This is why we need to keep synchronising the GPS satellites, because time passes slower in areas of higher mass/energy density, the foundation of Einsteins theory of relativity, time is relative, an object in motion has more energy and therefore a higher mass energy density and time passes more slowly, time dilation. However if you simply place an object in space that is moving the same relative velocity to yourself on the surface of the earth time will pass slightly faster for that object. In fact time passes faster for GPS satellites due to them being in space despite them being in motion and subject to time dilation. Once you take into account special and general relativity effects you find that time passes 45 microseconds a day faster simply by the satellite being in space and away from most of the earths gravity. However due to their motion they actually lose 7 microseconds a day due to time dilation, so the total of time gained per day is 38 microseconds.
Fun stuff, and while it sounds inconsequential, I mean what's 38ms anyway, I believe the actual accumulating error is around 10 meters (I could be wrong here I haven't look it up) meaning that over the course of a few days it would become useless for car navigation and other common application.
Ok, so I think I have a somewhat reasonable grasp of time/space and time dilation, and the way I'm approaching it is based on the principle that mass/density acts to warp space/time which would then slow time proportionally to the way that acceleration to c would, ie; the denser the mass, the stronger the warping of time/space up to that of a black hole warping space/time effectively equal to c. And using the example of the 1g acceleration being no different to an observer to that of 1g gravity given no other frame of reference to distinguish the two.
So I'm looking at 'gravity' as something that is pushing up, rather than pulling down, which (in my mind) would work out that as you leave a large gravity well time would pass faster for an object relative to that of one within the gravity well, hence your example of the GPS satellites. But that is speaking about relativity/time dilation differences, not specifically time itself (ie speaking of a car vs bike race is about the degree of difference of their velocity, not that they are both experiencing velocity, which is a given, but still distinct). My point about gravity = time isn't so much about how fast/slow time passes but that the effect of it is literally the motion of us traversing the fourth dimension, which is perceived as a motion effect (gravity/acceleration) but without actual motion in the three planes of dimensions (movement), ie; we feel a push equiavalent to 1g acceleration but we don't experience us actually going anywhere because the actual motion is in the fourth plane, though we do experience the effects of that motion via the passage of time expressed as aging, with the amount of aging being proportional to that of the frequency of the passage of time relative to another.
Please go easy on me on this bit if I'm utterly wrong as I'm literally trying to figure out this next part, based on the statement that time = gravity would require time to move faster in areas where density and gravity is higher.. (and it's almost 3 am now).
Well there's an argument there, however in areas with lower mass density, like between the stars and galaxies, time passes faster, whereas the theory that time equals gravity would need time to move faster in areas where density and gravity is higher, so that doesn't quite add up.
I guess where it gets tricky is that the effect to us would naturally seem like the the greater feeling of gravity pushing against us would equal a higher velocity of time, but I would suggest that it's the other way around. Though of course that reads as counter intuitive based on how we perceive 'force' acting upon an object. But if we were to look at it from the angle of a dense object, we would exert much greater force to initially get it to move even though it isn't actually going anywhere yet. That's my intial thoughts anyway.. I'm definitely going to be thinking/reading up about this a bit more in relation to some other aspects I've been thinking about. Again, very much appreciate the answer. o7
somehow... and a good question... but whatever it is, it's either too much or too little of it... 
