andy-k wrote:

I've never encountered a convincing means to enable continuity in an
objective step-by-step process or cognitive-independent flow of time
scenario. Last week or earlier I allowed it as a possibility /
alternative because bringing up the problem might sidetrack into another
lengthier issue, but now it seems ripe, is the focus.

A division of motion into a unit or division of *time* into a unit
(either universal or otherwise) creates a gap in what would otherwise be
unbroken (not involving constant creation and annihilation; eternalism).
Without a universal moment, the whole cosmos would not be winking in and
out of existence (or alternating briefly into something else) because
not all particles would disappear simultaneously. But there would still
be those interwoven, uneven micro-processes engaging in such
discontinuities. A "growing past" model might have continuity in regard
to what it was preserving, but it would be assimilating or adding a "new
unit" as it progressed, which seems to amount to discontinuity at the
"front end".

So for me, perhaps it's not so much a matter of what there is to gain by
positing it, but a matter of how to avoid it.

posted by Ecce