Dear Vinay

This is a wide subject and it combines between philosophy and science, however let me give you one point of view, which consider time as physical variable and connected with the expansion of the universe as in the attached paper

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259996539_Solving_the_instantaneous_response_paradox_of_entangled_particles_using_the_time_of_events_theory

Article Solving the instantaneous response paradox of entangled part...

Dear Vinay,

You are embarked upon a very difficult journey.

As is implied by your explanation of the question. There are two components to this problem. There is time as it supposed form an essential structural component of the universe - the time of the physicists. And there is the time that we all experience - as Einstein called it 'The Time of the philosophers'. Einstein believed that our experience of time was a 'persistent illusion'. Einstein and Bergson had a very public argument on the subject.

For me, the claim that our experience of time is illusory is a philosophically unsatisfactory position to take. The phenomenon of time perception is real it exists - it requires an explanation. Therefore, much of my research has been about the reconciliation of phenomenal time with the time of the physicists. Consequently, I have focused much of my analytic enquiry to the question of determining the physical basis for the apparent rate at which time is experienced - in the moment. I think I have made considerable progress and my findings are very surprising indeed!

For example, (this may have an impact upon the questions raised by the link above), cognition is not 'reactive' it is 'pre-emptive'!

The Fractal Catalytic Model Correlates consciousness with a catalytic coherent wave function (a solitonic matter wave). It transpires that the apparent rate at which time is experienced in the moment is directly related to the uncertainty in time of the carrier wave function!

Philosophy of Mind is characterised by a set of seemingly intractable problems - qualia, intentionality, phenomenal space and time..etc. Are these problems as difficult to solve as they seem?, or, are the difficulties we encounter a consequence of the cognitive stance that we are adopting toward them - the fundamental assumptions that we are making?

Many scientists and philosophers who are interested in the problem of consciousness adopt a position that can be loosely illustrated by the following metaphor.

The metaphor is also intended to help us make a step forward. It is accompanied by a statement. The statement does not form a logical component of the story - it simply lurks in the background and waits for its time to reveal its true significance.

The statement is - 'Consciousness Exists!'.

Ok - the metaphor:-

The problem (consciousness) must first be situated within a context - in this case - we shall use a stage in a theatre. We shall call this stage space and time. Our problem - consciousness, is represented by a masked character in the play.

The way in which we have intuitively set up the problem leads us to suppose that the answer to our problem - What is consciousness?, is to be found by analysing the interaction between Consciousness and the other characters on the stage, or, perhaps. as a consequence of the interaction between characters other than consciousness - physics, chemistry, objects, physical phenomena, stars, etc! This is a mistake!

Consciousness is the stage not play.

Consciousness does not exist through virtue of it being in space/time. Consciousness exists through virtue of the fact that that it is space/time!!!

(Kant, Bergson?)

Chris