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?
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
-
$\begingroup$ What does "affect" mean? Does the intermediate value theorem affect physical processes? $\endgroup$– WillOCommented Sep 28 at 13:31
Add a comment
|
4 Answers
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
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.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
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.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
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
answered Apr 25, 2021 at 10:38
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
9
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.
-
$\begingroup$ 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. $\endgroup$– Laff70Commented Jan 4, 2020 at 17:50
-
$\begingroup$ @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. $\endgroup$– GianniCommented Jan 5, 2020 at 8:58
-
$\begingroup$ @Gianni So SR slows down clocks but not living creatures? What about dead creatures? Want some fish? $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 25, 2021 at 11:22
-
$\begingroup$ @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. $\endgroup$– GianniCommented Apr 26, 2021 at 12:17
-
1$\begingroup$ @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. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 26, 2021 at 13:39