What's the latest take on the andromeda paradox argument? (free will)

[....]

I was reading the sciam special issue on time from two years ago, and there the physics professor talked about how the 'present' is an illusion, and the relativity of simultaneity.

Einstein's special theory demonstrates that there are occasions when there is no "correct" answer, where no observer has a privileged status, and all the observers can claim to be "correct" even if their ordering of events disagree with each other.

But another intriguing argument I read about later, the andromeda paradox goes even further.


Andromeda paradox link 1

andromeda paradox link 2

So how does it stand?

I've read a counter-argument from 2001 and a counter-argument to the counter-argument that's from 2005 from the wiki links, I've also read another argument in favor of block universe from elsewhere.

Here's the most recent counter-argument link provided in the wiki:
block time

 

[Frank]

It's a special case of the locality paradox, and it's still an open question, as we (especially) don't really know how gravity interacts over long distances.

Other than that, there are no realistic scenarios in it that cannot be worked out through special relativity.

Or, in other words: it will never become a problem as long as we cannot transfer information faster than light.

 

[....]

It's a special case of the locality paradox, and it's still an open question, as we (especially) don't really know how gravity interacts over long distances.

Other than that, there are no realistic scenarios in it that cannot be worked out through special relativity.

Or, in other words: it will never become a problem as long as we cannot transfer information faster than light.

If it's a valid thought experiment, and doesn't violate relativity, it raises questions of determinism.

 

[dizietsma]

""Two people pass each other on the street; and according to one of the two people, an Andromedean space fleet has already set off on its journey, while to the other, the decision as to whether or not the journey will actually take place has not yet been made."

Why would the information that has just arrived from Andromeda be any different? I asume the information arriving happens to both the people at the same time due to their low velocities so the information should be the same.

 

[Fred]

Theres no essential paradox here (unless you are a philosopher), two observers can only agree on lorentz invariant quantities like p^2. Keep in mind, they are both witnessing past events here and are in relative motion to one another so yes their lightcones will differ.

The consistency question is, can observer A and observer B actually communicate what they just have seen, so that their lightcones can be enlarged? And the answer is no, they cannot.

Observer A will need to send a signal somehow to observer B, and even though they are very close (say some epsilon away from each other), and if you work it out you will see that by the time that signal hits observer B his lightcone will already have encompassed whatever observer A has sent him.

So this is a philosophical question moreso than a physics question and special relativity is fertile breeding ground for all sorts of mumbo jumbo about consciousness and so forth. See for instance the twin paradox and things of that nature.

 

[....]

Theres no essential paradox here (unless you are a philosopher), two observers can only agree on lorentz invariant quantities like p^2. Keep in mind, they are both witnessing past events here and are in relative motion to one another so yes their lightcones will differ.

The consistency question is, can observer A and observer B actually communicate what they just have seen, so that their lightcones can be enlarged? And the answer is no, they cannot.

Observer A will need to send a signal somehow to observer B, and even though they are very close (say some epsilon away from each other), and if you work it out you will see that by the time that signal hits observer B his lightcone will already have encompassed whatever observer A has sent him.

The way it seems to be stated they're passing each other by in the street, and there's a discrepancy in what they're seeing of up to several days or more.

I've not read penrose's original statement, so maybe he clarifies. But it seems that if the guy in the car simply tosses a piece of paper to the guy he's passing by on the street. IT won't take days for him to get it, read it and find out the invasion is coming. Just a few minutes.

 

[dizietsma]

The consistency question is, can observer A and observer B actually communicate what they just have seen, so that their lightcones can be enlarged? And the answer is no, they cannot.

I don't think that is the question at all, both the observers can easily communicate what they have seen because they are a few feet apart and travelling at very low values of the speed of light. The speed of sound has more relevance here.

The issue is more to whether the observers get the same information from the distant galaxy in relation to a space invation happening and the answer is yes, they either see them all deciding to leave or they have left.