Past, PRESENT--future?
Past, PRESENT--future?
There is a crucial division between the past and present vs. future.Reality only happens or has happened- it does not exist in the future. If it has not yet happened, it is not real, other than as a mental concept. This is also true of time. TIME ALWAYS STARTS NOW. Future time does not exist other than as a concept. Thanks for reading this.
-
- Posts: 4333
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Past, PRESENT--future?
with one foot in the future and one foot in the past, one is left on their ass today...
-Imp
-Imp
Re: Past, PRESENT--future?
The future can exist as fixed from a larger time zone, however that future follows the same nature and we are left with an infinite continuum.Richardmc wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 9:00 pm There is a crucial division between the past and present vs. future.Reality only happens or has happened- it does not exist in the future. If it has not yet happened, it is not real, other than as a mental concept. This is also true of time. TIME ALWAYS STARTS NOW. Future time does not exist other than as a concept. Thanks for reading this.
Everything is fixed if reality is assumed as one point.
Outside of this one point, the future because of it's fixed within a fixed, etc. nature will always have some elements predetermined and others not depending on the angle of awareness.
Even the future is relative and is a past event from a seperate time zone.
Re: Past, PRESENT--future?
This posting was my first ever on any online forum. It comes from many years of thought. I had hoped to get some sincere specific feedback, either positive or negative. To my surprise, the only two replies did not really address my assertions, which challenged the common conception of time. So, am I making such logical sense that a reply is not necessary, or am I too far out to bother with? Civil replies would be welcomed.
Re: Past, PRESENT--future?
It sounds like you are advocating some version of the growing block universe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growing_block_universe It's a perfectly respectable philosophy of time, sitting in between eternalise and presentism. So yeah, you are making logical sense, but you should be prepared for disappointment if you think your ideas haven't been thought of before.Richardmc wrote: ↑Mon Aug 26, 2019 11:17 pm This posting was my first ever on any online forum. It comes from many years of thought. I had hoped to get some sincere specific feedback, either positive or negative. To my surprise, the only two replies did not really address my assertions, which challenged the common conception of time. So, am I making such logical sense that a reply is not necessary, or am I too far out to bother with? Civil replies would be welcomed.
Re: Past, PRESENT--future?
Anything that can be said upon time rests on speculation. But if one just takes it at face value - if any such thing can be said of time - it manifests as the rate of change within a process. Would either time and space even need to exist if there is nothing which requires these fundamental preconditions. If time is born in and measured by process then there must be millions of different paradigms of it which coalesce into ONE process called the universe since processes are nested and usually affect each other. It's what Carl Sagan described as the Great Cosmic Fugue without necessarily thinking about it in those terms.
Re: Past, PRESENT--future?
Thank you, uwot, for your informative and useful comments. Though what I am saying has similarities to 'the growing block universe theory of time', they are not identical. The growing block theory visualizes each present moment adding a thin slice of spacetime to the present, thus the growing block. In my view, this thin slice is adding to the past. Everything happens now and it is always now. Time passing is dynamic moments of now, now, now---.
Re: Past, PRESENT--future?
There is plenty of neuroscience to support the claim that what you are perceiving as "now" is actually latent by a few milliseconds. Your brain takes time to process stuff. So technically speaking the "now" you experience is already part of history.
Re: Past, PRESENT--future?
The future is just as real as the past, it's just that we can remember the past but can't remember the future. (Organisms, and evolution in general, are bound to the direction of an increasing entropy, otherwise they couldn't advance.)Richardmc wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 9:00 pm There is a crucial division between the past and present vs. future.Reality only happens or has happened- it does not exist in the future. If it has not yet happened, it is not real, other than as a mental concept. This is also true of time. TIME ALWAYS STARTS NOW. Future time does not exist other than as a concept. Thanks for reading this.
Fundamentally, past, present and future are all one within the NOW.
Re: Past, PRESENT--future?
This is written to unify my statements and to add a couple of sentences. "There is a crucial division between the past and present vs. future. Reality happens or has happened- it does not exist in the future. If it has not yet happened, it is not real, other than as a concept. This is also true of time. Time always starts now. Future time only exists as a concept. Everything happens now- it is always now. This includes time, which always starts and happens now. Being conscious is being here now. Time passing is dynamic moments of now, now, now, etc. The future, meanwhile, NEVER arrives."
Re: Past, PRESENT--future?
Wearing a seatbelt is an example of prudent behavior. In other words, acting now(reality) to avert possible danger, which might or might not occur(future).
-
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm
Re: Past, PRESENT--future?
I'll back you up. There is only one state at a time and that is the present state. Past states don't exist except in memories. Memories are present but the past is not. Neither is the future.Richardmc wrote: ↑Mon Aug 26, 2019 11:17 pm This posting was my first ever on any online forum. It comes from many years of thought. I had hoped to get some sincere specific feedback, either positive or negative. To my surprise, the only two replies did not really address my assertions, which challenged the common conception of time. So, am I making such logical sense that a reply is not necessary, or am I too far out to bother with? Civil replies would be welcomed.
Re: Past, PRESENT--future?
OK, but if the future isn't real why are you worried about future danger?
Last edited by Skepdick on Tue Sep 10, 2019 3:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.