Is Time Speeding Up?

[@anywallsocket]

Hawking wrote about this way back in the day. The fact that the Universe was so much more dense back in the day, means it was deeper inside its own gravity well, and so time will dilate relative to our reference frame.

[@monstrositylabs]

But our reference frame was part of that universe.

[@filonin2]

@@monstrositylabs No it isn't. We cannot see our own past. We can only see the past of far away objects.

[@smlanka4u]

Hawking is wrong about Black Holes because they absorbs hidden matter. Therefore, they don't decay in vacuum. There speed can increase when they can't absorb dark matter, and then they would become liquid material energy.

[@charlesnathansmith]

​@@smlanka4uwhat on Earth are you on about?

[@smlanka4u]

@@charlesnathansmith, Observations confirmed that Black Holes causes galaxies to move away from each other while increase their mass from nothing.

[@DrBenMiles]

If light is a point-like particle, how does it get stretched by a universe expanding around it? I want to know what you think...Leave your answers in the comment section down below 👇

[@bastiaan7777777]

If light is a point-like particle, it can travel TROUGH an expanding universe around it without stretching itself.

[@davidgodin6485]

Adjust the kerning

[@GregoryCarnegie]

I'm guessing you can't pinpoint where the photon particle is due to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Its position in space is described probabilistically by some wave function. And what's actually red-shifting is the wave function rather than the point particle itself.

[@PearlmanYeC]

Pearlman YeC: how many particles in a light beam emanating from the average visible stellar object? so as the fabric of space is inflating / expanding there will be fewer particles per a fixed amount of volume that contains that light. for the higher probability alt. on when, where why 99.99% of the visible universe we see here and now departed reference SPIRAL cosmological redshift hypothesis and model, volume II of Pearlman YeC alignment of Torah testimony, science and ancient.

[@nighttrain1565]

If you were to imagine space-time like a grid and each square on the grid of 1 cm is equivalent to 1 second passage of time. It wouldn't matter if time and space stretched. To the person in the space-time stretching 1 cm will always be 1 cm and one second will always be 1 second. The stretching and dilation observation only comes into effect as the observer not as the experiencer. This is why it is wrong when scientists say that time passed slower in the early universe. It did not. Time actually passed faster In the early universe but because of dilation and the observer effect it only appears to have ran slower because we are observing it from here and now. How the entire scientific community has this unanimously wrong baffles me.

[@unshackledjester]

Clearly the reason the photon is red shifted is because the light is old and tired and had to walk uphill both ways to reach where it wanted to go, and crossing all of known spacetime is exhausting work. It isn't as energetic as these new whipper snapper photons, but it doesn't cry about how unfair the universe is or "how it wanted to see the stars, but got absorbed by a plant!" or "how scary black holes are" or how annoying lensing effects can be from objects that just can't bring themselves to stop eating. The old photon is content to just carry along, no matter how tired and weak, until if finally finds a place to rest.

[@michaelccopelandsr7120]

Time is fascinating. I worked the subway stations for nearly 10 years. From one end of the city to the other. Every so often I would notice the city would be saying that, "Today just flew by" or "The day was just dragging along." How can an entire city, with no interaction with each other until they used the subway, complain about the same time paradox unless it was effected by it? MAYBE a time distorted bubble the earth passes through in its revolution around the sun. MAYBE they're the effects of gravitational waves. Either side of the wave effecting time just enough for we humans to notice. Making time seem to drag on the upside and fly by on the downslope. MAYBE they're given off by the sun. MAYBE they're from outside our Solar system and reach us in intervals. ???? 🎶Ti-i-i-ime, is on my side. Yes, it is!🎶 If you can think of a better way to do a blind survey of an entire city, in the small window of opportunity, I'm all in. Until then, I invite you to spend a couple years in the subways during rush hour and you'll see for yourself. Just listen as an entire city gets off of work and gets out of school. You'll see it's more than a, "coincidence of circumstances." ;-P

[@jlee1014]

I was discussing this with a friend and thought that if time moves at different speeds everywhere due to the gravitational impact of surrounding objects, how can we say our measurements of distance to far away objects in space are accurate? Wouldn’t distance be inherently unmeasurable at large distances due to all the matter & objects the light has to pass by/through to get to us?

