Tony8

I actually posed an argument to this claim, suggesting that time speeds up the faster one moves--whereas time for everyone else is going relatively slower for that person. Likewise, I turned the present assertion that one gets younger the faster they move around by suggesting that one actually gets older the faster they move.

 

If a person is moving faster than something else, then time outside of them moving slower in relation to their time and movement would mean that in relation to the the outward time, the person moving faster would be experiencing time moving quicker for their self in comparison to those moving slower. It makes sense to me, and is that why you asked this question? If that is why, consider reading this thread: http://www.sciencefo...ead.php?t=10878

My personal theory (that hit me one day over a pizza) was that if time is relative to position or distance (or changes thereof), then that must mean that time is also relative to size and scale. I believe that all living creatures of different sizes have roughly the same lifespan (with many obvious exceptions). This would explain why Hollywood and National Geographic finds it natural to film small animals in slow motion and speed up larger ones. This would also explain why an insect can fly or hop away and react to us so fast (and no, there were no flies on my pizza)... our large human movements must seem so slow to a small fly! And relatively, small flies' movements seem so fast to us large humans.

This leads to my following quesiton... what would be the Relativity Constant for calculating time relative to size? Imagine what detail science is overlooking because we study smaller or larger things on our time-scale instead of theirs!