I’m thinking about time not as something that exists independently, but as something that’s perceived through change. When particles interact, fluctuate, or disturb fields, those changes might be what we interpret as “time.”
So instead of time being a built-in feature of the universe, maybe it’s just a way of organizing change—a kind of emergent rhythm that arises from interaction. If nothing changes, does time even “pass”? Or is it just a placeholder for potential change?
This idea leans into quantum mechanics (where time is just a parameter) and challenges the classical view of time as a smooth, flowing dimension. I’m curious if anyone has explored models where time is a perceptual consequence of interaction, not a fundamental quantity.
This is both a philosophical and cognitive question about time. Philosophically, are we as humans affecting time in the same way time is affecting us? if time is affecting the observable results in nature (the cycle of day and night and that of seasons) and in us (growing bigger and older through aging), therefore there is no interaction possible since the act is a one-way street for time. We do not seem to affect time; we cannot stop the natural cycle of days and nights and we cannot reverse the work of aging in us. Cognitively, time is an abstract non-observable entity, dissimilar to substances and fluids. As an abstract category, time is partly perceived metaphorically, partly conceptualized using other palpable, delineated categories such as money, enemy, social superior, etc. I hope this will help.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Computer Science
- Data Mining