[@patrickbennett439]

Well times gotten faster just in my 41 years on earth. When I was a kid, it was quite a bit slower than it is nowdays.😄

[@charlestaylor3195]

I've thought about this, and just came up with more questions. How would we know if our time has slowed, sped up, or even stopped, because to us time would seem normal no matter how time travels. If time stopped, I don't know how you could measure how long it stopped for. Also, it would seem that the speed of light would change right along with time. Come to think of it, if light speed was unaffected by time we'd be able to detect and measure changes to the speed of our time. Great video.

[@MichaelWinter-ss6lx]

But speed is a factor of _distance_ by _time_ 🚀🏴‍☠️🎸

[@msaif6598]

Hi, interesting topic indeed. Just ask an old person how much things would she or he would have been able to do back then when they were young in a certain time (morning perioed for example), like 40 or 50 years ago and whether she , he or any person would be able to do the amount of things in the same amount of time today, you would be much surprised :)!

[@neonemptiness8152]

Time just seamed to move slowly because there wasn’t so much to do

[@monstrositylabs]

Exactly. Boredom caused the inflationary epoch

[@STaSHZILLA420]

So, is this similar to how humans experience time as children compared to adults? When comparing your second birthday to your first birthday, You could say that 50% of your life had been lived. As you grow older, each birthday is a smaller and smaller fraction of your total time lived, so it almost appears as if time speeds up when you get older.

[@DrBenMiles]

I always liked this idea

[@CarFreeSegnitz]

To mess with your head still more… senior citizens often describe time subjectively slowing down again in later life. Probably has to do with the busyness of the individual. From 20-60 people tend to be frantically working, looking after others, studying, etc. After retirement from paid work a lot of activities drop away, fewer things fill up the day freeing the mind to contemplate the ticking clock again.

[@robotaholic]

I don't know you from anybody else on the internet, but I love your style of teaching. You are humble or at least not at all arrogant. I'm glad I subscribed. 🤩🤘

[@CarFreeSegnitz]

Could we see light originating from beyond the cosmological horizon? Not just that the emission came before it slipped over the horizon but light that was emitted when the object was already over the horizon. A fortuitous line-up of gravity lenses that pulls up that light like a bucket chain?

[@filonin2]

By definition, no. Lensing does not change the speed of light.

[@Kraflyn]

Nice title, very informative. Super original too!

[@SamtheIrishexan]

I remember reading a study about Astronauts aging slower. They did a study on twins it was interesting. If just being in space dialtes time, time must be something we can one day interact with.

[@MichaelWinter-ss6lx]

Interacting with it all the time, from birth to death. 🚀🏴‍☠️🎸

[@levibsilasintlltd.3394]

Just a thought. Time slows down where gravity pools are. The higher the gravity the slower time is perceived. It's possibly the same thing when an object moves farther and farther away from a gravitypool. No gravity pool ..no perception of time. Massive pools perform the same but in am opposing ways. Singularity when mass is so crushed into an infinite weight.. perceptions stop. Regards

[@nickifiable]

3:21 Is it possible that a supernova could be creating too much light (ie too many photons) to fit inside a given volume, and the “time dilation” is is caused by a decrease in concentration towards a more favorable equilibrium over long distances?

[@rayoflight62]

We all know that the various particles and waves that sums up into the Universe, are not small spinning balls or travelling waves, but each of them is a variation in lockstep of all different fields which are spread across the Space. They appear to us as particles and waves because of our modality of observation ingrained into our logic reasoning; we have a set belonging to a set, the Gödel theorem of incompleteness, and the principle of cause and effect which make us see a totally distributed Universe as one made of particles and waves which we can observe and cross-correlate thanks to another great work of the human inventiveness, i.e, Time. My idea is, that the scientist in the early Universe is dreaming 5x slower. Interestingly, our mathematical construct of the Universe still stand when you don't think anymore in terms of particles/waves/physics laws but purely in terms of fields in lockstep. I'm not referring to the vibrational modes of the string theory, but of an Universe made of fields construed so to not respond to the Set Theory, but creating the theory as it goes along, so to be free of antinomies (logical contradictions) and, most importantly, free from probability waves. You asked to write in the comments what I think about the travelling of "light jiggles" in Space: this is my thought, the thought of a philosopher. Greetings Anthony

[@ShawnHCorey]

Yes time did move slower in the early universe. This is caused by masses being closer together than now. The gravity well was deeper in the past and according to general relativity, time moves slower. And since time moves slower, the universe is smaller. The expanding universe forms a positive feedback loop where time gets faster, distances increase, and the rate of expansion increases.

