This thread raises some interesting philosophical questions. From pre-history, time was always marked from the point of view of the observer. It was day or night, depending on whether the sun was 'up' or down,' with the position of the sun indicating the 'hour.' The 'season' was determined by the observed length of days and how high the sun reached in the skies, and 'months' were determined by the moon's observed phases. Always the 'time' was from the point of view of the observer, although that we now know day and night, summer and winter, are not the same everywhere on the earth. Eventually we realized these differences. As science progressed, along with more precise measurement, we became able to relate the 'now' here with the 'now' there and tried disassociating our concept of time from the observable, setting it up as its own constant to which we could relate our observations. Then along came modern physics, and we realized time isn't really a constant after all, that it can in fact vary on the according to the observer, particularly as an observer might travel at speeds approaching the speed of light. Once again, we realized that our concept of 'time' depends on the observer.
Which brings me around to this question - does the perception of time vary between that of an observer sitting in a chair while giving a spanking, and that of another observer draped over his/or her knee with a good view of the carpet, receiving that spanking? | 
Page 1 of 3: 2 3 »»