## Neil Armstrong's ACTUAL age.

For the discussion of the sciences. Physics problems, chemistry equations, biology weirdness, it all goes here.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

harrumphicus
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:52 am UTC

### Neil Armstrong's ACTUAL age.

With the passing of Neil Armstrong the last August, I've been wondering something. Officially, he was alive for 82 years and 20 days... from OUR perspective. My question, if it's possible to answer, is how long was he alive from his own perspective through his two trips into space and back? Surely relativity played some measurable role? I myself am unaware of how to gather the required information (though I have some idea of what is required) to make the necessary calculations to deduce his relive time passed during his life.

I feel like this is a rather unique question, but if it has indeed been asked and answered feel free to smite me from the forum for my ignorance.

You, sir, name?
Posts: 6983
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:07 am UTC
Location: Chako Paul City
Contact:

### Re: Neil Armstrong's ACTUAL age.

For time dilation (and other relativistic effects) to manifest themselves on any sort of meaningful scale, the Lorentz factor needs to noticeably diverge from unity. This only happens near the speed of light. Really, anything less than 30% of the speed of light is basically the same as newtonian physics (this is where the lorentz factor starts to approach 1.1).

Now, we know it took about four days from take off to lunar landing. In order to reach a relativistic speed in four days, they'd have to have a constant acceleration of (.35c / 4 days) = 31G. If this were the case, they'd arrive at the moon rather dead (that's not even dealing with how they would stop once they arrived at the moon at 30% the speed of light).

TL;DR. No measurable twin paradox stuff going on. The apollo missions didn't travel at nearly fast enough speed for that. If you want your passengers to stay alive, with sustained acceleration of say 2g for 4 days, you only reach a percent or two of the speed of light, with a lorentz factor of order 1+10-4.
I edit my posts a lot and sometimes the words wrong order words appear in sentences get messed up.

ImagingGeek
Posts: 380
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 6:41 pm UTC

### Re: Neil Armstrong's ACTUAL age.

Apollo 11 didn't travel at a constant speed, so the math isn't easy. Peak speed was ~24,000mps (approx 10,700m/s), which while it sounds fast, is actually slow by relativistic standards - 0.0036% the speed of light. Ignoring acceleration, and assuming that the whole trip was done at max speed, time would have passed 1.0000000013 times slower during the trip. So over the ~6 days of travel, Armstrong would have experienced roughly 0.00067 fewer seconds.

Not much...based on SR. GR (plus the actual acceleration profile) would provide a different - and correct - number. But the effect would be roughly the same in magnitude.

Bryan
I have a new blog, on making beer.

harrumphicus
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:52 am UTC

### Re: Neil Armstrong's ACTUAL age.

Damn... I was hoping it would at least be measurable in minutes. Well, thanks for crushing my dreams of living longer by going to the moon on an Apollo rocket.

(not actually one of my dreams)

yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

### Re: Neil Armstrong's ACTUAL age.

Yeah, the difference is less than the uncertainty in his birth time.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?

Xanthir
My HERO!!!
Posts: 5311
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Contact:

### Re: Neil Armstrong's ACTUAL age.

Now that the thread's over, I was really hoping it would turn out to be a bizarre conspiracy theory.
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))

Snark
Posts: 425
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:22 pm UTC

### Re: Neil Armstrong's ACTUAL age.

Xanthir wrote:Now that the thread's over, I was really hoping it would turn out to be a bizarre conspiracy theory.
Neil Armstrong was an alien. We switched him with the real Neil on the moon.
Dashboard Confessional wrote:I want to give you whatever you need. What is it you need? Is it within me?

Avatar by Matt

harrumphicus
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:52 am UTC

### Re: Neil Armstrong's ACTUAL age.

Good theory, Snark, it was actually quite different. Neil is actually only 46 because the ACTUAL testing was relativistic "time travel" - he was sent hurtling around the moon at .8c and returned years later. The man who was on the news after the "successful" "moon" "landing" was just a cloned body that deteriorated over time a la "Moon" with Sam Rockwell. I know this because things.

Meteoric
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 4:43 am UTC

### Re: Neil Armstrong's ACTUAL age.

harrumphicus wrote:Well, thanks for crushing my dreams of living longer by going to the moon on an Apollo rocket.

You just need to upgrade that dream to a much longer journey, in a much better rocket!
No, even in theory, you cannot build a rocket more massive than the visible universe.

sardia
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

### Re: Neil Armstrong's ACTUAL age.

If you really cared, take an airline pilot's age, and calculate the dilation from a career's worth of flight. It should work out to the same number. Hint the answer is less than a second.

tesseraktik
Posts: 218
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 9:14 pm UTC
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

### Re: Neil Armstrong's ACTUAL age.

Sergei Avdeyev is said to hold the record for time travel by time dilation: In his 747½ days in space, he's managed to avoid 0,02 seconds of aging!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Avdeyev
(Not sure if gravitational time dilation is included. It may be that because all of his missions have been in lower Earth orbit, translational time dilation would have dominated it to death.)
ni'o mi nelci le zirpu sovmabrnornitorinku
Spoiler:
++\$_ wrote:What's a "degree"?

EDIT: I looked it up on Wikipedia. Apparently it's some ancient Babylonian unit for angles :/