No ked si spomenul, ze vesmir je jeden, uceleny, co do toho zahrnas aj cas.
Ci existuje nezavisle od pozorovatela. Ci je to realny fyzikalny jav, alebo ako to nazvat. Fyzici ti povedia, ze time je chapany ako dimenzia v teorii relativity, v specialnej sa moze aj spomalovat, a ze v quantovej fyzike je nemeratelny, dokonca ani nie je pozorovatelny.
My mame pocit, ze cas plynie. A zrejme nas mozog je nastaveny na vnimanie zmien v patternoch v nasom prostredi. Ale mame pocit, zatial, ze cas plynie iba jednym smerom.
Ak by sme si povedali, ze cas je len iluzia, nas konstrukt, tak mozme napr. povedat, ze od vpadu mongolov nas nedeli cas, ale len nespocetne mnozstvo reorganizacii atomov v priestore. A cas by nam nechybal. Ale zaujimave je, ze pri vyhodnocovani dat z gps satelitov sa spomalenie casu berie do uvahy a aj porovnanie takych vypoctov s realitou sedi. Akoby to teda bolo potvrdene praxou, ze cas sa moze spomalovat, ak je napr. objekt vo vacsej vyske nad rotujucim systemom, alebo object leti rychlejsie (zem sa toci, a object prekonava vacsiu vzdialenost za rovnaky cas)
Ak by podla mna cas realne existoval, tak existuje nezavisle od hmoty a priestoru (nie len nasho maleho rozpinajuceho sa vesmiru) Plynul by aj tam kde nie priestor. Na priestor by vplyval ako keby ho ozaroval.

Niektori tvrdia, ze cas je iba tam, kde je pohyb, zmena, entropia..Ak sa to zastavi, zastavi sa aj cas. Ak sa znovu zacne pohyb, zacne znovu aj cas..Ale to sa mi nezda. Cas bud nie je, alebo je uplne nad vsetkym.

In ancient Indian thinkers believed that time existed. They had a deep understanding of time as a cyclical and eternal force that governs the universe. They viewed time not as a linear sequence but as a living force that shapes and binds existence. This perspective is evident in their cosmological theories, which include concepts like the Wheel of Time and the Mahākāla metaphysics, which describe the vast spans of time from the twinkling of an eye to the duration of Brahmā's life.

https://z-library.sk/book/DOgr3mBBvX/the-janus-point-a-new-theory-of-tim...

Julian Barbour who has argued that we don’t need time to begin with. We
do need it in General Relativity, which is the currently accepted theory for the universe. But
Barbour has developed a theory that he claims is at least as good as General Relativity,
and does not need time. Instead, it is a theory only about the relations between
configurations of matter in space, which contain an order that we
normally associate with the passage of time, but really the order in space by itself
is already sufficient. Barbour’s view is certainly unconventional and it may not lead anywhere,
but then again, maybe he is onto something. He has just published a new book about his ideas.time

tak moze byt, ze niektori by presun kamena ocami, myslou nazvali para, ale to mozu by nejake zatial neobjavene sily, ktorych jednym zo zdrojov moze byt nasa mysel, ale to by som nenazval para. Je to zatial neobjavene, ale nie vylucene, kedze pozname uz nejake sily a vieme ako funguju. Take su aj radiove vlny, dlho neobjavene, ale nelisia sa svojou podstatou od slnecnych lucov, ktore sme uz poznali dovtedy.
Pod para by som chapal ine priklady, napr. ze tvoje meno bude napisane v piesku na marse, co by tiez nemuselo byt nepravdepodobne a niekedy v buducnosti nevysvetlitelne, ze vietor, pieskova burka, tam rozviril prach, ale kedy si si den predtym povedal, co keby moje meno bolo napisane v piesku na marse a na druhy den to druzica, dalekohlad nasnima, zdokumentuje, tak to uz by sa dalo nazvat para. A podobne javy aj tu na zemi, v beznom zivote.