Is the concept of time just an illusion?

If you are suggesting you physically went back in time such that you could change events rather than just had a vivid memory, I would suggest that was a little delusional (unless you could prove it).

veinglory said:

If you are suggesting you physically went back in time such that you could change events rather than just had a vivid memory, I would suggest that was a little delusional (unless you could prove it).

Click to expand...

Isn't that what you said last time?

veinglory said:

If you are suggesting you physically went back in time such that you could change events rather than just had a vivid memory, I would suggest that was a little delusional (unless you could prove it).

Click to expand...

How could you prove you went back in time and changed past events if the present already represents those changes as if they always were?

Taking mementos proves very little other than a well preserved antique. You'd have to do a Bill & Ted and bring someone back with you to vouch for it -- and then they get locked up for being a schizophrenic with identity based delusions of grandeur.

Why would you want to prove it anyway? If the changes made were for the better - the knowing of that deed would be enough - but then, that memory would fade as you adjusted to the new existence created. Also, if you change things previously wrong, then the present would offer no reason to go back and alter anything - effectively undoing any timeline in which time travel had purpose - so you wouldn't have, would you? - or nothing can be changed.

I would pursue the issue of how it might be proved if OP wishes to suggest he is actually doing it. My main point was that he is probably talking about memory, which is kind of what proves time, not what questions it.

Are you talking about the cliche- opening up a can of worms when writing about something painful and having difficulty leaving the emotional baggage behind?