Does ‘time’ actually exists in the sense we believe it to? Most will look upon this question and then ponder how insane I am, or what drugs I must be taking. But, even just for a little light humour, please read on and post a (mature) comment :-)
My perception (although most would argue ‘mis-understanding’) of the world drives a belief that there is literally no other moment in ‘time’ other than the present. The world simply exists in this one moment, as we do too. In fact, the dimension of time seems like an intangible tool that we use to try and digest/explain/model our changes in thought, position, size, etc.
I wonder whether our concept of ‘time’ has risen solely from our ‘memory’? For, in my mind, just a moment in ‘time’ ago I was thinking ‘something else’. And in my mind I determine ‘that’ moment is completely separate from ‘this’ current moment. Then I logically determine, that ‘this’ and ‘that’ moment can’t be described solely by a change in position. (For if I was not to move, this moment is still surely different to the last moment). Thus the only factor for which I can blame this new moment on is a change in ‘time’. (((Have I lost anyone else here, or just myself?!)))
What if one was to argue that time hasn’t elapsed; that it is a dimension defined by humans to make logical sense out of our memory. Some might respond by saying that time does exist, “just take a stroll into a library and pick up a book on history”. Others say that time is certain because we have proved through scientific means that the universe existed more than 14 billion years prior to us. My shallow response: the past only ever exists in the present – a photo, a video, a memory, a book… without some evidence in ‘this moment’ what happened in the past is either ‘forgotten’ or, arguably, never existed in the first place.
We have an inherent faith in time; time doesn’t lie; it has existed forever; it is (disregarding GR) invariant. And most disgustingly, we view time as a guaranteed and unwaivering dimension of life.
Time is characterised by physical change, and yet physical change is characterised by time (back to the world of calculus; yet another tool to help make sense of the world around us). So, if nothing undergoes change can we be convinced that time is still steadily ticking by?
I pose these questions – If the universe stood still how could we convince ourselves that time is still passing? What would our models of the universe look like without time? Can we find another way to deconstruct the world around us through a different physical relationships?