# Which reference frame in our solar system experiences the most time?

Suppose we must choose a location in our solar system for a self-sustaining space-station. Imagine that the station will house experiments which must be completed as quickly as possible for the benefit of all humankind, and these efforts will be ongoing, so long-term productivity is the dominant concern.

For this reason, we want time in this station to progress as quickly as possible relative to the rest of the solar system. The station is allowed to be attached to a stable body, or it can reside in any stable orbit.

It seems we need general relativity to solve this problem, and I do not know where to begin.

• As far from the sun as possible, with rockets keeping it from falling into the sun (do not orbit.) This minimizes both gravity and velocity. Note that this will in fact be negligible compared to the earth. Aug 6 '15 at 5:02
• What I would recommend though, is to slow down humanity a lot, relative the experiments. This provides great gains. Aug 6 '15 at 5:02
• I am also interested in ways to accomplish that, since both should be done if possible. It's a separate question though, and there's the extra restriction that the majority of the population isn't allowed to know that anything like this is going on.
– Keen
Aug 6 '15 at 5:04
• Sorry to say, but making things experience more time is generally not very possible (unless you magically acquire negative mass stuff.) On the other hand, slowing things down is very possible, which is what you will want to focus on. Aug 6 '15 at 5:10
• You may want to see this question. Specifically read the premise. Simple place computers in a non-time dilated frame, and it will go faster relative to the humans. Aug 6 '15 at 5:12

The Oort Cloud.

As PyRulez said, as far from mass and as slow as possible. Hanging out in the Oort Cloud will get you as close to Barycentric Coordinate Time as possible. This is the "fastest" (least slowed) time you could hope get while staying in the solar system.

However, I hope your experiments are incredibly efficient and incredibly long duration because the best you're going to get is about 490 milliseconds per year faster than on Earth. It's hard to say if that is worth the cost of setting up a lab in the Oort Cloud. Generally I would think not, but perhaps you have a compelling reason.

• A back of the envelope calculation says you'd have to run it for perhaps half a million years before that half-second per year offset the time lag from signalling the calculation back home... Aug 6 '15 at 5:38
• But the oort cloud contains mass. See my Answer for Aug 6 '15 at 9:21