So we in the information age we will all live longer so long as we are always on the go…
When you’re at maximum speed (i.e., the speed of light), you’re at minimum (zero) aging.
I do have a question that will show my ignorance on the theories of relativity. You mentioned as an example:
So, if you’re standing “still” and I run by you, time is moving slower for me.
If you were to stop and we were to meet together it seems to me that we are in the same moment/time rather than you being some finite time behind me, or am I wrong here? If not then does time catch up as you inferred in your comment/post:
(It’s like you have a certain amount of energy, some of which is dedicated to moving, and some of which is dedicated to aging. When you’re at minimum speed (i.e., at a stop), you’re at “maximum aging.” When you’re at maximum speed (i.e., the speed of light), you’re at minimum (zero) aging.
I’d be up for an interesting read but would you suggest something to better understand relativity and quantum physics to more appreciate the book you read?
If you were to stop and we were to meet together it seems to me that we are in the same moment/time rather than you being some finite time behind me, or am I wrong here?
Read my post that replies to the same one yours does for a more complete picture, but here’s a little bit simpler response to this specific question…
If I run by you for a little while, so that my clock runs slower than yours, we can’t “meet up” unless you also traverse that same distance. You’d have to move towards me, slowing your own clock down.
That’s not the complete explanation, but it’s a sort of obvious implication that corresponds to the same oversimplification Brandon’s example uses.
The Comprehensible Cosmos, by Victor Stenger, is an excellent little book.
Welcome! OmniNerd's content is generated by nerds like you. Learn more.