English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In the following discussion I suggest that the reason there is no consensus on whether the passage of time is physical is that our current best theory of spacetime, general relativity, lacks such a concept. This means that the sense‐experience of passage, appealed to by those who claim it is physical, cannot be properly expressed: it is not even a fact. I draw attention to work in the literature on a model of a growing, granular spacetime—arising within a proposed theory of quantum spacetime called causal set theory—that does contain the concept of passage as the coming into being or birth of atoms of spacetime. I present an example from the history of science of a sense‐experience that cannot be understood within one theory but is revealed to be an important fact within a better successor theory.

The birth of spacetime atoms as the passage of time