these are AWESOME.

Here’s my take:

1. There is more past than future.
a. The future is not a definite thing. It isn’t tangible in any way, and can only be speculated on.
b. the past is a definite thing. It has already happened and can/has been recorded.

2. You have both failed and succeeded. The two are not mutually exclusive. Haven’t we all had times where a certain aspect of our plans worked but others didn’t?

3. A broken down car is parked if it’s in park…. obviously if it’s in neutral then it’s not parked. you can still put on the emergency brake and work the gear shift if the car is broken down.

4. I have no idea, but I hope there’s more happiness.

While you would be hard pressed to find a person alive who loves doctor who more than I, I do not believe in time travel as an actual physical thing that is possible in this non-fictional universe. (though I wish that it did every day)
I disagree whole-heartedly that the future “exists” as anything other than an abstract concept.

the past existed.
the present exists.
the future will exist.

(these are of course, just my opinions.)

@sydiarniee I’d argue that since sound is just airwaves (Well, waves, anyway. Doesn’t have to be air!) and doesn’t become interpreted as sound until it hits, say, an ear or a microphone, it doesn’t technically make a sound when a tree falls in the woods and nobody’s there.

Predestination could be true, but the only possible conclusion that doesn’t end in the loss of the will to live is that it isn’t. So the future hasn’t happened yet

A lot of theologies believe that good and evil are balanced. There are plot lines where something good has happened so an evil act is set in motion, although I can’t think of where I read that. Christianity says that good has already won.

If you plant dandelions on purpose, are they still a weed?

If you succeed at failing then you have succeeded. You achieved the result you wanted, regardless of what that result was.

Not sure about the broken down car. But I know there’s a definition for damn near everything traffic related, so with a bit of research it shouldn’t be too hard to figure out.

This off topic: I apologize.

In computer science a thunk is a statement that is passed around in the implementation of a lazy language.

That is all.

Thank you.

The question “Is there more past or more future” is only meaningful if both are considered tangible things. The answer to this question is probably “future” then, because (I believe, correct me if I’m wrong) the most popular current scientific thinking is that the universe had a definite beginning (defined as the point prior to which no events could possibly be causally related to events in this universe) but instead of ending, it will keep expanding for an infinite amount of time. Then we have a finite time span behind us and an infinity of time in front of us, so there is more future.

Then again, if modern scientific thinking is wrong (and any scientist will admit that this area of study has plenty of gaps in knowledge), then either the universe is going to collapse in on itself, or the universe never had a true beginning. In the first case, there is probably still more future in front of us, since the universe is currently in a state of expansion, meaning we’re not yet halfway through our existence as a universe. In the second case, there is an equal amount of time on either side (it becomes equivalent to the question “are there more numbers less than 0 or greater than 0?” which is in turn equivalent to “are there more numbers less than x or greater than x?” for any number x).

Now, if you choose to look at the future as an intangible thing, then there is no way to make a comparison without putting all sorts of parameters on the question. Since the past is a thing that happened and is (supposedly) measurable, the question is equivalent to “are there more ants in the world or thought?” or else, “which is greater, your height or your weight?” Two things that cannot be numerically compared.

Plus considering time as anything other than a definite thing kind of flies in the face of physics as we know it. As alien as it seems to our extremely limited human experience, time and space are closely interwoven. Einstein’s theories of relativity allow for two events to take place in any order, as long as they are not causally connected. So if event A happens on Earth and event B happens on the Sun (about 8 light-minutes away), as long as the events happen within 8 minutes of each other, they can happen in a different order from a different frame of reference (i.e. event A might happen before event B from the frame of reference of a ship traveling from Earth to the Sun while event B happens first from the frame of reference of a ship traveling from the Sun to Earth). So, really, thinking about the future is tricky business, since events that happened in the future of some far off space traveler may have happened in our past, even though we both exist right now at this particular moment in time.

Or maybe I’m overthinking this.