What is time, and why does it only seem to move forward?
Clocks really do disagree, rising entropy seems to give time its direction, and whether time flows is still debated, so here is what is measured, what is explained and what is open.
God Plays Dice Editorial · independently fact-checked · corrections welcomeChecked Sep 30, 20269 min read
THE SHORT ANSWER
Nobody knows yet what time is at its deepest level. But physics has measured how it behaves. Clocks tick at different rates depending on how fast they move and how high they sit, as Einstein’s relativity predicts. Time’s one-way direction seems tied to entropy, roughly a measure of how spread out and mixed things are. A widely discussed idea says entropy grows because the universe began with very low entropy. Why it began that way is still debated. Whether time truly flows is a question for philosophy.
In October 1971, four atomic clocks flown around the world on airliners lost 59 billionths of a second going east and gained 273 going west, compared with clocks on the ground, as relativity predicted.
In 2010, NIST found that a clock raised 33 centimeters, about a foot, ticks slightly faster; in 2022, JILA saw the effect across one millimeter.
Heat flows from hot to cold and never the reverse on its own, a one-way pattern physicists tie to rising entropy.
A widely discussed idea, the Past Hypothesis, says entropy rises because the universe began with extremely low entropy; why it did is still debated.
In a study of 1,865 adults, age made little difference to how fast time felt, except for how fast the last 10 years seemed to pass.
About this picture
NIST researcher James Chin-Wen Chou with an aluminum-ion atomic clock in 2010. That year, NIST compared a pair of these clocks and found that raising one by 33 centimeters, about a foot, made it tick slightly faster, as Einstein’s relativity predicts.
J. Burrus/NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), via Wikimedia Commons · Public domain (PD-USGov-NIST) · Image source ↗
WHERE THE EVIDENCE STANDS
How sure are we?
Clocks tick at different rates depending on their speed and height.Measured with atomic clocks flown on airliners in 1971 (Hafele and Keating), built into GPS (Ashby, 2003), and seen across 33 centimeters (NIST, 2010) and one millimeter (JILA, 2022).
Left to itself, a system’s entropy tends to increase, so heat flows from hot to cold.The second law of thermodynamics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy says it is almost universally acknowledged that the Second Law captures these one-way processes.
Time’s one-way direction comes from the universe starting in a state of extremely low entropy.The Past Hypothesis: Boltzmann, Einstein, Feynman and Schrödinger saw such a condition was needed, but critics question whether it can be explained or even stated precisely (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Thermodynamic Asymmetry in Time”).
Time truly flows, and the present moment is special.A philosophical debate that current experiments do not settle; the Stanford Encyclopedia says views that give the present a special status can avoid conflict with experiments. In the 2020 PhilPapers Survey, 38.2% of philosophers who answered favored the B-theory and 27.2% the A-theory.
Time feels as if it speeds up as we get older.Studies find a small effect at most: Wittmann and Lehnhoff (2005) found age explained at most 10% of the differences; Friedman and Janssen (2010) found age differences very small except for how fast the last 10 years had passed; Droit-Volet and Wearden (2015) found no age difference in the passage of the present moment.
Nobody knows why the universe began with such low entropy, or whether that even needs explaining. In some approaches to quantum gravity, time may not be basic at all. And philosophers still disagree about whether the present is special.
WHAT WOULD CHANGE THIS ANSWER
A tested theory that explained the universe’s low-entropy start would put the arrow of time on firmer ground. A careful clock test that broke relativity’s predictions would force a rethink, but every test described here matched them.
Nobody knows yet what time is at its deepest level. That may sound strange, since we measure it every day. But measuring something and knowing what it is are not the same. Here is what is well measured, what is well explained, and what is still open.
