How Fast is Time?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RunToFreeForFly
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Running Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the "speed of time," exploring how time is perceived and measured in relation to movement and reference frames. It touches on theoretical implications from special relativity and the subjective nature of time perception.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the speed of time is influenced by the speed of movement of an object, suggesting that time may flow differently on Earth compared to other locations.
  • One participant emphasizes that experimental evidence shows time intervals differ for objects moving relative to one another, asserting that there is no absolute speed of time.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that time is perceived differently based on one's frame of reference, with the rate of time flow being subjective and dependent on relative motion.
  • A participant argues that if one object accelerates, the passage of time for that object decreases as viewed from another object, linking this to the fraction of lightspeed the object is traveling.
  • There is a suggestion that the concept of "speed of time" could be equated to the speed of light, with implications for synchronization of time between objects at different speeds.
  • One participant humorously connects running speed to the speed of time, indicating a more metaphorical interpretation of the concept.
  • A question is raised about the existence of a FAQ on this topic, indicating a potential for further exploration of commonly asked questions regarding time perception.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of time and its relationship to speed and reference frames. There is no consensus on the concept of "speed of time," and multiple competing interpretations remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about reference frames and the subjective nature of time perception, which may not be universally agreed upon. The implications of special relativity are referenced but not fully resolved in terms of their application to the concept of time speed.

RunToFreeForFly
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
How fast is it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Exactly 1 (s/s).
 
estein said speed of time is change with the speed of movement of the object.

so the speed of time in Earth should be different?
 
Sticking to special relativity...

Experimental facts have shown that intervals of time are different for things that move relative to other things. What Einstein did was to explain it using other experimental facts.

All frames of reference are equivalent (earth = car = shuttle = particle = baseball = asteroid = random object in galaxy = Random object in Univers = etc.). While 4 seconds tick in one frame, 4.00001 seconds might tick in the other, and 3.554 s in another, and 10 s in another. (all depending on relative speed)

There is no "speed of time" anymore than there is a "speed of distance". Your question may assume there is an absolute reference frame in which time intervals are more important than in another. This is not the case. (although it was common good sense until 100 years ago, when new phenomena were discovered.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Time is flowing at a rate that is determined by your perception, or the rate at which an instrument may detect constant distance.
 
RunToFreeForFly said:
estein said speed of time is change with the speed of movement of the object.

so the speed of time in Earth should be different?
Not quite - since you are at rest relative to yourself (or your watch), you don't notice time dilation.
 
It could be said that the "speed of time" is c. For two objects that are at rest relative to one another, time progresses at the same rate for both. If one object accelerates to some arbitrary speed, the passage of time for that object (as viewed by the other object) will decrease. This decrease is a function of whatever fraction of lightspeed the first object is traveling. If you look at time as traveling by at lightspeed, you can say that the accelerating object is "catching up" to time. If this object were ever to actually reach the speed of light, time would cease to move for that object. It could be argued that the object has accelerated until it was synchronized with a particular moment, and is not traveling parallel with that moment.
 
Isn't there a FAQ on this?
 

Similar threads

Run so fast that you'd run over your back?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Why do all my clocks run slow?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Undergrad Understanding how time derivative = acceleration
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
High School How Fast Do Different Atoms Vibrate?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
High School True static equilibrium and effects on time
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
Undergrad Time Dilation Paradox: Geosynchronous Satellites
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Python Why does my loop run slower with larger lists in Python?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Graduate Question About SETI & Time Chauvinism
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
10K
Undergrad The paradox of symmetrical time dilation
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
Question about response time in PF threads
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K