GR & Early Universe: Time Dilation & Light Speed

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of general relativity (GR) in the context of the early Universe, particularly focusing on time dilation due to intense gravitational fields and the speed of light as perceived in different reference frames. Participants explore the relationship between time, gravity, and the expansion of the Universe, as well as the observational consequences of these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that in the early Universe, intense gravity could cause time to run more slowly compared to current measurements according to GR.
  • Others question the comparison of time across different epochs, asking how one would define or measure "actual time" in this context.
  • There is a suggestion that the observed reddening of light from distant objects could be influenced by both the expansion of the Universe and potential time dilation effects, though some argue these may be two sides of the same coin rather than additive factors.
  • One participant emphasizes that the concept of a "gravity field" is not applicable to the Universe as a whole due to its expansion, challenging the notion of stationary systems in GR.
  • Another point raised is that proper time in a gravitational field is relative and depends on the gravitational potential difference between observers, rather than the intensity of the gravitational field itself.
  • Some participants express skepticism about defining a "time dilation factor" in the context of the expanding Universe.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of time and gravity in the early Universe, with no consensus reached on the implications of these concepts or the definitions used.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of time and gravity, the unresolved nature of comparing different reference frames, and the complexities introduced by the expansion of the Universe.

Juan Carlos del Rio
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
According to GR the proper time measured by an observer in a gravity field runs slower compare to another frame with no or less gravity intensity. Looking for relative implications when comparing physical phenomena in different frames with different gravity fields strength
If in the early Universe the matter density was density so large causing an intense gravity field, was the time at that epoch running much more slowly compared to the actual time according to the GR?
If so then, would any reference frame in the early Universe see the light apparently traveling faster than we measure it nowadays? What would the implications be in this case?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
More slowly than what? Explain how you would compare two clocks at different times.
 
Translating time into space. We should just look into distant stars, galaxies, CMB, etc. I guess that in this case the light received is reddened due to the Universe expansion but could it also be any time dilation factor in this reddening? Or this is just two sides of the same coin? I mean we can see the reddening as space expansion OR time dilation but never with AND
 
Juan Carlos del Rio said:
According to GR the proper time measured by an observer in a gravity field runs slower compare to another frame with no or less gravity intensity.

These statements have a very important qualifier attached to them: they only apply to a system which is stationary, i.e., whose global properties do not change with time. Only in such systems can the concept of "gravity field" even be defined.

Juan Carlos del Rio said:
If in the early Universe the matter density was density so large causing an intense gravity field

This is not correct, because the universe is not stationary; it is expanding. That means the concept of "gravity field" can't even be defined for the universe as a whole.

Juan Carlos del Rio said:
was the time at that epoch running much more slowly compared to the actual time

There is no such thing as "the actual time". Time is not absolute. It's relative. The only invariants are the elapsed time for particular observers between particular events.
 
Juan Carlos del Rio said:
We should just look into distant stars, galaxies, CMB, etc. I guess that in this case the light received is reddened due to the Universe expansion but could it also be any time dilation factor in this reddening?

There is no way to even define a "time dilation factor" for this case.
 
Juan Carlos del Rio said:
According to GR the proper time measured by an observer in a gravity field runs slower compare to another frame with no or less gravity intensity.
That's not right, although it is a very common misunderstanding. It's not the intensity of the gravitational field that matters, it's the the difference in gravitational potential between the the two observers. Consider for example two observers, one inside of a hollow sphere of matter and the other somewhere outside the sphere. The gravitational field inside the sphere will be zero - no intensity at all - while the observer outside the sphere will be subject to a gravitational field that depends on the mass of the sphere and the distance from it but which will always be greater than zero. However, it's the inside observer whose time will run slower.

Note that this hypothetical hollow sphere is a stationary system. If it weren't, there would be no way of defining the potential and as @PeterDonis says above, no sensible definition of "gravity field"
 
Last edited:
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: Torbert

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K