Science of actual events, memories, and ixperiencitness 1

Science of actual events, memories, and ixperiencitness

What is the importance of actually experiencing something? If you have a memory of some experience do you actually have to experience it to make it yours?

What is the difference between a physapath that is produced through actual experiences connected to reality and one that was just created by making the structure and functioning identical to the case where you actually did have the memory?

The experience of that event that both the original and cidentireplica would have would be identical. Having or not having the actual experiencing of the event does not effect the present experience of the memory of the event when the structure and functioning is identical or near identical.

The memory of the event is a different experience than the event itself. And is caused by a different structure and functioning of the brain. Why should the ixperiencitness be effected by the actual experiencing or not of the event if there is no difference between the two physasections?

It might be possible that a specific external event might be the only physical way to get from one actual physamoment in the same body to another physamoment in the same body. Outside of that body there maybe many different ways of producing a specific physamoment or physasection.

It is believed by many that the original experiences the actual event, and a cidentireplica can not. The cidentireplica can only experience a different event from the original. What if the original is in an experience machine and the experienced event of the original is actually duplicated for the cidentireplica in the same way as it was produced for the original?