Are we living in the past?

John, I agree with you. But, don't you see that even the causality restriction for scattering integrals are put by hand. You distort the contour, according to causality restrictions. Moreover, Newton's laws of motion, Schroedinger's equation, Maxwell's equations are all having time reversal symmetry! Problem with STR and Galilean relativity (newtonian) finding inertial reference frames...They are idealised models. These models have been tested for LOCAL intertial frames! But then models are models! D

Octogan (?) was a very ancient tribe (3mil, yo) of eight legged, tree swinging Octopus thingy's; who were hunted by a forest floor dwelling Octopi thingy's called a Megapus......Men, ain't they just so phallic when comes to studying and naming anything with more or less than one leg with a few bushes around it? Or maybe they just love dead men and innately hate all women for some strange reason? Anyhowdy-dudy, I wonder how their women danced with all them interchangeable legs and arms.....Hmmmmmm!

Perhaps so Jasper.. But I really can't be bothered to learn Jasperees so as to try and understand what you say. If you wish to communicate your ideas, you must make more of an effort for your potential audience. Why waste your time otherwise? The onus should be on you... after a while, your refusal to do so just becomes annoying... even though I believe you have some interesting things to say.

I suppose if you have spent a long time in confinement, as you once said you did, that would explain why you seem to be having a conversation with yourself half the time. That is Ok. However now that you have been made aware, try and compensate for that at least if you come on here. I mean, I do want to read your contributions, but cut out the cryptic nonsense style (or at least provide a translation underneath it)... otherwise, eventually you will just be ignored.

If you only lived in the past it would be the present (think of a catatonic patient). You have to be in the present to conceptualise the past. Although you're never really in the present either. If you think of the natural and physical world, there is a tangible and measurable sense of time - past, present, future or, if you like, ageing - but this all goes tits up when applied to consciousness. [%sig%]

Perhaps, when it comes to our experience of consciousness there is only the present, and the definition of the present embodies the appearance of all that is past. The past thus does not really exist.... my head is hurting!

It's all a bit like watching TV - even if it's live it's still already happened and so in that sense is part of the past which is seen as the present - clear as mud :o)

There is the well know "Principle of Determinancy", which states that if you know the position and momentum of a particle at a time, you will be able to tell its position and momentum at a later time. (Well, classical regime!)

You are definitely living in the past Debashish :o)

Not only me, all of us! We are living in present, with basis states of our past! Present is just a superposition of our past. D

Debashish, you may well be able to make some predictions given relatively simple (controlled) conditions. Say a particle was on a tennis ball, you could predict with some accuracy its path given some parameters such as angle of racket strike, force, wind direction etc... How the hell would you compute that a person comes along picks it and places it elsewhere. The future in a real sense is indeterminable... too many variables if you like.

As John might say : reliable predictions are farily simple but as stastistics show the more specific you get the less reliable the prediction - in other words the more you try to predict the less chance you have of being right. However some people manage to score substantially higher with their predictions than chance would allow - so maybe they live in the future.

Gerry, There are many indeterminate quantities and there are many lagrangians which are on themselves very difficult to construct. I was just giving arguments taking simplistic models. Let us not talk about stochastic processes and all, life is very complicated otherwise. D

What's the chances that there will be a huge revolution in physics and that we will revert to an 'ether' and disconnect time from space?

Life is complicated, and conciousness is perhaps the biggest mystery of all. Is that not the subject of this thread.. Is this still too big a subject for science to try and tackle?

ZERO! However there can be special autonomous systems where time can be disregarded (eliminated)! D

Could you experience consciousness without time? [%sig%]

Do you think we will find the Higg's Boson then Debashish?

Time is the minds prison.

There was a song about this= happy ever...after we're all livin in the past. It must've been them acid days.

I've occassionally wondered if this is all a trip and I'm still in Fat Pat's flat with a dozen or so other people sometime in the late 60's with Steppenwolf on in the background and the sweet-scented perfume of hashish hanging in the air..... no, it's this wierd new air-freshener - I suppose I should unplug it.

YES! We will find Higgs Boson, but we will need bigger accelerators! D

That's similar to what the elephants used to say in their war with the mice - once we get bigger...

hahaha. How very interesting this discussion is. I just arrived back home, came out to my study because I have head ache and this was the first thread I clicked on. hahahaha. Owww me head hearts already. Well I'm gonna have something to eat and a cup a tea first. But in response to marc's question, "Could you experience consciousness without time?" I would change this to Can you be in a specific places without being their at a specific time? Time for me tea.

