What is time?

A-WT-Pic. 1

Making sense of it!

Although, we all intuitively know what time stands for, defining time seems somehow to keep us in a deadlock.
Let us therefore have a brief look to what modern science has to say on this subject.

Sir Isaac Newton, in his Principia, defines ‘absolute time’ as that what is of itself and flows by its own nature without requiring externals.
To him, ‘time’ isn’t a mere abstraction such as a number, but factual as ‘space’ because it has substance.
He also considers one second to be equal for all observers, this regardless the observer’s state of movement.

G. Leibniz, Newton’s contemporary, believed in the factuality of space but insisted that time has no substance.
In other words, in Leibniz view, time is a pure mental abstraction as it only came into being when creatures had brains that were endowed with enough mental containing capacity to think conceptual.

Our modern view of time rest on Einstein’s notion that time and space, although factual, are not separate from each other but an interwoven interdependency that forms what he calls ‘space-time’.

He even stated that the presence of matter & energy bends the ‘geodesics of space-time’ itself, and nothing can move faster in it than the speed of light, which is being considered as constant for all observers!

A-WT – Pic: 2

We know, Einstein’s space-time makes Jesus’ resurrection of the Christian narrative look stupid.
Amazing, isn’t it?

In case you doubt in the magic of ‘space-time’, just consider some of its merits:

• Space-time has gravity wormholes that can easily help you to get rid of your stepmother,
• Space-time allows you to assist your own birth,
• Space-time allows the older sister, while moving at relativistic speeds, to become the youngest sister (twin paradox),
• …
• Space-time not only creates its own void but also accelerates in it.

If you think that’s absurd, then be reassured; absurdity is a trademark of truthfulness.
Wasn’t it Einstein, the hero of the plot, that said, I quote:

“If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it”?

Of course, one might rightfully ponder:

“What if that idea, after a long-time (let’s say 100 years or so), remains absurd, what then to hope for”?

What’s Godinci’s take on time?

Time, according to Godinci, is not a substance, but a relational abstract that measures spatial and/or structural change in Space.
Those changes can be measurable or Immeasurable.

• Measurable change requires physical and referential things (such as matter particles and their conglomerates) to allow us to relate and quantify this change.
• Immeasurable change is all change that occurs in the absence of a physical reference but where activity is of order.

To better grab the concept of ‘immeasurable change’, just think of someone who is dreaming.

Although his/her thoughts are active, within the thought there is no quantifiable and measurable reality, only sequences within the thought such as: before, during, after, and so on.

In case you doubt, just ask a person that wakes-up from a dream how much time went by between two successive events within the dream (assuming he/she wasn’t dreaming about time passing by on clocks).

Thus, though we’re dealing here with change, for us, it’s no longer measurable change because ‘time’, in the absence of ‘tangibles’ becomes a meaningless concept.
If clocks tick faster or slower while moving, then this says nothing about ‘time’ itself, but tons about space.

Not understanding this leaves us in a relativistic abyss.

A-WT-Pic: 3

In case you’re still struggling with the concept of ‘time’ then take the following advice.

For all simplicity, forget Einstein’s time nonsense, and stick, for daily purposes, with the Italian common-sense notion of time; it will spare you of much trouble.