It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# The faster you go, the slower you age, but...

page: 4
12
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 09:45 AM

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation

The question is: which effect wins out — the speed or the gravity effect? Interestingly enough, the two effects cancel if you orbit Earth at a radius of 1.5 times Earth's radius. This is pretty far out: about 1,900 miles (3,100 kilometers) high. If the space station were to orbit this high, an observer on Earth peering through his telescope would see the ISS clock and his clock agreeing.
usatoday30.usatoday.com...

I'm assuming this effect occurs at natural orbital velocity. At GPS sat orbit, adding propulsion to increase velocity may cancel the lowered gravity but I'm not positive about that. That's something I would like to know for certain.
Good catch. So 1900 miles is the zero point where time is neither faster nor slower. I had never calculated that.

I was thinking of this graph I ran across but it didn't consider natural orbits, but rather geostationary, which really isn't such a good graph because the lower altitudes shown won't really be geostationary orbits, as they won't have enough velocity to maintain orbit:

www.thescienceforum.com...

The x axis is radius from centre of earth.
The y axis is proper time added to satellite (second) per earth (equator) second from earth-equator's reference frame.
Green is gravitational time dilation
Blue is velocity time dilation
Red is total time dilation
So, someone should really make a better graph than this, showing the 1900 mile zero point, but I've never seen it.

Adding propulsion to the direction of the tangential velocity would send the satellite spiraling out into a higher orbit, and if enough propulsion was applied it could leave orbit completely. So if that 1900 mile figure is correct, that would be the only altitude where gravitational and velocity time effects would cancel out, and still be in a stable circular orbit.
edit on 15-3-2013 by Arbitrageur because: clarification

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 09:46 AM

surly, by being in the solar system and thus effected by the sun, time will never be 'space neutral'

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 10:05 AM

Originally posted by Zaphod

Originally posted by spy66

From the edge of a black hole you will start to accelrate towards the center of gravity. Your time slows down as you accelerate. But as you get closer to the center of the black hole you will start to reduce speed. And time will start to move faster again.

Here's a thought. At the very instant a black hole forms time at the centre of the (ex) star is normal whereas time at the surface must, since light stops, be stopped.......hmmm So if time has stopped how can anything move ie collapse. This is the yorkshirelad theory : black holeas are not black holes but black stars. The gradient of time across the "black" star means that as atoms vibrate (ie temperature) some will move into an area of slower time. The net effect is for atoms to drift from the centre of the black star to the surface. Completely the opposite of the current theory. My solution solves the paradox of a singularity as well !

Light doesn't stop, so the rest of your 'theory' falls apart. Light continues to move it just is on a path following bent space that doesn't allow it to ever escape the event horizon.

However, it takes more and more time to arrive at the solution...

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 10:32 AM

Why does the Earth's speed affect our aging, and how does going in a larger ellipse help?

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 10:38 AM

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

Why does the Earth's speed affect our aging, and how does going in a larger ellipse help?

further away from the gravitation effect, the speed round the sun, im not sure how much that might help, but it seems mass causing gravity seems to effect matter more than speed, since high speed is so hard to achieve.

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 10:42 AM

further away from the gravitation effect, the speed round the sun, im not sure how much that might help, but it seems mass causing gravity seems to effect matter more than speed, since high speed is so hard to achieve.

Does the sun's gravitational force also affect our molecular cohesion?

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 11:00 AM

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

further away from the gravitation effect, the speed round the sun, im not sure how much that might help, but it seems mass causing gravity seems to effect matter more than speed, since high speed is so hard to achieve.

Does the sun's gravitational force also affect our molecular cohesion?

yes, but not like the earth, simply due purely to proximity.

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 11:07 AM
I was wondering why I looked so young at an age so old.

So, if my days just keep getting faster, I will slow down my aging process.

Thanks.

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 01:45 PM

who is the one that has slower time? The answer is the one who accelerated to the faster speed. So with the above clocks. The one in the plane accelerated.

