18

Einstein's big revelation was that time and space are inseparable components of the same fabric. Physical observation tells us that distant galaxies are moving away from us at an accelerated rate, and because of the difficulty (impossibility?) of defining a coordinate system where things have well defined coordinates while also moving away from each other without changing the metric on the space, we interpret this to mean that space itself is expanding.

Because space and time are so directly intertwined is it possible that time too is expanding? Or perhaps it could be contracting?

Loourr
  • 948
  • It's a gauge transformation which allows $dt$ not to be scaled - time is set by fiat. The end result is there is no inertial co-moving frame with the Hubble bubble - since a gauge transformation is a coordinate transformation in GR. – Cinaed Simson Dec 01 '19 at 23:08

4 Answers4

25

The simple answer is that no, time is not expanding or contracting.

The complicated answer is that when we're describing the universe we start with the assumption that time isn't expanding or contracting. That is, we choose our coordinate system to make the time dimension non-changing.

You don't say whether you're at school or college or whatever, but I'm guessing you've heard of Pythagoras' theorem for calculating the distance, $s$, between two points $(0, 0, 0)$ and $(x, y, z)$:

$$ s^2 = x^2 + y^2 + z^2 $$

Well in special relativity we have to include time in the equation to get a spacetime distance:

$$ ds^2 = -dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2 $$

and in general relativity the equation becomes even more complicated because we have to multiply the $dt^2$, $dx^2$, etc by factors determined by a quantity called the metric, and usually denoted by $g$:

$$ ds^2 = g_{00}dt^2 + g_{11}dx^2 + g_{22}dy^2 + ... etc $$

where the $... etc$ can include cross terms like $g_{01}dtdx$, so it can all get very hairy. To be able to do the calculations we normally look for ways to simplify the expression, and in the particular case of the expanding universe we assume that the equation has the form:

$$ ds^2 = -dt^2 + a(t)^2 d\Sigma^2 $$

where the $d\Sigma$ includes all the spatial terms. The function $a(t)$ is a scale factor i.e. it scales up or down the contribution from the $dx$, $dy$ and $dz$, and it's a function of time so the scale factor changes with time. And this is where we get the expanding universe. It's because when you solve the Einstein equations for a homogenous isotropic universe you can calculate $a(t)$ and you find it increases with time, and that's what we mean by the expansion.

However the $dt$ term is not scaled, so time is not expanding (or contracting).

John Rennie
  • 355,118
  • 4
    Impressive covering of heaps on information in a few paragraphs. I got my partner to read your explanation; she is a bright non physicist so a good model for an "educated lay reader" and she said it was crystal clear, so well done. – Selene Routley Nov 06 '13 at 13:15
  • 1
    My understanding is that you use a co-moving coordinate frame then fix all the points then define a metric on that space and define a rate of expansion for it. But if I'm understanding you correctly your saying that leaving the time factor out was done for simplicity, and you could conceivably construct a model where the scale factor applied to the dt term? – Loourr Nov 06 '13 at 15:51
  • 5
    You can choose any coordinate system you want, but some coordinate systems are more useful than others. The coordinates used in the FLRW metric mean there is a simple interpretation of the time - it's equal to the proper time time for a stationary observer (wrt the CMB) - and all such observers everywhere agree on the elapsed time since the Big Bang. – John Rennie Nov 06 '13 at 15:56
  • What kind of evidence will be seen to disprove this assumption? – Sujoy Gupta Jan 30 '14 at 08:51
  • 2
    @SujoyGupta: what assumption? If you have doubts about the procedure used for deriving the FLRW metric maybe you could post a new question. – John Rennie Jan 30 '14 at 08:55
  • 1
    What if the assumption is made that space isn’t expanding? Would time contract / slow down? – Wouter Dec 12 '20 at 21:17
  • I have the same question as Wouter. What if space is taken to be static, and a scale factor is given to time instead? Would it produce results "equivalent" to the current theory, or would it produce unique/incorrect predictions? – aiwl Sep 29 '21 at 04:47
  • This answer is also found here: https://qr.ae/pGzuVB – Ronnie Overby Jan 03 '22 at 21:08
  • How can you conclusively say "no, time is not expanding or contracting" while also saying "we assume that the equation has the form" and leaving time unscaled? I am not satisfied with this reasoning. – Cameron Hudson Jan 10 '24 at 01:40
0

How could someone inside the spacetime measure the expansion of the time dimension they participate in? It could expand all day long but to the interior time is constantly flowing.

Darrell Burgan
  • 1
  • The notion of time as "flowing", probably dating from the medieval days of water clocks, seems to be Newtonian, as in Newton's opening remarks in the text preserved at https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/newton-stm/scholium.html : In SR & GR, it seems to be treated like a spatial dimension, as in Minkowski diagrams, the thought experiments that led to SR, and John Rennie's answer. – Edouard Jan 23 '20 at 03:45
  • If A and B are in the same inertial reference frame, and two photons are fired 1 second apart from A to B, wouldn't the time separation between the photons be different when measured at B (since 1 s then is not the same as 1 s now)? If this is true, and the measured time interval is larger, it would look as if space was expanding in all directions. – aiwl Oct 03 '21 at 08:52
  • Spacetime can and does have local variations, which is why we have gravity. It seems plausible that one region of spacetime could expand faster or slower than another. I think your answer needs a scientific basis. – Cameron Hudson Jan 10 '24 at 01:44
-1

I'm neither a cosmologist or a physicist, but everything I have learnt about gravity, energy, momentum photons and universal expansion over around 15 years of spare time study, tells me that the dilation of length as the universe expands must be accompanied by the contraction of time.

I believe time contracts by the same percentage in a second as length contracts in a metre. In doing so, the rate of increase in energy wrt distance is equal to its rate of decrease in momentum wrt time and there is no net force and therefore no work being done as the universe expands, due to the expansion.

This is almost the exact opposite of the effect of gravity.

When we make observations of cosmological red-shift, we see a length dilation that meets our expectations, and there doesn't appear to be any time contraction. But don't forget that time must contract c times more slowly than length dilates, i.e. as proposed above it contracts the same amount in a second, which is c metres of travel, as length dilates in a metre. It's virtually insignificant in relation to length dilation.

If I'm right, then what we observe is the net effect of time dilation and length contraction due to gravity, combined with time contraction and length dilation due to universal expansion.

In regions of higher mass density, within galaxies, gravity dominates, and the effect of expansion just makes gravity appear weaker than it really is. In intergalactic space, the effect of expansion is dominant. So when we look at a photon that's been on a relatively short journey, it doesn't seem to have been affected by expansion, but one that's been on an intergalactic journey does.

Alan Gee
  • 245
-2

Since what science tells us is that spacetime expanded away in all dirctions from the singularity, then its logical to assume that it still continues to be emitting if you will, from matter to this day. But since all the matter has spread out it maybe said that all massive bodies including subatomic particles, (except massless ones) emit spacetime. This explains time dilation where gravity is present since gravity slows the emission of spacetime only to speed up again as light through glass. I believe that spacetime is emitted from all matter at the speed of light and therefore its this emission that carries all massless particle such as photons. In otherwords photons have no mass and when emitted out of say electron the spacetime expanding from the electron picks up and carries the photon at the speed of light. Though this is just a theory.

Armondo Villaescuza
  • 225