Physical Reality Is Probably Fundamentally Timeless/ Unchanging

Well, this is going to be easier than I thought!Addressing My Opponent's ConcernsMy opponent's contention is:"Nothing can happen and exist without time." - ConI agree that nothing can happen without time, but timeless existence isn't incoherent at all (as long as the thing that has timeless existence doesn't change). So, my opponent is half-right. Nothing can happen without time, but changeless things can still have existence without time."This is very simple. In time, there is a past, present, and future." - ConMy opponent's statement depends on what view of time you adopt. If you are a Presentist, then only the present exists and that past and future play no ontological role in reality. In this view, the present changes, but the idea of the "future" and "past" are nothing more than concepts in our mind. "Presentism is the philosophical doctrine that only events and entities—and, in some versions of presentism, timeless objects or ideas like numbers and sets—that occur in the present exist. According to presentism, events and entities that are wholly past or wholly future do not exist at all."[1]Therefore, if Presentism is true, then in time, there is only the present. Con has to disprove this view of time before we can even begin to accept his statement above. "Without a future, time wouldn't be moving, as we move into the future, so to speak." - ConThe present could still constantly change, even if the past and future don't exist. This is exactly what Presentists adhere to. If my opponent is saying that the future exists, then this means that the Moving Spotlight Theory of time[2], or B-Theory of time is true[3]. However, my opponent hasn't defended either view. Also, if the B-Theory of time is true, then this is essentially saying that time doesn't exist anyway (In B-Theory, everything is static and unchanging). Therefore, my opponent must actually support his claim by justifying the assumptions it relies upon. "Future validates the past. Since time is moving, those events that have already past are now... past." - ConThis begs the question. It assumes time exists, and it moves. Also, as I said, his view depends on a view of time he has not supported, and one that assumes time exists in the first place. "If both did not exist, we must be frozen, never to move." - ConNonsense. Even if the past and future do not exists, the present could still change. "However, without the present, not even what things currently are can be so, which I rightfully consider absurd." - ConWhy can't things exist without the present? This is just a fallacious bare-assertion. Also, what Con "considers absurd" is a subjective opinion, not an objective argument. ConclusionOddly enough, nothing Con mentioned undermines my arguments at all, even if all of his objections go through. It seems that if Con is attacking Presentism, however, my view is not Presentism. He hasn't attacked the idea that time is an illusion at all. He just argues that if it is; nothing changes. However, this is what my position embraces ("no change"), so how could "no change" be a problem for my view? Take for instance the Wheeler-Dewitt equation, it states that nothing happens:"It seems to describe a static universe in which nothing happens."[4] If my view is correct, then time is not fundamental, and time and change may be illusions. If change is an illusion, then this still accounts for our experience of change. Thus, my opponent can't use our experience of change to undermine timelessness, because if my view is correct, then change is just an illusion anyway!Con only attacked Presentism; not my view. He has done absolutely nothing to undermine the resolution. I urge voters to remember that I had 5 points to establish the resolution:. Quantum Events Are Not Dependent On Space And Time. The Wheeler-DeWitt Equation. Time Emerges From Quantum Entanglement. The Mathematical Object Resembling A Multifaceted Jewel In Higher Dimensions. Special Relativity And Static TimeCon ignored all 5 points, and his arguments weren't even relevant to my case. The resolution has been established. Sources[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...(philosophy_of_time)[2] http://qspace.library.queensu.ca...[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...[4] http://www.thehealingpages.com...