Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Does the past exist, or is it just an illusion.

The only way it could exist is if there is an infinite multiverse somewhere, where everything in the past goes to after it stops being the present and becomes the past.

But the past does not exist in the universe, as it is just an illusion of the human mind and imagination.

Everything in the past existed.

bleah...your mind is clouded by too many movies.
the past exists AS A MEMORY. as electrical signals in yor brain, if you may call it. the past is not, however, a tangible object. not all that exists, you can grab in your hand.

THe past existED, but how can you really prove that.??
The human memory is NOT perfect. THe past doesnt exist at the moment, it is an imaginary concept created by the mind of humans.

But what is real? Something you can sense?

'the past' existed in the mind only... all the objects that were in the past exist now still unless they were destroyed or whatever, so the past doesnt exist, since it never was a tangible object

the individual memory can be mistaken. The collective memory of society is less likey to be mistaken, so that means that if society on the whole cannot remember something (and if the entire population of the planet cannot remember an event), then it didnt exist.

So do you exist?

The past has to exist really..or nothing would've happened..Nothing would be here....

Hmmm, I existed in the past, and back then now was the future... I remember the past, my past, thus I believe it, after all, I am here now, so I had to come from somewhere.

Similarly, I am a history student, in a way my field of study and eventual expertise is the past, and I believe it exists, as there is evidence of it, artifact's records, memories... a clay Athenian pot from 200 BC, exists, it can be charted to being a certain age, thus it was forged, at some point in the past...

But I think that to much weight is put into physical presence, that time is some how something materiel, like fire, or water, an element, it is simply a measure, the "past" is not something physical, it was merely the time before, just as their is no "physical" future playing itself out before we arrive, it happens as it happens, then its just memory, or artifact.

as i said...too many movies.
but...yes, basicly.

umm..no..you're just being ridiculously childish.
first of all 'the past' exists as a word in a dictionary. secondly..the notion of a 'past' action is by it's definition not a tangible object. it may only be recalled via our memory systems.
if you want proof..well...i guess you can't have any. but continue to doubt everything...
hey..perhaps your entire brain was whiped last night and someone injected you with brand new memories...everything you remember didn't actually happen.
keep it up!

this thread is gay ... its only gay cause I have a cold at the moment

No, that's why its the past......


It existed when it was the present.

Basically you're are the product of the past. Your experiences and your personality has been shape by events that happen in the past. To say the past didn't exist is just denying yourself who you are.

St. Augustine wondered what it is that makes the past and the future real. How can the past and the future exist, when the past is already gone and the future is yet to come? For men, both the past and the future are abstractions, constituted by the human mind. For human beings, they only exist in virtue of the present. In men' s experience, the present is all that exists. We will always exist in the present.
If you would travel back to the past, it would no longer be the past but the present.

It' s hard to imagine a dimension where the past and the future, as well as the present all exist equally, in spite of Einstein' s relativity theory.

I was saying the past doesn't exist now and, of course, it doesn't which is why we refer to previous events in the past tense. The past is not like a physical thing we can go back to unless time travel becomes real.....

You mean like in the 4th Hitchikers Guide? (the one with dolphins and rampant sex on a plane wing).

Just because the majority of the planet does not know you exist, does not mean you don't exsist.

"What is today but the tommorow of yesterday?"

According to science, if the molecules in one's body move quickly enough, one may pass through a seemingly completely solid object, true? Then is that object still solid?

The human brain is not perfect. You see/feel/smell/ect, what you want to see/smell/feel/ect. Therefore, all is an illusion, created by your subconcious. Even the past, the present, and the future.

Scary concept, eh?

Been reading 1984, have we?

The past doesn't exist in the here and now, but there are ways to prove it happened outside the human memory. There are many, many written records that talk about events in the past. Granted, not all of them are entirely accurate, and there is no physical record of every fraction of a second that happened in the past--but enough time has been recorded to create a believable timeline of our own existence, as individuals and a society. It's called history.

We can go back in time, We can watch a old silent film, and see things happing in real life in the 1920;s I have a few Chaplin movies, silent

If Chaplin was not real, than how did the films exist????

How can I have a 1955 boxing mag(I not that old I collect old fight magzines) With the Rocky Marciano on the cover knocking out Archie Moore?? If 1955 did not exist, and how can MArciano had fought Moore if the past did not exist?

(MArciano won by 9th round ko and retire at 49-0 after that fight)

Try to approach this philosophically, not scientifically.

THe past is my present to your future

The past existed.......

technically........there is no past.......nor a future. Everything exists relatively as present.

Today is the present, yesterday was the present.......but disappeared second by second.....there is no past.

There is no future. As we progress second by second, the "future" becomes the present.

If this were a sci-fi novel and somebody invented a time machine......he could not travel into the past or future........only into new presents. Time is relative. If the person traveled to 1963........1963 would be present for him. If he traveled to 2067........2067 would be the present for him.

