That time is real is an idea that dates well before Smolin and is certainly not dubious.

Μr Stam Nicolis,

OK.. Maybe i misused the word.

How would you describe the characterization of time as real, in the context of science, physics and as a factor in structured inquiry?

In order to accommodate his [black-hole selection] theory, Smolin develops a concept of time as “real.” Such time transcends any generation of universe. It is a container for everything, like Newton’s absolute space or the four-dimensional space-time manifold. The suite of universes is supposed to be causally connected within this meta-framework of time, but actually the universes are born from singularities where there is no demonstrable causal continuity. His concept glosses over this, and is no less metaphysical than versions of the multiverse with causally disconnected spatial regions. I believe a more appropriate question is, how did the universe evolve its own parameters within a unique cycle? But such a question cannot even be asked within current science, with its bias toward a concept of passive matter. To answer this question requires contemplating principles of self-organization beyond the mechanism of natural selection over generations. [From my book “The Found and the Made” Routledge 2016. See also my essay “An Argument for a Second-order Cosmology”, www.stanceofunknowing.com]

Time is one of the coordinates of spacetime, it takes real values, like all coordinates and that's it. What matters are the properties of spacetime. In classical gravity, spacetime is a four-dimensional manifold, with Lorentzian signature, and invariant under diffeomorphisms. These statements can be shown to be equivalent to Einstein's equations, if the geometry is defined only by the metric, or, more generally, by the equations of supergravity.

“Do you think Smolin's "real time" hypothesis is a bad attempts or paradigm of reconcukiation of physics and philosophy or proof of its imposibility?”

In the mainstream philosophy and sciences, including physics, all really fundamental phenomena/notions, first of all in this case “Matter” [and so everything in Matter, i.e. “particles”, “fundamental Nature forces” – and so “fields”, etc.], “Consciousness”, “Space”, “Time”, “Energy”, “Information”, are fundamentally completely transcendent/uncertain/irrational, and so in every case when the mainstream addresses to any really fundamental problem, then result is completely inevitably is transcendent/mystic something.

Including this

“…However, his main thesis, that "time is real" is dubious, never got endorsed.

At worse (or to tyevrelief of many) , it solidifiedvtge the idea of the imposibility of constructively bridging philosophical insights with physics….”

- really is some transcendent claim about really the transcendent “real time” hypothesis and existent completely transcendent, and so numerous [while any really true – and so really scientific, theory, model, insight, etc., can be only one], “philosophical insights”.

The fundamental phenomena/notions above can be, and are, really scientifically defined only

in framework of the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s really philosophical 2007 “The Information as Absolute” conception, recent version of the basic paper see in

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363645560_The_Information_as_Absolute_-_2022_ed

, note at that, that, since all “insights”, etc., are fundamentally only subjective products of humans’ consciousnesses, really all these phenomena/notions can be scientifically defined only together.

In the conception it is rigorously proven that really there exist nothing else than some informational patterns/systems that are elements of the absolutely fundamental and absolutely infinite “Information” Set that contains absolutely infinite “number” of the elements, while utmost general definition of the absolutely fundamental phenomenon “Information” is

“Information is something that is constructed in accordance with the set/system of absolutely fundamental Rules, Possibilities, Quantities, etc. – the set/system “Logos” in the conception”

I.e. all/every concrete informational patterns/systems, including Matter, absolutely for sure are made only by concrete actualizations of all Logos elements, including “Space” and “Time” are absolutely fundamental – “Logos” elements - phenomena, which so absolutely obligatorily “absolutely automatically” were actualized yet at Matter’s creation as concrete Matter’s spacetime:

- “Space” as the set of concrete Matter’s space dimensions;

-“Time” as the unique universal time dimension, which is common for all the Set’s elements.

The Matter’s space dimensions are grounded in the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s Planck scale informational physical model, in this case see at least one of 3 main papers https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367397025_The_Informational_Physical_Model_and_Fundamental_Problems_in_Physics, where it is rigorously scientifically rationally shown that

Matter’s spacetime is the fundamentally absolute, fundamentally flat, fundamentally continuous, and fundamentally “Cartesian”, (at least) [4+4+1]4D spacetime with metrics (at least) (cτ,X,Y,Z, g,w,e,s,ct),

- where the concrete space dimensions by “Space” definition correspond to the independent degreases of freedom at changing states of ultimate Matter’s base - the primary elementary logical structures – (at least) [4+4+1]4D binary reversible fundamental logical elements [FLE] that have at least 4+4 degreases of freedom;

- and the time dimension, where everything in the Set, including in Matter, moves at every change in parallel with motion in spaces.

So Matter’s spacetime is fundamentally nothing else than some empty container – as that are spacetimes of any other informational patterns/systems in the Set; and that fundamentally has no any relation to any transcendent “multiverses”, “singularities”, etc., in mainstream physics.

More see at least 2-nd link above, the 1-rst link differs from the 2-nd one in this case only in that in the conception paper the proof above is given.

Cheers

Μr Nicolis,

I agree. Given Einstein's inevitable relativity of time, spacetime is the "thing" to ascribe properties and not time - in its 4D manifold, Lorentz signature and - most familiar- metric defined geometry.

Thus any in depth inquiry about properties of time ends up physically irrelevant, also (state of the art ) physics-wise off

The thread question is clarified in the SS post above, here a some note to the discussion:

In mainstream physics the real time doesn’t exist. Real Matter’s utmost universal spacetime has [5]4D metrics (cτ,X,Y,Z,ct),

- however, because of the really extremely mighty Galileo-Poincaré relativity principle action, the motion of material objects and Matter as a whole in real time ct-dimension in mainstream physics isn’t observable, and so really the mainstream observers and analyzes only what exists and happens in the 4D space with metrics (cτ,X,Y,Z).

At that the really space cτ-dimensionessentially differs from the space XYZdimensions, first of all in that, since all fundamental Nature forces at small energies of material objects and at interactions act only in 3D space, and mostly humans observe material objects and interactions by light/photons, which move only in the XYZ space,

- but what exists and happens in the space cτ-dominion isn’t observable directly – despite that practically [i.e. besides photons] everything what humans observe, really constantly and always moves in this dimension practically with the speeds of light.

So in everyday humans practice and in mainstream physics the specific space cτ-dimension is used/postulated in physics as that is the time dimension,

- where, say, clocks – though “implicitly” - really show how they move in this “time”.

Including in 4D Lorentz transformation the time dimension/coordinate/observable in QM really is the cτ-dimension.

Because of the relativity principle action in the mainstream above that above is practically inessential at/in everyday practice, but that becomes to be fundamentally wrong if physics addresses to really fundamental problems, say, just so in the SR antiparticles don’t exist, in cosmology the Matter’s topology isn’t known till now [more see https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367397025_The_Informational_Physical_Model_and_Fundamental_Problems_in_Physics/comments], etc.,

- including just so the rather numerous attempts to solve any really fundamental problem in framework of the mainstream quite inevitably logically are really only some LaTeX exercises that have to the reality no relation.

SS posts in

https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_really_human_being_perceives_the_Time/2

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_it_possible_for_a_second_and_more_time_dimensions_to_exist#view=663454774b43cd33a802e672/2

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_time_a_fundamental_property_of_the_universe

- are relevant to this thread question.

Cheers