Forums → The Tavern → The Impossible Question of Time
| 13 | 2556 |
- 13 Replies
Showing 1-13 of 13
| 13 | 2556 |
What this is, and please excuse me if I confuse you, is that right now you think its the present, however, this may be a memory. This may be you in 40 years thinking back to when you used to play Armor Games. However, at the moment it doesn't seem like it. So my question is, past or present? Are we truly in the present or are we remembering what we have said in the past.
If you have any questions, I'm open.
You're theory that we're about us just remembering this doesn't make much sense, but aside form that, we're in the present regardless of wether or not we're recalling the past right now. We're in the present remembering the past. It's impossible not to be existing in the present, because that's the only possible time to exist. You existed in the past, and you will exist in the future, but not all at once.
That's what I think sometimes. Like maybe I'm 70 and in a coma. And I'm dreaming of my life. Or maybe I'm only a year older and it'll stop at same point when I had a coma. I keep beliving I'm in the present though. If I am then it would be good to live life as if it was. If I'm in a coma, there is no harm from living life the way I'm living it.
Master565, you missed the point. I think that we do* exist in the present however time just seems to be... weird. I think that we don't really* know what time we are in, yet we have this sense that we know exactly what is happening. There is a present, but where is the line between past and present?
Mathematically, there can be no present. Any and all progression of time will yield a negative--the future, and a positive--the past. The present, if any, is so instantaneous, it cannot be perceived or imagined.
Freakenstein had gotten what I wanted to say for one part very clearly (thanks), the other is how can we tell the difference between the past and the present. Now, presuming that we are making the past in bigger chunks, how do we know that we aren't remembering the past and living in the present, or living in the present and the past is farther back than that, so forth. There seems to be no end to this until we reach the end of our memory.
Master565, you missed the point.
meh time is just something humans made up so they can "understand" life better. anyway, we live both in the past, present and future. we will always have a past, the present is now so we obviously live in it. and even if your going to die today its still the future so as long as you live you have a future. so we live in all of them, it just depends who is looking at us.
The future has not happened, thus we cannot go there, nor is there anything there. If you were to get into a time machine and go to the future, you'd stuff up everything, and the universe, or at least time, will cease to exist. But if someone went into the past and changed something, than we would be feeling the effects now. It's very tricky, time. Best not to mess with it.
Mathematically, there can be no present. Any and all progression of time will yield a negative--the future, and a positive--the past. The present, if any, is so instantaneous, it cannot be perceived or imagined.
For me, the Time is like the Language. It's useless until you live with somebody else. Humans have invented the Time to get a reference.
I don't want to get a headache because I think too much about if I was, I am, I will be...
I'm not sure. But if I really was in a coma and I'm "dreaming" right now, it sure would be cool to be woken up and jump a bunch of years in the future. I know that I technically wouldn't be going into the future. Don't hassle me.
I'm thinking that this is all a dream, that soon i'm going to wake up and actually be a 5389381 year old alien. or i'll end up in something like the matrix.
randomness aside, i think it's a dream. i think dreams are your real life, and your life is a dream.
if that makes any sense at all.
If anyone attempts to read this their brain will explode. It's so complicated. Anything thaboss would want to say is in there. He doesn't think it's possible. Too many paradoxes. But that's not what this thread is about, kind of. He thinks that what is being said is "ossible" because when you think about it, anything is possible. Well, except if that was true, then it must be possible for something to be impossible. Which seems to be another paradox. But it then could be also possible to somehow have something be possible to be impossible but still keep the theory alive. If that made ANY sense! Click those four links. Especially read the Logical Possibility one. And the Subjunctive one. It's pretty confusing.
But anyway, everyone knows the answer is 42.
For the heck of it... Easier...
You must be logged in to post a reply!