• NASA’s 2026 cislunar time goal relies on deploying lunar atomic clocks and LunaNet for universal synchronization. • The paper argues this effort commits a category mistake, treating synchronized time as ontic rather than epistemic. • Ryle’s philosophy and Spekkens’ quantum insights help distinguish observer‑dependent clock models from real entities. • Forward‑In‑Time‑Only assumptions and the Wood‑Spekkens fine‑tuning argument expose hidden inconsistencies. • A transactional, bilateral atomic interaction model offers a philosophically sound alternative to unidirectional time distribution. • The study demonstrates how quantum‑mechanics clarity can resolve large‑scale engineering misconceptions.

Article Summaries:

  • A recent paper in computer‑science arXiv critiques NASA’s White‑House‑mandated Coordinated Lunar Time (LTC) program, which aims to deploy atomic clocks on the Moon, compute relativistic corrections, and broadcast a unified time standard via LunaNet by December 2026. The authors argue that the project rests on a “category mistake”: it treats synchronized time as an ontic, independently existing entity that can be transmitted from authoritative sources, whereas time is actually an epistemic, observer‑dependent construct. Drawing on Ryle, Spekkens, and quantum‑foundation concepts, the paper shows that the LTC’s assumptions are philosophically flawed and proposes a transactional, bilateral‑clock alternative instead.

Sources: