In reading about the theories of time, they do not seem to link time to the physicality of events.
All events are locked into change of physical objects, in relation to location. One can describe the death of a president like Kennedy, but it is locked into its location no matter the linguistic labels one puts on it.
The event recedes in time as we move forward. In relativity, time duration changes for each individual relative to their velocity, but the experience of events stays the same in terms of location.
So I wonder how B-theorists can claim time is not absolute, given the physicality of events and existence. Without time, movement cannot take place, as there is no distinction from being in one location or another. Without time there is no velocity or acceleration, no change, just eternal stasis.
Abstraction. In the world of ideas it is always possible to abstract things to the point where they do not reflect the world we live in. So I look for connection to ideas, that help give me insight to existence.
We all though carry faith positions, assumptions about the world and biases against certain points of view that would effect us radically if we shifted. Time and its passing is a clear reality to our existence, cause and effect, the order of events in the physical world. So any position that tries to overthrow this, needs to have something very substantial to move it.
It is this I am looking for. But maybe this is an impossible task. But then I would ask, does this not suggest, things are actually as they appear to be.
I watched a video where Simultaneity was explained. In summary the idea is 3 events happen. A light beam is sent from A to B and from B to A. 1. Leave A, 2. Arrive at B, 3. Arrive back at A. The proposition is viewing this transaction from another participant event 2 can happen before event 1. But this means the light beam going from 1 to 2 travels back through time, which is impossible. So I do not see how this model works or is correct, because the events are linked by the travelling light beam, and light cannot travel back through time.
It seems to me, that simultaneity implies events can appear to an observer to change order, but they do not actually. It is an implied view of a present moment experienced across the universe. So B-theory is a proposition, but must exist to serve a purpose rather than the A-theory which matches our known universe. Wonder if this is a theist non-theist debate?