To the question in your title, my Magic 8-Ball says:<blockquote>It is decidedly so</blockquote><hr>*Hi! I'm a bot, and this answer was posted automatically. Check [this post out](https://steemit.com/introduceyourself/@magic8ball/introducing-the-magic-8-ball-bot) for more information.*

I think the universe is psyched even beyond our imaginations, I think time isn't really a determining factor, I don't want to go Darwin or creation theory, but there is a big touch of something divine in the universe

Wow. This is some deep learning 

No. To start, there is far more data needed than "matter" or "no matter", unless the only thing you are trying to model is gravity, and even then how much matter is vitally important.

Second, the universe doesn't actually consist of blocks. The planck length is the smallest length you can measure due to how light works, but that doesn't mean everything fits into integer multiples of it. And string theory suggests there are structures in the universe at even finer scales.

Thirdly, Quantum mechanics says that objects do not even have fully specified locations. They exist in a probabilistic manner, so there is no hard edge of "matter here" and "not matter there".

Fourth, it doesn't account for things which are not matter, like photons, which are extremely important.

Fifth, the mapping to translate an index into this string into a 3d coordinate is shifting. The universe is expanding, so the conversion to and from the byte stream is going to change moment to moment, and so the array is unworkable.

Sixth, moments aren't discrete timesteps either. It is continuous, so you can't just break it down to a series of simple steps you apply rules on and remain accurate.

Seventh, not only is time not discrete, its not even consistent. Relativity says time flows at different rates in different places and for different things.

Eight, the universe is not deterministic. I will grant that taking in the set of all previous states of the universe in their entirity does get around bell's inequality, it does mean that your model is non-local.
#Researched

Good questions. Easy answers. ONE.: time is change of entropy. Nothing less, nothing more. The other word is action. Cf. de Broglie's hidden thermodynamics. TWO.: Of course they can be all predicted, you simply need infinite resources of spacetime and mass-energy to do it. A bigger universe in hand to run your target universe all future states. Cf. Claude Shannon 1940es. THREE.: What base deterministic you ask about? If you ask about unitary probability - even so I reckon because the non-unitary probabilistics ( with non-binary code ) must be renderable / compressible to unitary ( where probabilities add up to 1 or 100% ).

**What is time?**
*A dimension of the fabric of the universe.*

**Is time merely the current configuration of the universe or is it something else?**
*The configuration of the universe is dependent on time, time is not dependent on the configuration of the universe.*

**Is time an illusion?**
*No.*

**What role does entropy play?**
*In an open system entropy increases over time. (At least for now. If inflation ever disappears and the universe begins to contract for some reason e.g. unaccounted for dark matter/energy, then this will no longer necessarily hold true.) Time doesn't care what entropy does.*

**Can all possible future states of the universe be predicted from previous states assuming everything is casual?**
*No. You would never be able to:*
1. *Measure all previous states, or even just the current one.*
2. *Store all of the the position and movement data for everything in the universe within the same universe.*
3. *Carry out the necessary calculations without affecting the result.*

<p>This post has received a 0.94 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @dana-edwards.</p>