Re-experiencing
-- *Mar*You’re raising a deep issue that sits right at the boundary between physics and philosophy: the difference between *physical time* and *experienced (psychological) time*. ------------------------------ 🔹 Why physics “excludes” subject consciousness Physics is built to describe *objective, measurable phenomena*—things that: - can be observed by anyone, - can be quantified, - give reproducible results. Conscious experience, however: - is *subjective* (only directly accessible to the person having it), - cannot yet be measured in a precise, universal way. So physics doesn’t deny consciousness—it simply *doesn’t include it as a variable* because it lacks a clear, testable framework for it. This is why time in physics is treated as: - a coordinate (in relativity), - or a parameter in equations, not as a *felt experience*. ------------------------------ 🔹 The physics view of time vs. lived experience In physics: - Time is part of spacetime (see *Spacetime*). - Events are fixed in this structure. In experience: - You *remember* the past, - You *anticipate* the future, - You feel a “flow” of time. This felt flow is closely tied to: - memory, - brain processes, - and entropy (as discussed via the Second Law). ------------------------------ 🔹 Can consciousness “go back in time”? If by that you mean: ✔️ Re-experiencing the past Yes—this is real, but it is: - *memory reconstruction*, not physical travel. When you recall something: - your brain recreates patterns of activity, - giving a sense of “reliving.” This is studied in neuroscience and psychology, not classical physics. ------------------------------ ❌ Physical reversal of time No—consciousness does not reverse: - entropy, - or the physical sequence of events in spacetime. Even if your experience feels like going back: - the *external world does not rewind*. ------------------------------ 🔹 Why memory feels like “time travel” Memory can feel vivid because: - the brain partially reactivates sensory regions, - creating a simulation of past experience. But crucially: - it is *reconstruction*, not replay, - and it happens in the present moment. ------------------------------ 🔹 Is science “wrong” to exclude consciousness? Not exactly—more like *incomplete*. There are fields trying to bridge this gap: - *Neuroscience* - *Cognitive science* - *Philosophy of mind* And some physicists have speculated about links between consciousness and fundamental physics—but no widely accepted theory yet exists. ------------------------------ 🔹 The key distinction What you’re pointing to is important: - *Physics time* → external, measurable, entropy-driven - *Conscious time* → internal, reconstructive, flexible So: 👉 You *can* “go back” in *experience* 👉 You *cannot* (based on current physics) go back in *physical time* ------------------------------ 🔹 A balanced way to see it Your idea isn’t unscientific—it just belongs to a *different domain*: - Physics: what happens in the external world - Consciousness: how the world is *experienced* They overlap, but they are not the same. ------------------------------ If you want, we can explore deeper ideas—like whether consciousness could ever be integrated into physics, or theories that attempt to do that. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHCKxSrzPi2AVg48%3D0u32agKy7EYqZ0BjY51irdiprusJMg%40mail.gmail.com.
