Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Reply to ‘Rhythms alone cannot explain subjective time’

Nature Reviews Neuroscience volume 27, page 237 (2026)Cite this article

Subjects

I thank Carmelo Mario Vicario for their thoughtful comments on my Perspective (Buzsáki, G. Time, space, memory and brain-body rhythms. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 27, 61–78; 2026)1, in which they raise three objections to the brain–body–rhythms account of subjective time (Vicario, C. M. Rhythms alone cannot explain subjective time. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-026-01024-6; 2026)2.

First, Vicario argues that the theory of magnitude3 “must be incorporated into any comprehensive theory of time.” I agree that there are abstract, unit-free relationships between number, space and time. However, I view the theory of magnitude as a special case of the Weber–Fechner (WF) law, which governs a wide range of subjective experiences — sound, light, touch, weight, number, distance, memory and duration — under a common logarithmic rule. According to the WF law, only the ratios between observed variables have physiological meaning, because the unknown is always grounded to the known; absolute units (such as metre, second or ampere) are human inventions. Thus, the WF law incorporates the theory of magnitude, and both emphasize a ratio relationship.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Buzsáki, G. Time, space, memory and brain-body rhythms. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 27, 61–78 (2026).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Vicario, C. M. Rhythms alone cannot explain subjective time. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-026-01024-6 (2026).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Walsh, V. A theory of magnitude: common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity. Trends Cogn. Sci. 7, 483–488 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Poeppel, D. & Assaneo, M. F. Speech rhythms and their neural foundations. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 21, 322–334 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Neuroscience Institute, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York University, New York, NY, USA

    György Buzsáki

  2. Department of Neurology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York University, New York, NY, USA

    György Buzsáki

  3. Center for Neural Science, New York University, New York, NY, USA

    György Buzsáki

Authors
  1. György Buzsáki
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to György Buzsáki.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Buzsáki, G. Reply to ‘Rhythms alone cannot explain subjective time’. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 27, 237 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-026-01025-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-026-01025-5

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing