Is time truly continuous or just a collection of tiny discrete "ticks"?

Question

Since times smaller than the planck time are meaninless, would it mean that time is discrete?

Answer 1

"Planck time (~ 5.4 × 10−44 seconds) is the unit of time in the system of natural units known as Planck units. Current established physical theories are believed to fail at this time scale, and many physicists expect that the Planck time might be the smallest unit of time that could ever be measured, even in principle. Tentative physical theories that describe this time scale exist; see for instance loop quantum gravity."

This may be the fundamental "tick" of time.

Answer 2

Time is used by scientists in 2 entirely different ways. In the primary way, time is a fundamental constituent of the universe, the other one being space. This time is continuous. In the secondary way, time is a way of measuring cyclic motion through space. This includes such as the day, the month, etc. This time is discrete.

Answer 3

Time is a dimension of the space-time fabric. Time is measured by humans in arbitrary units assigned to it to measure segments of what is otherwise infinity which forms just one strand of the four dimensional model we are capable of perceiving. However,
if M Theory is correct, there are at least 10 or maybe 11 dimensions, but mathematically the number of dimensions could be infinite. So far the largest quantum of dimensions was finally solved the other day at 248 when E8 was solved.

Answer: If each "tick" is an arbitrary measure of a segment of time, it is just that. A measure but not a finite quanta.

Answer 4

I believe time is a smooth continuum.
I base this on the fact that the rate of time is dependent on the observer, gravity, acceleration and speeds approaching a significant percentage of light - and that necessarily means that Planck time quanta would also be variable - and my tiny brain says that kind of negates the basis of the premise that times smaller "than the Planck time are meaningless."
No discreet ticks - it's analog, not digital.

Answer 5

That is an exceedingly good question. Or it may be (as a number of folks, including myself, are wondering) that 'time' as a discrete point may be a conceptual mistake and that an 'instant' in time may actually be more like the common 'boundry' for an (essentially infinite) number of probability functions.

Doug