"The past is something always behind and the future is like grasping to a present moment that just feels like it right round the corner. Succession, as Exchemist says, requires a notion of time."
[The past is the collection of recorded events, individual memory, or public archives.
The present is an individuals current perception of events (now), consisting of sequences of events, each requiring a few milliseconds of mental processing.
The future is unknowable. It is predictable, but not certain, based on the consistency of universal laws of behavior, and assuming no change in initial conditions, or conflicting events.]
This sounds like my argument for human difficulty in eliminating the nagging concept of time. The word "concept" keeps coming up, and "notion”.
[Do you accept the concept of ‘accounting’? It works for most financial organizations.]
Correct me if I'm wrong but the light clock requires no mass. That also slows. But as you say in other posts - movement is always required, to maintain counting.
So I ask: Could movement of the clock be slowing movement of its workings? This would eliminate the need for any concept of time.
[Here is a light clock. Notice it requires a mirror and a emitter/detecter. Spatial location always uses a material object as a reference. Matter can have various speeds < c.
Light (em propagation) has a constant speed c, that is independent of its source. If the clock
moves at v, some of the light energy must compensate for that speed, leaving less for the clock function, thus requiring more ‘time’ to overtake the moving miror.
A simple comparison, the quail hunter aims his shot ahead of the bird, knowing both are moving. The ‘lead time’ is a judgement by the hunter, resulting from years of experience dealing with clocks which provide a convenient scale for lifes activities.]