It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Time Dilation and Deep space travel

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 11 2005 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
I will say it again Time is relative. This has been theorized and proven. If you two can't comprehend what relativity means, that's not your fault. But apparently neither of you have even tried to understand it.


You will get no argument from me that time is relative. My argument is that a living being's lifespan is not necessarily relative. Personally, the fact that clocks slow down relative to speed does not convince me that a man's life would be longer because he is moving faster.

It has been shown that cesium atoms in an atomic clock oscillate more slowly while moving faster than cesium atoms in an atomic clock that is earth-bound and stationary. It has been shown that subatomic particles decay more slowly at speeds approaching "c," but again no one, to my knowledge has shown that the human lifespan is affected one way or another by velocity.

[edit on 2005/11/11 by GradyPhilpott]




posted on Nov, 11 2005 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
My argument is that a living beings lifespan is not necessarily relative. Personally, the fact that clocks slow down relative to speed does not convince me that a man's life would be longer because he is moving faster.


Thanks for the welcome back Grady, and a belated happy Marines Birthday and Vets Day.

You are both right and wrong here. The man WOULDNT live any longer, BUT only X amount of years would have went by in the space ship. To HIM he would have lived a normal life. Here on Earth X+ years would have passed, also at the normal rate.

I know its hard to wrap your mind arround, I have trouble with it too.



posted on Nov, 11 2005 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
You will get no argument from me that time is relative. My argument is that a living being's lifespan is not necessarily relative. Personally, the fact that clocks slow down relative to speed does not convince me that a man's life would be longer because he is moving faster.

It has been shown that cesium atoms in an atomic clock oscillate more slowly while moving faster than cesium atoms in an atomic clock that is earth-bound and stationary. It has been shown that subatomic particles decay more slowly at speeds approaching "c," but again no one, to my knowledge has shown that the human lifespan is affected one way or another by velocity.

[edit on 2005/11/11 by GradyPhilpott]

Then you don't understand what aging is. Your brain will work more slowly, your cells will divide more slowly, your telomeres degrade more slowly. Everything that defines what "age" is would slow down. Aging is a purely physical event, and all the events that govern it would move more slowly. As Amuk said, to you it wouldn't appear more slowly, and from your point of view you would only be a few years older. But to the rest of the universe, you would be thousands of "their" years old.

Or, to make it more clear, you said that "a living being's lifespan is not necessarily relative." Well, what is a lifespan other than a period of time?



new topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join