TIME DILATION

>>8229513
Yep, if you don't feel any gravitational forces (i.e. the gravity is cancelled out because you're at the centre of a sphere) you won't have any time dilation effects either because there's no gravitational acceleration affecting you. Only in the presence of gravitational forces does time dilation come into play, and since the force acting on you would be zero you won't experience any dilation.

just make sure you don't move and offset your c of g

You don't even have to be at the center, the gravity is zero anywhere inside the shell. Well-known theorem, applies to general relativity (relativistic gravity) too.

Only problem I can think of is the shell collapsing on you.

>>8229522
Gravitational time dilation has nothing to do with force, it depends on the difference of the gravitational potential. A clock at the surface of the Earth shows about -60µs per day compared to a 'far away in the void' clock and a clock at the center of the Earth (no force) has another -30µs compared to the clock at the surface. This is the same as the velocity related time dilation of a clock orbiting close to the surface which also 'feels' no force. This is not a coincidence.

GPS pre-launch clock adjustment is +45.9-7.2=38.7 µs/day

>>8229513
One hole is that it would be virtually impossible to stay alive in the center because any insignificant movement that deviates you from the center would make the gravity imbalance unequal, so you would either be in extreme pain by being stretched in some direction, or you would be torn apart, or just both.

>>8230283
Actually I need to correct this. This would only apply if the mass of the shell was not distributed uniformly.

File: grav-time-dialation[1].gif (10KB, 400x305px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 400x305px

>>8229727
>it depends on the difference of the gravitational potential
So a huge hollow sphere providing gravity would be enough ?

>>8230324
that pic hurts.
Yes, gravity plays a role, but the main reason is the acceleration difference. One building is closer to the equator and thus is moving faster relative to the other.

>>8229570
It doesn't matter, the differences are very minute until you start getting into the miles range.

File: image017[1].gif (6KB, 579x473px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 579x473px

>>8230429
here's a less hurting pic for you then :^)

>>8230429
>moving faster relative to the other.
No, distance is constant, no relative motion. What does differ is the 'orbital' velocity, but that can be calculated away to isolate the gravitational component of the rate difference. In case of the GPS satellite this is the dominant part and velocity accounts for the smaller.

>>8230429
The effects of latitude difference cancel out. A building closer to the equator is moving faster, but is farther away from the center of the earth. The difference in the clock rates in the picture comes from the difference in altitude above sea level.

>>8230787
so wait, its got nothing to do with being exposedto more gravity due to being closer to the earths core ?

>>8230792
What I'm saying is the latitude effect she was mentioning cancels out. If those two clocks were both at sea level, they would measure the same time. The fact that the higher one measures more time is indeed due to the fact it's further away from the earth's core.

>>8230290
yep, I actually had trouble with the exact same problem, except I was talking about electrical forces in a perfect spherical conductor. if everything is evenly distributed on the shell of the sphere, and you're inside of that sphere, the way that the inverse squares in the gravity equation work out will cause a net zero force on you.

>>8229513
is time dilation the same as time rape?

File: albert_clock_troll.png (85KB, 210x429px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 210x429px

>>8230798
>the latitude effect

>>8229513
>everything would look like it's played in fastforward.
After a while you will see the future.