Cristi,
"This would mean that no region of space can exist, being collections of points."
This illustrates my point, in that if all those points have no dimensionality, i.e. some modicum of space in the first place, then they are all multiples of zero.
"Ockham's razor has two edges."
If I may describe my own view of physical reality, it is a dichotomy of energy and form(information). Energy necessarily manifests all form, or it would collapse into a black hole and form is the definition of all energy. For example, waves are defined by their frequency and amplitude. Try to imagine one otherwise.
Now I see a good proof of this dichotomy is that after a few billion years of evolution, we developed a central nervous system to process information and digestive, respiratory and circulatory systems to process energy.
Consider the properties of both. Energy is dynamic and conserved. This means it is always and only present, but necessarily constantly changing configurations, some at faster rates than other changes.
Form, on the other hand, is stable. If it is unstable, it loses its form. The constituent energy breaks apart, drains away, etc.
So energy goes from prior to succeeding forms, while the forms coalesce and dissolve. The result is the effect of time. As fairly stable entities, whose consciousness functions as flashes of cognitive forms, we proceed from past forms (and units of time), to future ones, yet these forms go the other direction, future to past. Tomorrow becomes yesterday.
Think in terms of a factory; The product goes start to finish, being in the future to being in the past. While the production line points the other direction, consuming material and expelling product. Prior to succeeding.
Life is similar. The individual goes from birth to death, being in the future to being in the past, while the species goes the other direction, onto new generations, shedding old. As our consciousness moves from prior to succeeding thoughts.
So I would argue time is not an underlaying dimension, measured as duration, but an effect of this activity, much like temperature. Time is the individual frequency, while temperature is masses of frequencies and amplitudes.
Duration is the state of the present, as events coalesce and dissolve.
Different clocks can run at different rates because they are separate actions. All being equal, a faster clock uses more energy, like metabolism.
Time is asymmetric because it is a measure of action and action is inertial. The earth turns one direction, not both.
The simultaneity of the present was dismissed by arguing different events would be observed in different order from different locations, but this is no more consequential than seeing the moon as it was a moment ago, simultaneous with seeing stars as they were years ago. It is the energy that is conserved, not the information carried by it. That the energy manifesting an event is radiated away is both why we observe it and why it no longer exists.
So this distinguishes between space and time. We could use ideal gas laws to correlate measures of temperature and volume, but temperature is only foundational to our emotions, bodily functions and environment, not our thought process, so we can presume to be more objective about it.
Given our nervous system is designed to process the information our environment provides, we do like to study it in detail and math is the most distilled and stable expression of form, but without the energy to manifest it, form does go to zero.
So, yes, Occam's razor does have two edges and it does cut both ways.
I would note Edwin Klingman, among others, is also disputing the blocktime aspect of spacetime.
One more thought, events have to occur, in order to calculate the total input, consequentially the future is not pre-determined, as that would require information traveling faster than the energy carrying it.
Regards,
John