..or simply because one is closer (the one on Earth) to Earth's bosonic field, which has energy and influences atomic decay.

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 01:50 PM

Couldn't this GPS argument simply be the result of the satellite's distance relative to Earth?

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 02:05 PM

Idk. So we can tell tales of our past, to future generations, with exactness? Maybe we leave the solar system and we want to use light as our new measurement. All hypothetical of course. My question though, was could it be done since matter is subject to space-time. Could any object hold accurate? Would we need watches made of light, for it to work? You seemed to know a lil something something about physics so I asked you cause I thought you would have fun thinking about it.

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 02:39 PM
Whether fast or slow, both lead to the exact same outcome of utter nothingness. All is lost, including memories.

Once that point has been reached, there are no memories regarding the speed at which one traveled while leading up to that inevitable end result.

Nothing matters.....
Nothing.

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 02:50 PM

Couldn't this GPS argument simply be the result of the satellite's distance relative to Earth?

This is from a page I found very helpful.

The combination of these two relativitic effects means that the clocks on-board each satellite should tick faster than identical clocks on the ground by about 38 microseconds per day (45-7=38)! This sounds small, but the high-precision required of the GPS system requires nanosecond accuracy, and 38 microseconds is 38,000 nanoseconds. If these effects were not properly taken into account, a navigational fix based on the GPS constellation would be false after only 2 minutes, and errors in global positions would continue to accumulate at a rate of about 10 kilometers each day!
www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu...

edit on 15-3-2013 by DenyObfuscation because: botched format

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 03:44 PM

Originally posted by swan001

who is the one that has slower time? The answer is the one who accelerated to the faster speed. So with the above clocks. The one in the plane accelerated.

..or simply because one is closer (the one on Earth) to Earth's bosonic field, which has energy and influences atomic decay.

No because if that was the case then you could just program in the delay and they would stay accurate.

What i talking about here is not a simple time delay but time dilation due to the speed they are traveling in relation to us. Because they are moving so fast time travels slower for them and there is a constant rate at which they go out of sync which has to be corrected from time to time. This constant rate can be accurately calculated by using Einsteins formulas for time dilation. Its got nothing to do with distance from the subject, NASA scientists are way to clever no to have thought of that

No offense but the entire professional scientific community is in agreement with this fact, its been tested (if you will excuse the pun) time and time again in the lab and in the real world. It has to be taken into account when we send space ships and astronauts into space as well as satellites. There really is no doubt if Einstein got it right its quite simply correct

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 06:39 PM
Doesn't everything remain exactly the same for you, the only change is from where you've come from. Youre only extending or shortening your life relative to the people you left.

1 day is always 1 day? Your watch never speeds up or slows down in your eyes?

and to the OP I think its no, if the earth was going faster we would still age the same relative to everyone else on earth...right?

Maybe I'm reading the thread wrong but some posts seem to say that's not correct?
edit on 15-3-2013 by drock905 because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-3-2013 by drock905 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 06:41 PM
double post
edit on 15-3-2013 by drock905 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 04:19 AM

I don't think light could be used as absolute reference. According to Relativity, light is indeed constant, but your measurement of it will never be accurate 'cause time is dilated.

posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 04:20 AM

Hm.

Thanks for the input. Star for you mate.

posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 01:19 PM

Yes as you speed up time slows down so you age slower.
You will also age slower on the moon compared to earth, due to its lower gravity
while you will age faster on jupiter due to its higher gravity, as higher gravity speeds up time

posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 02:07 PM
reply to post by Angelic Resurrection

You will also age slower on the moon compared to earth, due to its lower gravity while you will age faster on jupiter due to its higher gravity, as higher gravity speeds up time

Actually it's the other way. A clock ticks slower in higher gravity.

Yes as you speed up time slows down so you age slower.

What evidence is there that biological processes are slowed?

new topics

12