Earth time dilation vs Sun time dilation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of time dilation as it relates to the Earth and the Sun, specifically examining claims made in a MinutePhysics video regarding the passage of time on both celestial bodies. Participants explore the implications of mass on time perception and the twin paradox scenario in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference the MinutePhysics video stating that 24 hours on Earth equals 86,400.0 seconds, while on the Sun, it is 86,400.2 seconds, questioning the implications of this claim.
  • There is a suggestion that if time passes slower in the presence of more mass, then a twin on the Sun would be younger than a twin on Earth, challenging the video's assertion that more time has elapsed on the Sun.
  • One participant proposes that the video might mean that 86,400.2 Earth-seconds would pass while only 86,400 seconds are measured on the Sun, indicating that the Earth twin would age more.
  • Another participant emphasizes the ambiguity of natural language in describing time dilation, noting that a clock on the Sun would always show less elapsed time compared to a clock on Earth, leading to the Sun clock being younger over time.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of the time dilation effects described in the video, with no consensus reached on whether the video's claims are accurate or if they contradict the principles of time dilation.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of describing time dilation and the potential for misinterpretation, highlighting that natural language may not effectively convey the nuances involved in these concepts.

orion1977
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
In the MinutePhysics video "How long is a day in the Sun?" it is said 24 hours on Earth is 86,400.0 seconds, but on the Sun 86,400.2 seconds would pass.

However, if time passes slower with more massed objects, then wouldn't a twin on the Sun be younger than a twin on the Earth? If so, is the video wrong in saying more time has elapsed on the Sun?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
orion1977 said:
In the MinutePhysics video "How long is a day in the Sun?" it is said 24 hours on Earth is 86,400.0 seconds, but on the Sun 86,400.2 seconds would pass.

However, if time passes slower with more massed objects, then wouldn't a twin on the Sun be younger than a twin on the Earth? If so, is the video wrong in saying more time has elapsed on the Sun?


I suppose they mean 86,400.2 earth-seconds would pass while you measure only 86,400 seconds on the sun. So time would flow slightly slower, and the Earth twin would age more (by .2 seconds per day).
 
orion1977 said:
However, if time passes slower with more massed objects, then wouldn't a twin on the Sun be younger than a twin on the Earth? If so, is the video wrong in saying more time has elapsed on the Sun?
Natural language isn't well adapted for describing things like this unambiguously. As @Gan_HOPE326 says, if you put a clock on the surface of the Sun and sat on Earth with a powerful telescope watching that clock, it would not show that 86,400s had elapsed until slightly more had passed on your own clock. The Sun-based clock would always have a lower (and getting farther behind) reading than your clock - so it would be younger than yours by an increasing margin.

I haven't checked their numbers.
 
Last edited:
Ibix said:
Natural language isn't well adapted for describing things like this unambiguously.

(slight aside: it's funny I should read this remark today as I've just started reading the story from which the movie "Arrival" is adapted and

it dwells a lot on how different the language as well as the physics of an alien race with an a-temporal perspective is. For example they find extremely natural and fundamental the concept of "action" while they need to derive quantities such as velocity. Similar considerations I assume would apply to someone who developed in a context in which relativistic effects are daily occurrences.

)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
5K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K