Yes, and let's use a "fun metaphor!" Suppose that you and I are sitting in a snug, space station near the planet Venus, continuously watching the spinning Earth. We count an integer, each time that England, specifically say Greenwich (near London), passes its shortest line of sight to us. We would be counting time in a linear, "forward going" series, just as we do for counting days or seconds here on Earth. But there also would seem another form of time which we could call "circular time" (actually used, but in a different philosophical sense, by the Greeks and by many earlier civilizations) whereby as Memphis (M) passes, we count say 1/4 of an integer or 6 hours. And a philosophical difference is that we "label" the number 6 with the concept "Late." For Auckland (A) we count, say 12 hours and Calcutta (C), say 18 hours. And we "label" the number 18 with the concept "Early." But then when Greenwich (G) comes around again we would, in this second description of time, start counting from zero again AND, in a certain logical sense we have a different "form" of time definable as: "The Perception of Lateness Relative to OnTimeness." The OnTimeness is here described by when the point G passes. The concept Early is indeed a "Form of Lateness." It, in theory, can be a "supersymmetric" Form of Lateness whereby an approximate, meridian rotation of pi radians transposes "Earliness" into "Lateness." Linear time "t," time I, counts 1,2,3, --- etc. (our days), whereas circular or "Rhythm Based Time" (RBT), Time II, counts 1 to 24, 1 to 24, --- etc. (our hours). Yes, the two are related in obvious ways. For instance, ironically, a wrist watch is circular but is generally considered to measure time I, or linear t! But time I, and Time II are also different, as especially evident if we transmit a message from the space station to Earth that is only encoded in Lateness relative to the passing of point G. For example, a laser pulse 6 hours Late when we are over M, then 6 hours Late again, also over M but on the next, or a subsequent rotation of the Earth, could encode the message: "My orbit is stable." Whereas a laser pulse 6 hours Early when we are over C, then 6 hours Early again on the next, or a subsequent rotation, could encode the message: "Is my orbit stable?" Notice that, if after the first message, a change of direction of RBT (counting from 24 to 1, 24 to 1, --- etc.) keeps the signal pattern the same (the data is 6,6) but changes the message from the declarative to the interrogative. (As a relevant digression, two pulses from Earth to us when we are over G could signify an affirmative answer; the same but when we are over A, could signify a negative answer). Linear time t has gone onward from G1,G2,G3, --- etc. but RBT has changed from 6=M=Late to 6=C=Early. And  the declarative message 6,6 has changed to an interrogative 6,6 merely by counting 24 to 1, 24 to 1, --- etc., or reversing the direction of RBT.
     Two important issues can now be related to this "Earth-rotation metaphor." #1 is to ascertain how RBT can, in this case, be orthogonal to the t-labels or "timetags" carried on the laser vectors. For this we must perceive that RBT as measured at equinox, on the equator of the Earth, is identical to RBT measured on a longitude line orthogonal to the path of incoming energy. At any instant, supersymmetry (a property of RBT), can transform such arcs on a sphere. Issue #2 is that the Earth cannot change its rotational direction, principally because it has mass (and therefore momentum), but RBT has no mass, no energy, no momentum and therefore it can change rotational direction very quickly, simply by way of the encoding mechanisms of the information transfer. 
     RBT, just by being bi-directional is a different form of time than linear time t. It now appears to some, to be a "missing element of reality" for both relativity and quantum theory.