Energy time relationship from an observer in space

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between energy and time in the context of mass in space. It proposes that more massive objects have shorter lifespans, but questions arise about the observer's perspective near massive bodies affecting their perception of time. Participants clarify that the initial assertion lacks accuracy, noting that mass does not directly correlate with lifespan, as larger celestial bodies can exist longer than smaller ones. The conversation highlights the complexity of these concepts, particularly regarding the effects of gravity on time perception. Ultimately, the relationship between energy, mass, and time remains a nuanced topic in astrophysics.
Entropee
Gold Member
Messages
134
Reaction score
0
So here we have the simple equation: E\uparrow T\downarrow

This can also be stated by saying that the more massive (energetic) an object in space is, the less time it will exist for.

But if time passes slower in areas of space near more massive bodies, wouldn't an observer near Body B notice that even though Body A has less mass, it exsists just as long in space as Body B with more mass, because the time passes slower around body B (where the observer is)?

Or is one of these exponential and the other linear?

Sorry for being extremely bad at wording my questions lol, if nobody understands what I'm trying to say it's ok.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Entropee said:
So here we have the simple equation: E\uparrow T\downarrow

This is not an equation. An equation has an equals sign.

Entropee said:
This can also be stated by saying that the more massive (energetic) an object in space is, the less time it will exist for.

This is not true. A planet is more massive than a top quark, but a planet lasts longer.
 
I mean more in a general sense of, this star is twice as big, therefore it will burn up all of its fuel twice as fast.

And I'm not trying to be technical or anything, just wondering if my idea is wrong or not.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top