>Time exists. It's the observed difference between two states. For something to be said to exist, must it not be immediately observable in the present? Since

>Time exists. It's the observed difference between two states. For something to be said to exist, must it not be immediately observable in the present? Since state is perpetually changing, isn't "the observed difference between two states" always an observation of the past and never the present? Perhaps it is more precise to say that change exists rather than time because "the observed difference between two states" can never include the present state.