News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The illusion of time by coldtea on Friday April 20, 2018 @02:41PM (#16887399)
>I always saw time as a way of applying numerical labels to a state of the universe. In my view, the universe only ever exists in one state, albeit constantly changing at the "speed" of light.

If that was the case there would be nothing to take it from state N to state N+1 because (as per your definition) there's nothing in-between states.

Re:The illusion of time by contoraria on Sunday April 22, 2018 @03:14PM (#16897946)
indeed, in such a concept there is no room for causation between the smallest time steps. That's in line with basic human thinking, it is how it is. I mean, I settled on time being the measure of change, every change is a tick. However, there doesn't need to be a smallest time step if you use rational numbers or sum such. But the