Does the universe have one clock on the wall?

Question

Cyclical dynamics are ubiquitous in the universe with spatial/temporal extents varying over many orders of magnitude. Each dynamical structure has its own tempo and is likely to be a consonance of many varying sub-system tempos. We select a certain, extremely rarefied atomic frequency to ground our SI time unit upon the underlying physical reality. Thus, any temporal measurement of a dynamical system is referential to a highly unique clockwork tempo that is currently accurate to one second in some billions of years. Question: Does this practice project upon our mechanics a clockwork regularity that is not in fact actual? Does it create the illusion of a universe in which every part moves in phase with interlocked regularity? Alternatively, and more attractively to me, if the depth of distinction between entities bestows upon them their own clockwork which governs their turnings, then, particularly with more complexly organized entitles, any interaction between them creates the possibility of an eureka moment in which a new future path may be created. Which is the case? This question may be better stated and perhaps lies more in the realm of physics, but we are reminded that philosophy has long played the role of elder sibling to physics and been helpful in its refinement. Attached: Photo of entity – Bubble of exhaled air in water.

Answer 1

I think that the answer to this is basically a clear 'no'.

Post special relativity* - think of clocks as like odometers, they measure what is called 'proper time' along the trajectory that they are moving; this is basically an interval between two events in spacetime (an event being a spacetime equivalent of a point). There is no defined meaning to the idea of an absolute simultaneity between times at clocks at different events. Any physical system that can be used to measure time (a conventional clock, a human body, etc.) follows the same rules.

Philosophy of Physics: Space and Time by Tim Maudlin goes over this very clearly, from a geometric perspective.

*General relativity doesn't change this essential point, it just says that the spacetime metric can vary from place to place, whereas in SR it is always the same.

Answer 2

The strength of the ‘one clock’ argument is that you could build an atomic clock anywhere in the universe and it would appear to an observer that shares its frame of reference to run at the same speed. (same frame of reference = not moving at relativistic speed with respect to it) So while clocks moving at different speeds will tick at different rates, the rules that predict this are, as far as we know, consistent across the universe.

Answer 3

From a street level view, the answer is no, the universe does not have one clock on the wall. Rather, it can be more usefully considered as a multiplicity of ‘clocks all the way down.’ In this view, being is a dynamical phenomenon and all composite, enduring physical objects are dynamical systems with innate tempos. One might analogize, say that in concert, physical objects create spacetime topology, puffing it up like a bag of microwave popcorn, or perhaps see time as a coral reef accretion of many differently gaited species.

Cadence in nature varies by more than 32 orders of magnitude as measured in the seconds units of the Système International metric system. Within this system we can measure time five orders of magnitude more accurately than any other base unit. There is a clock ‘on the wall’ at the Boulder, Colorado NIST laboratories that is accurate to about one second in the age of the universe. Every day they receive twenty billion inquiries asking, “What time is it?” As far as I know, all these inquiries to the NIST laboratories arise earth proximate and not from the universe at large. And, one may ask whether they are measuring time or making it.

For all its utility, SI time is part of an abstracted domain, an overlay on the topology of nature much like a cartographer’s latitude and longitude. Devices of measurement divide, perform a kind of Midas touch transformation that abstracts from running nature some fixed figure to fit within the crystalline matrix of our equations. But the map is not the territory. We cannot expect that a time defined in Boulder, Colorado is property of the universe as a whole.

Answer 4

I'd say we can apply Liebniz principle of indiscernability. Every electron is alike and so their innate sense of time is alike. So we get what looks like a universal clock. But in fact, it is a universal harmony.

Answer 5

The time experienced by satellites can be computationally adjusted to keep them functional for GPS, etc. They do not wander off into their own incalculable time when unobserved. There is no reason that the same cannot be said for more convoluted space-time. Consequently the one-clock idea pertains. In other words, the 'now' moment is universal.

To reiterate: Notionally, relativistic time difference are calculatable and can be synced to any unprivileged clock. For example, on the satellite add one second per hour and the satellite clock tells the same time as on Earth: Therefore one clock.

Edit 23/11/21

The counter-argument is that closed time-like curves (CTC) produced by a spinning black hole could scatter the 'now' moment over time, resulting in past and future at the same time.