Past and future do not exist

in STEMGeekslast year (edited)

All past is unreal, all future is unreal; everything that is imagined, or that is far away, or that is in the mind, is unreal. Only the present, physical and effective moment is real, that is to say, causality.
Shamansky, R. 2002. Presenteeism...Or When Being There is Not Being There.

How I would like to go back in time and be able to see places and witness situations in the history of the world. Moreover, I would like to go back to various moments of my childhood and perhaps relive them.

However, there is no current means to travel back in time or to become a child once again, or at least to see the past with a device, such as the hypothetical chronovisor, which I talked about in another article.

I know I am not a specialist, but giving my opinion is not a crime nor am I trying to denigrate the opinions of others.

black and silver police car
Photo by Delorean Rental on Unsplash

Time travel has been the most desired illusion of mankind. It would give us the opportunity to unveil mysteries that break our heads in these times. Mysteries to which we can only make assumptions based on withered evidence.

According to Einstein time travel is possible.

According to the conventional description of the theory of relativity, material particles moving through space-time move forward in time (into the future) and to one side or the other of space. The fact that the total energy and mass are positive is related to the fact that the particles move into the future (in quantum mechanics a change of sign in time or a negative mass are equated).
Wikipedia (Spanish article)

Still, I believe that time is a mental object used to be able to measure reality and predict events, measure physical change or deduce events; Nothing in reality is static. This position I advocate is known as presentism.

I consider myself a bit of a Buddhist, not an orthodox practitioner, but I agree with its basic and original precepts.

The quote that starts the article is given by a Buddhist and within the doctrine of Buddhism, everything mental is not real, they are only images of the physical universe. They are useful, no doubt, but if we are dominated by them or believe them to be real, we are being blinded and are still not seeing reality as it is (it has nothing to do with conspiratorial ideas).

Now, time becomes relative because without a reference point (such as a clock), determining the amount of change that has occurred is speculative.

A clock is, in any case, equivalent to a tape measure. If this is so, then a second is a measure of physical change and a metre is a measure of space that changes or is affected by motion. No doubt both are mental objects for measuring reality.

Like Shamansky, I believe that the past and future do not exist except in our minds. They are only memories and predictions. Desires and longings. Time has no physical representation because it does not exist. The only thing that exists is space, and it is the only thing that changes.

In studying the world, we should not expect it to be as we would like it to be. It is better to let ourselves be surprised by it and then give it as objective an explanation as possible. And if no explanation can be given yet, create possibilities and consider them false until proven otherwise.

Translated with (free version)

Posted with STEMGeeks


Great article. My husband always says "You can look into the past, and you can 'travel' into the future. But don't get the two mixed up! You can never travel into the past or look into the future". Kinda makes sense.

Have you considered entering the proof of Brain Word of the week contest? I think you write rather well and might enjoy it. It is also a good opportunity to challenge yourself and potentially win some POB tokens in the process. Latest contest post is here if you are interested. Contest closes this Sunday at midnight and then the next one starts. Follow @scholaris for new contest posts each week.

Posted via

thanks for the comment. Yes, I will consider writing in that contest. Thank you for letting me know.

Your content has been voted as a part of Encouragement program. Keep up the good work!

Use Ecency daily to boost your growth on platform!

Support Ecency
Vote for Proposal
Delegate HP and earn more

Oh, wonderful, someone who also thinks that humanity is too literal about what it thinks it can accurately measure. Scientific methods of measurement are an approximation to this relative reality experienced by the individual.

For example, I would have disagreed with you before I myself embarked on the time issue and once countered your concept of an illusion with the accepted time unit of 365 days per year in which the earth orbits the sun. Only after I went through the whole thing experimentally in my head and constantly stumbled over differences in the calculation of time, as well as the really amusing and crazy "attempts at correction" in Christian time measurement, did I come to realise that even small deviations can cause huge effects. I remember that - I think it was Pope Gregory - had erased a whole eight months from the calendar? If my memory does not deceive me :)

For me personally, as a result of my research into scientific as well as philosophical, religious and esoteric texts, it hardly makes a difference to my decisions, I could consider everything equally "voodoo", insofar as my mind is not able to translate such readings into a form of expression that I can understand. When I then think I have finally understood, I am guaranteed to encounter contradiction. HaHa!

The professional idiocy that I detect in scientists and the efforts at interpretation in understanding texts of this and other writings on the part of the humanities or theologies, where one scene tries to convince the other that it is right, is suspicious to me in principle. Possibly not even so much by the scientists themselves in the debate among themselves, but by the general public who, in search of reliable information - or to find security in their existence - are prepared to reject one for the other and such expresses itself in compulsion of opinion.

I like the Buddhist approach, although it is often accused of nihilism. In my view, the non-existent question of a creator defuses the eternal arguments about whether we live in an intelligent or stupid universe.

Though I probably like the practical, touchable practices more than the mind-related teachings. Like washing the dead, looking at dead bodies, taking care of the congregation in terms of physical ceremonies. When it comes to birth, the beginning of life, there is not much to find in Buddhism. Motherhood, midwifery etc. I think has not a particular connection to this form of religion or concept. So I am happy to complete this lack with other forms of cultural influences.

Thank you for this article, I very much enjoyed reading and commenting on it!