What if…

• The internet boasts a timeless topology where ordering hinges not on temporal progression, but on data relevance and connectivity.

• Data and content online exist in a multifaceted state of interpretation, misunderstanding, and relevance, all simultaneously.

• The absolutes of data and content are a myth; they are intrinsically tied to our context as observers.

• Data doesn’t lose relevance over time; instead, it 'decays', becoming obscured in the burgeoning expanse of new information.

Over the past few months, I’ve developed a slight obsession with Time. It began with my quest to improve in generative coding, leading me to create evolving yet rule-bound small watches. Delving deeper into Time, I found it increasingly alluring.

I am, undeniably, tethered to the online realm, existing predominantly in this digital space. My life is often spent in front of a screen, consumed by the notion that entering this digital domain is akin to stepping into a different state of being. Unlocking my screen, I feel as though I'm entering a space where traditional laws falter, reminiscent of a REM sleep phase or a lucid dream. This is not a scientific hypothesis, but rather my rambling, an attempt to grasp the elusive nature of online time.

Online time operates on a unique wavelength. I revel in getting lost – in books, the euphoria of a runner's high, or the flow state of experimenting with new tools, where time slips by, unnoticed, much like in sleep. In this online bubble, the conventional flow of time seems to pause. Here, content from the past, present, and future coexists. We browse webpages from years gone by, engage in real-time on collaborative platforms, and contribute to content that may be consumed in the future, all within a single session. This content exists simultaneously, intertwined in a timeless web, whether in sync, asynchronously, alone, or together.

Deeply immersed in the web, whether mindlessly scrolling through endless short videos or in a contemplative state, the only jolt back to reality is a glance at the top right corner of the screen. "Shit, too much time has passed." The online world is a peculiar dreamscape, akin to a lucid dream where I am both participant and observer.

Online, data resides in a perpetual "now." Every TikTok video, article, or meme coexists in a massive, interconnected library, open and accessible at any moment of time. I saw a tweet earlier that X is now downstream in terms of vitality than TikTok, but when I think about the lifecycle of online information. Perhaps it's less about the passage of time and more about the evolving network of connections. Like a tree in a dark forest, each piece of data’s relevance is defined not by its age but by its relationship to its surroundings. The internet feels like a static, multi-dimensional structure where all data exists simultaneously, rather than a network evolving with time.

The landscape of information online is time-independent yet observer-relative. My interaction with content is shaped by my unique digital context – my online habits, frequented sites, and chosen links. This reminds me, in an unscientific manner, of Einstein’s relativity, where time and space are relative to the observer's position. The meaning and significance of online information change based on the viewer and their vantage point. No wonder the internet feels like a vast, contentious discussion space, with everything existing in all states and variances simultaneously. In real life, things change over time, but perhaps in the physics of the internet, it's all about the relational dynamics of data, defined by its current network of relationships and connections.

When I post online, I add basic metrics to track views. But I never know the contexts or the viewers. Suddenly, this information exists in multiple states of interpretation and misunderstanding, yet in a seemingly timeless way. It appears in various timelines and communities, creating different contexts and associations by proximity alone. This makes me think of information entanglement, where separate pieces of content, or even fragments, once removed from their original context, become intrinsically linked in the minds of others, existing all at once in myriad forms. The data becomes the medium. Like a quantum particle, understood only in layman's terms, it exists in multiple states of interpretation, misunderstanding, and relevance simultaneously, collapsing into a specific state only upon interaction (viewing, sharing, commenting, etc.).

Information online simply is; it’s timeless. It doesn’t lose relevance over time but becomes obscured or lost in the influx of more information. Its decay is not chronological but rather a matter of attention span. Older data resembles a once well-trodden path in a forest, gradually overgrown, harder to find, and less frequently encountered, yet always there, waiting to be rediscovered. Perhaps this is a form of entropic decay, driven not by time but by our shifting patterns of attention.

Sometimes I view the internet as a self-referential closed loop. The content shapes our digital spacetime, which in turn influences the behavior of its content. But then, if I lose any sense of time online, perhaps there is no time online. This mirrors information existing in any state at any time. Information, from my perspective, is non-existent and viral, with cause and effect existing simultaneously. My understanding of the online world is not linear.

If we remove the sense of time from the equation, the internet might be solely about the relational properties between objects and events. What is change without a temporal dimension? When online, I feel that time is more a construct than a reality, until I log out and am reminded of its existence with a look in the mirror.

All of this brings me back to a lucid dream. Like in such a dream, I am aware and can influence, yet I exist in a constant state of blurriness and wakefulness. Content simply is, existing in a nonlinear temporality. Perhaps someone will eventually write a unified theory of the online experience.

Sometimes, I feel the internet is a peculiar space that demands a different approach to physics. We often try to apply skeuomorphic designs online, but maybe reality just doesn’t function the same way there...

I am no scientist, at all, but I love my thoughts going rampage. So I am sorry if I misunderstand the world, and would love any links, comments, quote, to challenge any of my thoughts.

Support by Mint: