Yep, I know your ideas, Amrito. But personally, I consider the atemporal concept somehow unbalanced. The Universe is based on dynamic equilibrium of dualities: space-time, matter-energy, and so on. The removal of time or space concepts bring an unpleasant reductionism into such view, thus removing its internal symmetry. It's like to constrain all perspective to the internal perspective only, while neglecting the outside view. This doesn't says, the atemporal Universe is nonsense, it's just one of many particular perspectives, which our Universe allows. Some others are proposing the Universe composed of time or energy with the same "success".
By AWT the time is the spatial coordinate perpendicular the Aether density gradient, defining the space. From this point of view, the time can be defined by geometry of underlying space, so I can understand your perspective. The only problem is, this concept must remain recursive to be working. From this point of view the avoidance of time coordinate in physical models brings no significant simplification - on the contrary. After all, the atemporal concept isn't nothing very new here (I know the atemporal ideas of
J.A. Wheeler,
D. Bohm,
P. Yourgrau,
Dennis A. Wright,
J. Barbour's,
P. Lynds,
Ron Larther and some others) - but I'm still missing some testable predictions of these concepts. The acceptance of atemporal concept is mainly utilitarian problem, not the technical one. If you ask the people to believe in your concept, you should provide them some advantage in understanding for it.
A. Einstein: "
Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler".
