Max:
The point was that it is nothing to us if it cannot be experienced …
What has not be experienced is not the same as what cannot be experienced.
… and if it is said to exist outside of our experience it is transcendent.
We have discovered many things in the universe since the Hubble telescope. Obviously they can be experienced because they have been experienced, but they could not have been experienced if they did not already exist. They existed outside our experience but are objects within the natural world, not objects that transcend it.
Other natural categories?
As the context makes clear, the mental or conscious are considered by some dualists to be a fundamental category that is not transcendent.
Music cannot be defined as what is aesthetically pleasing, as that is far too subjective and personal to pass as a definition. It must be defined as various combinations of pitch and sound duration.
There is a difference between aesthetics as a subject of philosophy and what is pleasing. The point is not whether this is an adequate definition of music but whether a form of music is the whole of music, and this is only relevant because it served as an example of why a form of the will to power is not the whole of it.
Wouldn't this conception make time completely irrelevant?
Are you claiming that Nietzsche’s concept of time is completely irrelevant?
it is a logical consequence of infinite time
So why do you say this?
You have provided absolutely no evidence that eternal recurrence is the result of what we will.
Because the first statement explains eternal return as the consequence of infinite time, it says nothing about your claim that eternal recurrence is the result of what we will.
I have provided evidence the eternal recurrence could be what we will, as any point can be considered the beginning.
First, no point is
the beginning but only
a beginning, it is, however, for the same reason also an end. Second, if any point can be considered a beginning then there has been and always will be throughout the iterations of recurrence a time prior to man, just as there was a time prior to man during this iteration. Third, it does not follow from the claim that any point could be considered the beginning that any moment is willed or that if a moment is willed that it is willed to be eternally over and over again. Fourth, if eternal recurrence is willed then we can will that there be no eternal return. Saying yes to eternal recurrence, amor fati:
My formula for greatness in a human being is amor fati: that one wants nothing to be different, not forward, not backward, not in all eternity. Not merely bear what is necessary, still less conceal it—all idealism is mendacity in the face of what is necessary—but love it.
implies that not all love fate, that only the great will eternal recurrence and that eternal recurrence is a necessity. It can be opposed, born or accepted, or loved, that is to say, willed, but if it is a necessity it is regardless of whether man wills it to be as it is.