Start with clocks. Today the official second is set by atoms: it lasts exactly 9,192,631,770 wave cycles of a particular radiation from cesium atoms. Einstein’s relativity says clocks do not all tick at the same rate. A clock that moves fast ticks slower, and a clock higher above Earth ticks faster. This has been measured again and again. In 1971, atomic clocks flown around the world on airliners came back slightly out of step with clocks on the ground, by the amounts relativity predicted. GPS satellites must allow for this, or the system would not work. In 2010, NIST measured the effect between clocks only 33 centimeters (about a foot) apart in height.
Why does time seem to move only forward? The basic laws of physics barely care which way time runs. Yet many things happen in only one direction. Heat flows from hot to cold. The smell of coffee spreads through a room and never gathers back into the cup. Physicists tie this to entropy, roughly a measure of how spread out and mixed things are. There are far more mixed-up arrangements than tidy ones, so mixing is overwhelmingly likely. A widely discussed idea, called the Past Hypothesis, adds one more piece: entropy keeps rising because the universe began with extremely low entropy. Why it began that way, and whether that needs explaining, is still debated.
Then there is time as we feel it. Stress, boredom and busy days can change how long things seem, and memory plays a part. Philosophers also still debate a deeper question: does time truly flow, or are past, present and future all equally real? That question has been argued for more than 2,000 years, and experiments so far have not settled it.
THE LONG ANSWER
THE LONG ANSWER · ABOUT 7 MINUTES
You’ve read your 3 free long answers this month.
The short answer, how sure we are, what we don’t know, what would change our mind and every source stay free on every page, for everyone.
All Access members read the long answer: the evidence piece by piece, the strongest objections, and how to check it yourself.
The measured slowing of a clock that moves fast, or that sits deeper in gravity, compared with another clock.
Entropy
Roughly, a count of how many ways the tiny parts of a system can be arranged while it looks the same from outside. Mixed, spread-out states can happen in far more ways than tidy ones.
Second law of thermodynamics
The rule that the entropy of a system left to itself tends to increase. It is why heat flows from hot to cold.
Past Hypothesis
The proposal that the universe began with extremely low entropy, which would explain why entropy has been rising ever since.
Block universe
Another name for eternalism: the view that past, present and future events are all equally real, so “now” is like “here.”
A-theory and B-theory
Two families of views about time. A-theorists say the passage of time is real and the present is special; B-theorists describe all change in terms of earlier and later.
Sources & further reading
(10) · Checked Sep 30, 2026
Around-the-World Atomic Clocks: Observed Relativistic Time Gains (J. C. Hafele and Richard E. Keating) ↗Science 177: 168–170 (1972)Abstract read via Europe PMC (PMID 17779918); authors and pages via Crossref. Four cesium beam clocks flown on commercial jets in October 1971, once eastward and once westward; relative to the U.S. Naval Observatory the clocks lost 59 ± 10 ns eastward and gained 273 ± 7 ns westward, “in good agreement with predictions.” Companion paper with the predictions (−40 ± 23 and +275 ± 21 ns) on regularly scheduled commercial jet flights: doi:10.1126/science.177.4044.166 (PMID 17779917).
Relativity in the Global Positioning System (Neil Ashby) ↗Living Reviews in Relativity 6: 1 (2003)Full text read at link.springer.com. Abstract: “without carefully accounting for numerous relativistic effects, the system would not work.” Net fractional frequency offset −4.4647 × 10⁻¹⁰ (the orbiting clock beats too fast, primarily because it is gravitationally blueshifted), so clocks are adjusted to 10.22999999543 MHz; the factory frequency offset is applied before launch, while rubidium clocks are corrected after launch through the navigation message. Round numbers: Richard W. Pogge, “Real-World Relativity: The GPS Navigation System,” Astronomy 162 course pages, Ohio State University (updated March 11, 2017; https://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/pogge.1/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html): about 7 microseconds per day behind from special relativity, about 45 ahead from general relativity, net about 38 (45 − 7 = 38).
