From the September 2010 Scientific American Magazine | 53 comments

The Paradox of Time: Why It Can't Stop,

But Must ( Preview )
Yes. And no. For time to end seems both impossible and
inevitable. Recent work in physics suggests a
resolution to the paradox
By George Musser

The comment of Marcel Chelba (Kantinomus)

The new paradigm of modern science since the discovery of the theory of relativity and quantum
mechanics now, there is no consistency, but completeness: rational integration of opposites in a
single system. This will do just that in modern science, opposites may not be contradictory but
complementary (as Niels Bohr said). For the same reason modern science have become some
theoretical science (transcendental, how could Kant says), in which we try first to imagine reality
and then to discover it in such experiments. In Kant's transcendental idealism time is the form of
our inner sense, the matrix of our representation faculty. It is therefore natural that our new
relativistic models of universe to be somewhat subjective and "physical time" somewhat flexible,
as our "subjective time" (ie to compress or dilate depending on the density of events that happen
in "life of universe"). In fact, both quantum mechanics and relativity are more metaphysics
(ontology) than physics (experimental sciences, in the classic sense of the word).
I have discussed extensively that "epistemological problem of modern science" in my book –
Marcel Chelba: Critical introduction. About the possibility of Metaphysics, as Science, in the
critical philosophy of Kant (2004) – which unfortunately I can not give you only a few excerpts
translated into English on Scribd (http://www.scribd.com/doc/17474184/Marcel-Chelba-
Kantian-tetralogy-Vol-I-Critical-Introduction-Kantinomus).