This never made any sense to me whatsoever.
I’ve see all the physicists (Michio Kaku, Stephen Hawking, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, etc.) explain this principle but it doesn’t make sense. They say that if you were to go to the moon and back at a certain speed near the speed of light, you might return to Earth a thousand years into the future like what happened in Planet of the Apes. But if you were going at the speed of light, you would arrive at the time light takes to arrive there. Why the dip? What is being missed?
Perhaps a stupid follow up but what would this mean for things necessary for survival like food and water? Would I theoretically starve on that 4 year trip before I even realized I needed water?
No. Let’s say you and I start each one a stopwatch at the same time here on earth. Then you get in your spaceship and travel the 8 years at light speed, get back to earth and land your ship. When you get out and we put the watches side by side mine shows 70000+ hours while yours the couple minutes it took you to get on and off of the ship.
Just want to add that what the person on the ship observes is length contraction. When their ship is at near light speed, the distance to their destination contracts to nearly zero (because it is moving at near light speed relative to them); this is why the trip seems short to them.
It’s not just your perception - your actual atoms slow down in “time”. This is because any movement they make, from their vibration alll the way up through chemical reactions and physical movements, from your metabolism to your thoughts being transmitted through your neurons, will require acceleration towards light speed from their already high speed.
The faster you move through space, time literally moves slower- you sacrifice one for the other, like a ratio.
No, you would physiologically age at the same fast-forwarded time rate. Essentially, for you, less time would pass at the same time that more time passes for the outside world.