As humans, we only have one point of view........and that point of view is the world around us. Wherever we are, the world around us that is occuring is considered present......no matter the year.

So according to your theory, E.D., we're always living in the past. If the future second by second becomes the present, then the present second by second becomes the past.

Therefore, we live in naught but the past.

no Dwarf......reread my post. There is no past, there is no future......only present. "past" and "future" are only ideas......we can never physically be there, they do not exist. Every second we live, we are living in the present.

I'll try to keep it philosophical.....If there is no past then how does a person explains what he is now? If there is no future then how can we know what we might become? There is a flux (philosophical term) happening in human existence which makes us perceive that there is flow from beginning to end. Is contradictory to say I'm the same person I was yesterday or the day before. There are changes occuring in me and in everyone else. Experience tells us that thing changes. And when things change that means something started and something will end. Now if you want to go all Matrix mumbo jumbo remenber they clearly stated "everything that has a beginning has an end." That implies a timeline. But to be fair there is that theory that says that time doesn't exist....go figured.

WD........there is one constant in our universe. That is forward motion. That is how we became the person we are today. One second leads into another......one minute leads to another.....one year leads to another......one century leads to another......one millenia leads to another. The very concept of "past" and "future" are as man made as 12:00 am and 12:00 pm. They are merely man made labels used to place events in sequential order.

I am the person I am today because of the series of events that have occured over my lifetime......from one second to the next, from one minute to the next. I have been moving forward since the day I was born and will continue to do so until my death. When I die, my energy will continue to move forward as my body rots and fertilizes the soil, giving life to another life form. There is no beginning.......there is no end. The cycle of forward motion of the energy that gives me life did not start with me........it will not end with me.......it will merely move on to another form.

as for your theory of time not existing........very true in the lamen sense of the word. There is no time, only forward motion.....which as I stated was occuring long before I was born and will occur long after I am dead. There is no beginning, there is no end. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. It can and will change form.

In the scientific sense of the word, time is very real. In the scientific sense of the word, time is merely a coordinate (dimension) on the fabric of space that prevents two peices of matter from co-occupying the same space.

There is no time, and no forward motion... the "passing of time" is simply a function of our nervous system.... all things that have existed and will exist exist now and will always exist... only the way our brain processes information makes it seem otherwise... remember, time is not the stage upon which we act, merely a fellow player... the easiest way to describe the universe is to think of one of those photos of a road junction at night, with a long exposure time... all those lines of light and elongated blurs of cars, then multiply that by infinity....

no forward motion?

I'm sorry Big Gay Kirk..........but uh.......are you trying to tell me that everything I have ever done in my life, I did all at the same time? That I was popping out my mother's birth canal the very same second that I will one day die........my brain just interprets these events as taking place 80 years apart?

Furthermore, since time does not exist.........are you stating that every single piece of matter that has ever existed all existed on the very same co-ordinate of space-time? That I was standing in the exact same spot as millions of other people at the same time, our matter was somehow overlapping each other?........that it's all a trick my brain is playing on me, interpreting it as such that I was in the spot, I left (forward motion), somebody else was in the spot, they left and so on and so on.

I'm sorry man but uh.........lay off the weed. It's good to promote abstract thinking........but you're leaving the abstract and entering into the realm of laughingly ridiculous. The Matrix is not real. Life is not a dream. You are a real physical being........so is everybody around you......do not hurt anybody.

Evil Dead> That I can agree with... that there is a forward motion happening. Even Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle believed in that. Except they called it "The Prime Mover" From which all comes from. The trick here is why is the flux occuring? (again flux in the philosophical term) Or better yet why is it happening? If we were to say that all energy in the universe comes from one destination and thus returns to its original source is like implying a reclying (sp?) event. And I doubt that, but then again there are things I don't understand and won't dispute without the proper knowledge.

In a philosophical sense you are the person that exists now because of your experiences. A mind starts like a blank sheet of paper that as life progress the sheets gets fill with sentences and paragraphs of knowledge. And it all ends when you run out of room to write. If there is an energy that motivates the mechanical body.....then would you consider that to be the essence we call a soul? Now, don't get me wrong I don't seek to connect religious stuff with philosophical thoughts. I'm only trying to learn how does this energy works in the body.



Agree, but there is a philosophy in it that is quite appealing.

Forgive me for my ignorece but I dont understand thist question.

What do you mean? It a pretty straight-forward question...Does the past exist?

I've actually just realized, the question should be...

"Did the past exist?"

...Right? Or are my gramatical instincts off?

Edit: Oh, and E.D., I agree with you...Your first post seemed a little contradictory, is all. Becasue you say, each moment of supposed "future" slowly becomes present, that would also lead to each moment of present becomin the past just as quickly, therefore the future goes straight to the past, and the present doesnt exist, and we live in naught but the past. But I see your point now.

