> it is no longer a violation of T-symettry for us to have both B → C and D → C
But you don’t have A → B → C or A → D → C, you have A → E → C.
Where E is a state (that can written in different ways as a combination of other states)
Analogy: if a wall is purple → purple → purple, would you say that its color history was purple → red → purple and purple → blue → purple at the same time?
But you don’t have A → B → C or A → D → C, you have A → E → C.
Where E is a state (that can written in different ways as a combination of other states)
Analogy: if a wall is purple → purple → purple, would you say that its color history was purple → red → purple and purple → blue → purple at the same time?