Albert “bort” Ripple: given that special/general relativity is a thing, i'd say the answer to the question of whether time exists is far less likely to be that it's an illusion, as opposed to when time was thought to be a static, simple progression.
Albert “bort” Ripple: oops, i missed a part of your question, the part where you asked if the question of the nature of time was a physical or philosophical one. well, as you can tell from my earlier responses, i'd say both. and to add on to such responses, the original name of science was "natural philosophy". the difference between philosophy and science really is that science is more rigorous, test based, while philosophy is more ponderous, coming up with potential ideas -- theorizing . and so philosophy and science are quite meshed.