The past does exist It is not mere electrical impulses if thats all the past was we wouldnt exist

the past existED.........but at the time it existed we called it the present......all that exists is the present. The future doesn't exist yet.......and when it does exist it will be the present.......same for past.

Yup... spot on... the universe is simply a mess of continuously extant particles, all interacting with each other.... our brains, like any computer, can process only certain types and amounts of information, and so.... we perceive time passing, we perceive travel through four dimensions, but none of that really exists... the universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine....

Of course.. because they were bound by their perceptions.... they could feel time passing, so they believed time was passing... but perception is not reality... it is merely the means by which we interpret reality... this is why it is useless to ask where the universe came from... or where the matter for the big bang came from... the universe is an absolute constant... it did not begin, it will never end... our big bang theory is flawed because we cannot perceive of things having no beginning and no end... because of the way our nervous system operates... we are only a small bundle of particles (and remember, at the end of your life, none of those particles are the ones you started with... ) and our processing capacity is very finite... thus it is impossible to comprehend the infinite... therefore the past exists, the future exists, and everything exists... all at the same time...

I don't touch mind altering substances... except alcohol, and then only rarely... and these aren't my ideas... they date back centuries... I simply find them the easiest to believe in.... a lot easier to believe in than the idea that the past doesn't exist anymore except in memeory, and that the future doesn't exist at all...yet...

ok... but what if there is a time machine that could bring an individual to the past or the future, then what would he call that time as it is present to him as well as we are experiencing present? And so when he travel back through time travel would he say that he had experienced the past as well as present??

the past DOES NOT exist!!
it existED

This is my input, and I'm willing to accept that I may be wrong.
There's this general opinion that time is only a continuum of minutes, of days, of light graduating to darkness, etc. IMO, the general image of what time is, isn't conveyed accurately-- time only exists, it doesn't progress. The universe is sitting in a stillness, time does not shift. Yet, what causes progression? The earth rotates, sun and moon give us day and night-- we know how it goes-- yet it is only our progression and not time. We move, we make these clocks electrically-generated, or battery-powered, or whatever, for the hands to tick away the so-called progression of time. It is the universe, and the masses that occupy it, that live, that cause progression. We're all born, we live till our phase is over, then we die and end our progression. In the same way, natural progressions of the universe cause "time" to exist as we imagine it. As time just exists as a stillness, the earth rotates, facing the sun, giving us day and night, and, hence, the illusion that "time" is somehow continuing. The progressions of nature cause leap years, cause natural disasters, etc, but it is not the progression of time as we think of it.
In this way, if time does not actually progress-- it just exists as a stillness, and we are the beings who actually progress, causing the illusion of a continuum of time, then how can time travel be possible?
Anyways, the question wasn't time travel.. If that^^ is true, then a "history" of time does not actually exist since time does not have any progression-- therefore, the theory that the past is but a memory, or something kept in the mind, is correct.
Obviously, the past exists-- we can't deny what happened before we were born-- but it existed in the same stillness that we live in today. Someone was contradicting something close to this that BGK said earlier, and I want to make my point clear-- of course all the events of time could not have possibly occurred simultaneously-- but, they all occurred in an unmoving, uncontinuing (<is that a word lol?) that holds the universe. By the progressions of the universe, there is the general illusion that many years have passed, and even that there exists an alter-universe of the past-- but there is only one universe with a progression of events and generations.
Basically, the past does exist, of course, but not as a "history of time" or even an "alter-universe" but as a sequence of events that occured before we came into existence, and as a memory, as you guys said earlier^^

time is like a road you walk on. the further you go on the road the more things move on and progress. You can remember events on the road but you can't go back because the road only moves forward. All the events that happened are recorded in your mind but the actual physical substance of that place and time do not exist.

eleven I think you have had enough doobage for now

Man Made

Suppose a jet engine fell off a plane that you were on, went back in time, and crashed through your bedroom roof. Would you disappear from the plane?

There is no time dimension, only motion. Past, present and future is all one dimension - the passing of time is merely a sensation of movement.

i think that time is actually just an infinite sets of realities all conected and existing parallel to each other but having definite margins between each universe, and every universe in the chain is just an infinitely strong portion of time in front of the one behind it, n the matter and forces differ only that much as they SMALLEST amount of time would let them be different from the last reality, meaning that an infinte number of identical masses and forces exist in each reality but they only differe from each other by the smallest fraction of time possible, this can be looked at as when u draw different simple figures on the end of a notebook each slightly different from each other n then when u just quickly flip all the pages, the images moves{like in tv},

so we are actually just stuck in one reality{actually theres hardly Any US to begin with, its just a generated illusion} and time exists because of the strings of infinit realities and the very slightly different positions and state of the masses and forces in the next universe.

Since you debate this widely accepted scientific definition........let me pose you a question.

If there is no dimension "time".............what keeps two people from standing on the same exact point in space time, overlapping their matter, destroying them both?

