Re: Time

["Rauber, Joel Phys" <RAUBERJ@mg.sdstate.edu>]

> In my opinion time, a "continuos sequence of instances" is as
> fundamental as
> directions in space "continuos sequences of locations". As such it can
> not be
> described in terms anything more basic. It is what it is. The issues
> worth
> discussing in physics are: a) how to measure it accurately, b) its
> relative
> nature and c) ?? Philosophers may stretch this list.

And let me add (d), which may be part of Ludwik's (c), but I don't think so.

(d) What makes time different from the 3 spatial coordinates?  Because it is
different, I have a very difficult time reversing the flow of my time
coordinate, not so for my x-coordinate; the number of gray hairs on my head
are irritating reminders of this fact. (assuming the Hawking "chronology
protection conjecture" (may have the name incorrect) is correct).

This of course involves all the discussion of "Time's arrow" etc, etc