I would think that how long something lives is down to how fast it processed chemicals and how fast mistakes built up in it's cellular make-up (so causing old age and natural death).
If something moves very fast, then it has to be at a speed it can cope with so gnats, flies, etc must process such information faster than we can, while sea turtles and such process it slower since they do not need to process it at our speed.
(dogs rule,,, cats drool) Have you never had pets? Every dog I've seen has drooled and are usually slavish to their masters. Cats are independent and could be said to rule since cat owners end up waiting on them.
How we perceive time is down to what I call memory events. In times of great stress we remember so much more so time seems to go slower. Boredom can also make time seem to go slower as the mind is unoccupied.
Animals do not know time and live for the day. Our ancestors were probably the same. We have since invented measurements for passing events which we call time to help us cope with civilisation. Some people however claim that time actually exists. So called time dilation is a series of illusions.
Dogs vs cats,,,, I knew I'd get someone with that one.

I couldn't help it.
>In times of great stress we remember so much more so time seems to go slower.
I saw a neat experiment the other day (on TV): A test subject was given a digital clock to watch, the clock was set to a speed that the observer could not read , then they dropped him from about 100 feet and while he was in free fall he could read it.
>Animals do not know time and live for the day
What about Pavlov's dogs? or my next door neighbor's pet birds that come over at 6:20 pm every day for a treat. Yes I know that there is a difference between their internal clock and time,,, but, but, but
So, is the difference of perceived time any different than "actual" time? (me thinks so)
it all seems quite fluid. both seem to have a degree of variance. If our time is relative to external conditions then perhaps it is also relative to perception as well. It's just that there would be no way to calculate it, or would there?
SirShanson
21st October 2007 - 04:13 PM
There is a book called "Time" that mentions this exact question and answers that question very well, the jist of it though is that unfortunately for many animals they do experience time the same way we do.
paul h
21st October 2007 - 04:39 PM
>that unfortunately for many animals they do experience time the same way we do.
Please go on,,, what do you (the author) mean by "unfortunately"?
and by "same way" do you mean rate?
I wonder if the sea turtles see days the same way that we would perceive hours ?
or in Greenwich mean gnat time,, would the gnat record as many memories in a day as we would in a month? (or something like that)
SirShanson
22nd October 2007 - 01:21 AM
Sorry I was too brief, my fault only.
By unfortunately I simply mean that a vast number of animals live short lives experiencing time at the same speed we do, i.e. their day is the same as our day, they do not feel it as a year.
By same way I mean that as far as research goes it is believed that the turtle will still perceive a day as a day they will record memories in the same quantity as we will, time in their eyes does not speed or slow basically.
Sorry my answers a bit naff I'm struggling to explain this, hence why I said the jist since it took the author many pages to provide a comprehensible answer.
Think its better I just provide you with details of the book =P
About Time: Einstein's Unfinished Revolution
by Paul Davies
magpies
22nd October 2007 - 01:48 AM
Why dont different humans experience time differently or do we?
fizzeksman
22nd October 2007 - 05:18 AM
Hi paul h, kaneda, SirShanson, magpie
Interesting subject for a thread paul.. felt inclined to inject my 2 cents worth..
I remember reading somewhere the results of a study once where it was reportedly determined that all creatures exhibit an astonishing correlation, from species to species, in the average number of heartbeats over their average lifetimes. Thus the faster the heartbeat, the shorter the average lifespan, and vice-versa.
Personal experience has led me to believe that routine alters our perception of the passage of time tremendously. If you wish to make days extend to the length you perceived them to be when you were a child... eliminate the routine. Have you ever noticed how much longer and more interesting the days become when you are on vacation? Or taking a day anytime, breaking your routine, and doing something out of the norm?
Alternatively... most of us have experienced fast days... and slow days. A fast day being one that seems to speed by... whereas a slow day seems to drag on forever. Ummmm...then there are the days when our efficiency is unparallelled! When verything we do seems to happen in much less time than normal? When you feel very confident and your awareness and perception seems heightened? (A day such as this is a good time to gamble and win, ask the boss for a raise, or put the moves on the lady who has been hesitant with her favors!)
Realistically.. it seems perhaps... we are never to become timelords.. for time dilation as it relates to clocks seems to be essentially an effect of acceleration on clocks... and not on time itself. Therefore... control of perception of time appears to be the most promising avenue for research because our perception of time is something over which we already have some degree of control.
Jack
kaneda
22nd October 2007 - 08:48 AM
paul h. Everything has some kind of body clock, I would think it an evolutionary involuntary response so that living things continue to do what is necessary to survive. This makes us hungry at certain times of the day.