[@ronald3836]

Slower according to which clock?

[@ShawnHCorey]

@@ronald3836 Our clock now.

[@ronald3836]

@@ShawnHCorey Thanks. So this is just what we expect from general relativity (as you indeed wrote). The end of the video made this also clear. Can't wait for a gravity-well card to plug into my PC to make it faster 😀.

[@HirenMehta-vv3ij]

Really informative, will use it in my lesson plan, for my y13's thanks Dr M

[@TCASAnalytics]

Maybe this could offer some explanations on how SMBH and ancient galaxies grew so much in such a short amount of time...

[@F_L_U_X]

9:40 the great Cosmological TreadmilllllllllllLLLLLLLLLLL

[@mediawolf1]

I thought the effect wasn't caused by distance, per se, but relative motion-ie, due of expansion, distant objects are moving away from us. And we observe any object moving relative to us as having a slowed clock. Is this correct? If so it wasn't fully clear from the video.

[@nrclee]

my layman take: Light is composed of photons, which is a massless wave/particle. Although it has momentum but it not have the mass/gravitational-pull to hold the form in an expanding universe (without influence of gravity). It would be interesting to see if we can measure the different distance when gravitation pull of nearby objects produces differential wavelength stretching through the course of its journey. ie the red shift for CMB of the same distance could be different depending on its journey towards us. Would be good if someone could be so kind to explain to me how wrong i am...

[@GB-je5tc]

Salurations Dr Ben... what are your thoughts on multiple Universes (linearly spread out) as opposed to there being just currently visible galaxies within the greater Univers-o-sphere (s)... ie Multiple Big Bang events spread out across time or distance? We don't exactly have an extensive grasp on the dimensions of our own "known" universe. Why can't there have been (or yet to be) MULTIPLE Big Bangs. We are unfortunately limited to what the eye / "telescope" can see, and yet we know now that bacteria or atoms exist, despite that we could't usefully touch them then or now Could multiple Big Bangs constitute "alternate" universes where physics typically follow currently know coincidental parameters? Where Universes possibly even flow as quantumly entangled "cubits", chaotically changed with each new variable or galactic development. Could these theoretical Universes possibly flow as a lava lamp? You advised in another video that Earth's lava is changing our Magnetic pole if not our rotational pole as well. It makes you just wonder in awe doesn't it? I hope the hereafter allows us to really travel in a meaningful way across time /distance. Cheers mate 🖖👍

[@jiveturkey26m]

Blue light emitted in a slow universe will turn to red as time speeds up. Could this mean there is no expansion just time changing from slow to fast? Maybe CMB is light from an even slower universe, and radio waves would be light from an even slower universe.

[@BennyCFD]

Ben, I understand time dealation. The faster you go time slows down, but happens on the other end of the speed/velocity spectrum how fast is time at or near zero speed/velocity. Is it ultra fast..................

[@Josh-tl5ug]

Its the expanded version of the spacetime difference you see in flights... the further away from the gravitational source the faster time has to compensate for the fixed speed of light. So... doesnt sound so farfetched

[@finspin8577]

Light redshifts because as the universe expands, the distance photons have to travel increases. Their packets of information become less and less frequent due to the time they've taken to reach us.

[@42Hz]

Photon behaves as a wave while travelling through space. When it interacts with anything and gives off all of its energy - then we can see particle-like effects.

