No Time

So I have been slacking on the posting. It has been hard for me to get back into the swing of things since the holidays. I just don't seem to have enough time. But it turns out that time might not even exist. I love the way Western science has wrestled with this for years.

Meanwhile the Buddhist have been saying the same thing for years (even before Jesus Christ):

Regarding the Buddhist concept of time, our philosophy has. adopted several positions. The Sautrantika school, also known as the "Holders of Discourse," affirms that all phenomena and events exist only in the present moment. For this school, past and future are nothing other than simple concepts, simple mental constructs. As for the Madhyamika-Prasangika school, the Consequence School of the Middle Way, it generally explains time in terms of relativity, as an abstract entity developed by the mind on the basis of an imputation, the continuity of an event or phenomenon. This philosophical view &scribes, therefore, an abstract concept whose function is dependent on the continuum of phenomena. From this point on, to try to explain time as an autonomous entity, independent from an existing object, proves impossible. That time is a relative phenomenon and can claim no independent status is quite clear; I often give the example of external objects which can be easily conceived of in terms of the past or future, but of which the very present seems inconceivable. We can divide time into centuries, decades, years, days, hours, minutes, and seconds. But as the second is also divisible into multiple parts, milliseconds for example, we can easily lose our grasp of the notion of present time!

As for consciousness, it has neither past nor future and knows only present moments; it is the continuum of a present moment being trans . formed into another present moment, whereas with external objects the present disappears in favour of notions of past and future. But further pursuit of this logic will lead to absurdity, because to situate past and future we need a frame of reference which, in this case, is the present, and we have just lost its trace in fractions of milliseconds.. . .

I remember being throughly confused when my philosophy professor was explaining how Kant says time starts at the same time of space, and that while both are, in a sense, constructs-- it is the only way we can experience our surroundings...

Now, don't quote me on that as I am pretty sure I got the concept wrong. I better go read Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics again. If anyone knows, please, feel free to post the proper concept in the responses.