So time is space streching? if so should time not speed up?

Question

streching=expanding

Answer 1

No, time is not space 'stretching' (whatever in the hell that's supposed to meas).
Space and time are two different forms of the same thing. Sometimes, depending on your frame of reference, a distance may look 'spacelike' and within other frames, it may look 'timelike'.

HTH ☺

Doug

Answer 2

You need to understand what physical time is. It is a particular value formed into three dimensional mass. An example of this is when high frequency electromagnetic energy forms into mass. This happens when an energetic wave nears the nucleus of an atom and forms into negative and positive electrons. The singular entity of electromagnetic energy that is one-dimensional, by completing an arc of greater than 360 degrees and then overlapping its own frequency, becomes bonded into three dimensional mass. The inherent speed of "c" does not diminish. By this manner, all energy (E = hf) and mass (also E = hf) have exactly the same value of "c", and all move from the present into moving into the past at the same instant.

So, in the expanding universe the value of "c" does not change. Mass at different rates of speed begin moving toward the ultimate value of which they are composed "c".

Answer 3

You have things rather mixed up. Time is NOT space stretching (whatever that peculiar statement means)! And in fact, the TIME used by a RAPIDLY MOVING person or object is what seems STRETCHED OUT, as far as a "stationary observer" is concerned. That means that time runs SLOWER for the rapidly moving person, from the point of view of the a stay-at-home stationary observer.

Meanwhile, the LENGTHS of rapidly moving things, measured in the direction they are moving in, are SHORTER (from the stationary observer's point of view) than those of a IDENTICAL OBJECTS that are at rest in the stationary observer's frame of reference.

So, when making measurements of both elapsed time and of knowm lengths in a rapidly moving observer's frame, the stationary observer measures that time slowed down (elapsed time stretched out) and lenghts contracted. Both of these effects seem to be the EXACT OPPOSITE of what your question postulates or speculates.

Live long and prosper.

POSTSCRIPT ' doug_donaghue's ' final two sentences are far too strong.

First, despite the fact that space and time are two facets of spacetime, they are NOT the same thing. (That's why the diagonalised metric of space time has a (+, +, +, -) or (+, -, -, - ) character, depending on how you like to write it. [The "odd one out" is always ' time,'] )

Second, in CONVENTIONAL relativistic physics, speeds greater than the speed of light, ' c, ' are simply not possible. In that case, SPACELIKE intervals are ALWAYS SPACELIKE, and TIMELIKE intervals are ALWAYS TIMELIKE.

I believe that ' doug_donaghue ' is mixing up what COULD happen in a purely imaginary, TACHYONIC or SCIENCE FICTION fantasy world with things that ACTUALLY DO HAPPEN in the REAL and FASCINATING relativistic world around us. Those latter are things are bizarre enough, for most us !