The philosophy of naturalism holds that all that exists in the Universe. All that exists at all is physical existence that science studies
There isn't a separate realm of mental events; there isn't a separate realm of mathematics. There's just natural stuff in nature that science describes. If you believe that you are a naturalist
However, there is a big division within naturalism depending on your view of the nature of time and I am going to talk about naturalism version one, or what might be called timeless naturalism which is the presently dominant view. 
It is the view that Einstein was reflecting from that quote. It is the view in which time neither disappears nor exists within another dimension. In any case there is no objective reality to our experience of the present moment within naturalism version one
So let's talk about naturalism version one and then I will explain what's wrong with it and then I will explain what's wrong with it. Then I will introduce you to naturalism version two which is intended to be a cure for the problems that arise in version one, so is everybody with me. 
Okay
Naturalism version one started also with the Greeks, with the Atomists providing a conception that nature is nothing but atoms moving in the void
All sensory experience that we have. All the sensations. All the colours. All the sounds. All hardness. All softness. All texture is all just a reflections of the way atoms can be arranged and moved
In other words, atoms, which are according to Democritus and Lucretius eternal and unchanging. The properties of the atoms don't change 
Just like the properties on the list of the elementary particles on the standard model don't change in time. The charges in the different groups of the quarks and the electron and the neutrino, don't change in time. We assume that the elementary particles have unchanging properties. They move according to laws which are unchanging
In a space or a void which is also unchanging. Now that's had to be updated a little bit with general relativity but that actually can be incorporated into the philosophy. This is the picture. Atoms moving in the void that all else is secondary. Is emergent as we would say.
Emergent in the present era and anything that is not a demotion of the position of an atom or a collection of atoms is emergent. Is a property which is not essential to the fundamental description of nature which only emerges from collective properties of materials of atoms on a large scale
This is the philosophy that I think that we all believe in and I am not going to be challenging its essential aspects but I will be challenging it on one point which is the relationship to the notion of time as we see
And to say it very simply if the laws are timeless. If the laws are not the result of some process of dynamics or some process of causation; they are inexplicable within the methods that we physicists have to bring to science
we can explain why this is the way that it is, we can answer why something is the way it is when it is the cause of some cause or process that evolves with time. The presumption that the laws of nature are timeless, that are not phenomenon that are influencable or evolvable means that they are outside explanation. They are inexplicable and that's the crisis of physics that we face
