New theory suggests time is an illusion created by quantum entanglement

Overall reaction to “time is an illusion” framing

• Many see “time is an illusion” as overstatement or clickbait; time is described as a basic category of thought and experience that we cannot help but use.
• Others argue that showing time to be emergent (not fundamental) is meaningful, even if we must still use it in models, likening it to how color is emergent from electromagnetic waves.
• Several commenters dislike the word “illusion” and prefer “emergent”: emergent things are still real, just not fundamental.

Page–Wootters mechanism, clocks, and circularity concerns

• The paper builds on the Page–Wootters idea: treat time via entanglement between a “clock” system and an evolving system.
• Summary in the thread:
  • System Γ (harmonic oscillator) and clock C (magnetic/spin system) are entangled but non-interacting.
  • Time is defined operationally by reading the clock.
  • As the clock becomes macroscopic, time behavior looks classical.
• Critics call this circular: a clock is “something that keeps time,” so defining time via a clock just rephrases the problem.
• Defenders respond that the model only assumes an oscillator, not a prior notion of time, and studies when such oscillatory correlations look like classical time.

Philosophical and conceptual debates

• Kantian angle: time might be an a priori form of human experience; it’s argued that physics cannot empirically decide whether time is “in the world” or “in us.”
• Block universe / eternalism is referenced: all events “exist” in a static 4D structure; change and flow may be perspectival.
• Some tie this to free will and determinism; others note this becomes largely philosophical, not directly testable in the discussed work.

Entropy, arrow of time, and perception

• One view: time is “a result of entropy” or “measured degradation,” giving direction to time.
• Counterpoint: entropy increase follows from time-ordered causality, so making entropy fundamental to time seems backwards; it robustly gives a direction but may be only statistical.
• Several comments emphasize subjective perception:
  • Time may feel like sampling or aliasing of an underlying static or cyclic reality.
  • Different organisms perceive time at different effective rates.

Skepticism about theoretical physics narratives

• Some express frustration that such work often rephrases existing formalisms or finds isomorphisms without new testable predictions.
• Concerns include:
  • Pop-sci headlines overreaching relative to modest technical advances.
  • Risk of “confusing map for territory” when mathematical equivalences are turned into ontological claims (“the universe is X”).
• Others still find the direction “a solid step” toward connecting quantum notions of time with classical experience.

Related references and side threads

• Multiple books and popular expositions on time and quantum foundations are recommended.
• Tangential discussions cover eternal recurrence, cyclic universes, kalpas, “block universe” visualizations, and the link between entropy, memory, and the subjective arrow of time.