Time Dilation at Rest: Theoretical Perspectives

[jredinger]

I'm wondering if there are any theories of how time would be experienced by a fixed point in the universe.

I realize the relative nature of the time dilation formula, but I find myself wondering if it would be any different if there was no movement at all.

I mean, after all - we're all moving through space, quite fast in fact, at 1.3 million miles per hour according to this article:

http://www.astrosociety.org/edu/publications/tnl/71/howfast.html

Is there an accepted theory on this? Or does the formula hold true? Theoretically it seems to me that, from the perspective of that fixed point in space, time would seem to stop all around it. Is this true?

 

[Vorde]

It's not a real question.

Absolute velocity can't be defined, so all that matters is relative velocity. So your question isn't really valid, there is no 'fixed point in space' (and btw, if there was - which there isn't - time wouldn't stop).

 

[russ_watters]

Or to put it another way: you are moving at zero speed, with respect to yourself and a lot of other objects that are also stationary with respect to you.

 

[phinds]

If you are interested in cosmology, I suggest you read the FAQ in the cosmology section

 

[jredinger]

Thanks for the replies. I figured out where my logic was taking me - if everything was moving at zero speed relative to me, then obviously, from my perspective, it wouldn't be moving!

Bah.

Thanks for the suggestion btw, but at the moment I'm sort of in the frame of mind that I want to 'reinvent the wheel' because I'm not entirely convinced of it's efficiency. And I'm speaking metaphorically;) So please, no lectures on the efficiency of the wheel! Haha!

 

[phinds]

Thanks for the suggestion btw, but at the moment I'm sort of in the frame of mind that I want to 'reinvent the wheel' because I'm not entirely convinced of it's efficiency. And I'm speaking metaphorically;) So please, no lectures on the efficiency of the wheel! Haha!

If by reinventing the wheel, you mean that you intend to come here and ask questions that are already covered in the FAQ, I doubt that will go over very well. Modern cosmology is complicated enough without tying one hand behind your back by deliberately ignoring readily available knowledge.

 

[pervect]

The best case scenario for re-inventing the wheel is that you get the same results as everyone else does, but by a different process, so it becomes difficult to communicate with them. This can be mitigated if you understand the "standard" wheel as well as your own wheel, so that you are at least able (probably with some additional effort, since you are used to doing it a different way) to talk about things in a standard manner.

The worst case scenario for re-inventing the wheel is that you get different results as everyone else, and wind up isolated in your own little world. There's various unpleasant names for this, but in any event you wind up pretty much isolated and unable to communicate sensibly with anyone else in the subject.

The third scenario (and I see this more often than I'd like) is that you think about the wheel in your own non-standard way, talk about it in your own non-standard way, and that we and the rest of the science advisors spend quite a bit of time trying to figure out what you're talking about. This usually leads to long confused threads, or possibly a total lack of replies if nobody can(or wants to take the time) to figure out what you're trying to say.

There's also an excellent chance that your "improved" triangular wheel doesn't actually roll as smoothly as the more tradional round ones even if you become very fond of it.