[@thomasschon]

I asked my friend Bard about it. Your questions about photons, the expanding universe, and redshift are all interconnected and fascinating. Let's delve into the nature of photons, their wave-particle duality, and their behavior in an expanding universe. Photons as Wave-Particles A photon, the fundamental particle of light, exhibits a unique property known as wave-particle duality. This means that it can behave both as a particle, with a well-defined location and momentum, and as a wave, with a wavelength and frequency. This duality is evident in the double-slit experiment, where a single photon can create an interference pattern, a characteristic of wave behavior. Photon Expansion in an Expanding Universe The expanding universe, as you mentioned, does not expand individual particles like photons. Instead, it stretches the space between them, resulting in an increase in the wavelength of light. This effect is known as redshift. To understand redshift, imagine a light source emitting photons in all directions. As the universe expands, the photons travel through a larger and larger expanse of space. This stretching of space causes the wavelengths of the photons to elongate, resulting in a shift to longer wavelengths. This is why distant galaxies appear redder than nearby ones - their light has been redshifted due to the expansion of the universe. Photons as Point Particles While photons exhibit wave-particle duality, they are essentially point particles. This means they have no internal structure or size. However, their energy and frequency are associated with their wavelength. Redshift as a Cosmological Indicator Redshift is a powerful tool for understanding the expansion of the universe. By measuring the redshift of distant galaxies, we can determine their distance and the rate of expansion. This information helps us trace the history of the universe and its evolution over time.

[@harshad761977]

Time speeding up, universe expansion is also speeding up. There must be some connection between them. If there is any direct correlation then there can’t be time or spacetime without expansion of universe

[@filonin2]

Well yeah. Time moves slower in a gravity well and as the universe expands it is a less and less deep. Time would still go on without expansion though, it would simply move at a constant rate.

[@stevewhitt9109]

A photon is just a concept. It represents a fluctuation in an energy field. A photon is not stretched but its wavelength associated with the fluctuation is lengthened. A photon does not actually spin. Spin is a classical idea that was labeled with the intrinsic property of angular momentum. SpaceTime is a single entity. Stretching one part does affect the other. Altohugh time is relative, it will slow down and speed up.

[@jasonmorahan7450]

Okay for what it's worth, here's what I've got. The electromagnetic field is a gravitational field and that's because gravity is topographical time dilation. I would therefore explain redshift over distance with the sum of local topography at a macro scale, or curved, infinite spacetime. The time dilation is causing the redshift and the expanding universe is just the human perspective. Of course, philosophically speaking that would make photons the gravitons everybody's been looking for or more precisely another product of the same field like ice in water or salt in brine. Also have a more logical inflation theory, all you need is absolute entropy and you know Brownian motion is what happens in a virtual particle field, so if nothing exists in the last instant past the last entropic decay of everything that exists the very first thing which happens is an extreme variation in the virtual particle field and what does Relativity say if only one piece of mass-energy exists in the entire universe? It is the entire universe and everything which may ever be immediately collapses upon it in order to exist and the engine driving it? Simple entropy creates it all. If you finally have absolutely nothing it must be followed by the big bang creating absolutely everything, the thing which stops that is having something other than nothing but where there is absolutely nothing, that causes it. Brownian motion was the tell.

[@demonicar]

It’s been like 12 years since Skyrim came out. Yea, time is moving WAY faster. Maybe because we are approaching a the end?

[@kaczan3]

Yes, like in The Langoliers.

[@FunkyDexter]

Time only exists as a measure of processes, it doesn't have an independent existence. The way time enters in GR is through a "metric", i.e. a measurement. It's all about comparing clocks. Saying time went by slower in the early universe is simply stating that processes happened slower with respect to now, but an observer in the distant past would experience NO difference. This is the same reason we locally measure the speed of light to always be the same: every single process is fundamentally dependent on information transfer, and this transfer happens at the speed of light. If that speed is slower, no measurement can detect the difference unless you have an external reference frame (i.e. the distant universe). In essence, the energy density of space was higher in the past, and this in turn means the coordinate speed of light (not the local!) was also slower. This translates as a slower ticks of clocks when viewed from earth. The speed of light is NOT constant in GR, because gravitationak fields are NOT inertial frames of reference. It's that simple. GR swapped this postulate out for "light travels on null geodesics".

