When we observe the crab nebula, for example, we are seeing it not as it is now, but how it was 4000 years ago. In the elapsing of 1 minute, a star 10,000 light years away from earth explodes and it no longer, after the explosion, is the same. It actually ceases to exist. 5000 years later, after this explosion, there still exists the light horizon that came from event. This spherical shell is as wide as the event duration; the distance that light travels in 1 minute. Due to the explosion, more light was produced than at previous normal by the star. This 1 minute deep spherical shell of light continues to travel as the star itself (which for purposes of understanding could be considered to be the event) has been non-existent for quite some years. When this band of light eventually reaches the earth, we see an increase of light of some 60 second duration and then that burst of light goes out.

Has the event has taken place?

If you say no, the event has not taken place - then no event could ever occur because the light horizon eventually continues on past virtually every other point in the universe. At what particular point does the event become official?

If you say yes - then, the event has taken place -then you deny the fact that the 60 second light horizon continues on. The idea that the event has taken place relevant to you, is not the question. (of course, relevant to you, the event is over).

This is logic that may seem silly or questionable due to the current conceptions regarding relativistic theory. It is a distinction that need be made for our current understanding of the word "event". In the above example of the explosion of a star, if we choose the "event", to be the existence of the star, then logically, when the star has ceased to exist, the "event" has taken place. The inclusion of the light horizon generated from the stars explosion in terms of the "event", is not only confusing but is where much of the misunderstanding regarding the deductions and conclusions of relativity. The star and the 60 second light horizon are two completely different phenomena. They are connected by cause and effect, they are not the same event. When the star ceases to be, the event has taken place. When you do not make this distinction for the "event", then (1) there is no universal present (2) there is no absolute sequence of events (3) there is no absolute distance (4) the passage of time is not the same under varying conditions - someone or something can age faster than another.

When you do make this distinction for the "event", then (1) there is a universal present (2) there is an absolute sequence of events as well as a perceived sequence of the light horizons from events (3) there is an absolute distance as well as a perceived distance (4) the passage of time is the same under varying conditions - someone or something does not, nor cannot under any condition age any faster or slower than anything else in the universe in terms of time.