Talk:Problem of time

WikiProject icon This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation . The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC

Note icon

This article was accepted on 5 June 2014 by reviewer Ritchie333 (talk · contribs).

WikiProject icon Physics Low‐importance

"It also involves the related question of why time seems to flow in a single direction, despite the fact that no known physical laws at the microscopic level seem to require a single direction. For macroscopic systems the directionality of time is directly linked to first principles such as the second law of thermodynamics."

This is plain incorrect. There is a related "problem"/open question in physics under the name "the arrow of time", but both QM and GR are agnostic with respect to time reversal. Kilgore T (talk) 03:09, 2 July 2022 (UTC) [reply ]

"They confirmed for photons that time is an emergent phenomenon for internal observers but absent for external observers of the universe just as the Wheeler–DeWitt equation predicts."

The cited articles in Phys Rev A and D refer to some "internal" and "external" observers of a quantum system so it will be better to delete this phrase about the "external observers of the Universe". TV8phys (talk) 21:55, 24 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

@TV8phys, I edited the sentence. Please review if you have a chance Merlin.anthwares (talk) 12:08, 26 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

For clarity, Wikipedia policy does not treat Zenodo as a categorically unacceptable source. Zenodo is listed under academic repositories (alongside arXiv, HAL, etc.), and material hosted there is evaluated based on the underlying work rather than the platform itself. It is inaccurate to frame the removal as being required because "Zenodo is not acceptable." Policy guidance instead indicates that repository sources can be used. I’m noting this distinction... so the basis for the deletion is what exactly?, rather than a blanket exclusion of Zenodo as a platform. ERT is some serious work, that Physics will find useful. ~2026-16474-28 (talk) 15:26, 15 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

I agree that the edit summary by @Paradoctor was not quite correct in that Zenodo itself is just an upload site. Conceivably a peer-reviewed and published source might be uploaded by a copy-right holder as a form a archive and we could link it as such.

I agree with Paradoctor in the revert of the content related to "ERT". The source is WP:Selfpublished and there is no evidence that this is a WP:reliable source. Please do not add this material to Wikipedia until a peer-reviewed version has been published. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:44, 15 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

@~2026-16474-28, @Johnjbarton: The citation gave Zenodo as publisher. That is never an acceptable citation. If a paper is reliably published elsewhere, you need to cite that. If a paper is self-published, the author is the publisher. The basis for the deletion is exactly that: Zenodo is not a reliable publisher. Paradoctor (talk) 16:29, 15 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

I agree that as publisher, Zenodo would never be appropriate. Johnjbarton (talk) 17:13, 15 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

P.S.: ERT is some serious work, that Physics will find useful Maybe, but that is not sufficient for inclusion.

WP:V: Wikipedia's content is determined by published information rather than editors' beliefs, experiences, or previously unpublished ideas or information. Even if you are sure something is true, it must have been published in a reliable source before you can add it. Paradoctor (talk) 17:47, 15 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

~2026-16474-28 (talk) 11:23, 22 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

First off, this is bordering on WP:LEGAL.

Secondly, there is currently no ERT-related content in this article, so this comment was not helpful.

Lastly, if you are (a representative of) Oye-Atta, and you see any content you think infringes your copyright, you may find the advice at Wikipedia:Copyright violations § Information for copyright owners helpful. Paradoctor (talk) 12:03, 22 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

P.S.: I just realized that you are apparently the person who added the content in the first place. Can you explain this? Paradoctor (talk) 12:06, 22 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]