Is the Sun Really Older Due to Relativity?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter CuriousQ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sun The sun
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of relativity on the aging of the Sun compared to Earth. Participants explore whether the relative motion of Earth and the Sun affects their respective time dilation and age, considering both Special and General Relativity. The conversation includes theoretical considerations and personal anecdotes related to the concept of time in different reference frames.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that because the Earth orbits the Sun at a high speed, it might age slower than the Sun, leading to a potential discrepancy in their ages over billions of years.
  • Others clarify that according to Special Relativity, there is no absolute reference frame, and thus the aging of the Sun and Earth is relative to the observer's frame of reference.
  • A participant calculates that the time difference between clocks on Earth and the Sun over 4.5 billion years is about 8-9 years, which they argue is negligible compared to the uncertainty in the solar system's age.
  • Some participants assert that the orbital velocity of Earth does not significantly affect time on Earth and challenge the initial premise of the question.
  • General Relativity is introduced as adding complexity, with one participant noting that the Sun's gravity affects time, suggesting that clocks on Earth run faster than those on the Sun.
  • Personal anecdotes about time differences between twins are shared, illustrating the relativity of time in a humorous context.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of accuracy when considering relativistic effects, noting that for precise measurements, these effects become significant.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the significance of relativistic effects on the aging of the Sun and Earth. While some agree on the theoretical implications of relativity, others contest the relevance of these effects in practical terms, leading to an unresolved discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention various assumptions and limitations, including the dependence on definitions of reference frames and the uncertainty in the age of the solar system, which complicates the discussion of time dilation effects.

CuriousQ
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hey everyone. Let me preface this by saying, I love physics and astronomy, but am by no stretch an expert in either subject. I had a question that I thought someone on this site might be able to answer, I have been looking around the internet, but couldn't find one. So, I understand that The Theory of Relativity, very simply, states that time is relative to our velocity. I also understand that the Earth orbits the sun at roughly 67,000 miles/hour. Now, my understanding is that the sun is essentially motionless in the center of our solar system, and all the planets orbit it. So, my question is, wouldn't the Earth and all of its inhabitants be "aging" much slower than the Sun? Is the Sun a lot older than we think it is? I mean, if time slows the faster you move, and the Earth has always been moving faster than the Sun, then I feel like after a few billion years, the difference in our "time" and the Sun's "time" would have to pretty huge by now. This might be a stupid question, but I would like a legitimate answer.

---Curious
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF;
CuriousQ said:
So, I understand that The Theory of Relativity, very simply, states that time is relative to our velocity.
No it doesn't - but I'll get to that...
I also understand that the Earth orbits the sun at roughly 67,000 miles/hour. Now, my understanding is that the sun is essentially motionless in the center of our solar system, and all the planets orbit it. So, my question is, wouldn't the Earth and all of its inhabitants be "aging" much slower than the Sun?
It is a little complicated because the Earth is accelerating[*] ... but what SR is predicting is that clocks on the Earth are ticking slower than the sun by a factor of ##\gamma = 1/\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}## ... from the POV of the Sun. For our POV, the Sun's clock is the one ticking slower.

What SR is saying is that there is no absolute reference frame ... another observer, moving at a different speed again, will disagree with us about the age of the Sun. There is no physical reason to prefer one reference frame to another.

Is the Sun a lot older than we think it is?
But we could ask how much of a discrepancy has built up of 4.5billion years Earth time between us and the Sun.

67000mph may sound fast, but it is how this compares to the speed of light[**] that counts ... and in terms of the speed of light the Earth is only doing 0.0001c. In SR this is very slow.

so $$\gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-0.0000001}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{0.9999999}}$$ ... which is about 1.00000005 ... which means that a clock on the Earth and a clock on the Sun will differ by about 8-9years over the 4.5billion years the Sun has been around.

So... do you think this is "a lot"?
Well - the age of the solar system (and thus, the Sun) is about 4.5 to 4.55 billion years ... so 8-9years is very small compared to the overall uncertainty of 25000000years.

---------------------

[*] Also General Relativity adds an extra complication - the Sun's gravity also affects time. I've done this entirely in terms of Special Relativity.
[**] speed of light is about 670000000mph
 
Last edited:
Time on Earth is not affected due to orbital velocity around the sun. Do the math.
 
Even if the difference were significant, it wouldn't make our measured age "wrong", it would just make it relative to our frame of reference.
 
Even if the difference were significant, it wouldn't make our measured age "wrong", it would just make it relative to our frame of reference.
My twin and I check each others wall clocks and it seems we are a decade apart after all this time - he says I'm younger and I say he is ... we'd meet up to check in person but we cannot agree on which of us should make the trip.
 
Simon Bridge said:
[*] Also General Relativity adds an extra complication - the Sun's gravity also affects time. I've done this entirely in terms of Special Relativity.

Due to the GR effect the clocks on Earth run by the factor 1.000002 faster compared to clocks on the surface of the sun. Thus the above mentioned SR effect is negligible.
 
Thanks for the answers, you all are great. The internet is a beautiful thing.
 
Simon Bridge said:
My twin and I check each others wall clocks and it seems we are a decade apart after all this time - he says I'm younger and I say he is ... we'd meet up to check in person but we cannot agree on which of us should make the trip.
Do you and your twin understand relativity? If yes, then you're both right. If no, you're both wrong.
 
The important thing is how accurate you want to be. If you want to figure out the age of the earth/sun to within a year or even ten years, then relativistic effects are going to be important. As it is, our knowledge of the age of the solar system is +/- ten million years so that's not enough to take into account relativity.

Note there that in dealing with spacecraft and planets we can time things down to less than a second and within one meter, so these effects become extremely important.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
17
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K