[@knightjacob80]

7:54 it just means there is a difference in energy not shape.

[@P-G-77]

Fantastic question... in fact, ... i ask me, frequently... "hooo my GOD... WHAT??? Isn’t it possible that the month is over? "

[@F_L_U_X]

2:40 How would we ever find a single photon from that long ago with things like black holes and gravitational lensing?

[@filonin2]

Why would black holes or lensing hinder and not help in that search?

[@F_L_U_X]

@@filonin2 Hold up, Tom...you threw me off

[@F_L_U_X]

@@filonin2 It would hinder because there's no clear line of sight between the light from the early Universe to us...no? It would be like a Universe-sized house of mirrors

[@knightjacob80]

I hear what youre saying but i have a thought as well. What if the reason "time moved slower" is because there were less differences and as the pieces expand and collide it creates differences and the more differences, the more things change which looks like faster time because the amount of changes is more than in the beginning. Like a particle collider smashing only 2 things together but once they break and combine the differences are subject to entropy but its the changes between now and then that give time a meaning.

[@jakerz0]

Nice mild Douglas Adam’s paraphrase 😉

[@danwall9301]

Would two observers at different points in the universe observe the same magnitude of time dilation?

[@windfoil1000]

Does the greater gravity caused by the increased density of matter during the early universe cause time to slow down from our perspective? And will the future dilution of matter cause time to speed up?

[@robotaholic]

You said to put any questions you have down below so here is my question: how can two black holes merge if it is a fact that nothing in the entire universe can escape the Event Horizon of a black hole what happens when the object is another black hole and nothing can escape its Event Horizon? I know this is hypothetical and it will probably never happen but if you have two black holes identical in every way except one has swalled 1 additional proton than the other black hole. Does the biggest one slurp on the smaller one?

[@robotaholic]

I'm sorry I didn't type it clearly and it's not just one question. I'm sorry for that, too lol

[@armstrongro]

As always really enjoyed your video. There is one thing that continually bugs me about the world today. That is people saying things like 5 times slower. You gave me a brief moment of hope when you said one fifth. If something takes 10 second to reach earth and something else is 5 times slower then 5 x 10 = 50, 10 - 50 = -40. So, it is going to take minus 40 seconds to reach earth. This makes no sense and scientist, of all people should stop doing it. I know what it is meant to be saying, but science is about reporting things accurately and this way of saying things, is not right.

[@filonin2]

Why would you subtract 50 from 40? There is no reason to find the inverse difference in travel times. We are not talking about the difference but how many times faster it is, which as you can see, 50 seconds is 5 times more than 10 seconds and 10 seconds is 1/5 of 50 seconds. Grade school math. Scientists know basic math and it's crazy you thought they didn't.

[@armstrongro]

@@filonin2 I never said they didn't understand it. I am saying they should use incorrect terminology. You cannot move 5 times slower than something. You cannot be 5 times smaller than something. It is 1/5 the speed/size or whatever it is you are measuring.

[@anoopkvpoduval]

What's fast and slow? It's more and less distance per time. What's time slowing down? Less time happens per time. Time's on the numerator and denominator.. numerator time goes slower than denominator time? How's that possible? 😮😮😮

[@UFOxBAE]

Time is slow for me 🤷🏽‍♀️ I was fortunate enough to not have a job I hated and never got stressed like a lot of people and I don’t spend all day on my phone and I’ve never had TikTok I feel people don’t think about the fact that time speeds up for those on their phones

[@42Hz]

For me it is still looks believable that the time was going slower in early Universe. It sounds as a more elegant explanation that just variable speed of expansion

[@filonin2]

This would not effect Inflation. Inflation occurred at 10^-32 of a second after the Big Bang and its volume increased by a factor of at least 10^78. Time would have to move 10^78 faster, not slower.

