Energy time relationship from an observer in space

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between energy and time as perceived by an observer in space, encapsulated in the equation E↑ T↓. Participants clarify that while more massive objects may have shorter lifespans in terms of energy consumption, this does not universally apply, as larger celestial bodies like stars can exist longer than smaller, more energetic particles like top quarks. The conversation highlights the complexity of time dilation effects near massive bodies and the misconceptions surrounding the linearity of mass and time perception.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of general relativity and time dilation
  • Familiarity with concepts of mass-energy equivalence
  • Basic knowledge of astrophysics and stellar lifecycles
  • Awareness of particle physics, specifically regarding top quarks
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of general relativity on time perception near massive bodies
  • Study the mass-energy equivalence principle as articulated in Einstein's theory
  • Examine the lifecycle of stars and their energy consumption rates
  • Explore the properties and lifespan of fundamental particles like top quarks
USEFUL FOR

Astrophysicists, physicists, and students interested in the interplay between mass, energy, and time in the context of general relativity and cosmic phenomena.

Entropee
Gold Member
Messages
134
Reaction score
0
So here we have the simple equation: E[tex]\uparrow[/tex] T[tex]\downarrow[/tex]

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[tex]\uparrow[/tex] T[tex]\downarrow[/tex]

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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 86 ·
3
Replies
86
Views
9K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K