The World Isn't Even A Second Old

[The Sum of Awe]

Unless there are parallel universes that are created every second we live of all of the possible things we could do at each second...

The past only exists in memory, which is subconsciousness... Memory could be fallible too, and misleading. We can forget about a certain event during an event that we remember and replace it with something that actually never happened...

So only the present exists. Right?



Another thing similar to this: Are we a different person every minosecond? Because of the same logic.

 

[Quagmire]

Unless there are parallel universes that are created every second we live of all of the possible things we could do at each second...

The past only exists in memory, which is subconsciousness... Memory could be fallible too, and misleading. We can forget about a certain event during an event that we remember and replace it with something that actually never happened...

So only the present exists. Right?

The present only exists in memory too: since it takes a moment (even if it's a micro-moment) for our sensory apparatus to process information and relay it to the brain, then we never really are looking at the present moment, just the very recent past.

Another thing similar to this: Are we a different person every minosecond? Because of the same logic.

Could be: if we are our thoughts, and our thoughts change constantly and continually, then there never really is an "I". The "I" would be in a constant state of flux.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

The present only exists in memory too: since it takes a moment (even if it's a micro-moment) for our sensory apparatus to process information and relay it to the brain, then we never really are looking at the present moment, just the very recent past.

Yes, I thought about this during it... It is kinda a paradox, because you'd have to keep getting smaller and smaller in the amount of time... .01 then .001 then .0001 etc. So basically, we're never here.

Could be: if we are our thoughts, and our thoughts change constantly and continually, then there never really is an "I". The "I" would be in a constant state of flux.

Agree

 

[Willamena]

The present only exists in memory too: since it takes a moment (even if it's a micro-moment) for our sensory apparatus to process information and relay it to the brain, then we never really are looking at the present moment, just the very recent past.

Well, then by that same token, it's the brain-relayed, sensory apparatus-processed information that is "the present," so reality actually happens in the future!

 

[Quagmire]

Well, then by that same token, it's the brain-relayed, sensory apparatus-processed information that is "the present," so reality actually happens in the future!

This would really confuse me if I weren't psychic.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

This would really confuse me if I weren't psychic.

I am a banana!

Anywho, memory is not subconscious. It's what's called preconscious, meaning it's not always on your mind, but you can access it easily whenever you want. Subconscious is deeply rooted stuff that's hard to find, and nonconscious stuff is stuff you can never find.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I am a banana!

Anywho, memory is not subconscious. It's what's called preconscious, meaning it's not always on your mind, but you can access it easily whenever you want. Subconscious is deeply rooted stuff that's hard to find, and nonconscious stuff is stuff you can never find.

But still not physically existing.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

But still not physically existing.

If you don't count it as existing, then computers have souls.

Unless you're talking about the past, in which case, never mind.

 

[Panda]

But still not physically existing.

The past has existed and the future will exist. I would say the real question here would be about the concept of time?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

It gets even trickier when to take into consideration the "sum over histories" idea of time. We have multiple pasts and multiple futures.

 

[Quagmire]

I am a banana!

Pffft. Knew that.

Anywho, memory is not subconscious. It's what's called preconscious, meaning it's not always on your mind, but you can access it easily whenever you want. Subconscious is deeply rooted stuff that's hard to find, and nonconscious stuff is stuff you can never find.

that's not true at all: I think you'll be amazed by all the examples of non-consciousness you'll find in our forums after you've been around for a while.. :yes:

 

[The Sum of Awe]

If you don't count it as existing, then computers have souls.

Unless you're talking about the past, in which case, never mind.

Yes, the past.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

The past has existed and the future will exist. I would say the real question here would be about the concept of time?

Yes it has existed, and the future will... But doesn't presently... But we need to figure out how to define presently... .00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 and beyond...


It has to do with time, but I'm not sure if it is about the concept of time.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Pffft. Knew that.



that's not true at all: I think you'll be amazed by all the examples of non-consciousness you'll find in our forums after you've been around for a while.. :yes:

I meant in your own mind, but I respect the joke. Well played.

 

[Panda]

that's not true at all: I think you'll be amazed by all the examples of non-consciousness you'll find in our forums after you've been around for a while.. :yes:

A certain Quagmire being a prime example of this

 

[Panda]

Yes it has existed, and the future will... But doesn't presently... But we need to figure out how to define presently... .00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 and beyond...


It has to do with time, but I'm not sure if it is about the concept of time.

So the problem is just definitions?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

So the problem is just definitions?

Kind of that with the mixture of the concept of time... So a little of both.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Senses: the human equivalent of lag.

EDIT: To run with this idea a bit, assuming the senses are faulty in their "display" of the information received, it would the same as a schizophrenic thinking the TV is reading their mind. You'd think of something before seeing it.

Okay, rant over.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Senses: the human equivalent of lag.

EDIT: To run with this idea a bit, assuming the senses are faulty in their "display" of the information received, it would the same as a schizophrenic thinking the TV is reading their mind. You'd think of something before seeing it.

Okay, rant over.

Hmm? Explain.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Hmm? Explain.

Your mind would have the information, but you haven't consciously seen the information. You'd think of something and then suddenly a commercial comes on showing it, when actually you're just receiving the image later than the thought.