>>> Timelessness, for example, is not past, or future. The "present" really wouldn't have much meaning since it derives a lot of its value from what it is not - past or future. <g> From a timelessness pov you could say that all time-based events are observable at the same ..er.. time. <g> It's tough to try and define, we're so stuck here in our thinking process.
>
>>You might enjoy Hawking's book...
>
>Try also, "The End Of Time" by Julian Barbour (www.julianbarbour.com) - proposing " ... time is an illusion. The phenomena from which we deduce its existence are real, but we interpret them wrongly."

Hi Michael,
Hey, I've wanted to read that book. Is it a good read?
Not only may time be an illusion, so may be the three space dimensions. Can we point to any one of them? No, but we perceive a 3-D space (well 2½ anyway).