HIVE

Interesting idea, I mean time is merely a Human construct we use to define the process of moving from one state to another. It would be very interesting if the universe did have a tick rate which I'd guess would be 1/c but even then I'd be skeptical it exists at all. That said I'm open to the idea and the implications of it, as it would quantize any process to within a minimum time but I suppose that would disagree with quantum theory unless you could use a fixed tick rate to gain greater accuracy in the HUP but then as far as I can tell the HUP can't be broken so yeah I'd lean towards no tick rate but its an interesting idea and could maybe be used in other fields to see what could be developed.

Time is relative, yes. It's not a universal constant, is it?
But it cannot surpass c?
So therefore, time even as a construct is finite, regardless which puts us in the dilemma if actual infinity exists.
And even by surpassing c, then it means going back in time paradoxically, no?
It's crazy and I don't have the mind to understand it.

Time is measured in seconds, c is a speed so I don't really know what you mean by time cannot surpass c. You are correct that time is relative however you can establish a "real time" but that requires some uni level physics. Yeah if you could travel faster than the speed of light then you could go back in time. You do get the interesting case of quantum entanglement where two entangled particles will copy each other across any distance or space. You could separate them by a million light years and if one was made yellow the other would be yellow even though it would be impossible for that information to travel that distance by relativity.

I meant that time would have to be relative to the speed. So if speed goes beyond c, time would reset or something.
Also, what about negative time? Does that include back in time? What of negative speed? I don't think these currently even work at a theoretical level. Because going past c means back in time whilst going under 1 means 0.infinite. How's that fair ?
Real time based on the universe's expansion rate? Or?

Well, if entanglement beyond the speed of light or at it(?) is actually possible, then that means there might be no actual distance, basically paradoxically infinite. That or there an infinite speed we can't access currently or simply, distance is fake and we're basically like one point stretched in all directions ad infinitum.

Eh not really so we don't really know what would happen if you travel faster than the speed of light but by analysing World Lines of Minkowski diagrams we predict you'd be able to travel back in time. As for negative time, you could visualise it in various way one, would be going in reverse another would be that you're merely travelling in the opposite direction to the way time normally travels. Theoretically we can insert some of these things in and see what happens. For example setting t in an equation to -t. In some equations we find no difference that by setting the time equal to negative we see things proceed as normal, this has different implications.

If entanglement is a transfer of information between the two particles it would need to travel faster than the speed of light to be instantaneous however, you wouldn't be able to tell if it had occurred unless you travelling slower than the speed of light went to check which would satisfy Einstein's laws of relativity that say you can't see the cause before the event. Infinity is more of a concept than a number so I doubt there's an infinite "speed" merely there might be means of travel not relying on distance or time terms in the equations. As far as we can tell distance exists just depending upon your size determines what dimensions you can access.

Does this back in time mean from the start when the Big Bang started onward? I assume it's something linear and you wouldn't be able to selectively go back besides, you wouldn't be able to survive through all until life on Earth even if continuously travelling beyond c since you'd not be out of spacial harm.
So if t=-t that's not even a mirror (where things happen in opposite to each other) but they more like happen in an entanglement state the same always, exactly.
Yeah, so basically entangled stuff being changed is like seeing them in the past when you modify them in the future.
Would we be able to tell the distance in total darkness without any space bodies around?

Theoretically you can set t=0 to be whenever. Well if you have a squared term in an equation then t squared and -t squared give the same result so going back in time might not change as many things as you might think.

For the entanglement yeah you're seeing something after its already happened but its impossible for you to see it when it did happen. And no since distance requires two points.

I guess we only go forth. To be able to load a save file we'd need to be the operator outside the borders.

Exactly

Man. Why do we have feeling then? Programs seem not to
This holographic principle theory makes me desire scopolamine.

Well man, tbh we don't have all the answers, can only do more research.