>I consider the idea of the arrow of time as the most fundamental superstition of the sentient. I am interested in this statement. I would like to hear an elaboration, or be pointed to a reference on this topic (genuinely so; I'm not being sarcastic in any way). The arrow of time is taken by many, myself included, to be among the fundamental inescapable realities of nature. The trudging forward of time is the reason Lorentz, in all his genius, gave us his transforms, then searched for where his error might lie so that he could abandon the transformation of time. There's a reason Einstein didn't win the Nobel Prize for Special Relativity. He didn't really give us any new theory. He merely (and this is obviously a very superficial account of a very revolutionary idea) said, "Lorentz was right; time does transform, so let's reinterpret physics with this in mind". It was a superstition to think that time absolute, and the physicists and mathematicians of the late 19th c. had all the evidence they needed but couldn't see the forest for the trees (Lorentz, and Michelson and Morely most notably). This is why I am interested to know why you believe that the arrow of time is superstition.