Search FQXi

If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest

Previous Contests

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American


How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help

Astro: on 5/17/10 at 13:35pm UTC, wrote The arrow of time doesn't even exist. I proved this once verbally. How can...

matthew kolasinski: on 12/30/08 at 6:09am UTC, wrote Hello Mr. Tyson, i experienced your paper as thought provoking. re: "It...

Cristi Stoica: on 12/16/08 at 13:47pm UTC, wrote Dear Ing. James Tyson, I agree with you that the phenomena of light,...

James Tyson: on 12/10/08 at 3:21am UTC, wrote I believe it was Einstein who said that something is more real when it...

F. Le Rouge: on 12/4/08 at 9:32am UTC, wrote Due to my French origin, I share your conclusion that Time has nothing to...

James E Tyson: on 12/1/08 at 10:55am UTC, wrote Essay Abstract Through a careful and persistent separation of...


Anonymous: "North Korea's unilateral action of announcing it was shutting down its only..." in Whose Physics Is It...

Georgina Woodward: "Hi Heinrich I'm not convinced that prior knowledge or experience is..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...

Heinrich Luediger: "Hi Georgina, I said way or another. I'm sure you could have..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Board of Directors, Irrefutable evidence exists that..." in Whose Physics Is It...

Georgina Woodward: "Hellen jos, you probably only wanted to place a link, however FYI lots of..." in Does Quantum Weirdness...

Eckard Blumschein: "There was perhaps not yet a third crisis of cosmology conference after..." in The Quantum...

Jonathan Dickau: "For what it is worth... I was there! The paper by Louis Marmet cited..." in The Quantum...

Ashish Kochaar: "No words for the Quantumology. As per their figures and Dates in the May..." in Deferential Geometry

click titles to read articles

Whose Physics Is It Anyway? Q&A with Chanda Prescod-Weinstein
Why physics and astronomy communities must take diversity issues seriously in order to do good science.

Why Time Might Not Be an Illusion
Einstein’s relativity pushes physicists towards a picture of the universe as a block, in which the past, present, and future all exist on the same footing; but maybe that shift in thinking has gone too far.

The Complexity Conundrum
Resolving the black hole firewall paradox—by calculating what a real astronaut would compute at the black hole's edge.

Quantum Dream Time
Defining a ‘quantum clock’ and a 'quantum ruler' could help those attempting to unify physics—and solve the mystery of vanishing time.

Our Place in the Multiverse
Calculating the odds that intelligent observers arise in parallel universes—and working out what they might see.

April 26, 2018

CATEGORY: The Nature of Time Essay Contest (2008) [back]
TOPIC: On the Non-Existence of Time by James E Tyson [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

James E Tyson wrote on Dec. 1, 2008 @ 10:55 GMT
Essay Abstract

Through a careful and persistent separation of physical reality from what our senses perceive, the author demonstrates that time is a function of our conscious minds and not a part of physical reality. He proposes that the time should be discarded as a fundamental dimension, and replaced with a fundamental quantity called “urge” which is a measure of degree and direction of the instantaneous motion of a particle or, in another sense, its desire to be somewhere else during the present instant. The question of the arrow of time is shown to be partly a mathematical near-certainty and partly a perception of the mind, rather than a part of physical reality.

Author Bio

James Tyson, 54, is a civil engineer from Central New Jersey. He has a Bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering from Princeton University. He has had an avocational interested in physics and cosmological questions since his high school years and has been a regular follower of developments in these fields. He has more recently developed an interest in the philosophy of science.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share

F. Le Rouge wrote on Dec. 4, 2008 @ 09:32 GMT
Due to my French origin, I share your conclusion that Time has nothing to do with physical reality and thus must not be included in Physics as it is in 'Quanta Physics' and in Einstein's Theories that are obvioulsly non-sense.

But is what we state understandable in an Anglo-Saxon or Asian culture? I do not think so. The difference between me and you is that it is the cut from what our senses perceive that has driven to this 'Time ideology' in my opinion -a 'Time ideology' which is first of all a 'Musical ideology'.

Bookmark and Share

James Tyson wrote on Dec. 10, 2008 @ 03:21 GMT
I believe it was Einstein who said that something is more real when it appears the same regardless of which perspective it is viewed from.

I don't know why a person from another culture would have more or less difficulty understanding this. Are you saying that some languages suggest concepts of time differently than others? I don't know much about Asian languages, but certainly French & English both have past and future tenses in addition to present, which, I would think, convey a similar concept of time.

Bookmark and Share

Cristi Stoica wrote on Dec. 16, 2008 @ 13:47 GMT
Dear Ing. James Tyson,

I agree with you that the phenomena of light, color, sound, language etc. are not fundamental, being “emerged” from the fundamental phenomena by our perceptions and minds. In a sense, time as we perceive it is also a projection of our minds. You sustain well a presentist view (I admit this, although my personal opinion is different), and you correctly acknowledge the usefulness of time in physics. On the other hand, if we consider time as being rather an illusion, this may apply as well to the space. Not necessarily because of the Theory of Relativity, which relates in an interesting manner the space and time, and which rejects an absolute direction of time in the spacetime by rejecting the simultaneity. You said well that time will be absent in the absence of motion (I would say that it would be useless, or redundant, but from operational viewpoint this means absence). But if the state of a system is invariant to translations along a given direction in space, then we can also factor out that direction from our representation of the Universe, so in this sense even space may be an illusion. I like your idea of “urge”, and your warning that we should not regard the word “desire” from an anthropomorphic viewpoint. My humble suggestion would be to use the word “tendency” instead of “desire”, as being less anthropomorphic. Especially because I understand that you attempt by this proposal to distillate the real, physical quantity underlying the time, from our anthropomorphic view of time. In this respect, maybe the essay of Hrvoje Nikolic can be connected with yours, as a complementary approach (he seems to defend the block time view). In fact, in my humble opinion, the “urge” may be independent from the presentist view (which I understand to be the two main proposals of your essay).

Congratulations for your essay, which is both interesting and well written.

Cristi Stoica

Flowing with a Frozen River

Bookmark and Share

matthew kolasinski wrote on Dec. 30, 2008 @ 06:09 GMT
Hello Mr. Tyson,

i experienced your paper as thought provoking.


"It may be initially difficult to think of motion in terms of an instantaneous velocity that exists only in the present. To aid our thinking, I would suggest a new quantity which I call "urge" (u). It can be thought of as a property of a particle that describes its ..desire,, to be somewhere else at the...

view entire post

Bookmark and Share

Astro wrote on May. 17, 2010 @ 13:35 GMT
The arrow of time doesn't even exist.

I proved this once verbally. How can there be a directionality to time, if big bang happened everywhere? To draw a linearity or directionality in time, you need a specific point in which you can draw a line and calculate the distance from. In all honesty, spactime does not hold such a quality.

The linearity of time is IN FACT purely part of our percption of a past and a future. Even though the past and future do not actually exist, the perception of it allows us to destinguish the psychological arrow of time. The only true kind of arrow which explains the linearity in terms of our experience of the world around us.

Bookmark and Share

Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.