In time dilation, does the "aging" referenced include biological/ physiological aging? for example, in the identical twin concept, is it possible for the twin who travels to space and back to have actually aged so much that by the time he returns his brother is dead of old age? in other words, does time dilation affect physiological processes?
Asked
Active
Viewed 4,837 times
4 Answers
6
Time dilation affects time itself, which means that it affects absolutely everything. For the twin that traveled away and came back, literally less time will have passed for him than for the twin back on Earth. So he will have aged less, his shoes will have worn out less, the turbines on his spaceship's pumps will have rotated fewer times - everything.
Mark Foskey
- 3,250
4
Every object has its own frame of reference. So, time dilation only means that, for this case, the twin in space is aging slower according to the twin that is still on Earth. However, according to the twin in space, he is aging normally in his frame of reference. In other words, yes, time dilation does affect biological aging. It just affects it differently depends on whose perspective you're with.
ConfusedStudent
- 435
-
What is normal aging? – Lambda Jan 04 '20 at 17:57
0
Yes, if the space twin goes fast enough and goes far away enough before returning , then his twin brother on earth would be dead when he comes back
silverrahul
- 4,446
-4
Time dilation on living creatures (and more in general to any experiment scenario not limited to light or e.m. wave propagation phenomena) is at the moment still only a speculation of the applicability of SR theory and no experiment has been conducted as far as I know to prove it. To note that such a situation, i.e. with different ageing scenarios depending on the reference frame you choose is contrary to a single physical universe assumption, and would led to the generation to infinite ones just based on the definition of an arbitrary inertial reference frame from which to look at the experiment.
Gianni
- 175
-
Time dilation slows down everything. This includes the physical processes involved in aging biological entities. Also, the existence of different frames of reference doesn't necessitate the existences of different universes. If one were to transform their frame of reference to another being's frame of reference, they'd agree with each other. Thus they're apart of the same reality. – Laff70 Jan 04 '20 at 17:50
-
@Laff70: the statement "Time dilation slows down everything" is an assumption if not proved experimentally. Concerning the multi-universe, that is a consequence of the possibility of choosing infinite arbitrary constant velocity moving inertial reference frames from which for the duality of the Lorentz transformation all the others should experience time slow down, i.e. different ageing on living systems. Infinite different physical systems at the same time starting from a single reality. – Gianni Jan 05 '20 at 08:58
-
@Gianni So SR slows down clocks but not living creatures? What about dead creatures? Want some fish? – Hartmut Braun Apr 25 '21 at 11:22
-
@HartmutBraun: nobody has provided until today any evidences of different ageing of living creatures or even of different clocks ticking (apart from atomic ones) in case of reciprocal movement at different speeds. That's a fact. And drift of atomic clocks can be justified by many different relativistic theories, including also those foreseeing absolute time, and not only by Special/General Relativity. – Gianni Apr 26 '21 at 12:17
-
@Gianni I don’t understand. You seem to agree that atomic clocks slow down due to relativistic effects and at the same time you seem to imply that “normal“ clocks may not slow down? I also don’t understand the experimental setup you have in mind when you talk about reciprocal movement. – Hartmut Braun Apr 26 '21 at 13:39
-
@HartmutBraun: a drift in atomic clocks has been measured and well characterised by a relativistic model containing a kinematic and a gravitational term. This model can be obtained both from Einstein SR/GR relativity theory as well from other different relativistic models, including absolutive time based theories. The fact there is a measurable time shift between moving clocks is simply telling us that there is an "effect" acting on the moving atomic clocks. Any generalisation to any type of clocks and to living creatures is still a speculation because we have no evidences. – Gianni Apr 27 '21 at 15:11
-
@Gianni A clock is a device that counts cycles of a periodic process. In that respect, an atomic clock does not differ from any other clock. This generalisation to any clock (including biological clocks) stems from most basic physical principles (independent from SR). When an atomic clock drifts, any clock drifts. It’s actually not the clocks drifting, Time itself drifts. – Hartmut Braun Apr 27 '21 at 15:34
-
@HartmutBraun: Atomic clocks drift may be caused by physical interaction with matter (including dark matter), not implying a generalisation to any clock or to leaving creatures. We do not experimental evidences for excluding this theory a general one targeting the a whole spacetime deformation. No dogma but experiments count in science. – Gianni Apr 28 '21 at 16:24
-
@Gianni „experiments count in science”. So true. All experiments done so far confirm the effects predicted by SR and GR (One of those experiments is running all the time: GPS would not work correctly if GR effects, e.g. time dilation, would not be taken into account). What kind of experiment is it you have in mind that would prove the aging effect? I guess your answer would be „Nah, this guy just has bad genes“. I see people here at stack exchange shaking their head. Not about you but about me still discussing with you. – Hartmut Braun Apr 29 '21 at 04:55