What if the Earth stopped?

[Shadow Conception]

I know this will probably never happen with the survival of a majority of humans, but I ponder this a lot. Rules of time dilation state that the faster something goes, the less it is affected by the progression of time.

So would this mean that if the Earth suddenly stopped, we would commence aging faster? Even if it were a negligible amount of less age initially, would it not build up and cause a noticeable decrease in general human lifespan? Or is it such a minute matter that even if the Earth stopped, nothing would be noticed concerning the duration of a human life?

On a larger scale: if our solar system suddenly stopped rotating about the center of our Milky Way galaxy, would all processes begin occurring "faster"? Would the life expectancy of the Sun suddenly drop half a billion years?

Ignore the fallacies and ridiculousness of these hypothetical situations ever happen. It's an "if" situation, even though it'll probably never happen in our lifetimes.

 

[f95toli]

No, time dilation is always relative. Everyone in the same frame will age at the same rate, it is only when we compare two frames that we can see the the effects of time dilation.
Remember that one can always say that earth is NOT moving, it is everything around us that is moving and earth is at the centre of the universe (or, you can use your self as a point of reference in which case you are the centre of the world).
Normally we don't do this (nowadays we tend to use the sun of the centre of our galaxy as reference) but that is because mose alternatives would be quite confusing. But, since motion (and therefore velocity) is always relative it would be a perfectly valid approach.

 

[firewolfsm]

There is one thing that confuses me about time dilation. If we're moving, we experience time dilation relative to a "stationary" observer just outside the solar system. We would seem slow to him. However, if we take the view that we aren't moving at all, rather, he's moving away from us, should he seem slow to us? One of them has to be time dilated relative to the other, so which is it?

 

[LostUte]

Originally posted by: firewolfsm
There is one thing that confuses me about time dilation. If we're moving, we experience time dilation relative to a "stationary" observer just outside the solar system. We would seem slow to him. However, if we take the view that we aren't moving at all, rather, he's moving away from us, should he seem slow to us? One of them has to be time dilated relative to the other, so which is it?

To compare the time that had elapsed, one would need to start with synchronized clocks. The "traveler" (carrying one of the synchronized clocks) is the one who leaves and then accelerates (turns around) to come back. The clocks can then be compared again. The clock that traveled and turned around would have a lagging time.

 

[Born2bwire]

Originally posted by: LostUte

Originally posted by: firewolfsm
There is one thing that confuses me about time dilation. If we're moving, we experience time dilation relative to a "stationary" observer just outside the solar system. We would seem slow to him. However, if we take the view that we aren't moving at all, rather, he's moving away from us, should he seem slow to us? One of them has to be time dilated relative to the other, so which is it?

To compare the time that had elapsed, one would need to start with synchronized clocks. The "traveler" (carrying one of the synchronized clocks) is the one who leaves and then accelerates (turns around) to come back. The clocks can then be compared again. The clock that traveled and turned around would have a lagging time.

Pretty much it's a matter of keeping track of all the frames of reference correctly. One thing to remember, as LostUte points out, is that in your case the observers never exist in the same reference frame. As such, it is a little different from the classic thought experiments that are used to present time dilation. Still, both observers will have time dilation corrections for any information eminating from the other observer and his system. In the classic twin paradox, the twins start and end in the same reference frame which is considered to be the rest frame. In this case, it's much easier to calculate the time dilation as an observer in the rest frame because the other frame experiences acceleration. You could do the time dilation calculations in the rocket's frame of reference, but it is more involved. Since you will get the answer regardless (oh hell, even irregardless) of which frame you use, it's more instructive as a simple thought experiment to only use the rest frame. So in short, yes, both observers will have to correct for time dilation, they always do. It is a consequence for simplicity that this is generally not shown in some examples.

Here's another example. If I have a point charge that's moving at relativistic speeds, then in its reference frame, there only exists an electric field. In the lab frame (stationary), there exists both an electric and magnetic field. The resulting electric and magnetic fields in the lab frame can be derived purely from the Lorentz EM 4-vectors and the simple electric field equation for a point charge that exists in the charge's frame of reference.

 

[jhelstrom]

.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

You be the tree and I will be the guy that is not in the forest.

 

[Modelworks]

My biggest concern if the earth stopped turning would be loss of gravity and one side of the planet burning to a crisp.

If you get the science channel, or can locate it through other means, watch the series Time.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/d...es/features/time.shtml

He covers the topic about how we experience time, whether its chemical, in our heads, etc, then moves on to cosmic time, black holes, relativity, etc.

There are some sample video clips on the site.

