Affect of deep space on time dilation

[Jzz]

I have been thinking deeply about the post on ‘TimeSpace’ by Jim Franklin (#4) in the thread ‘Dark Matter Revisited’ in Cosmology. I have been considering whether gravity would really affect matter in such a way as to cause time dilation. After much thought, I have concluded that it is doubtful. It is well established that gravity affects time, as clocks (and everything else) tick slower in strong gravitational fields. But let's consider deep space.

In deep space, far from any significant celestial bodies, a 100 kg object would exert essentially no gravitational pull because there is no nearby mass to interact with gravitationally. This would result in a negligible gravitational force, essentially zero.

Given this, what happens if such a 100 kg body were accelerated to 0.9c? The relativistic mass can be found using the equation:

m_r = m_o/(sqrt{1 – (v^2)/(c^2))

Where:

m_o = 100 kg

c= 3×10^8 m/s

v=0.9 c

Calculating:

m_r = 100/(sqrt(1 – (0.9c^2)/(c^2) (100)/(sqrt(1 - 0.81)) = (100)/( sqrt 0.19)) ≈232 kg

This gives a relativistic mass of about 232 kg, which corresponds to an increase of approximately 132 kg from the rest mass.

With this in mind, would time dilate under these circumstances? It seems there is room for doubt. However, if time dilation is not the cause of cosmic expansion, what then is the explanation? The idea of cosmic expansion might be flawed, especially since the equations used to describe it are not linear. This suggests the data may be skewed to fit certain models."

 

[Gibsense]

Cosmology. I have been considering whether gravity would really affect matter in such a way as to cause time dilation. After much thought, I have concluded that it is doubtful. It is well established that gravity affects time, as clocks (and everything else) tick slower in strong gravitational fields. But let's consider deep space.

We may get a bit confused here. This paragraph appears contradictory. The way in which gravity affects time is called Tume Dilation. Other similar effects result from speed:
Time is observed as slower in the moving object. The distance it moves over is shortened for it. The object's mass is increased (nowadays, it is preferred to say its momentum is increased).

 

[Jzz]

We may get a bit confused here. This paragraph appears contradictory. The way in which gravity affects time is called Tume Dilation. Other similar effects result from speed:
Time is observed as slower in the moving object. The distance it moves over is shortened for it. The object's mass is increased (nowadays, it is preferred to say its momentum is increased).

Thank you for your thoughts. As I mentioned, my intent was to rely as much as possible on proven empirical evidence. It is well-established that clocks slow down in the presence of gravity. The same applies to everything else. But what happens in the absence of gravity? Does time speed up? If you place a clock in a gravity-free environment, it might tick faster than in a strong gravitational field. But how significant would this effect be?

For instance, consider the Voyager spacecraft. They're in a near-gravity-free environment, yet their operations are hardly affected. So, to return to the original point about the "Timespace" theory, which suggests cosmic expansion is due to differences in time experienced in strong gravitational fields (within galaxies) versus weak gravitational fields (in the intergalactic spaces between galaxies), it seems this idea is flawed. The gravitational effects are too small to have any noticeable impact.

An interesting corollary to this, as I calculated, is that the effect of speed is also negligible when gravity is absent. For example, a 100 kg object moving at 0.9c (280,000 km/s) would have a relativistic mass of 232 kg, meaning its relativistic mass is 132 kg greater than its original mass. It turns out that using classical physics gives equally (equivalent ?) results. Using the equation K.E. = 1/2 mv^2, the kinetic energy comes out to 2×10^18 J. Using E=mc^2 to calculate the equivalent mass gives approximately 22.3 kg.

Now, if the 100 kg object is traveling at 0.9c and has a relativistic mass of 232 kg, it means that, in Earth terms, the object is experiencing a force 2.3 times greater than Earth's gravity (2.3 G). This is an interesting point.

There is always the possibility that I am mixing up kinetic energy and rest energy, but the results are still interesting.

I’d be curious to hear your views on this.