The fabric of space has 3 physical dimensions........x,y and z........just as any 3D plane does.

I can stand at:

x-22
y-22
z-22

and you can stand at:

x-22
y-22
z-22

look we're in the exact same spot in our physical universe...........what in the world is keeping our matter from overlapping? Why didn't the two of us meld into one being with 4 arms, 4 legs and 2 heads? Although we were both in the exact same spot.........we were there at different times, time being the 4th dimension of space.

you're coordinates were:
x-22
y-22
z-22
time-3

my coordinates were:
x-22
y-22
z--
time-6

while there is constant forward motion in the universe.........it is merely an action, a verb, not an adjective to label a dimension of space.

that'S right, although I think the coordinates you used are wrong

there are no real mathmatical coordinates for our universe.........I used imaginary numbers, there is no right or wrong.

To plot a 3-D graph for the universe you would need to know atleast one of the boundries, preferably two..........and could start assigning numerical coordinates from there. Since we know no boundries.........'tis impossible. The best we could do today would be to create a map of space not of our universe but of our solar system or galaxy using designated points of reference.

Yea, I know, it was just a joke, a good one too.

sorry...............can't joke around too much on here. We have some people running around this forum claiming that:

- forward motion does not exist...everything in our universe happened at the same time and our brain is just interpreting each event as happening seperately and in sequence. (nevermind the fact that each of us humans has a different brain yet still somehow interpret the exact same events happening in the exact same sequence)..........

sorry man.........can't risk a joke around this Matrix crowd.

no problem, some people have serious issues.

Define Time: Evil Dead and leonheartmm employ Time as an unsubstantiated maxim in their ontology of this concept. The concept of Time has never been properly defined in any field of scientific study or philosophical enquiry, it's merely referred to as an extra or 4th dimension in addition to the so-called 3 space-dimensions. Space-Time is a postulation extended onto the infinite flux of infinity or continuity of Being by human cognition. Their is no 'absolute proof' of Space or Time as an existential condition proper. It is a construct of the intellect at most. Evil Dead talks about Space coordinates or physical positions - there are no definite positions or coordinates in space, so two objects, humans in this case, cannot possibly occupy a common position in space. In fact, Quantum theory explains by virtue of its "uncertainty principle" the indefinite, imprecise and unpredictable condition of position and other properties of particles. But that's besides the point - in philosophical enquiry, all scientific notions are meaningless if they cannot be absolutely defined. One cannot ultimately talk about 'Time' or 'Space' as existent if they are ontologically undefinable. We should ask the question: "What do we mean by Time and Space?" First of all, define Time and define Space - one cannot argue over their existence if no tangible definition exists. One simply cannot just cast Time into an empty shell of "an extra/fourth dimension". Dimension, for that matter is another undefined intellectual construct - what do we mean by 'Dimension(s)' ? We can only on one condition talk further about these concepts after their true and substantial definitions has been established.
I CHALLENGE ANYONE TO COME UP WITH A REAL, SUBSTANTIAL DEFINITION AND ONTOLOGY OF THESE CONCEPTS OF 'SPACE AND TIME/SPACE-TIME'. WHAT ARE THEY AND WHAT DO THEY MEAN IN AN ABSOLUTE SENSE? FOR THE MOMENT THEY WILL REMAIN AS MERE CLOUDS OF THOUGHT, HANGING IN THIN AIR, UNSUPPORTED BY ACTUALITY.

I don't think anyone can give a defination of space yet... since nobody is FAMILIAR with it yet...(have to capitalise key points)

But as for time.. I think humans have live long enough to be familiar with time to give time a defination.... As I know... people first discovered time when people actually grow and die at certain "age"(they can't know this unless they know time).... curiousity brought them into giving out a possibility that there is time... my question is: How did they keep up with it?.... I mean they can't start it out of the blue... right?... but I think they did... and as long as they do this..

Time itself is still an imaginary concept... that is my theory...

in my opinion, there can be no proof that there really is a past... or there really isnt... but thinking about it if there wasnt a past, then nothing would really change in life, there has to be a past in order to move on. if this makes no sence or im getting severely confused with something else then please tell me

The word "does" refers to the present.

Maybe the past DID exist (or maybe not).
But that does not mean that the past DOES exist.

does = present tense
did = past tense

does and did - we are limited here by linguistic problems to express the idea of the dimensions or phases of time. The important thing to remember is that Time per se does not exist, as I have explained earlier.

Disregarding a question of linguistics, I'd venture this...

The past exists only in the echoes that are felt in the present. If we listen to them, then the past exists as a means of validating improvement. If we ignore them, then past failures are reborn in present times.

If you believe in tha past you have to believe in tha future. if i move my index finger left to right. as i am moving it, present would be like taking a picture of it while its moving. but as soon as i take it, it becomes an even of tha past. if you think tha way this thread questions... without a past we would have still images that do not progress.

