[DoctorBeaver (OP)]

Time is a force, not a dimension, and it is mediated by as-yet-untheorised particles.

As far as I am aware, there are no anti-forces - anti-gravity, anti-electroweak, etc - so there is no anti-time. That is why reverse time travel will never be possible.

Time dilation is the result of more of these particles hitting whatever it is that is moving. The more particles that hit, the more the time dilation.

The strength of the mediation is exactly that which matches the equations of relativity. So where relativity says that time will behave in a certain way, it does; but not for the reasons postulated by Einstein.

I'm still considering the implications of this so please don't jump on me too hard for being a total loony.

[another_someone]

Forces can be defined in two ways:

The traditional classical notion of acceleration applied to mass, but acceleration is a function of time - so if time is a force, then how do you break the recursive definition - the force is related to time through acceleration, yet time is a force - so which defines which?

The other view of a force, as the exchange of particles, but those particles have velocity, and velocity is a relationship between space and time, so you again have a recursive definition.

[DoctorBeaver (OP)]

Maybe the traditional views need re-visiting.

Acceleration being a function of time. Is it?

If time is a force then acceleration can be re-defined as a function of the resistance of the time-force.