[@michaelccopelandsr7120]

My idea so I get to name it! What I mean is, no one has claimed it so I'm officially calling, "Dibs." Voyager 1 is now in the, "Milky Way's interstellar time" or "Mikey's Time." "V-ger's" message has sped up now that it's outside our Sun's, "Time Bubble," or, "Terran Time." It will be faster, still, when "V-ger" sends a message from beyond the Milky Way's time bubble. Then there's Outside the Local Group time bubble. So on and so on until we get outside any influence and into the, "True Interstellar Time Standard." Or, "T.I..." ;-P Now that "V-ger" is outside our Sun's reach, in interstellar space, it's now in the Milky Way's faster moving, Interstellar Time or "Mikey's Time." This can be proven by turning off everything except its clock and transmitter. Have "V-ger" read time for as long as possible. They WILL show the flow of time speeds up the further away you get from any celestial bodies. Until you reach the Milky Way's time standard or "Mikey's Time." •Our sun's time bubble: "Terran Time" we know and have measured. In a lifetime, our head is one second younger than our feet. •Milky Way's time bubble or "Mikey's Time." The rate/flow of TIME outside any influence but within the Milky Way: We just got there and are still figuring what the difference is. Wild guess I'd say time will increase in speed, now and until V-ger is outside the Ort cloud. •Local Group's time bubble or the rate/flow of time outside of any influence but within the Local Group: Name still open and unknown. Wild guess .08 P-22% to a couple seconds faster, maybe. Used just for reference. •Outside any influence in the, "True Interstellar Time Standard." (or T.I...) ;-P This name is NOT up for grabs. The rate/flow of time is fastest here. (Time flows fastest here so it's best to use a motor boat and hold tight. Always applies when you're in T.I....) ;-P A minute is a minute in all. It's the rate/flow I'm talking about. Heck, rivers of time flowing differently might explain dark energy and dark matter. The Milky Way's Interstellar Time Standard will be known as, "Mikey's Time." Pass it on, please and thank you!

[@MrAdammace]

Does the whole red shift phenomena mean that as the wave length lengthens the photon is losing energy ?

[@ErikSmuts]

Why is it that the Shapiro effect is almost never mentioned as one of the reasons for the observed red shift of far away galaxies, given that the Shapiro effect is an confirmed reason for the slowing down of time or light for that matter?

[@msaif6598]

Let's have a look this way: Time is relative to space. A small planet would have the chance to revolve more times than a bigger planet, thus would a shorter day periods than a bigger planet. Earth is planet, in other words an object. Imaging that Earth erodes/ wears out at the edges through the years, that means it gets smaller and smaller, the revolving time would change accordingly, as a result the day time of the planet would be shorter though it is still 24 hours as always! (even planets/stars age, don't they)!

[@nighttrain1565]

I can't believe everyone has this completely wrong. How does the entire scientific community have this backwards?? Time did not move slower in the early universe it moved faster. When the universe was a more consolidated state time passes at a faster rate. It only looks to be going slower because we are in a less consolid state now looking back.. It's an illusion of relativity. As the universe expands the passage of time slows. Time is slowing everyday from the standpoint of an observer. As an experiencer our internal clocks never change to us. If we were to look back in time from our current location it would look as if time was moving slower but it wasn't. That's just relativity. Time passed fadter in the early universe. This is not a hard concept to grasp... I just can't believe literally everyone has this wrong..

[@filonin2]

If only you had any evidence to show what you say is true then maybe all those fools doing research could be shown the way. Also, relativity says time slows in gravity wells so it actually says the exact opposite of what you claim. Maybe, just maybe, the random burger flipper living in his mom's trailer could be wrong. Nope, you're right. Go get your Nobel Prize and Million Dollars. 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡

[@alldavids4202]

The question, “Did time always move at the same speed?” - is so strange to think about. The question seems to posit some third party timekeeper that keeps a canonical standard time by which we can judge other times. I love science for these brain twisters.

[@Agui007]

The vibrations are speeding up within us so we move through more time.

[@richardjarrell3585]

My sister would cavil that grammar insists upon “more slowly”. “Slower” is an adjective, not an adverb. (“Faster”, however, can serve as both adjective and adverb.)

[@TheRotnflesh]

All of existence is frequency and vibration. From the smallest perturbations to the largest light-year wide gravity wave the universe is vibrating. Our planet is vibrating. We are vibrating. We define these vibrations as different things but they are collectively 1 symphony. There are physical fractals of this and philosophical fractals as well. One of the reasons science can't answer all of the questions is that, sometimes, quantification is just not possible. Quantify the soul. Quantify a thought. Quantify faith, or love, or pride. We cant quantify everything, and this is where science is failing.

