"By reason of its character as continuous, successive, divisible, and measureable, time belongs to the category of quantity, which is a general attribute of bodies, and cosmology has for its object the essence and general attributes of matter"
When there is nothing, mentioned above, then there is nothing to measure, therefore, time doesn’t exist.
by definition, Time begins when creation of something measurable, begins.
Certainly, it took some time for Leibniz to define momentum for the first time in history. However, Leibniz used to say that time is not a thing but “the order of successive events”; that is to say, that it is ideal.
On the other side, as soon as you adopt the belief that time is an unperceivable substance, you forget about it and immediately invoke mathematical symbols and equations, ignoring that mathematics has nothing to do with substances nor time, but with quantitative relations, which are timeless (you will say: ah, no, but “t” is used in mathematics and it means “time”! ). “t” is just a variable which doesn’t have any peculiarity in mathematics.
Where is this taking us? You are wrong about mathematics because mathematics combined with certain physical quantities can tell us what initial velocity is needed to escape the gravitational pull of the earth. Your discussion about time is basically useless and tells us nothing about the altitude required to attain a geostationary orbit about earth.
Well, okay, but just be careful with sharp and cutting things. Good reasons, along with fingers and toes, tend to end up on the ground; and it seems like you are squeamish about standing on such things.
Ah, but is time a “timeless” measure that holds without a necessary reference to events in succession? I.e., is it mathematical in the sense of having to do with “quantitative relations, which are timeless?” That was, I believe, @JuanFlorencio’s question to you.
Is time meta-temporal, or non-temporal, so to speak?
It is a measure, yes, but not of irreversibility. There are no processes which are more or less irreversible than others. Or they are reversible or they are irreversible. And as time is a measure, there must be someone who measures (you, she, me…); and without him, there is no time, but only processes.
Absolutely not, at least when you are outside of the Planck length. There is no possibility of going back in the past and reliving your life. Abortion is always gravely wrong of course. But to take an extreme example and speaking hypothetically about time travel in the past, there is no possibility of someone going back in time and aborting or somehow preventing the birth of her great grandfather. In such a case her great grandfather would never have existed and then where does that leave the great granddaughter who traveled backward in time?