Time as an Observable Empirical Function

For a accurate context and explanation please read the posts in order starting with the first

1st:  https://acopais.blogspot.com/2025/08/before-i-start-with-main-topic-i-should.html

I want the reader to see that when directly observed both time and space individually in any physical sense exists only as a single phenomenon. While imaginations and mathematics can separate them, as a physical function the observable is only one phenomenon. Physically, they only have relevance as a single function.

 For me it was easier to first to recognize the physical function of time. To better understand time I started to look more closely at various types of clocks and the ways we measure it. The rotation of the Earth as a day, our orbit around the Sun being a year, mechanical clocks, quartz oscillators (the most common time device used today), and atomic clocks (specifically cesium-133 based atomic clocks), our most precise measurements of time[1].

Anyone can easily see the common physical function for all these time measurement methods is a consistent change of position as it relates to a specific distance. For example, the Earth’s rotation, one orbit around our Sun, mechanical clocks most often use the consistent oscillation of a disk or pendulum, while quartz-based timepieces use the oscillation of a quartz crystal. Atomic cesium clocks use the consistent speed of light over a specific distance denoted by the wavelength that resonates with a cesium-133 atom. The official wording for cesium clocks that define a second, may for some, possibly obfuscate lights change of position per a specific distance in referring to the wavelength component as cycles or periods; that could make it less clear that lights change of position over a distance is the underlying physical phenomenon defining a second, that is the same physical function all other clocks use (a consistent change of position over a specific, consistent distance). There is no denying 9,192,631,770 cycles (Hz) is the wavelength of a specific distance light travels that currently defines a second.

 If I’ve done an adequate job, at this point you may recognize that physically time, at least as we measure and can directly observe it, is the change of position of energy[2]. If that change (speed) is relatively consistent, then over a specific distance, we can subscribe a unit of time to it. Which is exactly what we do for all clocks. We take the consistent change of position of a pendulum, quartz crystal, disc, light, etc., and assign a time value to that. Just as we do for the Earths rotation and orbit around the sun. We then use that unit to measure against other changes, i.e. your current age to Earth's orbits around the Sun. How can that reconcile with distance if they are both the same physical phenomenon, just as importantly for change we attribute to time throughout the Universe? I will explain that physical reconciliation in my next post.

---

[1] More precise clocks then the cesium clocks I researched are being developed yet they use the same physical attributes of light to measure a period of time.

[2] For this context energy includes all matter.