 

[NorthernSink23]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
one side of the planet burning to a crisp

:shocked::frown::thumbsdown::Q

 

[lousydood]

My biggest concern if the earth stopped turning would be loss of gravity

Do you think the Earth's gravitation depends on its rotation, or is this some kind of brain malfunction?

 

[gsellis]

Not measurable. delta max change of 1000 miles per hour.

Though most of us would stop 'aging'. As the oceans poured across the land masses because of inertia, most of the planet would probably drown.

Oh, and if anything, gravity would appear 'higher' if the world stopped. I doubt we would notice before the wall of water arrived.

 

[Foxery]

Er. You wouldn't experience anything differently because all available clocks and your own brain chemistry would be affected in the same way. You would have no way of even determining that the flow of time had "changed" in any way.

If you wish to coordinate with someone on a spaceship who keeps moving, then it's like any other case; relative to each other, your clocks tick faster/slower, but each of you will wind up living the same number of years based on your own clock.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: lousydood

My biggest concern if the earth stopped turning would be loss of gravity

Do you think the Earth's gravitation depends on its rotation, or is this some kind of brain malfunction?

I'm referring to the earthquakes that would occur due to the planet changing shape.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: lousydood

My biggest concern if the earth stopped turning would be loss of gravity

Do you think the Earth's gravitation depends on its rotation, or is this some kind of brain malfunction?

I'm referring to the earthquakes that would occur due to the planet changing shape.

How would that stop gravity?

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: gsellis

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: lousydood

My biggest concern if the earth stopped turning would be loss of gravity

Do you think the Earth's gravitation depends on its rotation, or is this some kind of brain malfunction?

I'm referring to the earthquakes that would occur due to the planet changing shape.

How would that stop gravity?

I should have said 'loss of the way gravity is applied'

 

[AllGamer]

Physically speaking...

Live will just go on as usual, but one side of the Earth will Perpetually be in Darkness, meanwhile the other side be Really really Hot

most people will then have to move and live in the Twilight zone between light and darkness, to keep a "live-able" temperature.

Animals, plants and other wild life will evolve in a much much interesting way, those that adapts only to light, and those that turns more like bad, and works at night

and the Moon Eclipse will be much more often, assuming the Moon will remain rotating around Earth, then we'll probably see a permanent path every 24hr.

that is if we still go by "time"

since earth has Stopped moving completely, all notion of Time as we know it goes out the window.

No more years, hours, months, all gone, it's a permanent light and darkness.

LOL criminals will most likely be sent to the Dark Side, or either the Sunny Side for torture, depending on their crime i guess.

Economically the world will be in Chaos, The lucky Nations (those that sits closer tot he Light & Darkness) will have their value increase exponentially, meanwhile the other not so lucky nations, will crumble and de-evaluate, due the Dessert wasteland like conditions.

USA will probably come up with an excuse to take over some of those lucky countries because of something.

Temperature in the Dark side will probably drop to below freezing temp in some areas.

North and South pole will suffer some drastic climate changes, along with the rest of the earth.

it'll be interesting to study the new Weather pattern, it'll still work, but... now it's all dependant of the cold air moving to the warm side which will push the hot air over to the cold side, but it'll be an uneven event.

and most likely the air will now go and revolve more like a big giant FOG along the Twilight zones, in a North South direction.

Well by this time NIGHT SKIing and Snow boarding will become the normal, since only the Dark Side of the earth will have snow.

However, having Earth Stopped.

It might cause problem with our natural Earth Shield.

As some of you should know, the Earth Shield is provided by the flowing and moving magma.

If Earth Stop, that magma flow will get disrupted partially, specially the Dark side of the Earth

on the Hot and Warm side the magma flow will remain normal, but we might lose our have a very weak shield for the Dark side.


Well... i guess i summarized all the important factors on a real life event of what will happed if earth did stop permanently.


... however if this is to happen, i'm almost positive the Moon will lose orbit and either fall into Earth, and kill everything including earth itself, or we'll get real lucky, and it snaps and swungs outward and get lost in space, it's a 50% x 50% chance either scenario could happen.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: gsellis

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: lousydood

My biggest concern if the earth stopped turning would be loss of gravity

Do you think the Earth's gravitation depends on its rotation, or is this some kind of brain malfunction?

I'm referring to the earthquakes that would occur due to the planet changing shape.

How would that stop gravity?

I should have said 'loss of the way gravity is applied'

You need to find out how gravity works. All the scenarios you layed out would not change gravity. The loss of 'spin' might reduce the centripedal force that almost immeasurable reduces the effect of gravity, but that is about it. Gravity is a phenomena of mass. See Newton g=...

