Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Could the speed of light and time be relative to scale? For instants, relative to us an atom moves very quickly because it exists in such a smaller scale than we do. On the other hand a galaxy looks like it is a snapshot in space. It hardly moves at all relative to us. If we were at the same scale as a galaxy then we would see the galaxy move very quickly. We would look out to super clusters and they would appear to move slowly, but how fast would they move if we were the same scale as the super clusters? Scientist's are basing the age of the universe on our scale. How long is 15 billion years to something the size of a galaxy, or a super cluster, or even to the universe itself? If you were the size of the galaxy you would see how fast it is actually spinning. 15 billion years to us would seem like a very short time to you. By the time you could bat an eye millions of generations of people would have come and gone. To us you would not appear to be moving at all. For example, you look at your watch. It is 12:00 noon. You instantly grow the size of the galaxy and you notice the galaxy is rotating quite briskly. You then wait till your watch turns to 1:00 pm. Only one hour has past for both you and the galaxy. However, when you shrink back down to normal size you find that millions or even billions of years have passed on earth. The volume of the Sun is 1,299,400 times bigger than the volume of the Earth; about 1,300,000 Earth’s could fit inside the Sun. This would mean that one day for the sun would be like 297 years for the Earth. So to the Sun the Earth is really whipping by fast. This could also explain why it takes a sun so long to fizzle out. That is just the Earth relative to the Sun. How much bigger is the Earth relative to us. Are there any mathematicians out there that can figure this out? My guess is that 1 day for the Earth is like billions of years for us. Just a side note but it kind of puts a new spin on the Bible account that it took six days for God to create the heaven’s and the Earth.
I see what you mean; the way small things seem to move really fast compared to us (like electrons), and big things, like galaxies seem to move really slow.....but, if there was no time, how could there be space? Wouldn't the dimensions be really screwed up? And time and the speed of light are mutual and interdependent, aren't they? So wouldn't it be impossible for the speed of light to be relative to scale? I mean, it's LOGICAL that small things can move faster because they take up less SPACE, and galaxies already take up a lot of space. Light would take much, much longer to cross a galaxy than an electron, and a galaxy doesn't have enough "unused time" to travel as fast as an electron because E=MC2 (I don't know how to type a little "squared" two) Still, it makes me think... there must be something ELSE, like some other kind of scale, because even if we travel near the speed of light, and we are aging comparatively slow to others who are stationary, that's ONLY relative... we'd still feel like we were aging at the same "speed" if there was nobody to compare. WHY???
The answer is no, it isnt according to all peer reviewed, repeated experiments that have been done about light.
Time Relativity with Regard to Scale Hi Brutus, I have pondered the same thing that you have described since I was young (junior high or high school). Every now and then I would try to Google the idea to see if anything came up but your post is the first I have seen. I think this is due to the fact that I don't know what to call this idea. In the subject I called it Time Relativity with Regard to Scale but I'm sure that it's known by a different name. The fact that an ant can take 20 paces for every one of my paces in the same amount of time seems to suppor this outlook. Not that my time is being affected but that the perception of time is different. I know you mentioned the speed of light in your paragraph but I guess i think of it as perception thing. Though at the atomic scale things move so fast that if there were life time would be measured at their particular scale (perhaps there would be a coresponding "light speed" at their scale that involved something much like our photons but at a sub-sub-atomic scale). Anyway, it was nice to read your ideas and see that I wasn't the only one that thought that way. I also think of space as an ocean or medium of subatomic particles, Einstein would have called it a matrix but some earlier scientists would have called it the luminiferous ether. I like the latter term even though it fell out of favor (I think they were right).
