This article is currently unfinished.

In my previous post, The Tyranny of Addition, I talked at length about how Euclidean geometry necessarily arises from any "reasonable" geometric axioms.
However, this was fundamentally a question of *space*, and I not once raised any questions of *time*.
There were some other thoughts that I had on the matter, but they were somewhat inappropriate to include in the main text.
Therefore, they were separated into this relatively brief article, to be presented on their own.

Time can be conceived of as a progression of events, placed in a linear order. Event *A* happens before event *B*, and this is always so.
The current conception of time places it on par with space, as being an ultimately Euclidean geometric structure.
While this has certainly been reinforced by physics since the era of Albert Einstein, this conception ultimately predates him.
Time has been imagined in recent centuries as being a continuous linear order (and therefore a Euclidean continuum) in the following manner:

- There exists an event.
- Events can be placed in a linear order.
- For every event, there is an event in its future.
- For every event, there is an event in its past.
- Given a pair of distinct events, there is an event lying strictly between them.
- (Often unstated, yet assumed) This order is complete, in that "it has no gaps."

The first two assumptions are seen as given by most people. The third and fourth are at least locally true, but some people object to these holding globally. The fifth assumption is not as obvious, but many people can eventually be convinced that it is true. The sixth property is where most people tap out. Not because they object to it, mind you, but because they have never really considered that this was ever an issue.

This article is currently unfinished.