Why 2 months in outspace could be equal years on Earth? I mean what cause the difference between time in space

Answer 1

What you are talking about is Time Dilation, part of the Theory of Relativity.

It reasons that Time slows as the Speed of Light is Approached. That would mean a Spaceship traveling at near the Speed of Light would seem to be gone 2 months to those Onboard, but the Rest of the Universe might have Years Passed.

Answer 2

There is only a difference in time between on Earth and in space when the spaceship is travelling VERY fast (at close to the speed of light).
Einstein's theory says that as objects travel close to the speed of light, time slows down for that object.
So if you were on a rocket ship travelling at close to the speed of light, then what would seem like just a few months for you would be years for people on Earth.

Answer 3

It is not. Where did you hear that?


Time can, in theory, move faster or slower depending on your speed, but you would need to be traveling close to the speed of light to notice that effect.

Gravity can also affect time, but you would need a really massive object, like a black hole, in order for you to notice any real effect.

Answer 4

In Albert Einstein's theories of relativity time dilation is manifested in two circumstances: Velocity time dilation and Gravitational time dilation.


This effect is described precisely by the Lorentz transformation. In general relativity, clocks at lower potentials in a gravitational field — such as in close proximity to a planet — are found to be running slower. In special relativity, the time dilation effect is reciprocal: as observed from the point of view of any two clocks which are in motion with respect to each other, it will be the other party's clocks that is time dilated.

Thus the duration of the clock cycle of a moving clock is measured to be "running slow." The range of such variances in ordinary life, where v / c < 1 even considering space travel, are not great enough to produce easily detectable time dilation effects, and such vanishingly small effects can be safely ignored. It is only when an object approaches speeds on the order of 30,000 km/s (1/10 of the speed of light) that time dilation becomes important.

Time dilation by the Lorentz factor was predicted by Joseph Larmor (1897). It has been tested and confirmed a number of times.

Velocity time dilation tests:
Ives and Stilwell (1938, 1941), “An experimental study of the rate of a moving clock”, in two parts. The stated purpose of these experiments was to verify the time dilation effect, predicted by Lamor-Lorentz ether theory, due to motion through the ether using Einstein's suggestion that Doppler effect in canal rays would provide a suitable experiment. These experiments measured the Doppler shift of the radiation emitted from cathode rays, when viewed from directly in front and from directly behind. The high and low frequencies detected were not the classical values predicted.

Rossi and Hall (1941) compared the population of cosmic-ray produced muons at the top of a mountain to that observed at sea level. Although the travel time for the muons from the top of the mountain to the base is several muon half-lives, the muon sample at the base was only moderately reduced. This is explained by the time dilation attributed to their high speed relative to the experimenters. That is to say, the muons are decaying about 10 times slower than they would in a rest frame (that is, for "stationary observers").

Hasselkamp, Mondry, and Scharmann (1979) measured the Doppler shift from a source moving at right angles to the line of sight (the transverse Doppler shift) as deduced by Einstein (1905). Thus there is no transverse Doppler shift, and the lower frequency of the moving source can be attributed to the time dilation effect alone.

Gravitational time dilation has also been tested and proven.

Velocity and gravitational time dilation combined-effect tests:
Hafele and Keating, in 1971, flew cesium atomic clocks east and west around the Earth in commercial airliners, to compare the elapsed time against that of a clock that remained at the US Naval Observatory. Two opposite effects came in to play. The clocks were expected to age more quickly (show a larger elapsed time) than the reference clock, since they were in a higher (weaker) gravitational potential for most of the trip. But also, contrastingly, the moving clocks were expected to age more slowly because of the speed of their travel. The gravitational effect was the larger, and the clocks suffered a net gain in elapsed time. The net gain was consistent with the difference between the predicted gravitational gain and the predicted velocity time loss. In 2005, the National Physical Laboratory in the United Kingdom reported their limited replication of this experiment. The NPL experiment differed from the original in that the cesium clocks were sent on a shorter trip (London-Washingon D. C. return), but the clocks were more accurate. The reported results are within 4% of the predictions of relativity.

The Global Positioning System can be considered a continuously operating experiment in both special and general relativity. The in-orbit clocks are corrected for both special and general relativistic time-dilation effects so they run at the same (average) rate as clocks at the surface of the Earth. In addition, but not directly time-dilation related, general relativistic correction terms are built into the model of motion that the satellites broadcast to receivers.

Time dilation would make it possible for passengers in a fast moving vehicle to travel further into the future while aging very little, in that their great speed retards the rate of passage of onboard time. That is, the ship's clock (and according to relativity, any human travelling with it) shows less elapsed time than stationary clocks. For sufficiently high speeds the effect is dramatic. For example, one year of travel might correspond to ten years at home..

2 months could correspond to years depending upon velocity of the craft.