If from a photons perspective it doesn’t experience time and travels zero distance in zero time, and from anything else’s perspective light clearly travels and it takes time to do so, could there be an opposite of this where from a points perspective it is moving through time, but nowhere else seems to be moving?

Since if you’re observing a moving object, that object would get less time compared to the time you perceived. Where would you get the most time, compared to everything else? Because what humanity moved outside the suns rotation and out of the milky way galaxy, so we didn’t have a rotational velocity anymore. If we did that wouldn’t we as humanity have more time in the universe before the big freeze or anything else happens?

Aren’t we also moving away from where the big bang originated? What if we made it to the center of that, and had no velocity? How fast would are time be flowing compared to everything else? Could the perspective from the center of the universe, have close to infinite time compared to everywhere else, and everywhere else compared to the center of the universe not be moving through time at all? Also, wouldn’t we then perceive the big bang as happening instantaneously, where from the big bangs perspective it could take as much time as it wanted?


closed as unclear what you're asking by sammy gerbil, Kyle Kanos, ZeroTheHero, Jon Custer, Emilio Pisanty Mar 19 '17 at 11:26

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • $\begingroup$ -1. Unclear. Too many questions. Too many "what ifs". This does not appear to be a question about mainstream physics. $\endgroup$ – sammy gerbil Mar 18 '17 at 19:17

There's a lot going on in that question, better to break it down;

Para 1) just reverse the roles, if the whole universe accelerates to near c but you don't, then it will be time dilated. Sounds unlikely, but distant stars are uniformly red-shifted.
Para 2a) it's not where, it's in the scenario where the other object accelerate to near c. Or if it is in a large gravity well, such as near a black hole it will be time dilated.
Para 2b) Accelerating the earth would time dilate it, you would need to accelerate everything else.
Para 3) Whilst an impossibility, if we made it to the centre of the universe and stopped we would have the lowest speed, and the rest of the universe would be time dilated to some extent. Not infinite it would depend on the kinetic component of universal expansion (as opposed to the expansion of space itself, the main cause of cosmological expansion). Various reasons why this is impossible, I'm afraid, like the observable universe is all we know, the location of the big band or even direction from which it occurred is unknown.
Para 3b) by the tie we got to the location of the big bang its earlier epochs would be over; light from its earlier moments would have long since departed and could not be viewed from this position.

I have only been able to make a brief summary in these areas which likely means there is some ambiguity in the words used - suffice to say a lot of reading around Relativity and cosmology will give you "proper" answers in time. (assuming, you know, you have enough... (attempt at humour))


Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.