this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
11 points (100.0% liked)

Space

7293 readers
1 users here now

News and findings about our cosmos.


Subcommunity of Science


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Five times slower for us distant observers, regular time (1 second = 1 second) if you're actually there, if I'm understanding this correctly.

Still, difficult to wrap my brain around.

top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] t3rmit3 1 points 1 year ago

So we even get less time now than older generations... sheesh.

[–] Myaa 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I read through the article and it didn't explain at all how studying quasars determined this. I wonder if there's a better breakdown as to how they were able to ascertain this. I know there's been some major announcements in the field thanks to quasar study so I'm curious as to how this ties into that.

[–] Phroon 3 points 1 year ago

Luckily there’s a preprint of the article on arXiv if you want to read the source material for the article.

My basic summary would be that they have a model for how variable a quasar should be over time, and they can see a difference in that variability depending on the quasar’s redshift, the distance from us. And that difference is right around what we expect from relativity.

[–] fluffman86@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Does this assume the speed of light is a constant? Is there a difference between Time running slower while C is constant, and Time being constant while C actually changes?