NIST Pair of Aluminum Atomic Clocks Reveal Einstein’s Relativity at a Personal Scale ↗National Institute of Standards and Technology (Sept. 23, 2010)33 centimeters (about 1 foot); about 90 billionths of a second over a 79-year lifetime, “much too small for humans to perceive directly”; moving-clock effect at speeds comparable to a car at about 20 mph; each clock based on a single aluminum ion; NIST postdoctoral researcher James Chin-Wen Chou first author. Paper: Chou, Hume, Rosenband and Wineland, “Optical Clocks and Relativity,” Science 329: 1630–1633 (Sept. 24, 2010), doi:10.1126/science.1192720 (Crossref). Also opened: NIST, “JILA Atomic Clocks Measure Einstein’s General Relativity at Millimeter Scale” (Feb. 16, 2022; https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2022/02/jila-atomic-clocks-measure-einsteins-general-relativity-millimeter-scale): clocks separated by just a millimeter tick at different rates; a single sample of about 100,000 ultracold strontium atoms; JILA jointly operated by NIST and the University of Colorado Boulder; paper Bothwell et al., Nature 602: 420–424 (2022), doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04349-7.
SI base unit: second ↗International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM)The second is equal to the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the unperturbed ground state of the caesium-133 atom.
Thermodynamic Asymmetry in Time (Craig Callender) ↗Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (substantive revision June 12, 2026)“one of the most salient and consequential features of the physical universe”; heat flows hot to cold, coffee smell spreads, reversed processes never happen; the hot and cold iron bars; almost universally acknowledged that the Second Law captures this; fundamental physics time reversal invariant, and weak-interaction violations do not appear responsible for thermodynamic behavior; Boltzmann’s counting (many more ways to be distributed with uniform temperature and pressure), Loschmidt 1876/1877 and Zermelo 1896; by reversibility the past is also predicted to have higher entropy, a prediction that is falsified; Past Hypothesis (Albert 2000), seen as necessary by Boltzmann, Einstein, Feynman and Schroedinger; “an elegant solution” with concerns: Penrose’s astronomically small probability, the lawlike reply, Callender vs. Price on whether it demands explanation, Earman: cannot be stated in the language of general relativity; section 4: the knowledge and trace asymmetries (traces on sound and light waves spread into the future light cone); “many philosophers have sought such reductions” of these arrows to thermodynamics; “The connections, if any, are bound to be subtle”; section 3.6: some philosophers propose instead that time itself is directed.
Time (Nina Emery, Ned Markosian and Meghan Sullivan) ↗Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (substantive revision Dec. 4, 2025)B-theorists describe all change in before-after terms; A-theorists classify events as past, present or future, and A-theorists and presentists think time’s flow is objective and real while B-theorists and eternalists treat time as a dimension like space; relativity of simultaneity as (i) frame-dependence plus (ii) no privileged frame, and A-theorists can reject the extra-empirical principle behind (ii) “without any conflict with empirical results”; in some quantum gravity theories there seems to be no temporal structure at the fundamental level, and “Work in this area is nascent.”
Being and Becoming in Modern Physics (Steven Savitt) ↗Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (substantive revision Oct. 6, 2021)Questions about time’s passage “have been debated for more than two millennia, with no resolution in sight”; Heraclitus around 500 B.C. (“Everything flows”) and Parmenides a generation or so later; the eternalist picture, in which the now, like the here, is a function of one’s perspective; eternalism or the “block universe”; the argument endorsed by the physicist Wim Rietdijk and the philosopher Hilary Putnam; that the block universe is refuted is “controversial”; Carnap’s recollection that the problem of the Now “worried him seriously.”
Philosophers on Philosophy: The 2020 PhilPapers Survey (David Bourget and David J. Chalmers) ↗Philosophers’ Imprint 23 (2023)Full text read (journals.publishing.umich.edu). 1,785 of 7,685 targeted philosophers completed the survey; main question “Time”: A-theory 306 (27.2%), B-theory 429 (38.2%), Other 406 (36.2%); inclusive “accept or lean toward” figures that exclude skips and “insufficiently familiar,” so totals can exceed 100%.