That means there would be no beginning and end. everything would have an infinite life with no movement...just like a picture. if there was no beginning or end, we wouldn't be here. it just isn't a solid theory.

You can't think of tha past as...tha past. rather, think of it like this. imagine a start and finish. stars are born, they die, planets are born, they die...etc. but does a star have a brain? of course not. so can it remember its past? no it can't. but to us a star can have a past because we can remember our past. everything is going thru stages...forever and ever advancing towards its death. therefore past is ONLY our memory.

Ou be Low hoo: "Disregarding a question of linguistics, I'd venture this...

The past exists only in the echoes that are felt in the present. If we listen to them, then the past exists as a means of validating improvement. If we ignore them, then past failures are reborn in present times."


HarmonicFlo88: "therefore past is ONLY our memory."

This makes sense. My theory is still that time is one single dimension and divided into an imaginary set of past, present and future, in order for the mind to make sense of it. Time is ultimately imaginary.

I don't dispute that the world and it's people have a history...Rather, I was commenting on whether 'the past' exists...which happens to be different and not on a solely linguistic level.

For me, the word exist has connotations of life. Therefore, I am musing on the life of 'the past' in the present.

"For me, the word exist has connotations of life. Therefore, I am musing on the life of 'the past' in the present"

Exactly, that's why I say Time is one dimension - 'life of 'the past' in the present" - imo you illustrate what I think, i.e. that all these instances/events and tenses of time fuse into one realm. That's why we sense life of the past in the future.

There is no such thing as time or dimension. These are tools by which we measure the real world. We cannot directly perceive the real world; there has never been an evolutionary advantage to seeing x-rays or any other like phenomenon. If we look at a flame, we only see a shimmering color of light. We cannot see the chain reaction of molecules exchanging atoms. Causality is the reason we perceive time. There is a consistent relationship between cause and effect that only goes in one direction. Since all phenomenon are effects of a cause (a never ending closed loop), this common direction of cause and effects relationship gives us the sensation of motion that we call time.

I liked the observations that Shakyamunison and HarmoNiC FLo made. And thats what I think. The past only exist because of our memories, and our necessity to make cause and effect true, so for me if the past exist its just to fill a psychological necessity to explain the causes of the observed effects that we perceive in the present moment. Then time would be created by the necessity to order the events in a way to make cause and effect coherent.

Originally posted by eleveninches
Does the past exist, or is it just an illusion.

TIME is an illussion, I believe Einstien over any jerkass who comes up with an idea in this era..

See, the thing is the past has already happend, so it stopped exsisitng.
The future has yet to happen so it doesn't and will never exsist.

If you go somewhere deeper into space you'll find time as we know it has little to no meaning at all. Time IS an illussion. There is only speed and energy. Make that just energy as speed is just the flunctuating path of energy either gaining or losing in velocity..

Hi Big Evil

Energy and Velocity are just tools that we use to measure the real world. There is the universe and it is temporal. Everything is changing at different rates. So, in a way I agree with you, however, I don't think you needed to call anyone a "jerkass"!

Originally posted by Shakyamunison

There's no point in sugar coating my feelings, I believe anything outside Enstien is full of s-hit. Would you rather me LIE to you and say I value your opinion?

I simply think that a foul mouth is a sign of a person with a little mind. You should start a topic "Is Einstein God?", otherwise I believe you are off topic here. Does the past exist?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I simply think that a foul mouth is a sign of a person with a little mind. You should start a topic "Is Einstein God?", otherwise I believe you are off topic here. Does the past exist?
I answerd already, you had to go a play the whiny little b-itch. Again, not an insult incase you were too stupid to see that. Just the cold hard truth. Or are you a compulsive lier?

As I said, time is an illussion. There is only speed and energy. (So I technichaly stayed on topic. You failed at flamming me, so don't do it again. Next time I won't be so merciful..)

Hi Big Evil

You should not get so upset. You may have your opinion all you wish, and I wasn't necessarily talking about you, just how I feel about bad language. Sorry if I offended you. However, I am new to all of this, how would I "flame you"?

Sorry for being off topic.

I know a great deal about Einstein, please tell me how my above statement is not in line with Einstein's theories.

"Does the past exist?"

Not right now.

Originally posted by Big Evil
TIME is an illussion, I believe Einstien over any jerkass who comes up with an idea in this era..

See, the thing is the past has already happend, so it stopped exsisitng.
The future has yet to happen so it doesn't and will never exsist.

If you go somewhere deeper into space you'll find time as we know it has little to no meaning at all. Time IS an illussion. There is only speed and energy. Make that just energy as speed is just the flunctuating path of energy either gaining or losing in velocity..

How can just only speed and energy exist, if without time speed does not exist since it depents on time? About the energy, I agree.

Please define Energy without using undefinable words or words that talk about what Energy does, like, kinetic or potential.

