I'll agree the divisions of time based on a planets solar day is a somewhat arbitrary concept, albeit a logical one. But time itself, the linear progression of events is a scalar dimension with a minimum value defined by Planck.
and it also uses "time" as that unit of measuring that light travel, which is conceptual as well.
I'm an Engineer, we tend to be pragmatic and just use the tools given to us by the universe rather than worry about where they came from, leave that to the Physicists. Planck units are based on 5 universal values we have observed to be Constants, look up Boltzmann etc. They're there, they exist. Time is a dimension, it simply adds a 4th coordinate to the Euclidean xyz position of a point in space. So we exist in this coordinate system, where you stand right NOW, emphasis on now is a point in not only space but time. By observation we see spacetime events with this real 4th dimension. Otherwise all the events at that point did/are/will occur at the very same instant. Which I don't see often, not without medication at least. But you're right, our understanding of 'time' comes from perception, and perception is just a construct of a consciousness trying to define reality. Zhuangzi's butterfly dream comes to mind.Exactly, but it's defined by Planck, which is the measure of light travelling in a vacuum, a distance, which is essentially based on theory
I know exactly what you mean, I just like the discussion. ha
It is exactly that though, logical, which is what humans need in order to understand something.
New studies (I read on Google) explain time more as, "Time is an emergent phenomenon that is a side effect of quantum entanglement"
Pretty much the ethos of all top end mechanical watches, the feet of engineering vs. simplest most accurate watch (if you want the latter then any cheap quartz/digital would be better).
