>>103
I recently read somewhere (I don't remember where) that they're toying with the idea of time as a 4th dimension of space. It seems to me to make sense, but in any case, if it is, I don't think I can say yes to "Since light moves at the speed of light (or very, very close to it), from the perspective of the light (if you can imagine such a thing), would the light exist along all of its paths at once, if we ignore any time it hits a medium that slows it down?"

If time were itself a dimension (what could have happened in this universe without it AND the dimensions of space?), I would have to assume that light moves within the dimensions of space (albeit at an incredible rate), according to the laws of time (which is presumably the only truly 'instantaneous' 'thing'). The actual speed time moves at, as opposed to the speeds things move about inside it, is the speed we have to beat to go forwards. Even then, I don't think we could pin-point A time and zap ourselves there. We'd exist in the 3 dimensions of space, going forwards through time quite literally (as one goes forward through time in their day to day lives). Going backwards seems to me, on this basis, impossible.