I don't think it can be done. Just like time or the past, Energy is something we think is real, but we can't put are finger on it.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Please define Energy without using undefinable words or words that talk about what Energy does, like, kinetic or potential.

I don't think it can be done. Just like time or the past, Energy is something we think is real, but we can't put are finger on it.

yeah maybe, but every concept is like this... even mass, color, or other more "tangible" concepts. But energy is a concept that explains many other concepts and do not depend on them to be defined. I mean, energy is a very fundamental concept.

The past exists only in our minds...

Technically, Time itself does not exist, it is merely an illusion created by humans to keep track of things, it is but an organizer so that we can look into the past and see what has happened and what has resulted from it. So, no the past doesn't exist for, to exist is to be here right now, at the moment, and the past is the exact opposite of such a definition. Only physical objects can "exist" persay but feelings exist within ourselves so, an emotion exists as long as someone is always feeling it somewhere in the world.

Originally posted by eleveninches
THe past existED, but how can you really prove that.??
The human memory is NOT perfect. THe past doesnt exist at the moment, it is an imaginary concept created by the mind of humans. we could have imagined it, or aliens took over our brains

Originally posted by Atlantis001
Yup, thats the way I think, I usually worry much more on the definitions than building models without understanding its principles. Thats why I think "energy" is a good concept, it explains many things, and it appears to be a very fundamental concept. I think we could even try to find something more fundamental which energy depends on, but this "search" will never finish. This could be a limitation of the logic itself, and maybe its not possible to reach an "end"(theres actually a theorem on mathematics that says that the logic is "limited" this way).

We are in agreement.

Imagination is what we need to bridge the gap. Have you heard of a place (maybe another dimension) where all are known? I thank I should start a new thread on this subject.

of coarse the past exists. you're memories arent just your own. you share memories with family, friends, etc. they wouldnt have the same past as you if it didnt exist.

St. Augustine wondered what it is that makes the past and the future real. How can the past and the future exist, when the past is already gone and the future is yet to come? For men, both the past and the future are abstractions, constituted by the human mind. For human beings, they only exist in virtue of the present. In men' s experience, the present is all that exists. We will always exist in the present.
If you would travel back to the past, it would no longer be the past but the present.

It' s hard to imagine a dimension where the past and the future, as well as the present all exist equally, in spite of Einstein' s relativity theory.

Is the past real? Yes.
Does it still exist? No.

The question isn't "Does the past still exist?" its "Does the past exist?"
Of course the past doesn't still exist, it's in the past. But the past itself does exist, or the present couldn't exist either; nor could the future. They are all interdependent.

Perhaps we should first wonder what sort of concept existence/exists is and what the explication might be.

Existence is just being. To be. English sucks.
The past is, even though it isn't anymore.

define "exist"

Does the past exist???....Not any more.

the past only exist with daylight savings time the clocks all say 12:59am then BAM! 12:00am you just jumped into the past so there it does exist but only for one hour a year

Everything we interact with is from the past, all the light that comes to our eyes take a time to arrive, so the greater the distance things are from us, the earlier they happened. Stars are very distant from us, so they are very in the past. My clothes are very near me so they are very close to the present.

Past doesn't exist. only now exists.
Our idea of the past are momeries. and I think it is very important to have memories because without them we're getting cut of the reality and alone.

The past doesn't exist.

The past doesn't exist, not even the future ... only present exist.

The past "existed"..

You can also look at it as the vapors of the past linger on, but no longer exist in our time to perceive...Though still exists....

The past existed, it was real before. It is the first states that lead to our actual states that generates the present. The past is just a logical necessity, for example : if something moves to the right, it necessarily was more to the left in the past.

Originally posted by Atlantis001
The past existed, it was real before. It is the first states that lead to our actual states that generates the present. The past is just a logical necessity, for example : if something moves to the right, it necessarily was more to the left in the past.

I keep waiting for this post to go into the past, but every time I read it, it seems to be in the present.

It's because the past is still with us..........even until the end.........Whooo..did jesus say something like that?..........I am with you even until the end

The past doesnt exist

Therefore we dont have to worry about any horrible things happening, cause they wont exist anymore tomorrow

Too bad most people dont believe this...

Originally posted by Bierbommetje
The past doesnt exist

Therefore we dont have to worry about any horrible things happening, cause they wont exist anymore tomorrow

Too bad most people dont believe this...

When did you do this post?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
When did you do this post?

What post?

Originally posted by Bierbommetje
What post?

The one above^

I keep seeing it in the now, but you did it in the past and it ends up in the now. So, when the past is destroyed, it dumps it's contents into the now.

You're smokin that stuff again aren't ya????

Originally posted by debbiejo
You're smokin that stuff again aren't ya????

Not right now, so, did I? It is in the past and I can't get my hands on it.Jumpy

past does not exist in the here and now...otherwise we could change it and we would all be rich! woohoo!

