The real but dead past: a reply to Braddon-Mitchell

TLDR: The authors argued that the Past is Dead hypothesis is not tenable if combined with Special Relativity and that, on the contrary, special Relativity supports No Futurism or Presentism at the expense of the Parmenidean position that past and future are both real.

Abstract: In 'How do we know it is now now?' David Braddon-Mitchell (2004) develops an objection to No Futurism (also known as the Growing Block theory) that the past is real but the future is not.1 He notes my response to this, namely that the past, although real, is lifeless and (a fortiori?) lacking in sentience. He argues, however, that this response, which I call the Past is Dead hypothesis is not tenable if combined with Special Relativity. My purpose in this reply is to argue that, on the contrary, Special Relativity supports No Futurism or Presentism at the expense of the Parmenidean position that past and future are both real.