[@foghornlongleg4236]

The older Time gets the more space time it is stretched, the smaller the universe, the slower time is, the bigger the universe, the faster time is.

[@michaelwicks7680]

I'm so sorry but doesn't it make sense that if the universe started at an infinite density then expanded all the laws of physics including time started at that point and expanded all of which is accelarting, then time must have started slower and is now accelerating with the universe, therfore time must have been slower in the past🤔

[@elvest9]

Only 10 million years and the first galaxies start to disappear from our view. Better hurry up if you plan to live that long.

[@ronald3836]

If 1 hour lasted 5 hours, we would call it 5 hours, not 1 hour.

[@johnyaxon__]

That's what she said..

[@PearlmanYeC]

In Pearlman YeC, just like we see CMB from a uniform departure point at up to a few light days beyond SPIRAL LY radius i, so too all stellar objects beyond SPIRAL LY radius i we see from a uniform departure point of SPIRAL LY radius i. Radius i defined as the nearest LY departure point of any light arriving here and now that has ever been subjugated to any cosmic expansion. reference Pearlman YeC SPIRAL cosmological redshift hypothesis and model where the entire universe became gravitationally bound by the end of 4/365.25 (SPIRAL LY radius i) a fraction into history. The more distant the object, the earlier they crossed radius i, the denser they were as the universe transitioned from hyper-dense to mature size and density. So massive revisions required in the cosmic distance ladder, on light departure distance, at best we are getting the relative distance. Also see Pearlman vs Hubble.

[@alanmalcheski8882]

that's fantastic but nothing you're saying is officially accepted physics. Space stretches? And time has to stretch too because that's how spacetime is? That's not the science. If time dilates in a 3D way then space would theoretically get smaller and bigger too. So all your calculations about distant objects would have to include that factor, or be wrong.

[@tasentriessomething7965]

yeah its because of made in heaven duh

[@staticmode25]

2024 is a jojo reference

[@Nilcha-2]

Frequency of light indicates how much energy a photon has. Perhaps, photon loses a very little bit of energy as it travels through vast space, and is slightly more red shifted. And off course the universe is expanding by a lot, the main component of the red shift as we know today. In the early universe, there was more energy and less space, so photons had very high frequency. As it expanded and cooled, photons lost it's energy and red shifted even further. So 3 components to the red shift, not just universe expansion. All this, no science, just my imagination 😂

[@CarFreeSegnitz]

Tired light theory.

[@Nilcha-2]

@@CarFreeSegnitz Thank you. Didn't know about that theory. Live and learn 😄

[@magnetmountain33]

Cool story bro my clock in my 20-year-old car is losing an hour every three weeks!!! the old stopwatch says it’s correct, newer stopwatch says it’s not😮

[@brianjennings7644]

of course it did...relative to stuff.

[@emenesu]

Which hospital do you work at?

[@Josh-tl5ug]

Couldnt this mislead us to think its expanding... even tho its not. Its all about the observer

[@WilliamTaylor-h4r]

I think the hammer is pretty much done, yep, the hammy ran out of chow, the hammy is finally done.

[@MiniLuv-1984]

We can say that oscillatory processes had different rates to today, but it makes no sense to say time flowed at a different rate. What is the "rate of time" measured in? Is it seconds per second? A completely nonsensical proposal! Like stretching of space - again, is that meters per meter? What we observe is decreasing distances between objects as we look further away. Let's not enter the world of fantasy and marketing when it comes to science please.

[@MichaelWinter-ss6lx]

Unscientific, to conclude in this kind of way on things that will be in many trillions^•^ of years. 🚀🏴‍☠️🎸

[@knightjacob80]

For the supernova the reason it looks slower is because the light takes more time to travel since the distance is greater. As the light travels it doesnt touch anything and as it does that light is changed from the friction of interacting with the other things in space. Also i think that depending on the energy released we will see some speed difference as well because there is still a gravitational force and the exploding pieces need to reach escape velocity during the change and the differences in pieces will cause variations in that which is why pieces stay and pieces fly out in all directions. Possibly.

