Please read the paper, may be helpful for you.

A new approach to the correction of

Galilean transformation

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sheng_Liu37

Why the Graviton smaller 10^42 times than a Photon, can not travel faster than the speed of light?

Because you were brainwashed by your professors for 100 years, that nothing can travel faster than light!

 “I am the first who understood and explained Gravitation with high speed gravitons v = 1.001762 × 10^17 m/s, with Negative Momentum, Negative Mass and Negative Energy” Adrian Ferent

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299135595_Ferent_Gravitation_theory

Article Ferent Gravitation theory

Maybe you would be interested in this other discussion on the same issue:

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

I defer to Saint Augustine: "What is time? If no one asks of me I know, but to him who asks, I know not." And then what does it mean "to exist"? Apples nominally exist because you can touch them, throw them, and eat them. But time is untouchable, unthrowable, and inedible. Time is as space is - part of a reference frame in which in ordered sequence you can touch, throw and eat apples.

Time cannot exist without space and the existence of time does require energy. I have a theory in which space, time and energy - all three simultaneously pop out from what I call the unmanifest. This is a level of existence which is one step deeper and beyond the zero point energy level with a non zero mass gap. More details in following article.

Article Unified field of consciousness

According to Immanuel Kant, space and time are nothing other than the subjective forms of human sensible intuition.They are "empirically real", which means that everything that can come before us externally as an object is in both space and time

Dear Anatoliy,

The first  thing required to answer is to define what time is. Definition by itself does not warrant a real existence but it is a good start. Do vectors exist? Yes, but only in your mind. Are they useful? Definitely. There is so many meanings of the word time in common language that it needs a little book do describe them all in detail. I am simply assuming you asking of that what is meant by t  in physical equations.

I will quote my answer to a similar question so save the effort of searching in other threads.

There is many aspect and flavours of time but that one used in physics is for me a glorious nonexistent entity.

Human knowledge stops at a few questions such as why things exist, why they change and how is it possible to perceive changes if everything changes.

For the physical time if you ignore the physical poetry associated with relativity, time is nothing but an abstract concept over the state of a reference device called a clock. Because we can put clocks anywhere within the reach and the world looks more or less the same wherever you look, you can rightly derive a concept of time which applies everywhere. You cannot do everywhere, but you can build clocks in a few places and get them synchronised  at distant locations and project that idea of properly synchronised clocks in the entire universe.

That is basically all without going into really complex details of the clock implementations, their variable rates depending on speed or gravitational field etc, and more intriguing details of their possible synchronisations.

So some people think time exist as an independent entity but cannot provide any reliable definition other that they take clock indications and create an additional extension in ordinary vector in 3D space to make the appearance we live in 4D space which is just a pure mathematical abstraction.

So overall the idea of time abstraction in physics is really simple, but it is rooted in the deep mystery of existence because we do not know why things change and how is it possible to move from past to the future and observing the change.

Dear Aleš

" If it is measurable it exists." 

There is no device you can prove it measures time, which not precisely defined.

Looking at Wikipedia definitions:

1. Time is the indefinite continued progression of existence and events that occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future.

How your measure "indefinite continued progression" other than recording new events which are changes of state of something?

2. Time is often referred to as the fourth dimension, along with the three spatial dimensions.

How do you measure the fourth dimension?

2. Time is a component quantity of various measurements used to sequence events, to compare the duration of events or the intervals between them, and to quantify rates of change of quantities in material reality or in the conscious experience.

Time - a component? Of measurement?

component:: part or element of a larger whole

1. Mesurement:: the action of measuring something.

2. amount of something, as established by measuring

Hence

1. Time is the action of  measuring time

or

2. Time is the amount of time as established by measuring of time

A simple answer is the obvious one  given by Einstein in his 1905 paper:

The “time” of an event is that which is given simultaneously with the event by a stationary clock located at the place of the event, this clock being synchronous, and indeed synchronous for all time determinations, with a specified stationary clock.

Nothing more or less, Just the state of the clock. IN such case I can agree that one exists, and can be measured and always is measured.

Dear Anatoliy,

My point of view is that time is a REAL infinitesimal periodic constant phenomenon. Time is what is measured between two periodical events.

I add that time has 2 dimensions: one absolute real, the other perceptive. (Relativistic physicists use the perceptive one.)

(For example, a good clock has a period of 1 second. A good perception of it sees this period of 1 second. But a relativistic perception could also see this period as 0,5 seconds.)

If time dilation occurs, then every periodical events are modified.

(For example, a good clock having a period of 1 second in a not time dilated referential will have a period of 2 seconds in a time dilated referential. Adding the relativistic perception of it (0,5x2=1) could lead to difficulties of knowing if time is dilated or not.)

Then time is always (then real) an absolute frequency.

Sincerely.

In most physics equations, the time is just variable T so the real question would rather consist to ask if there is a source or energy in charge to generate time manifestation wether in equations or our perception of the world. Suppose there is a generator of time then all equations need to be changed like differential or integral of time or E= MC^2 paradigm where T replaces mass M.

Dear Albert,

Then the question would not be if time exists, but if time is linked to a physical parameter.

Very interesting question.

I would say time is a free DIMENSION (4th), so it is independant of physical parameters. But I could strongly be wrong, then it would mean space-time should be very deterministic (in apparent conflict with QM).

Time is a phenomenon that prevents everything from happening simultaneosly. 

Dear anatoly,

That is an interesting question. How I see, Time is a measure of Motion, Motion is a physical phenomenon. Motion can be interpreted as the changes we can perceive through our senses or through laboratory apparatus. In mechanics, Time is the comparison of an arbitrary motion with a reference motion. It would be interesting a physical formalism without time, for instance in Supersymmetry, when the fermionic degrees of freedom of the Physical Space (Superspace) rotate, they generate translations in space-time.

The question "Does time exist?" is at best redundant and at worst meaningless. To "exist" requires "time" because entities that "exist" exist in "time". Existence is problematical. Do the three space dimensions with which we are familiar "exist"? I think "existence" in this case is meaningless. The three dimensions of space, as well as time, are simply there for our convenience and use. Did Charles Dodgson "exist"? Yes records, photos  and such affirm that he was a physical entity that "existed" in space and time. What about "Lewis Carroll"? The name only is what "existed" and continues to "exist" today. Such weighty issues - "The time has come, the Walrus said, to speak of many things . . . "

Instead of time as "a measure of motion" I suggest that time is a measure of "change", which includes motion as a "change" of location in space.

Dear Tolia, Accordingly to Arkady Raikin " Time is the distance between two paychecks"

I hope you know who is Raikin.

Regards, and how things are going in Kyiv now?

Georg.

my quantum professor told me once: before you answer any questions you must decide in what system are you talking. once you have decided that then only you can seek answers. hope that helps.