Aging and the speed of time (William J. Friedman and Steve M. J. Janssen) ↗Acta Psychologica 134(2): 130–141 (2010)Abstract via Europe PMC (PMID 20163781): 1,865 adults aged 16 to 80 in two countries; all ages report time passing quickly; age differences very small except for how fast the last 10 years passed; of seven theories, findings support one based on time pressure. Also: Wittmann and Lehnhoff, “Age effects in perception of time,” Psychological Reports 97(3): 921–935 (2005), doi:10.2466/pr0.97.3.921-935 (PMID 16512313): 499 people aged 14 to 94; small-to-moderate effects explaining at most 10% of the variance; results generally support the perception that time speeds up with age, with a caution about methods. Droit-Volet and Wearden, “Experience Sampling Methodology reveals similarities in the experience of passage of time in young and elderly adults,” Acta Psychologica 156: 77–82 (2015), doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.01.006 (PMID 25701720): 8 smartphone alerts a day for 5 days; no difference between young and old in the judged passage of present time.
Does Time Really Slow Down during a Frightening Event? (Chess Stetson, Matthew P. Fiesta and David M. Eagleman) ↗PLoS ONE 2(12): e1295 (2007)Full text read via Europe PMC (PMC2110887): backward free fall of 31 m (2.49 s) into a net at the Zero Gravity amusement park in Dallas; 7 participants made duration judgments, 36% longer for their own fall than for an imagined fall after watching another participant; wrist-worn display set 6 ms faster than each person’s threshold; in-flight accuracy no better than ground-based controls; time-slowing is “a function of recollection, not perception.” Later work: Sarigiannidis et al., “Anxiety makes time pass quicker while fear has no effect,” Cognition 197: 104116 (2020), doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104116, full text via Europe PMC (PMC7033556): under threat of shock, intervals were underestimated (d = 0.68 across three experiments); in two further studies they were “unable to replicate previous findings that fear leads to time overestimation” (Fayolle et al., 2015). Vignaud et al., “Examining the impact of physiological stress on time perception: A systematic review and meta-analysis,” Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 178: 106382 (2025), doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2025.106382 (abstract, PMID 40998286): 437 stressed and 434 control participants; significant effect toward overestimated time under stress (Cohen’s d = −0.40). Block, Hancock and Zakay, “How cognitive load affects duration judgments: A meta-analytic review,” Acta Psychologica 134(3): 330–343 (2010), doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.03.006 (PMID 20403583): 117 experiments; with higher load, prospective (told in advance) judgments shrink and retrospective ones grow. Droit-Volet and Meck, “How emotions colour our perception of time,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 11(12): 504–513 (2007), doi:10.1016/j.tics.2007.09.008 (PMID 18023604): time seems to fly when we are having fun and drag when we are bored. Kobayashi and Ichikawa, “Emotional response evoked by viewing facial expression pictures leads to higher temporal resolution,” i-Perception 14(1) (2023), doi:10.1177/20416695231152144, abstract via Europe PMC (PMID 36845026): the minimum noticeable duration was shorter for angry, fearful and joyful faces than for neutral ones, and arousal “might increase the temporal resolution of visual processing.” Europe PMC lists 80 articles citing the free-fall study; none of their titles describes a repeat of the fall experiment.
Why the matter surplus remains unexplained, what Sakharov's conditions require, and how sphalerons and proposed neutrino mechanisms might connect.
Open question3 min read
THE OCCASIONAL LETTER
Stay curious.
New stories, book updates, and notes from God Plays Dice, delivered when there is something worth sharing.
EMAIL UPDATES ↗
500 DIGITAL COPIES • GIVEAWAY PREVIEW
Be first to know when the 500-copy reader giveaway opens.
Join for the book launch, verified retailer links, and the announcement for a planned giveaway of 500 digital copies. The giveaway is not open yet: dates, eligibility, a dedicated entry form, and Official Rules will be published first.
Privacy · Check your inbox to confirm your subscription. Newsletter signup alone is not a giveaway entry.