Points, extension, time, waves and many times (help!!!) I have posted this on another forum. Please I am not a spammer, I just mean to find the best informed opinions I have so as to guide me on the path of truth. I have been patiently been trying to think certain riddles through, but the wise turn to authority, and you probably have more than me. I know that there are linguistic entities called points, or that we can sensibly talk about points. What I first want to know is, is it sensible to ask "is a point a thing?". I am accustomed to thinking of a thing as having 3d extention in the physical world over time t. Whereas, a point may have location but no extension. In that case it would seem that a point is not a thing (not being extended or having volume). Now in relation to location in the temporal dimension, if there is no thing which is spatially extended, can we still say that there is a time related coordinate to the percise location? If there is a "nothing" there, how can such a nothing "be" at a certain time? Isn't that an issue for the so-called singularity ie. that, without an extended universe, talk of temporality hits the fan? Maybe time emerges with extension, and is meaningless in the world of points, not just at bigb level, but across the board? So if there is no "object", does that mean there is no percise location in time? I am not too clear at all about relativity and reference frames, but it seems prima facie that the theory relates to objects, and objects to the lay person have extension rather than mere location (aren't even point particles "idealisations" where magnitude is neglible rather than properly absent?). Does this relate, if I am making sense, to QM uncertainty, and wave functions? What I am thinking is that if at the small scale an object's temporality starts to disappear, maybe this has ramifications for it's classical properties...and that a wavicle's uncertain attributes like uncertain position really describe the being of the analysand over what collapses at different locations to produce extended time. What I mean is that instead of MWI (many worlds interpretation), you get MtI (my version of 'many times interpretation', where the wave emerges as we approach the physical point, and describes via the probability distribution the spatial history of the energy "all at once"). So just as the telescope looks beyond the peresent, so the microscope might look beyond the present too. But now I really am a daydreamer borrowing terms from science. Help!