[@atlasnetwork7855]

You don't believe this, do you?

[@monstrositylabs]

I think he does. Thankfully I've found one logical person in the comment section.

[@ronald3836]

I think at the end of the video he explains this is just about Einsteinian time dilation. Viewed from our frame of reference, we see that a clock ticking in the past (billions of light years away) ticks 5x as slowly as a clock on earth.

[@ronald3836]

E.g. a clock on the moon runs a bit faster than a clock on earth (56 microseconds per day).

[@lady_draguliana784]

I'm of the opinion that Time... doesn't exist... it's not a "thing"... our tiny feeble brains need it in order to grasp certain concepts and utilize certain skills, but it's purely a construct, a side-effect of memory, as it were... NOT a universal force or dimension... what ARE "things" are Gravity, Energy, and Entropy. (I'm just a regular schmuck so I may be way of base here though) 1) So, "time", as we all know, is relative, but why? particularly if it's not a "thing"? the answer is gravity, of course, as Einstein noted. for lack of a better term, gravity creates "drag" on atomic processes, (and likely all processes, to a certain threshold). that is to say, if we define a second as a certain number of oscillations of a cesium atom in a given environment, then put 2 so-housed cesium atoms in different gravity levels, the one in the stronger gravity will oscillate slower, relative to the other. Obvious so far. I think of this as gravity slowing the processes at work by 'fighting' them with it's attraction (like trying to run on a treadmill weighed down with resistance bands) 2) while events may happen sequentially, I don't think that this constitutes a "thing". And, as far as I understand it, at subatomic levels, and more so beyond, "sequential" has less and less meaning. that said, there are 'events' and 'interactions' that do not happen simultaneously, but in sequence.

[@lady_draguliana784]

3) in the early universe, the 'primordial' energy that preceded the formation of particles would have had such high energy density that it's relative gravity would have been incredible. Thus, EVERYTHING would have moved slower at the subatomic level, relative to our current, modern frame of reference. thus, in the frame of reference of the early universe, it would (of course) seem that Planck's had passed, whereas, to our hypothetical observation from our current frame, it would be as if years, centuries, eons etc. were being taken. this would be similar to the effects of approaching an Event Horizon (approaching it you would experience the passage as normal time (spaghettification etc. aside), but outside observers would see you taking massive timescales to pass through). 4) so, as the universe expanded, so too did the matter-energy within it spread out: this spreading is Entropy. as the density of "Stuff" decreased, so did it's gravitational density, thus, the relative rate of subatomic functions accelerated. this is where we have the hypothetical 3rd cesium atom, this one floating by itself, not near enough to any other matter-energy to be effected by external gravity, moving at it's maximum possible rate, (sans excitement). hope this makes SOME kind of sense...

[@sir_marlfox]

I think God speeds up time as humans become more destructive. Otherwise we will have too long to plan and execute humanity's demise. For our own collective good, time has sped up and/or time has shortened.

[@staticmode25]

I CRY I PRAY MON DIEU 🗣️🗣️

[@controverso4149]

Does time ever moved at all? Ever!

[@filonin2]

You were able to make your post so there is your answer.

[@damo5701]

Time is relative.

[@SamtheIrishexan]

Red shift is the result of peeking too far out of Gods simulation.

[@areuokay4984]

ok i believe you then bro

[@geerky42]

Must be Pucci's doing.

[@eltinjones4542]

I fell asleep watching rhus 😱

[@DobaZlatno]

Einsteinism

[@TheCosmicGuy0111]

Hm

[@nicoleyu7852]

I think, our world hates us so much that it wants to speed up the time. Hahahahaha🤣😂😅. Maybe. I hope not😁.

[@spudspuddy]

days are shorter and time is going past faster, i feel it everyday

[@mrpepe1408]

big bang is a big fat lie 😂

[@johnyaxon__]

That's what she said......

[@nealdolphin]

Egads.

[@supinthiam5741]

This is spiritual has nothing to do with science.

[@sir_marlfox]

nice