Mark Kelly was born 6 min before Scott. 6 min = 360,000 msecs so Scott needs 36K yr in space to be younger than Mark https://t.co/wUb3YeHWmu
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) March 3, 2016
Because of Einstein's twin paradox, Scott Kelly is now ~10 milliseconds younger than his identical twin Mark pic.twitter.com/gMxBwfMjpZ
— New Scientist (@newscientist) March 2, 2016
Keith’s note: And of course since NASA now defines a “year in space” = 340 days it would take less or more time, depending on your point of view.
If Mark was born first, isn’t Scott younger anyway. Wouldn’t the elder brother have to orbit for more than 36 years to be “relatively” younger?
But they came from the same egg, so depends on where you start the count from.
’10 millieconds younger..” – New Scientist.
So they were born simultaneously? That’s a heck of a strain on the mother.
Mark Kelly spent 55 days in space during his career while Scott was on the ground, so that offsets the age difference somewhat. Although Scott spent 181 days in space prior to his latest mission, for a total of 521 days. So the actual difference between the two is 466 days. Not that it makes much difference.
As for me, since I will probably never get to spend any time in space I plan to retire to Panama where I will age more slowly due to the higher rotational speed near the equator.
I have a preference for the tropics myself.