without the conscious perception of some unit of time (say a second), there’s only sequence of state changes. “Time” is our notion of the speed of these state changes and also used as an artificial tool/index to describe the relationship between state changes between different “objects”, but the speed of the state change of the collective universe is irrelevant to everything that is the universe except those that can perceive.
In this sense, the progression of the universe is like a book. By itself, there is no notion of “time” but there is a notion of fixed sequence. Our perception of it can be equated to reading the book, except this is not an argument about free will.
If the history of the universe happened in an instant would we say time exists? If it doesn’t exist in that scenario, one can imagine a consciousness perceiving state changes (e.g “time”) so slowly that it seemed as if the entire universe occurred in an instant. So one conscious agent who perceives the state changes at a normal human pace may declare time exists, but this other aforementioned agent may declare time doesn’t exist. So it seems to follow that time is not a property of the universe but a property of the perceiver, an artificial construct conscious agents wrap around the metaphysical universe.
But the slip in the thinking above is that the notion of “an instant” is also an artificial construct since it’s based on some notion of time. There is only sequence and it does not matter to the sequence whether it is perceived to have taken place in “an instant” or an eternity.
But how can all these sequential state changes happen all at once? if X -> Y -> Z, are we saying that X immediately went to Y at the same time that Y went to Z? But Y didn’t exist yet right since X needs to first transition to Y? This is all to suggest there is an existence of the abstract form of indexing, something the word “dimension” suits well.
But maybe sequence is also something we conscious-beings imposed. Take this string of letters “fleajfea”. There is a sequence here but it’s a derived property if one were to choose to interpret things going from one direction to another. More fundamental properties are the ‘j’ is bordered by ‘a’ on one side and ‘f’ on another. In the same way, X -> Y -> Z might just be “XYZ” and it’s meaningless to say the sequence “happened” all at once when “XYZ” always has been and is. Our perception is reading from X to Y to Z, though intrinsically, there is no movement. For some, this may trigger the idea of time being the 4th dimension in the context of spacial intuitions.
So what is there? Outside of conscious perception, there seems to be just dimensions and orderings. Orderings meaning, Y is between X and Z for instance.
Bye, now I need to buy some new basketball shoes. Wait, how does this all square with relativity?
Also published on my substack.
