Luke And Leia Ageing In Star Wars

  • Thread starter Thread starter _PJ_
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Star Star wars
AI Thread Summary
The discussion critiques a paper that calculates time dilation effects on Luke Skywalker and Leia from Star Wars, arguing that while the premise is logical, the paper lacks scientific rigor. Key points of contention include the neglect of general relativistic effects from acceleration and deceleration, absence of specific data on planetary masses and distances, and incorrect application of gravitational principles. The paper inaccurately assumes that greater gravity on a gas giant like Bespin would lead to greater time dilation without considering the equivalent gravitational conditions on Tatooine. Additionally, it is noted that time dilation is influenced by depth in a gravity well rather than local gravitational acceleration. The conversation also touches on the perceived age differences between Anakin Skywalker and Padmé Amidala, suggesting that Padmé's extensive travel at light speed could account for her aging less noticeably compared to Anakin. Overall, the article is deemed unscientific and its conclusions trivial.
_PJ_
Messages
229
Reaction score
15
I read an article

https://physics.le.ac.uk/journals/index.php/pst/article/view/716/516
that suggested graduate students (or higher) had actually bothered to 'calculate' the dilation effects on Luke Skywalker and Leia from Star Wars to show how they, whilst born as twins, could not be the same age due to differing dilation effects.

Now whilst I can completely agree with the premise, it is common sense and a logical deduction. I just cannot understand how the rest of the paper could be considered at all 'scientific' even given the events and planets etc. in Star Wars (including capability of 'hyperspace travel') are accepted.

My main disagreements come from the following points:
1) Dilation effects on timelines would be countered somewhat with the general relativistic impacts of accelerating and decelerating. This is completely ignored in the paper.
2) There are absolutely no references to the masses of planets, distances between them, or actual duration spent in any location. Without any actual numbers even to make a reasonable estimate, there is nothing to base the 'calculations' on. The whole thing is unscientific.
3) Completely wrong use of principles and neglect to consider physical laws fully as explained below:

There is a reference to "Bespin" 'Cloud City' which assumes Bespin, being a Gas Giant, must have a greater gravitational strength than "Tattooine", a rocky planet with only two significant centres of civilisation. No argument there, HOWEVER - it is then suggested that the greater gravity would cause a greater slowing of time. This would be true if the distance at which the gravity acted was equivalent, however, the motions and rock formations and healthy musculature and breathing of those on "Tattooine" suggest a very similar to Earth 1G resultant gravitational field strength and 1atm atmospheric pressure.
The same, when on the High-Altitude, FLOATING 'Cloud City' which is clearly high enough to provide an equivalent 1G combination of gravitational field strength and 1atm atmospheric pressure.
Therefore, any time dilation would be EQUIVALENT for both parties.

One twin is said in the paper to be 'on the surface of a gas giant' which is ludicrous and utterly inaccurate.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
_PJ_ said:
Therefore, any time dilation would be EQUIVALENT for both parties.
Time dilation does not depend on the local gravitational acceleration. It depends on how deep in the gravity well you are. For a larger planet, with the same local gravitational acceleration, you are deeper down in the gravity well.

Anyway, the article seems to be quite pointless. A different distance at a different speed leads to a different time dilation. How surprising? Given the setting of Star Wars, travel happens faster than the speed of light anyway.
 
The "variable aging" I was wondering about was with Anakin Skywalker and Padme. He is nine years old and she is, what, sixteen or seventeen? So she is seven or eight years older than he is- but when he becomes a Jedi, suddenly the age difference is not so large!
 
  • Like
Likes Terrell
HallsofIvy said:
The "variable aging" I was wondering about was with Anakin Skywalker and Padme. He is nine years old and she is, what, sixteen or seventeen? So she is seven or eight years older than he is- but when he becomes a Jedi, suddenly the age difference is not so large!
i was about to say the same thing! padme traveled so much as senator at light speed so she didn't age LOL
 
I wonder how much stories were written, that involve space fighters, and arent so soft as Star wars. I dont think missiles totally make fighter craft obsolate, for example the former cant escort shuttles if one wants to capture a celestial body. I dont insist fighters have to be manned (i enjoyed Enders game about someone control the events for afar) but i also think it isnt totally unjustifiable.
So far I've been enjoying the show but I am curious to hear from those a little more knowledgeable of the Dune universe as my knowledge is only of the first Dune book, The 1984 movie, The Sy-fy channel Dune and Children of Dune mini series and the most recent two movies. How much material is it pulling from the Dune books (both the original Frank Herbert and the Brian Herbert books)? If so, what books could fill in some knowledge gaps?
I thought I had discovered a giant plot hole in Avatar universe, but apparently it's based on a faulty notion. So, the anti-gravity effect that lifts whole mountains into the sky is unrelated to the unobtanium deposits? Apparently the value of unobtanium is in its property as a room temperature superconductor, which enables their superluminal drive technology. Unobtanium is found in large deposits underground, which is why they want to mine the ground. OK. So, these mountains - which...
Back
Top