time: how is change possible and what do we mean by simultaneity and coincidence? We also examine the notion of “self” within our framework. A new model of personal identity is introduced which resembles a categorical version of the “bundle theory”: selves are not substances in which properties inhere but (weakly) persistent moduli spaces in the K-theory of perfectoid diamonds. (shrink)

According to a widespread view, Einstein’s definition of time in his special relativity is founded on the positivist verification principle. The present paper challenges this received outlook. It shall be argued that Einstein’s position on the concept of time, to wit, simultaneity, is best understood as a mitigated version of concept empiricism. He contrasts his position to Newton’s absolutist and Kant’s transcendental arguments, and in part sides with Hume’s and Mach’s empiricist arguments. Nevertheless, Einstein worked out a concept empiricism (...) that is considerably more moderate than what we find in the preceding empiricist tradition and early logical positivism. He did not think that the origin of concepts is in observations, but in conventions, and he also maintained a realist ontology of physical events, which he thought is necessary for his theory. Consequently, his philosophy of time in special relativity is not couched in terms of an anti-metaphysical verificationism. (shrink)

Eternalism is the view that the past, the present and the future exist simpliciter. A typical argument in favor of this view leans on the relativity of simultaneity. The ‘equally real with’ relation is assumed to be transitive between spacelike separated events connected by hyperplanes of simultaneity. This reasoning is in tension with the conventionality of simultaneity. Conventionality indicates that, even within a specific frame, simultaneity is based on the choice of the synchronization parameter. Hence the (...) argument for eternalism is compromised. This paper lays out alternative eternalist strategies which do not hinge on hyperplanes. While we lack a rigorous proof for eternalism, there are still cogent reasons to prefer eternalism over presentism. (shrink)

This treatise completes the Dynamic Resolution of the primordial crisis by deriving the operational mechanics of Time and Gravity from the Cosmic Algorithm established in Treatise IX. We formally define Time (τ ) as the cardinality of state transitions—the sequential count of computational steps executed by the Veldt—and derive its fundamental quantum, the Chronon (τ0). We prove the Arrow of Time is a necessary consequence of the non-injective, information-lossy Registration collapse within the Inversion Principle. Rejecting absolute simultaneity, we geometrically (...) derive the Light Cone as the causal horizon of algorithmic updates, defining the Speed of Light (c) as the fixed propagation rate of the state-update wavefront across the relational grid. Crucially, we identify Mass as Computational Density (Ω), a local concentration of algorithmic load that slows the local processing frequency, yielding Time Dilation. From this, we derive Gravity not as a fundamental force but as the refractive bending of worldlines toward regions of slower processing—a direct geometric consequence of differential time flow. The Event Horizon is shown to be a state of CPU lock where processing stalls entirely. Finally, we establish that the entropic, lossy nature of the algorithm ensures Computational Irreducibility, rendering the future ontologically open and driving the evolution of complexity. The universe is thus revealed as a self-computing, temporally-thickened process where physics is the manifestation of its operational logic. (shrink)

By deriving the Lorentz transformation from the absolute speed of light, Einstein demonstrated the relativistic variability of space and time, enabling him to explain length contraction and time dilation without recourse to a "luminiferous ether" or preferred frame of reference. He also showed that clocks synchronized at a distance via light signals are not synchronized in a frame of reference differing from that of the clocks. However, by mislabeling the relativity of synchrony the "relativity of simultaneity," Einstein implied that (...) this effect concerns an actual difference in times from one frame to another rather than merely a failure of clock synchronization across frames. As a theory of length contraction and time dilation on the basis of relative motion in the context of the absolute speed of light, special relativity is the definitive interpretation of the Lorentz transformation and the correct explanation of relativistic phenomena. The relativity of simultaneity, as I demonstrate, plays no role in this explanation but instead provides apparent justification for a view of time in which the present moment is frame-dependent. In contrast to its legitimate application, special relativity fails as a theory of time on the basis of the relativity of simultaneity. (shrink)

