Or rather, it's not that time is "recorded", but it just exists, all at once, just like that, and we're simply experiencing a lower-dimensional slice of the universe, so we feel like we are "moving" through time when we really aren't.
There's a non-fiction book, The Physics of Immortality by Frank Tipler, with a similar premise. Because the universe (according to some models) will end in a Big Crunch, collapsing to a single point, and because information can't be destroyed, then an omniscient intelligence will arise near the end of time with the ability to restore everyone who ever lived.
Re:Is Death Reversible?
by imtringued on Thursday October 31, 2019 @07:08PM
(#21414716)
>That would also mean that the universe is continually recording every single instance of time.
This isn't compatible with special relativity. Simultaneity is always relative to the frame of reference which can be picked arbitrarily.
Re:Is Death Reversible?
by irrational on Thursday October 31, 2019 @06:16PM
(#21414347)
I'd actually like to read that sci-fi story. Its a fun premise.
Re:Is Death Reversible?
by TheOtherHobbes on Thursday October 31, 2019 @06:24PM
(#21414403)
You are - for limited values of "read".
If I were a sci-fi author I would write that the reason the universe is expanding and accelerating is to record all of the new data being created. Just like a needle writing on a record. To record more data it needs to move the needle farther away from the center. And the farther away from the center it moves the faster the needle, relative to the disc, moves.