This question may have been asked before; actually, it's definitely been asked before, since it's on the topic of whether time is real or a man-made construct, but I don't believe it has yet been asked in this specific way.
We have 2 events, A and B. As long as we experience B after A, for us there was a passage of "time" in between A and B; that is, we can clearly say something must've happened in between A and B.
We can imagine time as an arrow pointing from event A to B.
However, now let's say event B never happens, we take it away. And we do this for any event B that may come after A, so that A is the only event that happened, period, ever.
Could we say that there is no longer any time? I mean, there is no event to even draw the arrow to!
Bear with me.
Now let us say event B suddenly DOES happen, and we are thinking of how long after A it HAS happened, that is, how long our arrow should be.
Normally, between A and B there would’ve been the passage of time. We would've been able to draw smaller arrows, and other events would have happened. But if NOTHING ELSE has happened in between event A and event B, doesn't that BY DEFINITION mean event B was right after event A? There must have been no time separating them, the arrow of time would have been infinitely small.
This is leading me to the conclusion that there really isn't anything fundamental about time, except something we designed to understand what we experience "in between" one event and another.
That is, if everything in the universe suddenly stopped, would there really be any time at all? Let's say we were creatures floating around in a space where literally NOTHING happens that we can clearly say came after something else. Would we ever come up with a definition of time?
Is time something fundamental, or a concept invented to describe how we experience events (and what even IS an event; I'm thinking about motion, including the motion of subatomic particles, but is that the correct interpretation)?
Physics answers greatly appreciated