Philosophy of Time

[Al6200]

At least physically, the state of the world is determined by past states. Let's get abstract for a second and say that a function L(t) where t is time gives the set of all true statements that are true at a time t. Perhaps it would be good to think of a physical analogy, like a ball that falls in time. If determinism is true, than if we know L(t - a), than we know L(t) for all a > 0. So if I know the position of the ball and all of the facts about the universe two seconds ago, we should be able to run all of our calculations and know the state of the universe in the present.

All of the physics that I know of (classical stuff) describes the state at one point in time in terms of any earlier point in time. But what if I needed to know L(t - 1) and L(t - 2) in order to know L(t). Let's say that L(t) = L(t - 1) + L(t - 2), that is the fibonacci sequence. Then we can't just look at our future as determined by our present. That is, the future is actively constituted by the past. Perhaps we can describe this as an authentically historical universe, while the earlier described universe might be described as a presentist universe. History still matters, but only insofar as it has shaped the present.

In a presentist universe, our history matters, but only insofar as we remember it and insofar as it has shaped the world as it exists. But if two historical states somehow converge to one universe, than it won't matter if we previously had one history or another history. If we don't remember something in the past, it may not matter. We can then view the present as the essential element of our understanding of the future.

Perhaps, alternatively, we can think that the past matters even if it does not actually affect the present state. I'm not sure quite what to think of this idea.

Maybe there's something really obvious that I'm missing here.

[LazyDrunk]

This sounds alot like tripping on mushrooms.

Anyway.

Everything you wrote up there makes sense. I'd add, but the language used to describe the commiseration would only diminish the intended consequence.

I'm just gonna nitpick a bit, if you don't mind.

At 4/30/11 12:53 AM, Al6200 wrote: know the state of the universe in the present.

After a long, given length of time, assumptions and faith in the works of others both come into play, convoluting the mixture of truths accrued and actual knowledge of the past. If we weren't so limited by our physical culmination (though our situation is indeed splendid) full-on total truth of time, and thus existence, would be graspable.

If only for a second ;)

History still matters, but only insofar as it has shaped the present.

With the future being unknowable, the pasts influence remains an X, for true total knowledge of history (in its purest, truest form) is simply too much to calculate. Makes me sad too.

Perhaps, alternatively, we can think that the past matters even if it does not actually affect the present state. I'm not sure quite what to think of this idea.

It's very aware.

Maybe there's something really obvious that I'm missing here.

Time waits for nobody.