If time was stopped, then you wouldn't cast a shadow. Normally, a shadow appears when you block the path of light so it can't reach a spot. But if time was stopped, light wouldn't move, and therefore it wouldn't matter if you blocked its path. Your shadow would actually stay in the spot where you first stopped time, because the light wouldn't be moving in to fill the spot you blocked. You would 'lose' your shadow until you started time again.
Actually, as I'm writing this, I thought of something else that basically invalidates it. How would you even be able to see? Your eyes depend on light bouncing off of surfaces and then into their receptors. No time, no movement; no movement, receptors get nothing. What if you were walking? You would actually be moving your eyes and their receptors into the light particles. What would that be like?C'mon, somebody, lend me your time-stopping device, I've got to do some experimentation.
Neurons firing outside of conscious control doesn't have inherent logical impossibilities, FSX :)
Actually the speed at which time appears to flow for different life forms is inversely proportional to their lifespan.
It's also why years appear to go faster as you grow older, as a year represents a smaller percentage of your entire rememberable life, which is usually from age 5 and on.