Debashish. I'm assuming you gave a link to Maxwell/Lorentz, Partial differentials in relation to having more than 1 potential variable? I agree that many equations used to model the physics of the real world are partial differential equations, but to apply them to the subject of consciousness hear, would require good knowledge of other contributions, including Lorentz, Maxwell, Planck, Nels Bohr, Einstein's Special theory and of course the general theory of Relativity. Then we would have to determine precise frame of references among other factors. Sticking to the topic of this thread: >Since nobody could possibly remember the future;Is it at all possible that we might all be living in the past?< Hears how I tend to think about it from a physics point of view. When we talk about Consciousness, we are un able to define it without the inherent limitations imposed by the internal three dimensional models that we use as out frame of reference. Its the same with any definition of 'Time', we assume that time is passing, because thats what our senses tell us. But in reality we have no way to determine whether time is already out their, waiting for us to step into it and so taking away free choose. When you talk about being in some places at some time in the past, future or present, then you have to decide weather you are talking about 'local time' Which is of our own construction and not relevant in terms of this discussion, or you are referring to the idea that this Universe has 'a beginning? The most popular theory's being the big bang, Simultaneous Creation and mutual annihilation leading to the emergences of the first fundamental particles. But this assumes that their was 'a beginning'? "Well there is much evidences to support it".? But this is not the only theory that has plausibility. When talking about time, we must talk about relative time and not local time. But time relative to what? We have no frame of references, so we say that the constancy of C is our bench mark and that time is a 4th dimension known as Spaces time. Well, I have a very big problem with the idea that C has V that is constant. I have a very very big problem with the idea of time as a 4rth dimension. I have an even bigger problem with the idea that 'All' humans ability to conceptualize is limited to our 3 dimensional constructs based on every thing we perceive in the 3d world we live on and I have an even bigger problem with the notion of time as a concept.

And that doesn't even touch upon Tetmajer and his inferation on the effects of Becquerel rays in triclinic approximates. Suppose for example you are only a chemical machine, you don't really have thoughts, you only have chemical reactions. You just think they are thoughts, so what ever you think is real, even if there is no basis in reality. I also think Planck was more theoretical and wasn't all that constant to begin with.

It would be so much easier if this thing we call Consciousness and time, had volume. Then we could really get our minds around it. *Suppose for example you are only a chemical machine* Well I have more evidences for that than i presently have for the Block Universe or Quantum probability. Instinctively, I fell that my Consciousness is biological in nature. But their are many contradictions to this instinct that cant simply be explained away. For instance radio. If I except that consciousness has a biological origin, then I must also except that it has a quantum origin to.

Try explaining that to a palm tree.

hahaha. Oh I have radio, I have. ~:

I have a block of chocolate in my pocket. Soon, I can't say exactly when, I will pull the chocolate out of my pocket and consume it! Now being hyper-lactose intolerant, and assuming the chocolate is made from full cream milk, I will have a fatal allergic reaction somewhere between 1 - 4 hours after I taste and swallow the very first piece of chocolate? Note: the argument of consciousness is irrelevent here as "I think" is a given premise. Question: Have I predicted my future and how? Note: This argument is based on the concept of "finite V Infinite" as I have clearly stated, I already have, but don't know when I shall eat the chocolate? Supposition: If quantum exists, form, space and time cannot, as all need sequence and hierarchy! Careful now ladies......I'm might just destroy your concepts of time and logic with this one?

All this talk of time and logic can become very confusing. However, I was conscious of what time I posted a short story last night, and by this morning it had disappeared. I want its sequence and hierarchy in the Last 100 stories restored please!! Can anyone help?

I will take a look see.....and be back.

Mmmmmm......must be hung up on the word filter, Lisa! I like 'Too Many Lyrics'.....lot's of cherries.....lots of F words too.....I'd say, hang on a little bit longer as I had work held up for almost 2 days.

Cheers! But I can't think of any words in it that would have caused it to get put in a word filter box! Unless it was the 'octopus legs' that did it! And it was there last night!

*octopus legs*!! Thats disgusting!!!!

Mmmm. I thought so too!

Or it could have been the word 'sex' and 'slimy suffering'. All combined it sounds pretty pervy!

*slimy suffering octopus legs* No problem. But the S.E.X word is a no no. Lisa. Well the would probably sen of alarm bells for the very sensitive spiky thingy.

lol. Hope you're well. I have a feeling we've spoken in real life too. Once!!

You never know. I;m sure you work will clear the spike soon Lisa.

Cheers. Sorry too (don't bother replying to this bit).

How about "Octopi shashlick"

*don't bother replying to this bit* Well thats just to intriguing not to reply to. Its like saying "I've got something you really need to know" But I cant tell you what it is! Typical! What are you sorry for?

And I told you not to bother replying! But you did!Typical!!

And I thought you would reply if I reply! So double typical!!

lol. To plagiarise the words of someone we, erm, both know. Grrrrrrrr!

*This is not a reply its a silent thought* Beat that!

Who's this, GRRRR, bloke?

* *

*