Right off the bat I'm going to say this is really abstract. About as abstract as string theory or the thought of the speed of light being broken by a moving light source and the light coming off from suns traveling at fantastic speed.... Anywho, basically my theory is this, The size of the any object you deal with, correlates to the speed of time. Sort of how our lives seem miniscule when compared to the cosmos. Perhaps that's because our lives literally are shorter when compared to the happenings in space. So with this in mind, really small things like cells and bacteria, experience time at a speed slightly faster than we do, and solar systems, galaxies what have you, experience time greatly slower than we do. I realize that this is pretty damn "out there" but then again science is full of things that are out there aside from the "practical" applications..
So your saying that an ant who lives 1 year and a human who lives 85 years both have an equal amount of time on the planet according to their perception?
It sorta makes sense if you think about it, like how dogs and cats age quicker then humans.. 1 year for us is roughly 7 years for them...
Actually, It's only seven years for the first two. The rest of the years they age by four. And yall are thinking too narrowly...cosmically speaking there isn't too much of a difference in the sizes of cats and people. I'm talking the differences between "us" and the universe at large and the animal cells at small...
So how do things age? Do smaller things age faster? What about a fruit fly it only lives fora day? But then again cockroaches live long ... without their heads. Omg this theory is as sound as a migraine, but all you need is to refine it, coz at the moment it aint saying shit. So light up a bowl and start philosiphising, [FTW] I would love to help but I don't know what you're tryin to say here
I think it is probably true that time and space contract together however I don't think the effect is noticeable at the kind of small scale differences as human to fly or bacteria. That being said, I do believe it is completely true that a fly's 'perception' of time is slower than larger creatures like humans and that the difference has more to do with their metabolism than the affects of spacial contraction. Birds perceive time slower too (you can tell from their movements / reaction time) and their hearts beat at 1000 beats per second when under load. It's like the frames per second of a camera, the more frames you have, the apparently slower the motion. When the universe was much younger and more tightly distributed, time was probably going at an absolutely slower rate and if we could somehow look into that ancient universe from our perception within the current space distribution of the ever expanding universe, it would probably look like it was moving much faster. Back to the actual phenomenon of space/time contraction; I would think local to any time frame the passage of time will go at a 'normal' speed according to our perception. Birds don't perceive their world in fast or slow motion. To us they move too fast, for a fly they may move quite slow. I gotta load this bowl.
an ant would experience time at a slightly faster rate actually because ants are closer to the center of the earth than humans are. Time dilation has more to do with the distance to gravitational mass, as well as relative speed, and not necessarily the gravitational mass of you or me, or an ant or a bird. an organism's perception is something else entirely though
What I'm saying about perception is that in a fly's timeframe our movement is slow, to us theirs is fast; and to both it is normal.
Question: If time is the fourth dimension and space is expanding, does that mean time is also expanding? Or if time is relative, does it even exist?
space and time are one in the same, thats why physicists refer to it as space-time. and yes according to string theory and m theory the fourth dimension is time. the fourth dimension exists as much as the first three do. to fat cat, humans move faster than flies do, only we are larger and therefore it takes less to move from one place to another. movement has nothing to do with time, only relative speed, and our speed is greater than that of a fly.
time dilation wouldnt take effect in a matter of a few feet from the ground where an ant lives to a 6 ft tall human. our feet are on the ground too so they arnt any closer to the center of the earth than we are. if what your saying is true then if i layed on the ground time would go slightly faster
I think perhaps you are missing what I wrote. What I wrote has much less to do with movement and is much more about the dichotomy between space time dilation due to the expansion of space since the big bang and the speculative effect this might have on both the perception of the rate of the passage of time by an observer in a given timeframe as well as the apparent contraction of the passage of time experienced by an observer outside the same timeframe. if that makes it clearer.....
it would only be a difference of a fraction of a second over a lifetime. i never said it was significant. Sergei Krikalev, the current holder of the record for longest period of time spent in space at 748 days, is actually living a fraction of a second in the future because while he was in space he was moving at 16000 miles an hour.
The hearts of men are easily corrupted and the Ring of Power has a will of its own. I think you have an interesting point with the Cosmonaut. WHY does going faster make time dilate? It just does not seem intuitive to me at all and whoever it does seem intuitive to must be spending WAAAY too much time filing patents in the early 20th century...Einstein for one. lol Also nice pic of Arnold
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHjpBjgIMVk]YouTube - Time Dilation - Albert Einstein and the Theory of Relativity[/ame]