Time is NOT the 4th dimension...

You say that as if centimeters are inherently written into the 2nd dimension. They're not. They are an arbitrary cutting up of the second dimension that we standardized for our convenience.

We've done the same thing with the 4th dimension of change, only instead of centimeters we use time. Time is our general name for the polysecting of change and our standardized forms of it are seconds, minutes, hours etc.

Again, this does not disprove the use of time as a dimension. To measure something you must have units! As I have already stated they ARE ARBITRARY yes, but they are agreed upon by HUMANS as a way to MEASURE our world in a MEANINGFUL way so we can do science. The computer you are using is working so we must be doing something right.
Time at least for "us" is the perception of change. It can be also thought of as the measurement of change.

In a very real sense stateofmind has a valid point that time itself is not a dimension, rather it is the yard stick with which we measure change.

Just as the x, y and z axis are not the three dimensions of space, they only represent the three spacial dimensions, such that we can talk coherently about space. Most of the time coherently. So is time as we address it within physics is the scale from which we measure change.

I don't think any of this actually demands that time not be thought of as a dimension. Any more than it demands that we stop thinking of space in terms of x, y and z. It does serve to remind us that time is a dimension only where there is change to observe and measure.

BTW This discussion about time is one that has been going on for a very long time, no pun intended, and continues even among some very prominent names. It is not only controversial, in that no one has come up with a completely convincing argument, but for the simple reason that books by prominent names in physics on the subject of time, sell well. Even books on time by some not so prominent names sell well.
How would seconds and minutes explain change in any meaningful way?

They don't Nobody is saying they do. They are simply the UNITS OF MEASUREMENT.
What things specifically change at different rates? Everything seems to continually change all at once.
Ah, okay.
So in your house a lump of lead and a dead leaf will alter at exactly the same rate?
You'll be able tell what condition the leaf is in by checking the lump of lead?
One paper.
Okay, it's new.
Wait to see whether it's generally accepted and what (if any) refutations come out.

But (from their own abstract):
Past and future belong to the inner time
The only time that exists is inner time

(Inner time being in the brain - but not claimed to be imaginary).
Sort of, er, not quite there, neh?
I.e. humans have time but nothing else does. :shrug:
(Inner time being in the brain - but not claimed to be imaginary).
Sort of, er, not quite there, neh?
I.e. humans have time but nothing else does. :shrug:

The entire world around you is a virtual reconstruction inside your brain and it is a few hundredths of a second time delayed. So how would time being in there be any different?