"We Are Time": A Li'l Theory Exploring Time and Intelligence

This loose and entirely unscientific theory builds on theoretical physicist Carlo Rovelli’s work exploring time and quantum gravity, and plays on the specific passage, “We are time. We are this space, this clearing opened by the traces of memory inside the connections between our neurons.” - The Order of Time

We understand that the temporal structure of our world is relative, and is influenced by variables like mass, gravitational fields, entropy, and our own partialities. But despite those abstract understandings we still feel that time is something. It rushes around us, carries us, is us, but is also ever beyond us. It's something so elusive yet still so near. How could a molecule of hydrogen calculate the river that it comprises? Like those molecules, we are unable to comprehend the river we're a part of.

There is no universal constant for time that we know of. Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity states that time is relative, and this has held true as it's been applied throughout the sciences. On a day-to-day level, humans measure time in the same way we measure space—but time, like space, is as vast as the cosmos, and grasping it, let alone wielding it, isn't something it seems we'll be able to achieve in this era.

This theory then asks, as long as we understand ourselves to be instruments of perceiving and measuring time, is there not some way to measure ourselves and therein find a constant—relative to the human experience—for the temporal river we exist within?

Our Nervous System and Time Perception

First, how do we sense time? What are our mechanisms for perceiving it?

The study Time Perception Mechanisms at Central Nervous System, states in its abstract, “The perception of time is the sum of stimuli associated with cognitive processes and environmental changes. Thus, the perception of time requires a complex neural mechanism and may be changed by emotional state, level of attention, memory and diseases.”

The study further states, “Diverse models of time perception have been presented, some of which include neurobiological internal clocks; spectral time; state dependent; and linear and non-linear network models that are able to identify mistakes, learn and change strategies. Of these, perhaps the best known is the internal clock, which is based on scalar expectancy theory.”

“Studies involving individuals who suffer from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, depression, schizophrenia and/or Parkinson’s disease (PD) have revealed that individuals with such conditions often have an impaired time perception. Interest in this area has resulted in the development of several models that were specifically designed to define how the central nervous system analyzes and encodes time perception.”

Our measures for cognitive processes are still relatively limited, but this type of research is helping us understand that time perception is determined by our central nervous system. We also know that hereditary factors can influence neurological functions, ranging through a wide spectrum of divergencies and dysfunctions.

A study published on Neuroscience dot com titled Hyper Brain, Hyper Body: The Trouble with High IQ states that “people with high IQs face a greater risk of psychological and physiological disorders compared to the general population.”

“Drawing from a survey of 3,715 Mensa members with IQs above 130, the researchers found notably higher rates of mood disorders, ADHD, and autoimmune diseases among the group. Lead author Ruth Karpinski posits a “hyper brain/hyper body” theory, explaining that highly intelligent people may have an overreactive nervous system that contributes to these ailments.”

So might highly intelligent people with overreactive nervous systems also be more prone to hyper-sensitive time perception?


Intelligence and Time Perception

Some theories have surfaced the idea that time perception is directly related to a person’s intelligence. These ideas posit that those with a high intelligence perceive time more slowly. 

If this were true, a wider temporal window would give individuals with high intelligence "more time" to analyze and process information. On the other side of the intelligence spectrum, those perceiving time more quickly would have narrower windows to analyze and process information. 

We already have a language for this: among individuals across the spectrum of intelligence, those who have more time to process are seen as “quick” or “sharp”, and those with less time are seen as “slow” or “dull”. Relative to those with more time, those with less literally appear to be processing slower. If my reality is such that I have more time to process information, but in yours you do not, my thinking and expressions will appear “fast” to you, and yours will appear "slow" to me. Even if the difference is minuscule, we still perceive a difference between cognitively "faster" and "slower" people.

And what if time perception wasn’t based on intelligence, what time perception is what determines cognitive ability? And more broadly, what if our genetic time-perceiving neurological mechanisms are the earliest determiners of cognitive ability? This could help us better contextualize the vast variety of neurotypes, and even some physical abilities. Those born with different abilities to perceive time and process information faster or slower would move through the world very differently from each other. They might excel in sports, or decipher the natural world in rich detail, or express themselves with rare and unique creativity, or they might intuitively understand mathematics. And across that range of time perception and cognitive ability, it would be the most common perceptions and abilities that would set the standard for the "typical" experience.

Additionally, Western society continues to define “intelligence” within colonial, Euro-centric constructs, and the expectations placed upon the “intellectually gifted” often gravitate toward academic performance. If we instead build our understanding of cognitive ability around how much time a person has to process information, those colonial frameworks quickly appear archaic and even harmful in understanding cognitive capacity and potential.

If hereditary traits passed to our central nervous systems can determine neurological functions and dysfunctions, then it stands to reason that time perception could also be hereditary. And if we consider that it might be the mechanisms of time perception that are genetically inherited, rather than “intelligence” or tightly categorized neurological affectations, we see a clearer picture of the great diversity of neurological abilities.

 

Measuring Time Through Intelligence Quotients

Building from the premise that it is the perception of time that first determines cognitive ability — that “intelligence” is an outcome of time perception, not a precursor, we can then hypothetically review the tools used to measure intelligence and apply them to measuring time.

Currently the dominant tools used to measure intelligence are found in Intelligence Quotient tests. It's worthwhile to note that IQ scores have been known to shift throughout a lifetime, and cannot encompass or account for the many variables introduced to an individual’s nervous system over the course of their lifetime, nor the complexities of a person’s neurological makeup. While still considered narrowly scoped in terms of the types of intelligence IQ tests can measure, IQ scores and current IQ classification methods remain consistent enough that they’ve been widely accepted as the standard for measuring human intelligence. 

Throughout different IQ scoring systems, all share comparable classification scales. Most measure “average” within a range of 90-109. This data is then presented through an “IQ Scale” that measures percentiles. When we look at these classifications, deviations and percentiles, our focus is on “intelligence”. Many of us get lost in self-conscious wonderings of where we fit on the scale. We become preoccupied with ranking ourselves within an intellectual matrix. 

But if we consider that intelligence can be directly correlated to our neurological abilities in perceiving time, this scale becomes something different, even while the data feeding the scale stays the same.

If we can presume that the perception of time is what determines intelligence and cognitive ability, this scale might show us the frequency of time as it washes up against humanity's nervous systems, and the shape of those waves could be right in front of us.

An IQ scale showing frequency and percentiles.

Okay, uhm, how does time wash up on us?

It’s tempting to think of some genesis point, some sort of personalized singularity that might configure our DNA to perceive time faster or slower, improving or hampering our cognitive processing abilities. 

My mind imagines timewaves rippling through our quantum reality; ancient, orphaned vibrations still discharging from the big bang (or big bounce), tickling our cognitive destinies on a plank scale, indelibly setting the tune of our nervous systems as we emerge from sparks of static. 

What is the scale of those waves? Does it take generations for them to pass, or a single lifespan? Are they so small and ceaseless that they break over all of life in a bubbling chaos?

But the more logical explanation is that genetic lineages have evolved within environmental and historical contexts, drumming away at the configurations of each generations’ nervous systems, conditioning us over the eons. Possibly just the same old inescapable combination of evolution, probability and chance, but it's fun to imagine time as a rippling something that we exist within. 

And maybe we're the best instruments for measuring it. Clearly, I'm no physicist, I've just been granted a bit of extra time to think about it.