To what extent does the past "exist"? Is everything

Does the answer to this question matter. What consequences does a yes or no answer have.

There is no past or future only the eternal present.

>>8342977
nice dubs.

what? are you meaning to say this question is more philosophical than scientific?

>>8342979
yes, my intuition leads me to believe this, I was just wondering what others thought

>>8342969
>To what extent does the past "exist"?

It doesn't, it never did.

It is a metaphore for memory.

The past is a mental abstraction.

There is only the now.

Which is why linking TIME as a dimension to the fabric of the cosmos is dumb.

>>8343201
Does this mean that time doesn't exist and is merely a conceptualization used to show the process of change?

Also, what of the term "space-time"? Is it an archaism now? And doesn't time play a central role in quantum mechanics?

The past is merely a construct designed by man to act as a container for his dank memes like society

>>8343271
I don't have the answer for this, but I wonder about it often

>>8343271
>Does this mean that time doesn't exist and is merely a conceptualization used to show the process of change?

Yes.

>what of the term "space-time"?

It is a mathematical construct, nothing more.

>And doesn't time play a central role in quantum mechanics?

Rate of change plays a role in QM; Time as a dimension is bullshit Mathematician posturing.

>>8342969
Through light, the stars that we see are probably dead now and the light reaching is is slow as fuck so if we monitor he people on them, they're probbly dead and we will see their light traveling to us.

>>8342969
>To what extent does the past "exist"?
To what extent does existence "exist"?
>That made more sense in your head.
If I understood what you're trying to say. The future is predetermined. which would imply the past was predetermined. So the "now" is just a moving actualizing point along this "direction of the future." I'd proverbially argue that the "direction of the future" is the more real of the two. And it contains the 'past' from our perspective.
>Is the past an actual thing or just a concept?
Is an actual thing an actual thing?

File: kinked sling.jpg (29KB, 600x411px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 600x411px

>>8342969
The future, past, and present are all the same when viewed from outside of our bubbled view.

All one mass seeming to have split, and coming back together from our limited perspective.

Imagine a rope or wire being twisted apart. It is all our Universe but when split apart each individual strand can be seen separately. It is all still one body spread into separate parts.

That kink in the rope is our bubble of spacetime in which it all appears to be individual parts. We in our view do not see it split apart or recombine but it is all one.

The past exists as a consistent extrapolation of the present. The present is both complete and yet incomplete since it contains everything, yet it cannot contain or explain itself.

File: Enzymes replicate DNA.png (157KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 960x720px

>>8344519
Similarly to DNA strands

Consider this: can any moment be experienced more than once?

What would it feel like to experience the past again without all the new memories you gained?

>>8344532
Currently we only have electronic recording devices to replay an event in audio, or sight, but that is the closest we have.
Perhaps if science discovers a way to record the brain's means of extrapolation of an event -"The Matrix" movie, we could then experience it but have no active part in changing it.

File: 292px-Spock,_2267.jpg (12KB, 292x356px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 292x356px

>>8344519
Fascinating.