Pavlov's dogs reacted to the ringing of a bell and not to time.
Birds react to daylight so in the wild they can find a good nesting place before night approaches so have a rudimentary sense of time. How did your neighbour's birds come over? Fly or in a cage?
I would think time would seem different on a heavier gravity world which would literally slow us down on all levels, possibly even at an atomic level.
I think that is why we were forced to invent clocks, as our own time sense could not be trusted.
kaneda
22nd October 2007 - 08:55 AM
fizzeksman. Someone I worked with who was coming up to retirement admitted that there were whole years he could not remember. He was a tight so and so and had done boring routine day in and day our for decades so had nothing worth remembering. As I said to him, if I asked him about his trip home a week ago today, he would remember nothing about it but if he had had an accident on his way home, he would remember it years later with clarity.
Because of all the possible data over our lifetimes, we have developed short cuts and instead of our minds being overwhelmed by it's sheer amount we only remember properly what is different from the routine.
Ron
22nd October 2007 - 08:46 PM
Hi All,
Quote Kaneda"Cats are independent and could be said to rule since cat owners end up waiting on them." LOL
I inherited a cat from an old lady friend of mine when she passed. Now 'Brittney' determines when I get up, why I can't eat unless she does first, when and under what weather circumstances should she be outside and of course , no matter what I'm doing, when she needs positive re-enforcement ("Oh what a good kitty, you're a pretty girl ..."). If I didn't love Pauline (my old friend) so much, I'd have given her away long ago.
I watched a show on ancient animals, and cats are some of the oldest creatures that are still around. I don't care how small their brains are supposed to be, we are their pets!
"So long and thanks for all the fish" (Douglas Adams)
Peace,
Ron
kjw
22nd October 2007 - 09:26 PM
QUOTE
magpies Posted: Yesterday at 11:48 AM Why dont different humans experience time differently or do we?
we do, the effect is very small
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele-Keating_experiment
paul h
22nd October 2007 - 10:19 PM
The discovery channel TV show "All about time" (I think that was the name) said that there had been an experiment where a test group were ask to count one minute, half of the group were about 10 years old (guessing) and the other half were about 60. the young ones counted too fast and the older group counted too slow. the conclusion may be that the old expression about "the older you get the faster time goes" is right after all.
kjw
22nd October 2007 - 10:50 PM
QUOTE
paul h Posted on Today at 8:19 AM The discovery channel TV show "All about time" (I think that was the name) said that there had been an experiment where a test group were ask to count one minute, half of the group were about 10 years old (guessing) and the other half were about 60. the young ones counted too fast and the older group counted too slow. the conclusion may be that the old expression about "the older you get the faster time goes" is right after all.
the Hafele-Keating experiment has to do with physical time. the tv show you watched seems to be dealing in psychological time and/or physiological time. the younger group counts fast because of short attention spans and the older group counts slow because of slowed physiological processes.
PS my mum says that as you get older the years seem to pass quicker, although mum does not have a nobel prize, it does seem to be true, my experience is confirming mums observation.
paul h
22nd October 2007 - 11:12 PM
QUOTE (kjw+Oct 22 2007, 06:50 PM)
the Hafele-Keating experiment has to do with physical time. the tv show you watched seems to be dealing in psychological time and/or physiological time. the younger group counts fast because of short attention spans and the older group counts slow because of slowed physiological processes.
PS my mum says that as you get older the years seem to pass quicker, although mum does not have a nobel prize, it does seem to be true, my experience is confirming mums observation.
I think I remember that they were showing the part of the brain that controlled this internal clock and the hope was to show a psychological difference.
And given enough time your observation will do the same as her's.
months now seem like weeks did when I was a young buck.
kjw
22nd October 2007 - 11:22 PM
and a recent dental appointment did seem much longer than the four hours that the wall clock indicated... i think the bill may have been worked out by hourly rate x psychological time rather than physical time x hourly rate
paul h
22nd October 2007 - 11:25 PM
QUOTE (kjw+Oct 22 2007, 07:22 PM)
and a recent dental appointment did seem much longer than the four hours that the wall clock indicated... i think the bill may have been worked out by hourly rate x psychological time rather than physical time x hourly rate
phyti
23rd October 2007 - 04:10 AM
Something else to consider is the ability of the mind to put a period of time in perspective. To a young person asked to wait a year for something is asking for a significant portion of their life. For an older person it's a smaller portion.
As an infant, the house seems large. As a child outside, it can envision the whole house. As someone who flies between cities, the country becomes a new yardstick and the house becomes miniscule. And so it is with time as it is with distance. As our world expands, we use a larger measuring standard.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click
here.