Ok, just something that sort of bothers me... Everyone says the past is like... concrete, we know what happened and blah... and the future is unknown... well unless we get into predestination of something... but usually past known, future unknown. And to me... past and future... really its all the same. Its not now. Now is the only thing that's really known. And before and after now.... anything is possible. Anyone ever read orwell's 1984? i tend to think of the past sort of like that. The past was constantly be written and rewritten. And each time, the new past was just as real os the former. And i know that in the book there was the "real" past. But, what if there really isn't? The past is just whatever we want it to be. Something really really embarrassing happens to you... and when it happens you're so humiliated you wanna die. But years later... its just a funny story... why aren't you humilated anymore? the past has changed.... and instead of embarassing its just funny. Like... maybe thats a bad example... but the past keeps changing... Oh... or maybe its like the "if a tree falls and no one hears it, does it make a sound?" if you say no to that... then if something happens and there's no witness, did it ever occur? or if it doesn't change anything did it happen? Anyways, i don't know if i really made my point or no... its late, and i don't exactly care... but i guess the short of it is just... is the past really so concrete? is it any more concrete than the future? and if yes, why does it have this quality? If time is the way most people percieve it... then why would the past be solid and the future hazy? to me, i think the past and future share the same qualities since they're just measurements of time. anyways... thoughts? ideas? opinions?