Recent discussions in Foundations of Science have revived the “two-times problem’’ - the apparent conflict between the formal symmetry of physical time and the experiential asymmetry of becoming. This paper develops an operational resolution based on the concept of closure: the completion of radiative relations between emission and absorption events. Time is defined as the ordered accumulation of such realized closures, forming a Lorentz-coherent record of the world W(s). Each closure adds a new element to this record without invoking a (...) global present or subjective flow. The future remains open as a set of lawful but unrealized possibilities F(s), while the realized domain expands locally through Past-Only Lorentz Equivariance. The resulting framework reconciles the empirical structure of relativity with the probabilistic openness of quantum mechanics. The arrow of time arises from the non-invertibility of closure; simultaneity and duration emerge from mutual verification among records. The two-times problem thereby dissolves: the universe does not evolve in time - it creates time as it grows. (shrink)

By eliminating the need for an absolute frame of reference or ether, Einstein resolved the problem of the constancy of light-speed in all inertial frames but created a new problem in our understanding of time. The resolution of this problem requires no experimentation but only a careful analysis of special relativity, in particular the relativity of simultaneity. This concept is insufficiently relativistic insofar as Einstein failed to recognize that any given set of events privileges the frame in which the (...) events occur; relative to those events, only the privileged frame yields the correct measurement. Instead of equally valid frames occupying different times, one frame is correct and all others incorrect within a shared present moment. I conclude that (1) time is a succession of universal moments and (2) in the context of flowing time, time dilation requires absolute simultaneity, whereas relative simultaneity predicts a nonexistent phenomenon here dubbed time regression. (shrink)

This paper presents an attempt to define temporal coincidence starting from the first principles. The temporal coincidence defined here differs from Einstein’s simultaneity for it is invariant across inertial frames - not relative. The meaning and significance of temporal coincidence is derived from axioms of existence and it somehow relates to Kant’s notion of simultaneity. Consistentl y applied to the Special Theory of Relativity framework, temporal coincidence does not in any way create mathematical contradictions; however it allows looking (...) at some common relativity claims with a dose of scepticism. Time, as derived from Lorentz transformations, appears to be conventional in order to match the postulate of constancy of the speed of light. The relative simultaneity is only apparent due to that convention. There are insufficient grounds to claim that inertial systems moving relatively to each other have their own different temporal realities. Overall, the innate temporal logic we have is not erroneous and does not need to be replaced contrary to the claims of some relativity educators. (shrink)

Though Einstein explained time dilation without recourse to a universal frame of reference, he erred by abolishing universal present moments. Relative simultaneity is insufficiently relativistic insofar as it depends on the absolute equality of reference frames in the measurement of the timing of events. Yet any given set of events privileges the frame in which the events take place. Relative to those events, the privileged frame yields the correct measurement of their timing while all other frames yield an incorrect (...) measurement. Instead of multiple frames occupying multiple times, one frame is correct and all others incorrect within a shared present moment. With the collapse of relative simultaneity, we may regard time as a succession of universal moments. Absolute simultaneity, in turn, explains why an accelerated inertial frame dilates in time rather than regressing to a prior moment relative to non-accelerated frames. In the context of flowing time, absolute simultaneity predicts time dilation while relative simultaneity predicts time regression. Einstein's explanation of time dilation is therefore incomplete. (shrink)

By deriving the Lorentz transformation from the absolute speed of light, Einstein demonstrated the relativistic variability of space and time, enabling him to explain length contraction and time dilation without recourse to a "luminiferous ether" or preferred frame of reference. He also showed that clocks synchronized at a distance via light signals are not synchronized in a frame of reference differing from that of the clocks. However, by mislabeling the relativity of synchrony the "relativity of simultaneity," Einstein implied that (...) this effect concerns an actual difference in times from one frame to another rather than merely a failure of clock synchronization across frames. As a theory of length contraction and time dilation on the basis of relative motion in the context of the absolute speed of light, special relativity is the definitive interpretation of the Lorentz transformation and the correct explanation of relativistic phenomena. The relativity of simultaneity, as I demonstrate, plays no role in this explanation but instead provides apparent justification for a view of time in which the present moment is frame-dependent. In contrast to its legitimate application, special relativity fails as a theory of time on the basis of the relativity of simultaneity. (shrink)