The past doesn't exist anymore, only the information left over from the past

This could be seen two ways... You are about to die, and your seeing your life flash before your eyes... it just takes longer for you and when you hit the end... you die end of story and so the past would have existed at one time... but the other way which i now find harder than before to explain is... that you are living your past and would thus make it real... also you would have lived some of it which makes it unexisting and existing at the same time

If things wouldn't change or cease to exits there won't be time. They create for them, what they learn and need.

Originally posted by eleveninches
Does the past exist, or is it just an illusion.

The only way it could exist is if there is an infinite multiverse somewhere, where everything in the past goes to after it stops being the present and becomes the past.

But the past does not exist in the universe, as it is just an illusion of the human mind and imagination.

Only in the future.

It is always now.

this subject ties in with reality and the different possibilities of individual as well as comunical reality. so there is no deffinate answer, and yet we cant help but believe or hope that there is.

sry to be vague with the reality thing, each individual's reality is significantly different than another's due to experiences. so ur past cannot be my past therefore ur past did not exist in my reality, i hope that cleared it up a little.

Discussions like these should be left to stone kids at Pink Floyd concerts.

The past does not exist (in the present).

Originally posted by eleveninches
Does the past exist, or is it just an illusion.

The only way it could exist is if there is an infinite multiverse somewhere, where everything in the past goes to after it stops being the present and becomes the past.

But the past does not exist in the universe, as it is just an illusion of the human mind and imagination. in my opinion, i think we are merely pictures being changed such as a cartoon. so, the pages of our past will never be seen again.

The question itself is part of the problem. "The past," by definition, is what's already happened, it's what was; yet "exists" is present tense. So in effect, the question is asking, "Is then still now?"


lamo

Originally posted by Mindship
The question itself is part of the problem. "The past," by definition, is what's already happened, it's what was; yet "exists" is present tense. So in effect, the question is asking, "Is then still now?"


lamo

Can't even answer a simple question.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Can't even answer a simple question.
shifty

Not quite sure I understand why people would think that the past doesn't exist. To say the past doesn't exist is to say that loved ones who are no longer with us didnt exist. They are the past. They were born, they lived, and they died, making them the past. So, to say the past doesn't exist is basically saying they didn't exist. Also, this would deny any past event that happened in which shaped our lives and cultures. Since 9/11 is the past, is it just an illusion of our mind? Did it really not happen? If that didn't happen, then you are also saying that the time my brother spent in Iraq didn't happen and all the friends he lost during that time didn't happen. Just because we can't feel it or see it, doesn't mean it wasn't real. Our brains do not create an illusion of a memory. We either have the memory or we don't. I don't need to reach out and grab the past to make it real to me; I know it's real. The past is the past, the present is ever changing and the future has yet to happen. The only solid evidence we have of our existance is....the past. So, answer me this...if I approached you and slugged you in the face with a hard right fist, the few seconds it may take for you to recover would make the incident of the past, therefore, it didnt happen and you would have no right to respond.....right? Because it didn't happen. It would be an illusion of the mind. Perhaps we can't actually take a time machine and go to the past, but that doesn't mean it doesn't and didn't exist.

Why is the future different from the past? It seems to me that if time is connected to space, then the past and future should be like up and down.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Why is the future different from the past? It seems to me that if time is connected to space, then the past and future should be like up and down.

The problem is the relativity of simultaneity. IIRC, if the events are not causally connected they can be reordered for different observers, such that event sequence a b c is c b a for another observer. What lies in the present of one observer is partially in the past and future of another.

Originally posted by En Sabah Nur X
The problem is the relativity of simultaneity. IIRC, if the events are not causally connected they can be reordered for different observers, such that event sequence a b c is c b a for another observer. What lies in the present of one observer is partially in the past and future of another.

That puts the future and past on the same plane.

According to most people: yes

According to skeptics: ha! you can't prove it without inferring from the existence of the present!

Originally posted by Omega Vision
According to most people: yes

According to skeptics: ha! you can't prove it without inferring from the existence of the present!

But you can: If you are moving, then time is passing slower for you then for someone who is not traveling as fast. In a way, the person traveling faster is in the past of the person who is slower. This can be proved mathematically.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But you can: If you are moving, then time is passing slower for you then for someone who is not traveling as fast. In a way, the person traveling faster is in the past of the person who is slower. This can be proved mathematically.
That's still inferring a causal link between the present and a past (mind you, this is me playing devil's (read: skeptic's) advocate), if the entire Universe was just created this moment complete with people with memories of a false past--then any argument for a past's existence would be invalid.

Of course Occam's Razor would favor an explanation that says we remember a past because there actually was a past.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
That's still inferring a causal link between the present and a past (mind you, this is me playing devil's (read: skeptic's) advocate), if the entire Universe was just created this moment complete with people with memories of a false past--then any argument for a past's existence would be invalid.

