Three elements seem to characterise human development in the early twenty-first century: technological advancement, sociological attitudes and Time. An example of this could be seen during George Bush’s election campaign where every new Democratic election broadcast was seen and countered in less time than it took me to power up my computer. Of these three elements, considerable amounts have been written about the first two. This might be because we have a curiosity about what gadgets may influence our lives in the future, or because we have a need to watch ourselves and understand why we do what we do. Time it seems has been neglected and it does seem to have an image problem. It is seen as either dusty and archaic, like the workings of a grandfather clock, or at the higher echelons of mathematics, too complex to be explored with the average person’s intellect. Perhaps we try and ignore it because it has an erosive effect on everything around us. Nothing really gets better the longer it exists. It may, in instances like Life and Technology, contribute to an evolutionary process which leads to a greater good. It doesn’t stop each element within that evolution from becoming obsolete or dying.

Where is our relationship with Time going? Is the relationship one of love or hate? These questions came to me, not in the cloisters of an academic institution nor in a local library. They arose out of a simple situation I find myself in every day – waiting at a set of traffic lights. As they changed from red to green a vehicle shot through the junction in front of me. Had I accelerated quickly there would have been a crash. Of that I have no doubt. My response was fairly typical. I drove off, attempting to make eye-contact with the reckless driver, while mouthing the most offensive, least ambiguous language I could think of.

I wondered afterwards what had made me feel such animosity towards this unknown person and settled on two factors. First, I had expected a car to jump the light and had anticipated with resignation if not glee the opportunity to verbally abuse a complete stranger; second, the vehicle had not been a car, it had been a bus. The passengers expected to reach their destinations within a reasonable margin of error, not spending a night in hospital. The only explanation for such wanton disregard towards the highway code by an operator of public transport is the presence of a bomb designed to go off if the speed of the vehicle dropped.

Not wanting to fuel the ‘life imitating film’ debate I needed another theory as to why this driver put his charges, and myself, at risk. The purpose of amber on a set of traffic lights is to provide motorists with a warning they should prepare to stop. At some point, because red meant stop, amber became a signal for some motorists to accelerate and thereby avoid stopping. Nowadays this seems to be fairly standard practice and God help any pedestrians taking a premature step. Now there are an increasing number of vehicles jumping the red light because to stop and wait is seen as an unacceptable delay. The margin between the light turning red and a vehicle continuing through it appears to be increasing. These drivers are, I would hope, not suicidal idiots so why do they do it?

I believe it is simply the next step in our temporal evolution where, to put it plainly, the fastest are the ones who survive. Hasn't that always been the case? The greatest leaps we have made as a species have resulted from being able to do things faster. The Renaissance was built on the speed with which texts could be produced. The Battle of Britain was won because of the precious time Radar gave to counter Nazi raids. As time has passed the effects have accelerated. The Industrial Revolution valued the concept of time as much as it did steam power. Henry Ford seized on the idea that if you make it simple you make it faster and his production lines ensured that demand for motor cars was satisfied. The success of the fast food industry was made possible by reducing cooking to its most basic blocks.

Two problems emerge out of this. First of all, individuality goes out of the window. The Model-T rolling off the production line was identical to the ones in front and behind it. The chicken nuggets you have in a fast food franchise in New York will taste identical to the ones you have in the franchise in Sydney - I know! The second problem is that people are not bothered. Worse, we have become addicted to this acceleration. Our disappointment and frustration grows the longer we are kept waiting for something.

What concerns me is this process cannot keep going. There are certain absolutes you have to accept, points that can’t be crossed. People are beginning to worry about what will happen when the silicon chip reaches its limit, no-one's thinking about what will happen when we hit this temporal singularity?

We have gone from an appreciation of craftsmanship with a long creation time, through ‘fast’ things, where we get something more quickly even if it is less satisfactory. We are now at the 'Just In Time' stage where if we want something it is assembled as the demand is expressed. What next? Is it possible to have something even faster than it is to want it? Unfortunately this is where my IQ packs up and goes home. The philosophical, sociological and mathematical giants pounding my brain defeat me. I can see something, but I can’t quite understand it much less articulate it. It looks like the gridlock of a junction where no-one bothers to look because they’re addicted to being at their destination.