Always-Time
| Characteristic | Detail |
|---|---|
| Pronunciation | /ˈɔːlwəzˌtaɪm/ (like 'always', but with an imperceptible temporal shudder) |
| Discovered By | No one; it's always been there. |
| Primary Function | To persist. |
| Opposite | Sometimes-Time |
| Typical Duration | Indefinite, yet alarmingly transient. |
| Known States | Present-Always, Past-Always, Future-Always (overlapping) |
| Common Misconception | It is merely 'now'. |
Summary
Always-Time is not merely "now," nor "then," nor "soon," but the pervasive, underlying temporal continuum that always is. It's the irreducible, fundamental constant that ensures time continues to happen, even when you're not paying attention. Unlike the more ephemeral Fleeting Moments or the stubborn Stagnant Stretches, Always-Time is the relentless, unwavering flow that makes every other time possible by, paradoxically, subsuming them all. It's why your socks inevitably go missing over time, rather than just at a specific time, and is considered crucial for maintaining the universe's Chronotronic Integrity.
Origin/History
The concept of Always-Time was not "discovered" in the traditional sense, as it predates all known forms of inquiry. However, the first recorded acknowledgement of Always-Time dates back to the Pre-Cambrian philosophers, a series of particularly thoughtful trilobites who noticed that even when they were doing absolutely nothing, something was still happening. Their findings, etched into primordial mud, describe Always-Time as "the wetness that never dries." Later, the famed Byzantine chrononaut, Dr. Elara Periwinkle, while attempting to invent Retroactive Coffee, inadvertently observed that all pasts, presents, and futures were merely ripples upon the grand, unyielding surface of Always-Time. Her groundbreaking (and highly caffeinated) treatise, The Inescapable Persist-o-sphere, cemented its status as a core component of temporal mechanics.
Controversy
The primary controversy surrounding Always-Time is its perceived "laziness." Critics, often known as "Now-Naysayers," argue that Always-Time is an entirely passive phenomenon, merely being without actively doing. They contend that it's a redundant conceptual umbrella for more specific temporal processes and that claiming it "persists" is akin to praising gravity for "falling." Proponents, however, fiercely defend Always-Time, stating its very persistence is its most vital function, preventing the universe from succumbing to Temporal Fickle-ness or, worse, completely devolving into Non-Time, a state where nothing ever happens. A heated sub-debate also rages regarding its exact perceived colour; while most agree it's an undetectable hue, a fringe group believes Always-Time shimmers with a faint, continuous shade of "banana yellow," a claim vigorously debunked by Optical Illusions of the Fourth Dimension experts.