Of course Occam's Razor would favor an explanation that says we remember a past because there actually was a past.
relativity of simultaneity still would exist and some recent past would be observed for some of observers the present of others would be past and future.

wteiuxyqtoM

keep in mind that simultaneity is basically the same as present or events happening in the present.

Originally posted by En Sabah Nur X
relativity of simultaneity still would exist and some recent past would be observed for some of observers the present of others would be past and future.

wteiuxyqtoM

keep in mind that simultaneity is basically the same as present or events happening in the present.
The Skeptic's Response: You're assuming that relativity is valid in this freshly created Universe.

A hardcore skeptic doesn't even believe that atoms exist in a provable sense.

NO

did the fact that your heart was beating yesterday exist?

yes.

did what ever happened the day before actually happen? yes.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
did the fact that your heart was beating yesterday exist?

yes.

did what ever happened the day before actually happen? yes.

Where is yesterday now?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Where is yesterday now?

in the past but yesterday exists because there's proof that yesterday happened because were today.

and yesterday is a man made unit. i nature there is no yesterday but just planet earth spinning around the sun. it's actually been just one long day since the beginning if you look at it from a natural perspective but if you want to be artificial then we have yesterday, today.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
The Skeptic's Response: You're assuming that relativity is valid in this freshly created Universe.

A hardcore skeptic doesn't even believe that atoms exist in a provable sense. Hardcore skeptics are idiots though.

only when you are living in it

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
in the past but yesterday exists because there's proof that yesterday happened because were today.

and yesterday is a man made unit. i nature there is no yesterday but just planet earth spinning around the sun. it's actually been just one long day since the beginning if you look at it from a natural perspective but if you want to be artificial then we have yesterday, today.

The proof you have exists in the now. You can use logic and cause and effect to reason that yesterday happened, but you have no direct evidence. In other words, you can't pull a part of the past into the present and show that it is real. The past is unattainable.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
A hardcore skeptic doesn't even believe that atoms exist in a provable sense.


Thinking about it...the uncertainty principle makes them right. You can measure position or velocity, but not both perfectly. So good luck proving they exist as real as ... your hand in front of your face.


But that may be just a logical cartwheel. We can indirectly prove they exist in others ways.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Thinking about it...the uncertainty principle makes them right. You can measure position or velocity, but not both perfectly. So good luck proving they exist as real as ... your hand in front of your face.


But that may be just a logical cartwheel. We can indirectly prove they exist in others ways.

Every time I look at this post, the time (in general) is now. I know that this post was made in the past, but I can't tell the difference because it is always now when I read it. If I didn't have memory, I would not know that I looked at it before.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
A hardcore skeptic doesn't even believe that atoms exist in a provable sense.

Is "hardcore skeptic" code for "Descart"?

That depends on how you define "exist".

Originally posted by Astner
That depends on how you define "exist".

OK, define exist.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
OK, define exist.
Why? I'm not the one who asked the question. While it would be nonsensical to define existence solely as the present it's fully possible. That's why I don't like philosophy, because we're dealing with undefined boundary conditions making it impossible to come to a logical conclusion without assumptions.

That said -- looking back at my master's thesis -- the current model of physics would transcend existence if we decided not to include the past in the definition of it.

Originally posted by Astner
Why? I'm not the one who asked the question. While it would be nonsensical to define existence solely as the present it's fully possible. That's why I don't like philosophy, because we're dealing with undefined boundary conditions making it impossible to come to a logical conclusion without assumptions.

That said -- looking back at my master's thesis -- the current model of physics would transcend existence if we decided not to include the past in the definition of it.

Why? Because a good definition will help in the topic. I wasn't trying to pin you down, just pointing out that you are correct, without a definition of exist, nothing useful can come of the discussion.

So, please define...

If we do indeed live within a multi-verse, an infinite cascade of realities that blend and flow from one another, time itself is likely an illusion. Our perception of time is like a shadow cast by higher dimensional forms. We see time ticking by moment by moment because we are inherently unable to perceive reality's true nature. There is a school of thought that sees time as having unfolded all at once in the higher dimension but that we are forced to march through it moment by moment because our perception is limited.

There are only 2 days in your life that you can never change yourself or your circumstances, yesterday and tomorrow. (paraphrase the Dali llama)

Originally posted by MajinGogeta
If we do indeed live within a multi-verse, an infinite cascade of realities that blend and flow from one another, time itself is likely an illusion. Our perception of time is like a shadow cast by higher dimensional forms. We see time ticking by moment by moment because we are inherently unable to perceive reality's true nature. There is a school of thought that sees time as having unfolded all at once in the higher dimension but that we are forced to march through it moment by moment because our perception is limited.

There are only 2 days in your life that you can never change yourself or your circumstances, yesterday and tomorrow. (paraphrase the Dali llama)




Also, look into time dilation. There is more then one now.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison


Also, look into time dilation. There is more then one now.

More than one kind of time dilation? As in SR vs GR? That's not new.