What bugs me about this explanation is the following: aren't we moving quite a bit all the time? We go along the earth as it's rotating around itself, then revolving around the sun, then the solar system revolving around the milky way, then the milky way probably moving somehow and so on.
If we could somehow "get off" earth, "stand still" and let it "float away", would time would appear to move faster?
If we could somehow "get off" earth, "stand still" and let it "float away", would time would appear to move faster?
A qualified yes, but it depends which time you mean by "time would appear to move faster". If you were "still", then those observed in motion would appear to have time pass more slowly.
Astronauts who spend time on the international space station age slightly less than people on earth (by 0.007 seconds behind for every 6 months) - time on earth goes faster than for them relative to those of us "stationary" on earth.
When two observers are in relative uniform motion and uninfluenced by any gravitational mass, the point of view of each will be that the other's (moving) clock is ticking at a slower rate than the local clock. The faster the relative velocity, the greater the magnitude of time dilation. This case is sometimes called special relativistic time dilation.
In any given reference frame you have a velocity vector that's some part space and some part time but has magnitude 1. It's just rotated.
There's nowhere to "stand still" in the universe. But if you pick a reference frame where you're moving less fast in space your velocity has more of a time component to make up for it. If you pick one where you move very quickly in space (maybe one that doesn't follow the Earth's orbit) then you have less motion in time. That observer sees you experience less time.
And if they pick a reference frame where you move the speed of light - where your velocity vector is fully in space; with '1' for space and '0' for time - they don't see you experience any time.
There's no way to stand still per se, but we can tell the difference between someone who accelerates and someone who doesn't - that's the resolution of the "twin paradox". So if one person travels around in a circle and their twin stays still (by magically floating above the earth without following its rotation, or by staying suspended at a particular point in the earth's orbit for a year while the earth goes around), then they have accelerated less than their twin and should therefore have aged slightly more.
What I don't understand is: does this still apply under General Relativity, or does proximity to the massive earth redefine acceleration?
If we could somehow "get off" earth, "stand still" and let it "float away", would time would appear to move faster?