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: AllGamer
Physically speaking...

cliffing for post length...

stuff that sounds like the lyrics to something Pink Floyd might write as a new song

You still forgot that the slooshing water drown them all, so who cares

 

[Nathelion]

Originally posted by: gsellis

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: gsellis

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: lousydood

My biggest concern if the earth stopped turning would be loss of gravity

Do you think the Earth's gravitation depends on its rotation, or is this some kind of brain malfunction?

I'm referring to the earthquakes that would occur due to the planet changing shape.

How would that stop gravity?

I should have said 'loss of the way gravity is applied'

You need to find out how gravity works. All the scenarios you layed out would not change gravity. The loss of 'spin' might reduce the centripedal force that almost immeasurable reduces the effect of gravity, but that is about it. Gravity is a phenomena of mass. See Newton g=...

He is right about one thing, you know. The earthquakes would be quite epic.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: Nathelion

Originally posted by: gsellis

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: gsellis

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: lousydood

My biggest concern if the earth stopped turning would be loss of gravity

Do you think the Earth's gravitation depends on its rotation, or is this some kind of brain malfunction?

I'm referring to the earthquakes that would occur due to the planet changing shape.

How would that stop gravity?

I should have said 'loss of the way gravity is applied'

You need to find out how gravity works. All the scenarios you layed out would not change gravity. The loss of 'spin' might reduce the centripedal force that almost immeasurable reduces the effect of gravity, but that is about it. Gravity is a phenomena of mass. See Newton g=...

He is right about one thing, you know. The earthquakes would be quite epic.

Spinal Tap epic... it goes to 11...

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: gsellis

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: gsellis

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: lousydood

My biggest concern if the earth stopped turning would be loss of gravity

Do you think the Earth's gravitation depends on its rotation, or is this some kind of brain malfunction?

I'm referring to the earthquakes that would occur due to the planet changing shape.

How would that stop gravity?

I should have said 'loss of the way gravity is applied'

You need to find out how gravity works. All the scenarios you layed out would not change gravity. The loss of 'spin' might reduce the centripedal force that almost immeasurable reduces the effect of gravity, but that is about it. Gravity is a phenomena of mass. See Newton g=...

You need to read up on how non rotating planets have gravity equally applied, where as rotating planets are actually distorted.

The planets are round because they have so much mass. Because of gravity, all mass tries to get as close together as possible. For a planet that does not rotate around its own axis, the ideal distribution has all points at the surface at the same distance from the center, and this means a round planet without any mountains or valleys. If the planet does rotate around its own axis, then the ideal shape is a sphere that is slightly flattened, so that the diameter from pole to pole is a bit less than the diameter at the equator.

Now take that planet that no longer has gravity equally distributed and make it perfectly round. It wouldn't be pretty.

 

[lousydood]

Of course gravity will vary based on altitude and local density of mass. But the effect is so small you would not notice the difference without equipment. It would certainly not be a "loss of gravity."

G = 6.672 * 10^-11
M = 5.9736 * 10^24 kg
Rp = 6356000 m
Re = 6378000 m
Rm = 6371000 m -- mean radius
(approx)

First, note that the difference in radius between equatorial and polar measurements is only about 22 km.

Second,

GM / Rp^2 = 9.8656 m/s^2
GM / Re^2 = 9.7976 m/s^2
GM / Rm^2 = 9.8192 m/s^2

If you can tell the difference between 0.05 m/s^2 then congratulations, superman. This hardly constitutes a loss of gravity. In fact, if the Earth were to revert to the mean radius, people at the equatorial regions would experience a slight increase in gravity. Not to mention, the small centrifugal effect caused by the Earth's rotation would be absent, thus further increasing the apparent effect of gravity.

But yes, reshaping the Earth from an oblate spheroid into an actual sphere would probably release energy of epic proportions in earthquakes. Not to mention the energy required to stop the Earth from spinning in the first place.

Tidal forces from the Moon are actually slowing the rotation of the Earth, very minutely, of course. At the same time, conservation of angular momentum is causing the Moon to inch away from the Earth.

 

[KIAman]

To the OP. It all depends on the observer. If the solar system stopped moving around the galaxy but everything inside stayed the same, someone on earth would not notice a time difference. Only someone outside the solar system would be able to observe a difference in time from his time compared to ours.

If the movements of the solar system stayed relative to the contents, then nothing would change. Hell, if the solar system suddenly took off and started going .999999c, we on earth would live out our normal lifespan as we know it. To the observer outside our solar system, we'd be immortal.