What area the arguments in favor or against the theory?
In: 0
He believed that time is a physical “substance”, like energy or matter, and can interact with objects.
This substance has a flow, in a particular direction.
This substance also contains “memories” of past events.
If we could influence the flow of time, we can influence the future.
—
There aren’t any arguments in favour of his theory. There’s no experimental evidence and it conflicts with relativity, our most highly proven theory^(1) of how the universe works.
===
^(1)Relativity can’t explain dark energy or dark matter, and they make up 95% of the universe.
That time is a physical flowing fluid filled with tiny spirals that permeates all of space and can be created and used up. If you smash a mug then you have created little spinning vortexes of time via spiritual cause and effect that can be measured by magic gyroscopes.
The only arguments in favour of it are it can be a comfort to people who want to assign intuitive human based meaning to physical phenomena rather than existing in an unfeeling universe described via cold hard logic and observation.
Imagine you have a toy top that you spin. Now, while most of us just see the top spinning, Mr. Kozyrev thought that the spinning action could somehow connect with a special energy from time itself.
Kozyrev believed that time wasn’t just something that passed by, like watching pages turn in a calendar. He thought time had its own kind of energy, and certain actions, like spinning, could interact with that energy.
It’s a bit like how you feel warmth from the sun on a sunny day. In Kozyrev’s idea, time isn’t just something we measure; it’s something that can affect things and has its own sort of “warmth” or energy.
Not everyone agrees with this idea, but it’s an interesting way to think about time.
Latest Answers