"Arrow" of time, or "arrow" of memory? I need help understanding this. To me, it seems, well not to be over the top about it, but, well, pretty much ridiculous that there wouldn't be *the appearance* of an "arrow" of time that points in one and only one direction. Take the classic question of why no one has ever seen a broken tea cup jump from the floor and reassemble itself whole on a table. Well suppose for a moment that that actually did happen, right there in front of your eyes. What makes anyone think that there'd be any way at all that you could possibly remember it? It seems to me that, unless the time reversal was confined *strictly* to the tea cup, and nothing else, that as time ran backwards, it would also be running backwards with regard to *all* the processes occurring within your brain as well. As a result, as the tea cup, from instant to instant, was reassembling itself, moving from one state, to a previous state, to the state before that, the same thing would have to be happening in your brain. The human brain isn't magic. As it moved, from instant to instant, from one state, to a previous state, to the state before that, there would be no physical mechanism for you to retain the memory of any state representing one beyond what you would perceive as the "present" state. Think of your memory as a deck of cards. In the first instant you put down a 2 of diamonds. In the second instant you put down a 9 of clubs. In the third instant you put down a king of hearts. In the fourth instant you put down a 5 of spades. At this point your memory is clear. 2 of diamonds, followed by 9 of clubs, followed by king of hearts, followed by 5 of spades. Now consider what you would experience from instant to instant as time ran backwards. The 5 of spades would go back to where it came from, and in the first instant of time reversal what you'd remember is - 2 of diamonds, followed by 9 of clubs, followed by king of hearts. You wouldn't remember having seen the 5 of spades because the changes to your brain caused by seeing it would have been undone in the first instant of time reversal. So even though time is now running backwards, it would still appear to you to be running forward. What you'd remember after the first instant of time reversal is 2 of diamonds, followed by 9 of clubs, followed by king of hearts. The king of hearts would appear to you to be the present, only because it's the last thing in your memory stack. The time reversal continues. Now the king of hearts goes back to where it came from. You no longer remember having seen the king of hearts because the changes to your brain caused by seeing it have been undone during the second instant of time reversal. So now in the second instant of time reversal time STILL appears to be running forward, you remember it, clearly. The 2 of diamonds is followed by the 9 of clubs. In this second instant of time reversal the 9 of clubs now appears to be the "present", but only because the 9 of clubs is now the last thing in your memory stack. My point here is this. When ever time runs backwards, it would always appear to you to be running forward. All you'd remember is a continuous unbroken stream of time from the past, right up to whatever is the last moment in your memory stack, from instant to instant, and with each instant the "present" would simply appear to be the last thing in your memory stack that hadn't yet been undone by the time reversal. So the way I see it there's really no such thing as a "arrow" of time. The only "arrow" is the "arrow" of human memory. Time could be reversing, tea cups could be jumping from the floor and reassembling themselves all the time, but due to the "arrow" of human memory, none of us would have any way at all of experiencing that time reversal. The ONLY way, and I do mean THE - ONLY - WAY you could ever, under ANY conditions whatsoever, remember seeing a tea cup jump from the floor and reassemble itself is if the time reversal that caused it where *STRICKTLY* confined to the tea cup, but not your brain. In other words the time reversal would have to be highly localized otherwise there'd be no way at all physically to see it. And this is where I need help understanding this. To me, there doesn’t' appear to be any mystery here at all. There is no "arrow" to time. The only "arrow" that exists, exists as a very basic and, in my mind at least, obvious and expected limitation to what we can perceive given the nature of the human mind. So what's the hoopla about? Why is this even a question? It seems fairly obvious to me that I just don't get the argument. There's something here I'm missing. What is it?