Is time as the color is?

This looks a strange comparison. How could be any similarity between time and color? To see, what the connection is, let us first examin...

This looks a strange comparison. How could be any similarity between time and color? To see, what the connection is, let us first examine, what is color.

We see colors everywhere where we look. Everything has a color. We know, color is a kind of light. A wavelength range of the light that we can see as color. However, we know as well, that the change of the wavelength is continuous for the light, no gaps that we could differentiate into different colors. Our brain is doing the trick. Of course, seeing the colors is very useful. To see the world in color, we can enhance the contrast in our perception significantly. Without colors, it would be much difficult to see. We would have less information from our environment to orient. Color does not exist as a physical thing, only our brain creates it.

Maybe the time is something similar to what the color is. Our brain creates it, we sometimes even feel it, but no such physical thing as time.

This statement looks stupid. In physics and other sciences as well, the time is in the laws. The time is deeply rooted not just in our life but in the law of nature as well. Several scientific formulas have the time as a parameter. We would not understand our world without time. The time is deeply rooted in our scientific laws. We see the time as a dimension, similar to the space dimensions. Time is the fourth dimension in the relativity theory, inseparable from the space. We would not understand, we could not describe our universe if it would not be that way.

Nevertheless, the statement is, that time does not exist. Time is created by our brain, and as like the color, not a physical thing in our physical world.

First, let's see what we think about time. We usually use it in the functions of physics. The time separates and arranges the events around us, and if we want, it can give a rhythm to our events.

This definition does not look scientific, but at least it is a good description of what we expect concerning the time, what it is. As we can see, time is not an independent individuum. It is about events and not about the time itself in the definition. Events are incidents, and the time separates and arranges them. We are not talking about the time itself but the events as they happen. It is convenient to introduce something, which is the time itself, with which we can easier describe the events as they happen around us. However, it looks like we just added something for an easier description, and not something real physical entity.

What about the rhythm? The rhythm, as any rhythm is, a cyclical event, or events. And there is an important aspect: the cycle must be stable and the same length. Is this cycle the time itself? When we measure cycle and its length, we compare it to something independent phenomenon, we always compare it to another kind of cyclic event. We always define the periods relatively, not absolutely. And we can construct mechanisms to count these cycles, and we call these devices like a watch. At the end of this comparison-chain, there is a definition of a cycle, which does not have the time itself, just a count, the count of a period, the definition of the second.

There is another independent thing to compare to, and that is the speed of the light. It gives us an independent measurement because the speed of the light does not depend on any circumstances. It can offer us an independent base of comparison. 

Now let's turn to the scientific description of the time, move on to the laws of physics.

The time used in several places in our physical laws. We can learn a lot about the time from these laws. Most of them are to describe the events as they happen. Usually, these laws do not differentiate between the directions how the events happen. The events can go back and forth. Looks like the time in most of its appearance are direction independent. Where this direction independence appears, we may rule out, that the time is an existing independent individuum in these events. We do not need the time to understand this kind of event, we just need to consider these events as changes from start to finish, which are interchangeable.

There are physical laws, where this symmetry does not exist. We may think we can see in these laws the time as it is working in its existence. The time must exist if it has direction. The statistical mechanics, where these asymmetric physical laws appear. The statistical mechanics is talking about the laws of the multiparticle systems. It says that the evolution of these multiparticle systems has a particular direction. The interactions on the particle level are interchangeable on the starting and ending state, but somehow it does not apply to the whole system. The entropy was introduced to describe this phenomenon. The entropy is related to the states of the multiparticle systems. Its value corresponds to the number of the particle arrangements at the micro-level, which we cannot distinguish on the macro level. And it says that in a closed multiparticle system, the entropy can only grow or stay the same. It means the number of arrangements of the particles on the microstate - what we can't differentiate on the macrostate - only can be more and more or stay on the same. Of course, if we could or want to see the individual particles we would see the different arrangements, but the law applies to the arrangements that do not make any physical differences on the attributions that we can measure at the macro level of the system.

This is a strong statement. It says the time is working on the complex systems. These systems have a definite direction of evolution. Is the physical reality of the time manifested in these systems? We can recognize, this is not the time what we are searching for, it is a likelihood of a specific state and the probability of the different arrangements. The particles in a left-alone multi-particle system are moving chaotically and arrange themselves in the most probable arrangements. This statistical mechanism can be interpreted as the direction of time, but it is not the time as a physical entity. It is the interactions, probabilities, and likelihoods of a multiparticle system.

The entropy and its behavior extended and applied to the systems where gravitation is a major factor. Using entropy where gravity is a major factor in some way different than using the entropy in the multiparticle systems. However, even with the extension to gravity, we can rule out the time as an entity, and we can see these systems' evolution as events, cycles, and interactions.

The time appears and looks like it has a significant role in the interactions of the elementary particles also. When we examine these interactions, we can sometimes see that they are not back-and-forth direction-independent every time. Most of the time they are direction-independent, but sometimes they are not. Sometimes the interaction does not happen backward, only if we use some particular symmetry, like switching to antiparts or applying mirror-symmetry. However, if we are using the necessary symmetries, then the interactions become back-and-forth direction independent. We can say on the elementary particles level, that any interaction can happen back way if we change the particles to its anti-parts and see the interaction from a mirror. Look like we found a significant nature of the time. However, this law is not talking about the time itself but talking about the symmetry of the world on the elementary particles' level. It says, an interaction always can go back way if we apply particular symmetries. Therefore, this is not the manifestation of the time either.

There is an area in the laws of physics where the time appears very significantly. By recognizing the role of the time in this field, it totally changed how we see our world, our universe. This is the theory of the relativity, discovered by Albert Einstein. In this theory, which is proven right, time got a significant role. It appears real, appears as a special dimension of our universe. According to this theory, it is not enough to give the space parameters to an event, but we must give the time parameter as well. It looks like, space and time dimensions are equally necessary and unavoidable to use them together. What could be more proof of the existence of the time than putting the time on the same level as space? Time must exist if it has the same role as the space dimension.

The time got this rank because it was recognized that there is a maximum speed in the universe. This speed is the speed of the light in vacuum, and which is independent of us, it is independent of how we move. And we cannot reach this speed if we have resting mass either. However, this speed limit must be a consequence of a deeper law, as time as a fourth dimension is a consequence of the Minkowski's space-time coordinate system, which seemingly represents the physical extensions of our universe.

The time always had an unequal direction. To go backward in time is much stranger than to go back in a space direction, but looks this is the only difference between space and time dimensions. There are theories, which show us methods of how we could go backward in time. If it would be possible, then the time and space dimensions really could have the same physical meanings. However, then our universe would lose the causality. We see causality is a basic principle of our universe.

Physics pointing to us that time exists and tells us what the time is. However, to step ahead in physics, we may have to accept that time does not exist as a physical entity. It is useful, yet only a concept, similar to the color. We should search for a theory where time does not exist, where time could be abandoned.