This makes no sense. How can time be created "all the time"? To visualize space expanding we can imagine an animation of a chart axis growing and the notches on it getting further apart OVER TIME. We cannot imagine TIME expanding because the concept of EXPANDING means getting bigger OVER TIME. i.e. an object that is bigger at one point in time than at another. How can TIME be bigger at one point IN TIME than another? Time does not exist IN TIME.

Each space dimension has expansion in both directions, so shouldn't this also happen for the time dimension? What could be happening in the newly created other end of time? An alternate universe? Does it go along with us as antimatter or dark matter?

Makes sense. Time is not 'tangible' - if we accept the concept of 'spacetime' continuum, then time too, is stretching along with space. We talk about the 'past' only because we have 'memory' but what we have is only the 'present' through which we are constantly moving towards the unknown future - one second per second - by our time. We cannot measure time. We have designed clocks to measure the numerical order of material change (frequency, speed) that we observe in space, which is a fundamental entity. The concept of time is exclusively 'human' and our concept of 'time' is only valid for the planet Earth, our home. Our clocks are useless even on the Moon.

Time-travel has never been possible, because all time is unfolding at the same instants. By that I mean the particles that make-up your body and the universe co-exists at all times, it's just your consciousness that can only perceive one instant. Saying you can travel in time, would mean displacing particles from one instant to a previous one, which is a quantum physics paradox, OR having your consciousness experience a previous instant but then what would that even mean?

Overall this is not good news. Find a way out.

We may not be able to go back in time but we can look back in time with astronomical observations. This brings up other questions. If the universe is expanding, is the speed of light the same if traveling toward the center of expansion or away from it? Has this been distorted by gravitational effects? If so, the 13.8 billion year estimate for the big bang may be totally in error. I have always thought that the age of the universe is closer to 50-100 billion years. This would explain the expansion and many generations of now cold stars which would now make up 90% of the mass of the universe rather than the dark matter and dark energy theories they are using to prop up their original theories. But then, that's my theory.

"The idea that the arrow of time is set by entropy does not make any predictions, it is simply a statement of a correlation," says Muller. "And to claim it is causation makes no sense." That I agree completely. I think if it was true, speed of local times would vary greatly everywhere. There would be past here and future there all around. But the rest I don't agree. Special Relativity makes clear "now" is relative and past and future coexist.

The only thing we have to defeat time is immortality. Not there yet.

I don't understand what this means for time dilation. If I was to travel at the near the speed of light around the Earth for a few years then when I land much longer than a few years will have passed for Earth. Either I'm experiencing time faster than everyone else or somehow they're experiencing slower. Either way, how does that fit with this?

Not sure how with this works with special relativity, although presumably it does. Does a moving observer travelling close to the speed of light create space relative to a stationary observer?