Wouldn't the principle apply to a moving car? If it had an exact position, then it wouldn't be moving and has no velocity. If it is moving, it doesn't have an exact position.

It seems to me the biggest mistake physics makes is assuming time as a dimension.

As these mobile organisms, this sentient interface between our body and its environment functions as a sequence of perceptions, in order to navigate. So our concept of time is as the point of the present, moving past to future. Which physics codifies as measures of duration and treats as similar to measure of distance, in space.

Logically though, change turns future to past. Tomorrow becomes yesterday, because the earth turns. Potential>actual>residual.

There is no literal dimension of time, because the past is consumed by the present, to inform and drive it. Causality and conservation of energy. Cause becomes effect.

Energy is "conserved," because it manifests this presence, creating time, as well as temperature, pressure, color and sound. Time is frequency, events are amplitude.

So the energy goes past to future, while the patterns generated go future to past. Energy drives the wave, while the fluctuations rise and fall.

Like consciousness goes future to past, while the perceptions, emotions and thoughts giving it form and structure go future to past.

So when we model time as this dimension in the matrix of spacetime, the events have to be primary to the actual dynamic generating them. The map is assumed to be more fundamental than the territory on which it is based. So the idea of "position" existing out on that time dimension seems to make sense, but the underlaying dynamic is constantly generating and dissolving the actual situations.